Indian strategic thinking and Pakistan.

[Nassr]

True as long as the riposte is launched along the main axis of intrusion. Your offensive forces can chose not to offer battle and leave the job to the defending forces. Regroup, realign and launch your own offensives en-masse, in the enemy territory of your chosing.

Riposte and Counter Offensive are two different types of military operations. The forces earmarked as reserves for riposte or counter offensive or any other such operation do not take part in the defensive battle of the holding formation, as per the pre-prepaired battle plan, unless it is deemed essential. Re-grouping, re-aligning and offensive en-mass are terminologies apparently used in different contexts. I am though naive and say things at times which may not be as close to reality, as I see them.

Thank you for the reply.

 

[deltacamelately]

Raising of China specific Strike Corps for NE India is a pretty old decision. If my memory holds, it is more than a decade old plan being implemented now. Regarding raising the additional divisions, part of it is old, particularly with regard to 3 Corps, as 3 Corps earlier consisted of just one division, probably 57. Remaining new raisings may be new.

The planning or recommendations were indeed old, but NO decisions were made till 2009. It all began as a decision of the China Study Group, a previously classified government body that considers all strategic issues relating to China. Thereafter, the IA’s Directorate General of Military Operations prepared a cabinet note. The decision to raise the additional divisions was taken by the Cabinet Committee on Security on 14th May 2009. It was rushed through because top UPA leaders felt if the UPA were not re-elected, the new government would begin the decision-making process afresh, losing another couple of years. To manage the expenses, it was decided the two defensive mountain divisions would first be raised during the 11th Army plan. Next, the strike corps, including its two mountain divisions, would be raised during the 12th Army Plan. Please note that the the approx. cost of raising a new mountain Division is estimated to be around Rs 700-900 crores. The IA's budget a decade back wasn't going to allow that.

You mentioned, "It is indeed planned, that the strategic command will have 3 strike corps namely 1 corps, 2 Corps and 3 Corps. In addition the strike corps will have a single armored division." You didn't mention 21 Corps, which is also a strike corps. The single armoured division with the strike corps, that you talked about; is it that each strike corps will have an armoured division, which they already do, or the new one being raised for NE India will also have an armoured division, consisting of light tanks. This aspect needs a bit of clarity please.

Okay, lets clear this a bit more. The China Study Group recommended for Three new Mountain Corps, ALL China specific, and these excluded the three existing Strike Corps based at Mathura, Bhopal and Ambala. The CCS however has given the decision of only one till date. It was for lack of nomenclature that I mentioned them as 1, 2 and 3. Please do not confuse them with the I, II and XXI. Lastly, the new Mountain Strike Corps is to have its own dedicated Armored Division, comprising of Lighter Tanks. Hope this clears the air, Sir.

Will the heli-lift operations behind enemy lines be undertaken by troops from the two infantry divisions from the new strike corps or the SF. You didn't include SF as part of the new raising.

Sir, from here on you will have to walk it alone for the obvious reasons.

Riposte and Counter Offensive are two different types of military operations. The forces earmarked as reserves for riposte or counter offensive or any other such operation do not take part in the defensive battle of the holding formation, as per the pre-prepaired battle plan, unless it is deemed essential. Re-grouping, re-aligning and offensive en-mass are terminologies apparently used in different contexts. I am though naive and say things at times which may not be as close to reality, as I see them.

Thank you for the reply.

I appreciate your understanding of the obvious. I commented on the bit about having to disengage after the reposte gettin petered out. Concur for the rest.

 

[Nassr]

The planning or recommendations were indeed old, but NO decisions were made till 2009. It all began as a decision of the China Study Group, a previously classified government body that considers all strategic issues relating to China. Thereafter, the IA’s Directorate General of Military Operations prepared a cabinet note. The decision to raise the additional divisions was taken by the Cabinet Committee on Security on 14th May 2009. It was rushed through because top UPA leaders felt if the UPA were not re-elected, the new government would begin the decision-making process afresh, losing another couple of years. To manage the expenses, it was decided the two defensive mountain divisions would first be raised during the 11th Army plan. Next, the strike corps, including its two mountain divisions, would be raised during the 12th Army Plan. Please note that the the approx. cost of raising a new mountain Division is estimated to be around Rs 700-900 crores. The IA's budget a decade back wasn't going to allow that.


Okay, lets clear this a bit more. The China Study Group recommended for Three new Mountain Corps, ALL China specific, and these excluded the three existing Strike Corps based at Mathura, Bhopal and Ambala. The CCS however has given the decision of only one till date. It was for lack of nomenclature that I mentioned them as 1, 2 and 3. Please do not confuse them with the I, II and XXI. Lastly, the new Mountain Strike Corps is to have its own dedicated Armored Division, comprising of Lighter Tanks. Hope this clears the air, Sir.


Sir, from here on you will have to walk it alone for the obvious reasons.

I appreciate your understanding of the obvious. I commented on the bit about having to disengage after the reposte gettin petered out. Concur for the rest.

Very grateful indeed for all this insight. The picture fits now. Thank you.

 

[Joe Shearer]

https://lh4.ggpht.com/iCDZfyGXc11DQHolYAyfGn97c71ewps53F4luOG6dSDgpOk5aO7m9ZtNzYFYXGc4ABz_tX8=s5

Hi a beginner's question, if the map above is to go by at how many places should we Indians be defending ourselves as we seem to have lot of areas where the Chinese could attack from??

ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting

As I mentioned somewhere before, one theatre, nine fronts.

1. India-China- Burma three country border;
2. Eastern Arunachal - the Walong sector;
3. Western Arunachal - the Tawang sector;
4. Bhutan;
5. Sikkim;
6. Nepal;
7. Uttaranchal/Himachal;
8. Southern Ladakh - Pangong Tso to Lahaul-Spiti border;
9. Northern Ladakh - Nubra Valley to Pangong Two.

Depressing.

 

[RazPaK]

Are external variables out of the question in this discussion?


India may be able to neutralize Pakistan military threat and stop advancement, however would this mean that Pakistani militas could not be mobilized from the Northern Areas?

 

[deltacamelately]

Very grateful indeed for all this insight. The picture fits now. Thank you.

You are humble Sir.
Everything I have quoted here is available in open source. Just trying to chip in along with you all.

 

[deltacamelately]

As I mentioned somewhere before, one theatre, nine fronts.

1. India-China- Burma three country border;
2. Eastern Arunachal - the Walong sector;
3. Western Arunachal - the Tawang sector;
4. Bhutan;
5. Sikkim;
6. Nepal;
7. Uttaranchal/Himachal;
8. Southern Ladakh - Pangong Tso to Lahaul-Spiti border;
9. Northern Ladakh - Nubra Valley to Pangong Two.

Depressing.

Indeed!

Why worry Sir?

They are reading us just right. It ain't 9 fronts for nothings....the adversary's motivation must diminish, not replenish.

1. India-China- Burma three country border; - Democratic India feeding the Junta isn't by choice.
2. Eastern Arunachal - the Walong sector; - Mostly academic.
3. Western Arunachal - the Tawang sector; - Short of Namka Chu and Thagla.
4. Bhutan; - NA
5. Sikkim; - NA
6. Nepal; - The International Community will bring down hell for the PRC.
7. Uttaranchal/Himachal; - The Lowest / Least battle incentive choice for the PLA.
8. Southern Ladakh - Pangong Tso to Lahaul-Spiti border; - The Lake is allowed free for boating by them, NOT by us.
9. Northern Ladakh - Nubra Valley to Pangong Two. - They still need the road, we just need a landslide.

 

[deltacamelately]

Are external variables out of the question in this discussion?


India may be able to neutralize Pakistan military threat and stop advancement, however would this mean that Pakistani militas could not be mobilized from the Northern Areas?

Yes, the PA can and possibly could.
However, why not go through some real interesting threads available in this very forum, before dishing out the prescription Doctor?

 

[Joe Shearer]

I am again a free man, proud and independent, and bowing before nobody on earth, and am informed by the all-highest that this status will continue for the rest of the night, since dinner is over.

Very true. Fighting a simultaneous war can be exhausting. The strategy what you seem to be advocating reminds me of the Schliffen Plan that was implemented by Imperial Germany during World War 1. Neutralize France before the Russians mobilize in 6 weeks.

To be honest, my inspiration is from contemporary engagements, where great care was taken, pains were taken to ensure comprehensive air superiority over the opponent before venturing into the terrestrial phase of the engagement.

My proposal for neutralizing the threat from Pakistan, and incidentally to revert to the spirit of this thread, is that we need to recognize the relative competence and performance under pressure of the three services.

I believe that the PAF is the strongest service in the Pakistani military; the PN is the weakest. Therefore, fighting a war of suppression of offensive capability is best done by attacking the PA after neutralizing the PAF and the PN.

is such a strategic alternative available, given that the superiority available to India even a decade ago has been eroded by administrative blundering and political cupidity ? That is a moot point. Until there is a clear superiority both in technical and in numerical terms, such a strategy must fail. It is only the forced diminution of technical capability of the PAF due to their increasing stringency of resource, and the increasing diplomatic isolation of their country, that prevents them from actually taking the upper hand over the IAF.

Therefore, any further expansion of this concept must be understood to be hypothetical at the moment.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I have deliberately stayed away from considering the needs of the northern theatre in any depth, in order to focus attention to the issue of neutralizing the western theatre first. However, your comments are interesting, and you may like to review what is being stated in response.

Indeed!

Why worry Sir?

They are reading us just right. It ain't 9 fronts for nothings....the adversary's motivation must diminish, not replenish.

1. India-China- Burma three country border; - Democratic India feeding the Junta isn't by choice.
I believe the motivation was elsewhere; our MEA is the fifth greatest enemy of Indian military capability, after the PLA, PA, the Indian political class and the IAS.

However, the effect is what could have been wished for.

2. Eastern Arunachal - the Walong sector; - Mostly academic.
Why so? Although the Indian resistance in 1962 was far more effective than people realize, it is still almost sure that in case the PLA attacks, it will do so at least on one main front and another feint. Within the Arunachal sector, or front, another attack in eastern Arunachal is a distinct possibility.

3. Western Arunachal - the Tawang sector; - Short of Namka Chu and Thagla.
I did not understand. This is our most vulnerable sector.

4. Bhutan; - NA
Again, not understood. Do you mean not applicable? Why so? Why would the PLA refrain from violating the neutrality of Bhutan, if only on the grounds of existing Indian military presence there?

5. Sikkim; - NA
Are you saying that this is the least vulnerable due to the fierce concentration of XXXIII Corps on this sector?

6. Nepal; - The International Community will bring down hell for the PRC.
Imagine a scenario where a Maoist regime actually invites them in.

Besides, the PLA has a huge temptation to overcome. Following the clash between the two Army factions, when General Panag was summarily transferred to Central Command, that command was simultaneously emasculated. There is nothing to oppose the PLA rolling down to the Gangetic Plain, horse, foot and artillery.

7. Uttaranchal/Himachal; - The Lowest / Least battle incentive choice for the PLA.
I wholly disagree, except from the point of view of it being an extra stretch for the PLA, in terms of logistics.

8. Southern Ladakh - Pangong Tso to Lahaul-Spiti border; - The Lake is allowed free for boating by them, NOT by us.
Not clear. We are vulnerable here, being at the end of our supply chain, while it is also one of the two sectors where the Chinese can deploy armour.

9. Northern Ladakh - Nubra Valley to Pangong Two. - They still need the road, we just need a landslide.
Are you referring to the Aksai Chin road? Yes, they do need it, an there is precious little we can do about it. Th reference to a landslide was not clear. If it is still a reference to the Aksai Chin road, I am surprised. That road runs through a cold desert plain, with hundreds of kilometres of flat land on either side.

 

[sputnik]

I request to senior members that we should take into consideration some other facts into consideration.
Here is my few observation:

1. India is engaging Pakistan more of in Diplomatic fronts at world platforms. And Being a weak democracy and economy it is finding difficult to keep up with India.

2. Issues Like Indus Water Sharing, Siachin, support for terrorism will keep hunting pakistan.And this is in our favour.
3. Militarily both Nations can't gain much from each other under nuclear over hang.But that doesn't mean we should gave up on this. India Need to form coalition in this region to have Iraq style invasion. Although it looks very imaginative but then only this long held problem can be sold. we have to deal with them Like world dealing with North Korea. Pakistan is our North Korea.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I request to senior members that we should take into consideration some other facts into consideration.
Here is my few observation:

1. India is engaging Pakistan more of in Diplomatic fronts at world platforms. And Being a weak democracy and economy it is finding difficult to keep up with India.

2. Issues Like Indus Water Sharing, Siachin, support for terrorism will keep hunting pakistan.And this is in our favour.
3. Militarily both Nations can't gain much from each other under nuclear over hang.But that doesn't mean we should gave up on this. India Need to form coalition in this region to have Iraq style invasion. Although it looks very imaginative but then only this long held problem can be sold. we have to deal with them Like world dealing with North Korea. Pakistan is our North Korea.

I cannot agree with this, personally.

There is a significant liberal and secular, though observant, section of Pakistani society which is more the ally of Indians (and people everywhere in the world) of similar thinking. We cannot abandon them and walk away.

The core of the Pakistani officers and men are decent people. They fight for their country, just as our soldiers, sailors and airmen do for ours, and we should respect them for it. We can't write them off either.

Finally, we need to work with Pakistan, not against her, to set things right. It is impossible to destroy a nation-state. That thought needs to be uprooted from every thinking person's mind, on grounds of moral inadmissibility. We are left with striving for peace, while remaining prepared to defend ourselves with arms.

Forming groups and blocs is a dangerous, double-edged weapon.

 

[Bang Galore]

I cannot agree with this, personally.

There is a significant liberal and secular, though observant, section of Pakistani society which is more the ally of Indians (and people everywhere in the world) of similar thinking. We cannot abandon them and walk away.

We can & we must. It is simply not our concern & it is downright dangerous to believe it is. We also put at risk any chance of success they may have in steering Pakistan away from the hardliners if we are seen to be their allies.

The core of the Pakistani officers and men are decent people. They fight for their country, just as our soldiers, sailors and airmen do for ours, and we should respect them for it. We can't write them off either.

Without doubt they are decent people but we simply are in no position to do anything for them.

Finally, we need to work with Pakistan, not against her, to set things right. It is impossible to destroy a nation-state. That thought needs to be uprooted from every thinking person's mind, on grounds of moral inadmissibility. We are left with striving for peace, while remaining prepared to defend ourselves with arms.

Whilst agreeing in theory, it is simply hard for anyone to influence Pakistan's eventual course or choice of destination & even more so from India. To defend ourselves, it is imperative that we leave all muddle headedness out of our thinking & act on very simple & basic premises. It serves us to find ways to contain the threat rather than opt for either retaliation (may still become necessary) or close engagement. Terrorism emanating from Pakistan (atleast at the level it is now) is more damaging to Pakistan & its cause than it is to India regardless of the loss of lives that will unfortunately take place. In a very odd manner, the terrorism emanating from Pakistan removes any premise of morality from Pakistani arguments & causes a substantial part of the population to be less gung-ho about the cause. Time is India's greatest asset & Pakistan's enemy. Peace will only come when the causes that separate us become less relevant(not irrelevant, just less relevant). For that to happen, Pakistan must see India moving further & further away from them on the economic scales. That alone will cause some rethinking in their priorities. The best we can hope for is a forced calm, imagining anything else at this point risks putting our population in harm's way.

 

[RazPaK]

Yes, the PA can and possibly could.
However, why not go through some real interesting threads available in this very forum, before dishing out the prescription Doctor?

While I am not claiming to be learned in this subject, I can say without a doubt, that the Pakistan military's greatest asset and trump card has always been these militias. Agree to disagree, however no serious discussion could be had with out addressing this point.

 

[sputnik]

I cannot agree with this, personally.

There is a significant liberal and secular, though observant, section of Pakistani society which is more the ally of Indians (and people everywhere in the world) of similar thinking. We cannot abandon them and walk away.

The core of the Pakistani officers and men are decent people. They fight for their country, just as our soldiers, sailors and airmen do for ours, and we should respect them for it. We can't write them off either.

Finally, we need to work with Pakistan, not against her, to set things right. It is impossible to destroy a nation-state. That thought needs to be uprooted from every thinking person's mind, on grounds of moral inadmissibility. We are left with striving for peace, while remaining prepared to defend ourselves with arms.

Forming groups and blocs is a dangerous, double-edged weapon.

Thanks for your post Joe.

But I am completely agree to Bangalore. It is very dangerous if we believe in that way as you said.

1. They do have intelligensia but then it can always provided sheltered in case of WAR.

2. Their uniform man are decent. Decent for whom. If speaking English, having good read in literature or world at glance and then conspiring Kargil like event is decent then to hell with decency. I think you are carried away by their sorry state of affairs. Prithviraj commited same mistake by forgiving Md. gaznavi. Even their decent society is swear by his name till date. Just look at the way we are treating hurriyat in India and Pakistan treating minorties at their place. One Should not forget what their decent man done in Afganistan.

3. And Indian planners are right when they keep 80% of military resources against them. I mean even China has not done as horrendouse things to any country forget India compare to what Pakistan done to India, Afganistan.

I like your tone Joe, But your tilt is dangerous. even for you.

Regards,
sputnik