India's Cold Start Is Too Hot

[MilSpec]

Agree with you for the most part. It doesn't explain the kind of nuke build up Pakistan is indulging in.

You think India doesn't desire peace? What can India do to achieve peace short of compromising territorial integrity? What can Pakistan do?

How can we stop this region from becoming a playground for extra regional powers like China and USA?

Vinod bhai,
Sorry to butt in to your discussion with mastan bhai. but it think Pakistans Nuke Buildup is justified according to thier doctrine.

I have been hearing Indo- pak conflict are destined by all the analysts to remain low intensity level conflict under nuclear umbrella... Now the question remains no one has really defined the parameters of low level.. Does low intensity mean entire strike corp (sorry now the IBG full scale assault) by IA or a surprise air raid by PAF or bsf vs Rangers slug fest on a border post.

In the history of modern warfare, no matter how disproportionate adversaries have fought, the results have always been surprising.

Indian perspective:

• With initial 4 decades of socialistic model and non aligned nature coupled nearly bankrupt economy, we never could afford higtech acquisitions or developments.

• Last two decades of economic growth has given Indian establishment the potential to expand its military muscle. Our military planners have fully utilized this sudden spurt to extend to military growth too.

Indian Military needs build more and flex less of its muscle... Indian Military should have more outreach to pakistan for confidence building, at the end politicians are not trusted by common poeple let alone the military.


Pakistani Situation (As per my understanding )

• Pakistan is smaller country with lesser resources, and it's political environment has not done its economy any good. Rather than following Models adopted by smaller states who have outgrown bigger states, pakistan's vote bank politics has used anti -india sentiment to an extent along with other internally divisive policies to devastating extent.

• Although pakistan's insurgent tactics were highly sucessfull against soviets, it has not yeilded desired effects against India since last 20 years. Its time for Pakistan to end the support anti-india groups because they have not achieved the desired effects and rather utilize a different method to counter India.

• pakistan has enjoyed technological superiority over india's numerical superiority in cold war ers, but that situation has changed with time. india now stand to gain both technological and numerical superiority over pakistan on paper

Rather than countering India's conventional deployment, It is economically justifiable deterrent for pakistan to expand its nuclear arsenal.

The above statement is very logical on paper, but use of nuclear weapons by both establishment will be with reference to a certain threshold... pakistan's definition and india's definition would not be the same.

If Indian IBG/Strike corp or even a precision air strike is responded by a nuclear attack/ retaliatory strikes will be massive. But the real question to ask here is what will aggravate India to make such an aggressive move.

As we have noticed in past, the inability of PA/intel assets to control taliban activities.. If in future PA is not able to contain so kashmiri group to carry out mumbai like or bigger attack on India, say 5 years from now... it will be very difficult for India not to respond.


What we need now is threat reduction, the only way that can be achieved is eliminating extremist entities which may cross sustainable threshold levels of both countries. this can only be achieved by military to military contacts and understanding.

 

[Zarvan]

Vinod bhai,
Sorry to butt in to your discussion with mastan bhai. but it think Pakistans Nuke Buildup is justified according to thier doctrine.

I have been hearing Indo- pak conflict are destined by all the analysts to remain low intensity level conflict under nuclear umbrella... Now the question remains no one has really defined the parameters of low level.. Does low intensity mean entire strike corp (sorry now the IBG full scale assault) by IA or a surprise air raid by PAF or bsf vs Rangers slug fest on a border post.

In the history of modern warfare, no matter how disproportionate adversaries have fought, the results have always been surprising.

Indian perspective:

• With initial 4 decades of socialistic model and non aligned nature coupled nearly bankrupt economy, we never could afford higtech acquisitions or developments.

• Last two decades of economic growth has given Indian establishment the potential to expand its military muscle. Our military planners have fully utilized this sudden spurt to extend to military growth too.

Indian Military needs build more and flex less of its muscle... Indian Military should have more outreach to pakistan for confidence building, at the end politicians are not trusted by common poeple let alone the military.


Pakistani Situation (As per my understanding )

• Pakistan is smaller country with lesser resources, and it's political environment has not done its economy any good. Rather than following Models adopted by smaller states who have outgrown bigger states, pakistan's vote bank politics has used anti -india sentiment to an extent along with other internally divisive policies to devastating extent.

• Although pakistan's insurgent tactics were highly sucessfull against soviets, it has not yeilded desired effects against India since last 20 years. Its time for Pakistan to end the support anti-india groups because they have not achieved the desired effects and rather utilize a different method to counter India.

• pakistan has enjoyed technological superiority over india's numerical superiority in cold war ers, but that situation has changed with time. india now stand to gain both technological and numerical superiority over pakistan on paper

Rather than countering India's conventional deployment, It is economically justifiable deterrent for pakistan to expand its nuclear arsenal.

The above statement is very logical on paper, but use of nuclear weapons by both establishment will be with reference to a certain threshold... pakistan's definition and india's definition would not be the same.

If Indian IBG/Strike corp or even a precision air strike is responded by a nuclear attack/ retaliatory strikes will be massive. But the real question to ask here is what will aggravate India to make such an aggressive move.

As we have noticed in past, the inability of PA/intel assets to control taliban activities.. If in future PA is not able to contain so kashmiri group to carry out mumbai like or bigger attack on India, say 5 years from now... it will be very difficult for India not to respond.


What we need now is threat reduction, the only way that can be achieved is eliminating extremist entities which may cross sustainable threshold levels of both countries. this can only be achieved by military to military contacts and understanding.

India has problem with each of its neighbor but in case of China China show India its auqat all the time

 

[MilSpec]

India has problem with each of its neighbor but in case of China China show India its auqat all the time

Although that is a very popular belief on this forum .. i would disagree ... Barring China a Pakistan with whom we have officially fought wars .. oter neighbor disputes aren't any bigger than Pakistanis own dispute among its own provinces....
And friend .. please change your tone when you are replying to me...

 

[Donatello]

You fail to see that India is surrounded on all sides by neighbors that can be or have been hostile to it.

I mean, Bangladesh, is more and more anti-India now. I had so many Bangla friends in USA and they are all anti-Pakistan (for obvious reasons) but what is more surprising is that they hate India equally as much, from Cricket to diplomacy. I mean, China can easily supply cheap weapons to Bangladesh which it already is doing. Pakistan always has been armed to teeth by China. Seems like by playing it's cards correctly, China can encircle India so much more easily. While Indian efforts to do the same to Pakistan by allying with Afghanistan has been met with not so great results.

I would say, it is in everyone's interest if India, being bigger and more powerful in terms of Natural/Human resources, should extend the hand of friendship to it's neighbors. But unless that happens, China would gladly supply arms to Pakistan and Bangladesh and that would mean India gets circled from all sides.

Think about it.

 

[Geronimo2011]

India has problem with each of its neighbor but in case of China China show India its auqat all the time

Par Pakistan mein to USA kabhi bhi aa ke apni garmi uttar ke chala jata hai.. Kabhi drone se to kabhi Seals se..

 

[Geronimo2011]

You fail to see that India is surrounded on all sides by neighbors that can be or have been hostile to it.

I mean, Bangladesh, is more and more anti-India now. I had so many Bangla friends in USA and they are all anti-Pakistan (for obvious reasons) but what is more surprising is that they hate India equally as much, from Cricket to diplomacy. I mean, China can easily supply cheap weapons to Bangladesh which it already is doing. Pakistan always has been armed to teeth by China. Seems like by playing it's cards correctly, China can encircle India so much more easily. While Indian efforts to do the same to Pakistan by allying with Afghanistan has been met with not so great results.

I would say, it is in everyone's interest if India, being bigger and more powerful in terms of Natural/Human resources, should extend the hand of friendship to it's neighbors. But unless that happens, China would gladly supply arms to Pakistan and Bangladesh and that would mean India gets circled from all sides.

Think about it.

And what would happen with those arms.. ?? You think about it.. First of all its a Pakistani wet dream that all the neighbours of India will attack us. Except China (which wont) and Pakistan, there are no tangible threats, no matter how much Pakistanis wish it.

Secondly, China today, will never want to get involved in a battle due to the same reason, India does not want to get involved in a war with Pakistan. Just like India has much more to lose than Pakistan economically in case of a war, China has much more than India to lose in case of a similar hostility with India breaking out. Hence the propping up of Pakistan which the naive population and leaders of Pakistan consider Higher and lower etc friendship. China is using Pakistan the same way USA used Pakistan against USSR.

But I do agree to the part about the peace being in everyone's interest. Unfortunately, given the condition of Pakistan today, it has really no control over its next few months/years to be able to form a sustainable plan for that peace process..

 

[Vinod2070]

You fail to see that India is surrounded on all sides by neighbors that can be or have been hostile to it.

I mean, Bangladesh, is more and more anti-India now. I had so many Bangla friends in USA and they are all anti-Pakistan (for obvious reasons) but what is more surprising is that they hate India equally as much, from Cricket to diplomacy. I mean, China can easily supply cheap weapons to Bangladesh which it already is doing. Pakistan always has been armed to teeth by China. Seems like by playing it's cards correctly, China can encircle India so much more easily. While Indian efforts to do the same to Pakistan by allying with Afghanistan has been met with not so great results.

I would say, it is in everyone's interest if India, being bigger and more powerful in terms of Natural/Human resources, should extend the hand of friendship to it's neighbors. But unless that happens, China would gladly supply arms to Pakistan and Bangladesh and that would mean India gets circled from all sides.

Think about it.

Except Pakistan, India has no hostile neighbor.

Even with China we have decent relations. Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Srilanka, Maldieves, Myanmar etc. all doing well.

Some individual Bangladeshis living in West can have their opinions. The government there is pretty friendly.

India's hand of friendship is extended to all who want friendship. It is up to you make the best of the offer.

Some day you will realize the limits of your current hostile posture.

 

[MilSpec]

You fail to see that India is surrounded on all sides by neighbors that can be or have been hostile to it.

I mean, Bangladesh, is more and more anti-India now. I had so many Bangla friends in USA and they are all anti-Pakistan (for obvious reasons) but what is more surprising is that they hate India equally as much, from Cricket to diplomacy. I mean, China can easily supply cheap weapons to Bangladesh which it already is doing. Pakistan always has been armed to teeth by China. Seems like by playing it's cards correctly, China can encircle India so much more easily. While Indian efforts to do the same to Pakistan by allying with Afghanistan has been met with not so great results.

I would say, it is in everyone's interest if India, being bigger and more powerful in terms of Natural/Human resources, should extend the hand of friendship to it's neighbors. But unless that happens, China would gladly supply arms to Pakistan and Bangladesh and that would mean India gets circled from all sides.

Think about it.

Sir,

Honestly my opinion will astray in a very different direction. in your post you mention two different things. Bangladesh's view point towards India and China's aspiration in curbing Indian influence.

Bangladesh: As you mentioned about bangla friends in US... I have quite a few Bangladeshi friends here and apart from that I am a bengali. In bangladesh, two very distinct camps exist (very much like mohun bagan and east bengal supporters in west bengal). One camp is pro India which sees India as liberator of bengali's and the other camp which see's India as Hindus who broke Islamic Pakistan and their Hatred is directed more towards Pro-India camp than India itself.
All bangladeshi's are irked by Indian tone towards bangladeshi refugee that India often raises, because there is a feeling of humiliation associated along with it. In 70's India was an overpopulated extremely poor country and couldn't provide the help that It should have provided to Bangladesh. Indian establishment also had the misconception that bangladesh would be a allied country to India which back fired. Once the establishment changed, soviet leaning Bangladesh changed its policy towards USSR and India forcing India to step back and thus there was a sense of mistrust on both sides. I wish india was economically stronger to have accommodate bangladeshis like nepali citizens. In last 5 years india and Bangladesh ties have grown very close and the future is looking bright.

China:
China has a big economy and a military Junta inclined towards arming satellite states. it is but natural for them to try to demonize India and fuel conflicts in the region to undermine an economically strong contender in geo -political influence. India on the other hand has the worst military industrial complex which can hardly arm its own massive army .. forget about arming neighboring states... we have to import our planes and guns.. how do you expect us to arm bangladesh or any other state for that matter.

India:
India is run by a parliament. with 500 different blabber mouth politicians where forget arming allies... it's even difficult to fight against local mafia's without politicians walking out of the parliament in protest. So India will never be able to flex its military might beyond its own boundaries... Our geo-political strength lies on our economy and culture... Thats is the way our future alliances will be based on... and pakistan is most welcome to join

 

[Waffen SS]

The armed forces of both countries are not capable enough to penetrate deep into each other's territory.

Neither do they have the resources nor the professional competence to achieve these objectives.

This is not Wehrmacht or the Red Army we are talking about.

The COMEDY OF ERRORS ON EITHER SIDE in 1965 proves that the subcontinent can't fight like the European armies of the past.

 

[Vinod2070]

The armed forces of both countries are not capable enough to penetrate deep into each other's territory.

Neither do they have the resources nor the professional competence to achieve these objectives.

This is not Wehrmacht or the Red Army we are talking about.

The COMEDY OF ERRORS ON EITHER SIDE in 1965 proves that the subcontinent can't fight like the European armies of the past.

I think you are right about 1965. It was a pathetic display from both sides.

1971 was more professionally done by India. The Sunday Times of London compared it to the Blitzkrieg of WW-2.

One would hope the militaries would be much better now.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The Attack on Pakistan Navy was also a cold start

 

[Hellfire]

The armed forces of both countries are not capable enough to penetrate deep into each other's territory.

Neither do they have the resources nor the professional competence to achieve these objectives.

How far from true. Yes as of today in purely conventional terms, Pakistan shall not be able to make deep inroads, but India will definitely be able to make deep inroads. That is why you have a clear first use policy for CBRNs!!!!

This is not Wehrmacht or the Red Army we are talking about.

The COMEDY OF ERRORS ON EITHER SIDE in 1965 proves that the subcontinent can't fight like the European armies of the past.[/B}

My friend, you take WWII as the benchmark. And then when you realised you will sound outdated, you decided to progress and get stuck on 1965 as a bench mark. I suggest you come to 2011. Its been 46 yrs now!

 

[notorious_eagle]

How far from true. Yes as of today in purely conventional terms, Pakistan shall not be able to make deep inroads, but India will definitely be able to make deep inroads. That is why you have a clear first use policy for CBRNs!!!!



My friend, you take WWII as the benchmark. And then when you realised you will sound outdated, you decided to progress and get stuck on 1965 as a bench mark. I suggest you come to 2011. Its been 46 yrs now!

Expand on that please? In a war of attrition, India will prevail due to its superior resources but it does not appear what the Indian military strategy is. They want a quick, mobile battle deep inside the enemy's territory to annihilate the enemy. All good and noble objectives, but appear next to impossible for the likes of Indian Army and taking in view how the balance of forces stand.

 

[Hellfire]

In a war of attrition, India will prevail due to its superior resources but it does not appear what the Indian military strategy is.

There shall be no war of attrition. The aims and objectives of IA in case of a future conflict (which is difficult to imagine in the prevailing scenario) will be to hold ground in sizeable chunks to force a resolution of the conflict at a political level and NOT for dissection/fragmentation of Pakistani state. Mobilisation has been a problem which has largely been negated with forward staging on weapons and stores as also improvement in rail-road communication links.

With the change in stress from conventional forces to specialised forces, IA is increasing its Special Forces and Airborne component. While 1,2,3,4,5,6,9,10,21 PARA (SF) 7,8,25(PARA) units are already in place, 11 and 12 PARA SF are being raised to further augment their numbers along with further enhancement of ancillary Airborne Uniits. There is further augmentation in pipeline, to ultimately raise and field 02 divisions worth of airborne troops with the necessary support and infrastructure.

On ground, the firepower is being augmented in terms of artillery support with another Artillery Division in process of being raised (42nd) and another in pipeline. The upgradation of M-46 130 mm by Soltam is roughly complete to 155 mm config. The aim is to have a greater number of SP and SP(APU) types to facilitate both armoured and mechanised as also SF ops.

Number of mechanized units is also going up slowly with more units getting mechanized to BMP-II configuration as of now.

The stress is on high tempo synergistic ops as envisioned by the Cold Start Doctrine. The existence of this doctrine is real and any denial by Indian COAS should be seen in backdrop of US pressure on GoI to keep the situation 'stable' and not to antagonise GoP and PA for their own interests.

As there is a convergence in US's and our interests at this point, GoI and IA are only too happy to accomodate them.

They want a quick, mobile battle deep inside the enemy's territory to annihilate the enemy. All good and noble objectives, but appear next to impossible for the likes of Indian Army and taking in view how the balance of forces stand.

Impossible? I am sure your PA think tanks dont think so. As for conventional balance of forces, its askew. That is why you have had to go on to a first use policy, because whether you accept it or not, your defences will not be able to hold against a sustained high intensity offensive.

Your only alternative to relieve any pressure in plains will be to take the offensive in J&K. Be our guests.

 

[oct605032048]

India can't afford a long time war. About 90% of it's oil supply is heavily depend on export from Arab gulf countries any cold start invasion at Pakistan bring the angry of fire of the Muslim world to India. I bet they are not stupid enough to neglect that.