Trying to Understand Special Group (
litterally 12 A.M thoughts)
Sources I am using are
- India's Special Forces by Lt Gen PC Katoch
- India's Wars: A Military history, 1947-1971 by Air Vice Marshal Arjun Subramaniam
Lt Col Nanavatty lead a committee to discuss special operations, based on what he saw of the SAS in UK. This was in very late 1970s. Apart from discussing how Para commando units must be mandated, it discussed the need for another tier of specialist forces which would handel strategic level operations.
One thing very clearly mentioned in the report was - 'Takeover the current responsibilities from the SFF'
That being said, it makes sense only to see what SFF was before SG was formed, today SFF is largly (not entirely) but largly - a paratrooper/airborne unit manned by Tibetans, if we can agree on this then you might want to read further.
What did SFF did in 1971 ?
In short, targeted enemy logistics and morale from behind the front lines, used Psy Ops, was given the autonomy to operate outside standard military chain of command, did helicopter-borne operations to disrupt logistics and enemy HQs and operated behind Pakistani lines in Chittagong as well as Burma...similar to MACV-SOG which also relied on close aerial support and was to sabotage Ho Chi Minh trail, and go far into Laos, Cambodia.
Though key differences are that MACV-SOG was far more globalized and tech-supported, with greater air mobility, and access to cutting-edge American war tech.......SFF did have access to Aviation Research Center etc..but America is america....
Also another key difference was that SFF was smaller and more regionally focused, but equally daring, especially given the terrain (jungles, hill tracts) and the political stakes of Indo-Pak-China dynamics
So SFF at the time was just India's own very limited SOG, and I am not comparing it with MACV, which was a much larger and focused, well supported element....just the SOG part kinda.
Now we can safley assume that SFF's these 'duties' would likely have been transferred to SG. By the way, SG did other operations as well like close protection and hostage rescues
So, Special Group was formed to do deep reconnaissance, covert action, high-value target neutralization and direct action in foreign or disputed territories
However, the books, especially the first one also defines, that the role of SG remains undefined in public doctrine, limiting broader military integration and strategic use.
Lt Gen Katoch mentions that a lack of deterrence capability has been noted despite RAW using SG, suggesting we underuses SG’s potential for bold strategic missions....this has been confirmed by an unamed ex SG guy in this article so I belive it to be true
An all-out war with Pakistan? Not feasible. Diplomatic offensive to isolate the enemy? Recommended, but may not be effective. Surgical air strike? Runs the risk of escalating tension. Covert operations? Good idea, but how battle-ready are our special forces? THE WEEK investigates
www.theweek.in
Now my understanding is, that the so called 'misuse' of SG could largly be because it's used in counter insurgency operations in Kashmir, which RR and SF already handel. I could be wrong, maybe they know what they're doing but that's my take on it
I think the closest unit that comes with SG's mandate is UK's 14 Int or SRR in a peactime setting and America's SOG in a wartime setting.
The thing is we never know when they might be at a secret war, Check how CIA assisted Che Guvera's capture and possible killing later on. They did use the same SOG like tactics they did in Vietnam but with lesser resources and support...somewhat such that they do not want to discuss it either
That's all I have to say
