Understanding how surgical strikes and retaliatory actions align with the Army Act, 1950 and Rules of Engagement:

Whenever there is news of surgical strikes or retaliatory gunfire along the Line of Control (LoC), our focus typically goes to the valour of our armed forces and the strategic implications. Behind every such act of war, however, stands a sophisticated body of law defining, circumscribing, and legitimizing such acts-not merely in the world's eyes, but also within India's military legal order. This article tries to simplify and critically analyse how cross-border military operations are regulated under Indian law, specifically under the Army Act, 1950 and the Rules of Engagement (ROE) adopted by the Indian Army.

What are the cross-border military operations? This phenomenon has evolved significantly through decades and has shaped the geopolitical history leading to technological advancements. The root cause behind emergence of this situation was the territorial disputes leading to securing land and establishing supremacy worldwide. This led to technological advancement which assists in operations. These operations include:

• Surgical strikes across the border targeting terrorist camps, training centres, launch pads.
• Border skirmishes and limited incursions in defensive or pre-emptive actions.
• Artillery retaliation in response to ceasefire violations.

These operations are often carried out in the context of asymmetric warfare, where the enemy may not always be a formal state army, but could be non-state actors operating from across the border.
The Army Act, 1950: Governing Discipline, Not Strategy The Army Act, 1950 is the foundational legal statute for the Indian Army. However, it does not directly deal with war strategy or authorisation of cross-border action. Instead, the Act lays down:

• The disciplinary framework for members of the Army
• The code of conduct they are expected to follow
• Procedures for trials by court-martial
• Provisions for offences and their punishments
  

So, where does the Act stand in the context of cross-border operations? The answer is accountability. Whenever a soldier participates in a military operation particularly one beyond Indian borders, the legality of his actions is adjudged under the Army Act and military discipline. For instance, any act of brutality, excessive use of force, or disobedience of orders can be penalized under Sections such as:

• Section 52 (offences against property or persons)
• Section 63 (offence against good order and discipline)
• Section 69 (civil offences by army personnel)

Therefore, while the Army Act does not authorize surgical strikes, it serves as the legal standard to measure the conduct of soldiers during such operations. Some treaties and conventions play a crucial role pertaining to these operations. Some of them are:

• The Geneva Conventions lay down the standards of humane treatment in times of war and prohibit the actions that may cause unnecessary sufferings.
• The United Nations Charter, which makes mandatory to comply with the security measures and outlines the conditions necessary under which military force can be legitimately employed.
  

Rules of Engagement (ROE): The Operational Compass The Rules of Engagement form the fundamental guidelines that dictate the conduct of military forces during the operations. These rules serve as a guide to protect the civilians and minimize the collateral damage. These aren't codified in Army Act but are crafted according to the mission's objectives, legal obligations and ethical considerations. These ROE should be crafted precisely and in clear manner in order to make it easier to comprehend in emergency situations or in high-pressure environments. Adhering to the established ROE is necessary to maintain disciplines, operational effectiveness and the legitimacy of military actions. Rules of Engagement vary according to the particular context of a mission operation. The variation can be due to the character of the threat, the prevailing law or legal framework, and the desired outcomes. In military operations, ROE can range from restrictive to less restrictive varying according to the situation at hand. For example:

• In peace operations, the ROE can stress civilians protection and the preservation of peace resulting in regulations that favor de-escalation and non-aggressive methods.
• In contrast, for intense combat operations, ROE can be relaxed to facilitate effective and quick counterattacks against the enemy.

Integration of Technology in Rules of Engagement (ROE) Technology plays an important role in enhancing the ROE by providing advanced tools for decision making and for the execution of the mission on the battlefield. The Integration of surveillance systems, drones and AI enables real time monitoring situational awareness allowing for precise and informed ROE application. Case Studies of Successful Cross-border Military Operations

• The NATO's operations in Balkans during the 1990s, particularly the intervention in Kosovo in 1999 was crucial in addressing humanitarian crises stemming from the ethnic conflicts.
• The Gulf War of 1990-1991 is a classic case of an effective cross-border military action, where a coalition involving the United States intervened in Iraq after it had occupied Kuwait. Operation Desert Storm was such an operation with the objective of restoring Kuwait's sovereignty and proving the potency of multinational cooperation in military operations.

Conclusion
Cross-border military operations, such as surgical strikes and retaliatory engagements, operate in a legally complex domain that requires a careful balance between operational necessity and legal accountability. While the Army Act, 1950 does not itself authorize or plan such strategies, it plays a crucial role in setting the standards for discipline, conduct, and accountability of military personnel involved in these operations. The Rules of Engagement (ROE) serve as the practical, operational framework that ensures military responses are proportional, precise, and in alignment with both domestic and international law.

India's approach to cross-border military actions is shaped by a combination of legal discipline under the Army Act, ethical and operational clarity provided by ROE, and adherence to global norms such as the Geneva Conventions and UN Charter. As military technology evolves and threats become more asymmetric and unconventional, both the ROE and the interpretation of legal norms under the Army Act must adapt to meet emerging challenges-while ensuring accountability, transparency, and respect for international humanitarian law.

Ultimately, the legal architecture surrounding such operations not only guides the conduct of armed forces but also strengthens the democratic accountability of military action, reinforcing India's position as a responsible global power committed to rule of law, even in matters of war and national security.


References:

1. https://totalmilitaryinsight.com/cross-border-military-operations/
2. https://redonbroadway.com/rules-of-engagement/
3. https://www.icrc.org/sites/default/files/external/doc/en/assets/files/publications/icrc-002-0173.pdf