Military Brass Credits Modi for Deafening Silence at LoC

[magudi]

NEW DELHI: Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s peace moves vis-a-vis Islamabad appear to have started showing results. In the past 50 days, not a single incident of ceasefire violation by the Pakistan army has been reported along the Line of Control. Leaders of India and Pakistan have met on four occasions in the past one month. In fact, Modi has met his Pakistan counterpart Nawaz Sharif twice in less than a month, and this seems to have contributed to ensuring peace along the LoC.

Military sources say such a long pause on the border is “surprising” and “unusual”. A military assessment suggests that this peace could be due to resumption of talks between leaders of the two nations. Though the overall number of ceasefire violations is high this year, the year-end lull is significant.

The LoC has witnessed 152 ceasefire violations till October-end this year compared to 146, same period last year. The last violation occurred on November 2 in Poonch, in which two jawans were killed in firing by Pakistani troops at Indian posts.

July and August witnessed a maximum of 70 violations, almost half the total violations this year. Aggression from across the border was met with equal use of firepower. Union Home Minister Rajnath singh at the time warned, “India will stop counting the bullets it fires in response if Pakistan provokes.” This fiery rhetoric has now changed as External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj remarked after the PM’s successful visit to Lahore on Friday, “That’s like a statesman. Padosi se aise hi rishte hone chahiyen (this is the kind of relation one should have with neighbours).

Resumption of the peace process with Pakistan began with Modi meeting Sharif on the sidelines of the Paris climate summit on November 30. Though a short meeting, it laid the foundation for restart of peace talks, derailed after New Delhi called off NSA-level talks on August 22 following Pakistan’s insistence on including Kashmir on the agenda. On December 6, National Security Advisor Ajit Doval met his Pakistani counterpart Naseer Khan Janjua in Bangkok, following which Sushma attended the Heart of Asia Conference in Islamabad. On December 9, Sushma held talks with Nawaz Sharif’s foreign affairs advisor Sartaz Aziz in Islamabad, in which both sides agreed to launch comprehensive dialogue stalled since 2012. The latest diplomatic move was by Modi when he paid Sharif a surprise visit on the occasion of the latter’s birthday on December 25.


Military Brass Credits Modi for Deafening Silence at LoC -The New Indian Express

 

[Pulsar]

Deafening silence? Both sides ran out of practice ammo! That's why!

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Deafening silence? Both sides ran out of practice ammo! That's why!

Both sides were waiting for Santa to visit with all the 'goodies'

read that as Santa Singh......

 

[Leviza]

First of all, this clearly tells that MODI asked his army to stop it , As Pakistan army only respond to the firing from the indian side ..
MODI understand that any firing from his army will only result in indian army personals being dead ...

 

[Sipahi]

It was Indian Army who was doing all that sh!t.

 

[MadDog]

Since elections in Bihar are over , hence ceasefire violations aren't required to gather votes, ceasefire violations increased since Modi came to power, he wanted to internally strengthen himself, & maintain his image which he got after 2002 gujrat riots among his voters. However now these votes are no longer required, he seeks peaceful relations with Pak.

 

[kadamba-warrior]

Military Brass Credits Modi for Deafening Silence at LoC -The New Indian Express

Deafening silence? Both sides ran out of practice ammo! That's why!

I thought the early winter snow (by making it impractical for infiltration attempts) was to be credited for the deafening silence along the areas prone to infiltration! If there is no infiltration, there is no cover fire and hence no need for retaliatory fire.

IMHO, the real test for Modi will come when spring arrives in the high Himalayan passes. The fellow seems to have boxed himself firmly in with his own peace overtures!

 

[Icarus]

I thought the early winter snow (by making it impractical for infiltration attempts) was to be credited for the deafening silence along the areas prone to infiltration! If there is no infiltration, there is no cover fire and hence no need for retaliatory fire.

IMHO, the real test for Modi will come when spring arrives in the high Himalayan passes. The fellow seems to have boxed himself firmly in with his own peace overtures!

Military Tactics 101, if you are carrying out an incursion into enemy territory, you DO NOT use covering fire to announce your arrival and also your position.

 

[kadamba-warrior]

Military Tactics 101, if you are carrying out an incursion into enemy territory, you DO NOT use covering fire to announce your arrival and also your position.

You could hardly say that the FREQUENT infiltrations that take place along the LoC as surprise incursions. In fact, the cover fire has been being provided just to distract the defenders away from the infiltrators.

The trick is to make the defending BSF, "DEAF" to the cross-border fire by firing frequently and randomly! That way, there is no way for BSF to know if it was a cover-fire or just a b'day celebration fire from across the border.

To Rangers' credit, it has actually been very effective.

 

[wiseone2]

Deafening silence? Both sides ran out of practice ammo! That's why!

when does it start again ?

 

[Pulsar]

Military Tactics 101, if you are carrying out an incursion into enemy territory, you DO NOT use covering fire to announce your arrival and also your position.

YOU DO! That's basic tactics! Covering fire is provided to keep the opposing force's heads down to prevent observation and fire whilst infiltration is conducted through gaps in the defences.

This tactic can also be employed as a deception measure ie., fire in one area to divert attention and infiltrate through another.

And you're a 'counter terrorism expert'?? You need to ask the real experts like Pulsar (Me!)

 

[Icarus]

YOU DO! That's basic tactics! Covering fire is provided to keep the opposing force's heads down to prevent observation and fire whilst infiltration is conducted through gaps in the defences.

This tactic can also be employed as a deception measure ie., fire in one area to divert attention and infiltrate through another.

And you're a 'counter terrorism expert'?? You need to ask the real experts like Pulsar (Me!)

Are you even serious? Covering fire is used only when you are trying to mount a breach into enemy lines during an exchange of fire, you do not initiate an exchange of fire during an incursion just so you can get covering fire. There is no way you are military. I think I will ask @third eye to shed some light on what Indian Army manuals on basic infantry tactics have to say about this matter.
What you are saying would amount to Pakistan bombarding Indian positions in Ladakh when they were infiltrating into Kargil just because they get to use a fancy word called covering fire, it would have no strategic utility. The same principle extends to the LoC, why would I want to fire at Indian positions and announce that something is up when the very porous and densely forested area can allow me to easily infiltrate unannounced?

 

[shah1398]

Well Modi cud not visit Pakistan with Indian Army firing at LOC and continuously violating ceasefire. So he ordered them to halt the firing for time being and meanwhile select new targets and devise a new strategy.

 

[Pulsar]

Are you even serious? Covering fire is used only when you are trying to mount a breach into enemy lines during an exchange of fire, you do not initiate an exchange of fire during an incursion just so you can get covering fire. There is no way you are military. I think I will ask @third eye to shed some light on what Indian Army manuals on basic infantry tactics have to say about this matter.
What you are saying would amount to Pakistan bombarding Indian positions in Ladakh when they were infiltrating into Kargil just because they get to use a fancy word called covering fire, it would have no strategic utility. The same principle extends to the LoC, why would I want to fire at Indian positions and announce that something is up when the very porous and densely forested area can allow me to easily infiltrate unannounced?

Icarus! Please don't try and teach me tactics! I've been doing just that for years!

It's silly and laughable when you say that 'Pakistan bombarding Indian positions in Ladakh when they were infiltrating into Kargil'!! We're talking about a stretch which is a km or two in extent where you have a gap between two defended localities (FDLs), through which an infiltration could occur. Now what would you do to help the infiltrators to infiltrate? You would prevent observation and fire from these mutually supporting localities by covering fire, thus putting their 'heads down' so they don't bring down aimed fire on the infiltrating force moving through the gap.

Secondly, as a deception measure, 'covering fire' could also be brought down on an adjacent defended locality a few km away thus diverting the attention of the defender's artillery and small arms so that a force can be infiltrated without interference.

Now do you get it? If you have any more queries on tactics, please don't hesitate to ask!

 

[Icarus]

Icarus! Please don't try and teach me tactics! I've been doing just that for years!

I would like to know under what capacity, you could be eligible for a Professionals tag.

It's silly and laughable when you say that 'Pakistan bombarding Indian positions in Ladakh when they were infiltrating into Kargil'!! We're talking about a stretch which is a km or two in extent where you have a gap between two defended localities (FDLs), through which an infiltration could occur. Now what would you do to help the infiltrators to infiltrate? You would prevent observation and fire from these mutually supporting localities by covering fire, thus putting their 'heads down' so they don't bring down aimed fire on the infiltrating force moving through the gap.

I purposefully used the Kargil example to highlight a point, the importance of a silent incursion though you took it in a very literal fashion. Okay, if I initiate an exchange of fire between two positions I would also endanger my own people who would then be caught in the crossfire. Since covering fire is not a mutually exclusive exercise that will not be responded to in kind and thus leave the people in the middle in a complete lurch.

Secondly, as a deception measure, 'covering fire' could also be brought down on an adjacent defended locality a few km away thus diverting the attention of the defender's artillery and small arms so that a force can be infiltrated without interference.

This point has merit, but then it defeats the entire premise of this discussion since it could just be that Pakistan has stopped firing but the infiltration continues regardless.

Now do you get it? If you have any more queries on tactics don't hesitate to ask!

I still see the same holes in your argument, there's never a fixed, by-the-book approach but I have been posted to Kashmir during the escalation and have thus seen significant cross border movement from both sides, we never announced the arrival of our guys and neither did the Indians.