What's new

Pakistani Army will remain India-centric: Kayani

third eye

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
18,519
Reaction score
13
Country
India
Location
India
DAWN.COM | Front Page | Kayani spells out threat posed by Indian doctrine


By Cyril Almeida
Thursday, 04 Feb, 2010

RAWALPINDI: While the Pakistan Army is alert to and fighting the threat posed by militancy, it remains an “India-centric” institution and that reality will not change in any significant way until the Kashmir issue and water disputes are resolved, according to army chief Gen Kayani.

In a presentation to Pakistani media, Gen Kayani reiterated his widely reported comments on the Pakistan Army’s view of the situation in Afghanistan and the way forward there.



But the army chief also made it clear that his institution’s “frame of reference” for addressing the problems in that country included certain concerns that are India specific.

History, unresolved issues, India’s military capability and its ‘Cold Start’ doctrine meant that Pakistan could not afford to let its guard down. Repeating a well-known formulation, Gen Kayani said: “We plan on adversaries’ capabilities, not intentions.”

The tough, matter-of-fact line on India was in stark contrast to that of Gen Kayani’s predecessor, Gen (retd) Musharraf, who tried hard to push for peace with India in his latter years in power.



Gen Kayani, though, does not carry the dual burden of being president and the army chief, which perhaps explains the narrower, militaristic formulation of Pakistan’s posture towards India.

The general was particularly keen to highlight the threat posed by India’s ‘Cold Start’ doctrine. Turing the traditional theory of war on its head, ‘Cold Start’ would permit the Indian Army to attack before mobilising, increasing the possibility of a “sudden spiral escalation”, according to Gen Kayani.

The Pakistan Army’s concerns about ‘Cold Start’ are well known, but Gen Kayani went as far as to put a timeline on its implementation: two years for India to achieve partial implementation and five years for full.



If true, the strategic impact could be of the highest order: defence analysts have speculated that ‘Cold Start’ may lead the Pakistan Army to lower its nuclear threshold as a way of deterring any punitive strikes or rapid capture of territory by the Indian armed forces.

Yet, Gen Kayani was also keen to point out that he did not have a one-dimensional view of security. Despite the fact that India’s defence budget is “seven times” that of Pakistan’s “there has to be a balance between development and military spending,” the general said.

He also pleaded that “peace and stability in South Asia should not be made hostage to a single terrorist act of a non-state actor”, a reference to the November 2008 Mumbai attacks.



Refusing to talk to Pakistan would send a bad signal on two counts: one, the non-state actors would know that they have the power to nudge India and Pakistan towards war; and two, within India it would become clear that relations with Pakistan could be suspended indefinitely.

The comments on India, though, came only later in an extended Power Point Presentation that covered everything from the operations in Swat and South Waziristan to the “way forward” in Afghanistan. Gen Kayani seemed relatively pleased with the reaction his presentation received when first unveiled at a meeting of chiefs of defence staff of Nato and its allied countries in Brussels late last month.

Emphasising what he termed the “fundamentals”, he claimed that until the Afghan government improved its credibility and governance record and until the Afghan population began to change its perception that Isaf is not winning, the Afghan government would not be able to establish its writ and the local Taliban would not be “weaned off”.

But on Afghanistan, too, India featured in Gen Kayani’s comments. Rejecting India’s reported interest in training the Afghan National Army and the country’s police force, Gen Kayani argued that Pakistan had a more legitimate expectation to do so.

Taken together, Gen Kayani’s comments suggest that the possibility of a thaw in relations between India and Pakistan any time soon is low.

Both India and Pakistan appear to have firmly lapsed into the old pattern of highlighting the differences between them and the threats they face from each other, while nominally leaving the door open to an improvement in relations if one side addresses the other’s concerns.



Unlike the past, though, the stakes appear to be higher because of the uncertain future of Afghanistan and a ‘nuclear overhang’ that may be affected by ‘Cold Start’.
 
.
The speech left some doubts in my mind.

The Pakistan Army’s concerns about ‘Cold Start’ are well known, but Gen Kayani went as far as to put a timeline on its implementation: two years for India to achieve partial implementation and five years for full.

This cold start doctorine was formulated in 2004. Going by Gen. Kayani words, is it in full implementation in India? :what:

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers10\paper991.html

If true, the strategic impact could be of the highest order: defence analysts have speculated that ‘Cold Start’ may lead the Pakistan Army to lower its nuclear threshold as a way of deterring any punitive strikes or rapid capture of territory by the Indian armed forces.

If there is any possibility of nuclear conflict...it means cold start is a failure. The purpose of cold start is to cause maximum damage through quick offensive action on adversery's military installation without threatening its existance.

Yet, Gen Kayani was also keen to point out that he did not have a one-dimensional view of security. Despite the fact that India’s defence budget is “seven times” that of Pakistan’s “there has to be a balance between development and military spending,” the general said.

A knowledgable person like him is well aware of the fact how much India is spending on defence. He should have atleast compared with his own country.

But on Afghanistan, too, India featured in Gen Kayani’s comments. Rejecting India’s reported interest in training the Afghan National Army and the country’s police force, Gen Kayani argued that Pakistan had a more legitimate expectation to do so.

Without going by "media reports", India has catagorically denied sending his army to Afghanistan. And how come it is legitimate right for Pakistan?
 
.
Well, he has a right to make his own conclusions & do what he feels best for his nation & army.

Making a presentation to the media seems away from the ordinary . Also the parts below :

1.He also pleaded that “peace and stability in South Asia should not be made hostage to a single terrorist act of a non-state actor”, a reference to the November 2008 Mumbai attacks.

2. Refusing to talk to Pakistan would send a bad signal on two counts: one, the non-state actors would know that they have the power to nudge India and Pakistan towards war; and two, within India it would become clear that relations with Pakistan could be suspended indefinitely.
 
. .
Just a another scrap from the Gen. blah.blah..blah...
Looks like you never read your own gen. Kapoora's statements. But why the hell am i comparing Kapoor with kiyani. Kiyani is a wise man on the other hand Kapoor.....just forget it.
 
.
Looks like you never read your own gen. Kapoora's statements. But why the hell am i comparing Kapoor with kiyani. Kiyani is a wise man on the other hand Kapoor.....just forget it.

May I request you (and others) to focus on artcle rather than persons.
We are not intelligent enough to judge either Gen. Kapoor or Gen. Kayani.

I pointed some points in his statements which does not look correct to me.
 
.
well his statement about lowered nuclear threashold can be as easily interpreted as threatning to nuke india as Gen Kapoor's statement of 96 hours response was interpreted as a boast of defeating Pak and China in 96 hours..
 
.
well his statement about lowered nuclear threashold can be as easily interpreted as threatning to nuke india as Gen Kapoor's statement of 96 hours response was interpreted as a boast of defeating Pak and China in 96 hours..

Well.....General Kapoor never said he would defeat any nation. The 96 hours was the timeframe to mobilize army into enemy's territory. The two front was is defensive in nature for China and offensive for Pakistan. BUT....it is not saying about victory. What is interpreted is not necessarily what it means. :azn:

As for nuclear threshold, I believe cold start is based on avoidance of nuclear conflict. Also India has NFU policy in place.
 
.
Well.....General Kapoor never said he would defeat any nation. The 96 hours was the timeframe to mobilize army into enemy's territory. The two front was is defensive in nature for China and offensive for Pakistan. BUT....it is not saying about victory. What is interpreted is not necessarily what it means. :azn:

As for nuclear threshold, I believe cold start is based on avoidance of nuclear conflict. Also India has NFU policy in place.

exactly.. i was just pointing out the difference in the maturity of responses to the 2 statements both of which can be misinterpreted..
I havent yet seen posts with headlines

Kayani threatens to Nuke India :azn:
 
.
RAWALPINDI: The Pakistani Army will remain "India-centric" until the Kashmir

issue and water disputes are resolved, its chief, Gen Ashfaq
Parvez Kayani,
says.

In a presentation to Pakistani media, Kayani made it clear that the army's "frame of reference" for addressing the problems in the country included certain concerns that are India specific.

History, unresolved issues, India's military capability and its "Cold Start" doctrine meant that Pakistan could not afford to let its guard down, Dawn.com quoted Kayani as saying.

"We plan on adversaries' capabilities, not intentnons," he added.

"The tough, matter-of-fact line on India was in stark contrast to that of Gen. Kayani's predecessor, Gen. (retd) Musharraf, who tried hard to push for peace with India in his latter years in power," Dawn.com noted.

"Gen Kayani, though, does not carry the dual burden of being president and the army chief, which perhaps explains the narrower, militaristic formulation of Pakistan's posture towards India," it added.

Kayani repeatedly highlighted the threat posed by India's "Cold Start" doctrine, and sid it would permit the Indian Army to attack before mobilising and thus increasing the possibility of a "sudden spiral escalation".

At the same time, Kayani pointed out that he did not have a one-dimensional view of security. Despite the fact that India's defence budget was "seven times" that of Pakistan's, "there has to be a balance between development and military spending", he noted.

He also maintained that "peace and stability in South Asia should not be made hostage to a single terrorist act of a non-state actor", a reference to the November 2008 Mumbai attacks.

On Afghanistan, too, India featured in Kayani's comments. Rejecting India's reported interest in training the Afghan National Army and the country's police force, he argued that Pakistan had a more legitimate expectation to do so.

"Taken together, Gen Kayani's comments suggest that the possibility of a thaw in relations between India and Pakistan any time soon is low," Dawn.com noted.

Pakistani Army will remain India-centric: Kayani- Politics/Nation-News-The Economic Times
 
.
thats is problem with them they think more about us first they think about them self

they have negative attitude
 
. .
Pakistans obesession to TRY and achieve some form of military parity is destroying the pakistani nation.

In 10 yeats time todays gap of 8-1 in GDP will ne nearer 12-1.

India already outspends Pakistan military by 4 or 5 to one thanks to huge GDP.

IN 10 YEARS it will cease to be a contest... ANYMORE

You cannot compete or match UNLESS YOUR RESOUCES alow you to MATCH
 
.
Pakistans obesession to TRY and achieve some form of military parity is destroying the pakistani nation.

In 10 yeats time todays gap of 8-1 in GDP will ne nearer 12-1.

India already outspends Pakistan military by 4 or 5 to one thanks to huge GDP.

IN 10 YEARS it will cease to be a contest... ANYMORE

You cannot compete or match UNLESS YOUR RESOUCES alow you to MATCH

"At the same time, Kayani pointed out that he did not have a one-dimensional view of security. Despite the fact that India's defence budget was "seven times" that of Pakistan's, "there has to be a balance between development and military spending", he noted."


Read before ranting please ...
 
.
Wasn.t meant to be a rant.

But the Economic difference is beginning to tell I think

I should have used a softer/ tone to make my point
 
.
Back
Top Bottom