What would India do if Soviet Union was at its gates?

[Iggy]

We will fight them till the last Pakistani!!

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

The treat means India was no longer neutral..it was allied with soviet...and therefore we planned it well to bury the soviets in Afghanistan itself...

That military neutrality part is a joke..it wasn't Antarctica navy trolling in the Indian ocean during East Pakistan war...and US is not signing CISMOA with Nepal or Bhutan...

It wasnt. It was as if we had a choice. When US and USSR announced alliances, we all knew how countries flew to sign agreements with them, with Pakistan one among them. Countries which havent signed where viewed like "you are with us or against us". After Nixon had become President, he had become too anti-Indian to contend with, and he was militarily prepared to engage India with all intelligence reports coming in.

We werent a self sufficient military to begin with. By the end of 65 war, what he had was British vintage planes. It was the Soviets who came forward to modernize our military.

Moreover wrt Afghanistan, Russia did come into (I wont call it Russian Invasion) disregarding Indira's advice to leave Afghanistan alone. And it faced it. Not once, but many times, USSR asked for India's help. They didnt pay to their friend's words, and had to pay the price.

In ur language, we werent neutral, and yes we didnt to a certain degree. But in our political context we were. We refused to drawn into a political and military battle btw 2 super powers. Once rebuffing USA during China war, second, USSR through Afghan conflict.

To this day, no USSR assets or bases were ever established in India, despite being an ally. Tomorrow US too cannot keep her assets or a base in India. In times of war, the article would be revoked, reinstating India's neutrality and not allowing war ships to fuel. Can u tell the same about Pakistan? The moment I type American drones are landing and taking off inside Pakistani soil with a Chinese base might come up in Gwadar.

I am not blaming Pakistan. Pakistan needs big powers to fend off India, which I do admire. If India was in Pakistan position (in landmass and population), we too might have done the same.

 

[somebozo]

So Do you mean that after Afghanistan ; Russia would have occupied Pakistan

Why would Russia occupy Pakistan

For the same reasons India is meddling in Baluchistan...strategic location..

It wasnt. It was as if we had a choice. When US and USSR announced alliances, we all knew how countries flew to sign agreements with them, with Pakistan one among them. Countries which havent signed where viewed like "you are with us or against us". After Nixon had become President, he had become too anti-Indian to contend with, and he was militarily prepared to engage India with all intelligence reports coming in.

This looks like a script straight out of Bollywood and in geopolitics reality it is complete garbage...the fact is that many countries maintained good releations with both camps..including Pakistan...relationships between Pakistan and Soviet Union only begin to deteriorate after Pakistan declared open all out support for Afghan mujaheddin.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

For the same reasons India is meddling in Baluchistan...strategic location..

Russia was never interested in Pakistan

It interfered in Afganistan to protect its former Central Asian states

 

[somebozo]

Thats a view most Pakistanis would like to believe.

The mass radicalisation Zia created in the nation, in the army & in Af lies at the root.

Even if the WOT was not ' mishandled' to use your word this situation would have still been arrived at thanks to the support Zia's action had by then created within Pakistan for such people.

Add to this the ' Strategic Depth' the PA felt it had in Af due to which it kept the ' animals' very close to itself, open borders also helped.

There is so much more & has been discusses here umpteen No of times.

Radicalization was created by Bhutto..Zia only made practical use of it..There were many radicalism plans thwarted during Zia time from pro-shariah extremist who wanted to over throw government and install shariah law..courtesy of Bhutto Islamisation...who adopted the purview that somehow going back 1400 years ago and building a tribal alliance like brotherhood (Islamic socialism) was the way forward in 21st century...

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

For the same reasons India is meddling in Baluchistan...strategic location..



This looks like a script straight out of Bollywood and in geopolitics reality it is complete garbage...the fact is that many countries maintained good releations with both camps..including Pakistan...relationships between Pakistan and Soviet Union only begin to deteriorate after Pakistan declared open all out support for Afghan mujaheddin.

Yeah. Nixon was garlanding India for not joining them. Was it?
India-Soviet relationship took off for better only after 1965 war. Why didnt Pakistan buy Migs from Russia if u had good relationship? Long before 1979?
Soviet never saw Pakistan as a ally nor a good relationship after Pakistan jumped at the first opportunity to join CENTO and something to get $$$ and new weapons. India didnt.

Even during Soviet in Afghanistan, there was no need for Pakistan to get involved. But u got involved. USSR, USA , Pakistan have learnt their lessons well. Afghans are still learning.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

that doesn't matter because by Zia time..Pakistan was not a member of Cento and Seato

You can't just snap your fingers and become friends with someone you hated for a good part of your life...

So you mean to say that Pakistan never opposed USSR?

Not really, Pakistan wanted to keep a neutral stance against alignment to either ideology, but that was not to be as the US was looked at in better light to the godless Muslim oppressing Soviets.

An amendment.

From what I recall,

You have my attention, can you guys reference this?

and could have made a security pact with India

It was offered by Pakistan back when it and China had conflicting interests to claims of Kashmir, before the Chinese-Indian war. Rejected by India.

If USSR had come to Pakistan, India would rather have helped them.

The whole strategy of the US in the Cold War was to prevent the Soviets from expanding. And expanding to any year round warm water port was a big NO-NO.

The US would probably have nuked Karachi and the coast of Pakistan than let the Soviets build roads or rails to Karachi.

Why didnt Pakistan buy Migs from Russia if u had good relationship? Long before 1979?

Chinese knock-offs were cheaper compared to the Mig- 19s, 21s, or 25s.

I dont know much of the early history of Pakistan, but the then Liaquat Ali, visited the US but not SU, pissing them off. I dont think it was until 1965 when the first notable Pakistan representative visited Moscow. And Moscow replied by sending the Primer before 1970, where they agreed among a host of ventures in economics/ political/ social.

If i'm not wrong it was during this visit the Steel Mills, OilFields, and other infrastructure projects were agreed to. The arrival of Bhutto, in a greater authority, was helpful also.

 

[Samrat420]

Considering that the messages sent accross were of Indian occupation officials working with the Soviets; I would think India would relish the opportunity to subjugate Pakistanis into total vassal status, or like the Japanese occupation of China.

It would be an extreme exaggeration to say India wants to occupy Pakistan(like Japan did to China) or subject it to vassalage. At most, India would like Pakistan to become like Bangladesh (in behavioral sense, not in economic or any other terms). Or if that's offensive to Pakistani pride, then at least, India would like Pakistan to become like Myanmar, having trade relations with each other, helping nab each-other's insurgents, and otherwise remaining largely aloof of each other.

BTW, What were you referring to when you used the term “Indian occupational officials" ?

 

[somebozo]

Russia was never interested in Pakistan

It interfered in Afganistan to protect its former Central Asian states

That was the excuse which Soviet union used to gobble half the planet..every next invasion was to protect some of their ally! Afghanistan was the red line..not only for Pakistan but the entire world..

pakistani were playing double game with India, India was long suspicious of pakistan be cause of kashmir invasion,
if any naive Indian PM would have accepted that proposal in case of chinese invasion India would have fore sure lost all of J&K. pakistan carries embed hatred for India and hindus can never be trusted, but in case pakistan would have come for help in case of soviet's India would have surely made a pact with pakistan.

And India is soo innocent they play a straight game everywhere? Right?
some key features of Indian personality..

Split ethics..passive aggression..whining and crying forever...

It would be an extreme exaggeration to say India wants to occupy Pakistan(like Japan did to China) or subject it to vassalage. At most, India would like Pakistan to become like Bangladesh (in behavioral sense, not in economic or any other terms). Or if that's offensive to Pakistani pride, then at least, India would like Pakistan to become like Myanmar, having trade relations with each other, helping nab each-other's insurgents, and otherwise remaining largely aloof of each other.

BTW, What were you referring to when you used the term “Indian occupational officials" ?

Pakistan is neither Bangladesh not Myanmaar!
So ... save the script for low budget bollywood flick..

Due to Soviet invasion of Afghanistan millions of Afghan refugees poured into Pakistani tribal areas..it became a moral and defensive duty to help them and arm them for protection against communist genocide..

 

[Samrat420]

That was the excuse which Soviet union used to gobble half the planet..every next invasion was to protect some of their ally! Afghanistan was the red line..not only for Pakistan but the entire world..



And India is soo innocent they play a straight game everywhere? Right?
some key features of Indian personality..

Split ethics..passive aggression..whining and crying forever...



Pakistan is neither Bangladesh not Myanmaar!
So ... save the script for low budget bollywood flick..

Due to Soviet invasion of Afghanistan millions of Afghan refugees poured into Pakistani tribal areas..it became a moral and defensive duty to help them and arm them for protection against communist genocide..

Read my post again Sir. No need to act so aggressively. I wasn't saying that Pakistan is either Bangladesh or Myanmar. I said that India ‘wants' Indo-Pak relations to be like either Indo-BD relation or Indo-Myanmar relation. India doesn't want to occupy Pakistan or subject it to vassalage.

 

[Hellfire]

From what I recall, the only reason why India didn't actually annex BD was because Nixon threatened India. Nixon was known to hate India with a passion, in particular Indira Gandhi, whom he accused of blatantly lying to him.

My point, an annexed Pakistan wouldn't be too much out of the ordinary.

The reason was more demographically poised.

Anyways, agreed with your statement above.

Thanks

 

[That Guy]

You have very good talent for out of the world ...err box imaginary thinking.

US & british did have plans to attack India during 1971 but once soviet subs surfaced in bay of bengal. They just ran away. Threatening & following up are two different things. There was nothing much US could till we had backing of soviets. It was not lying , unlike others Indira could not be bullied which frustrated the americans .

It was not as if nixon liked pakistan, he hated the entire subcontinent.

Ehrlichman: And the India-Pakistan thing in that larger canvas is really not understood by the average guy to be all that important. It’s a bunch of—
Nixon: Unwashed heathen. They’re picking away at each other over there.
Ehrlichman: Either side would have been the wrong side.1

Yes, I can google these things too. Don't pretend to speak about things as if you're an expert, just after googling them.

The US didn't run away, it merely didn't want to start a war unintentionally with the Soviets, but with Indira Gandhi blatantly going back on her word, Nixon was furious enough to threaten India. In fact, if the US seriously went in, there was zero chances that the Soviets would be able to stop the US, simply because the Soviets wouldn't risk start a nuclear war, simply to defend India.

This delusion that the Soviets could have actually protected India, in case the US did decide to enter the war, is simply that, a delusion. Historical evidence shows that there would be little the Soviets could actually do to stop the US, and vice versa, if the situation occurred.

 

[SecularNationalist]

I highly doubt india has the resilience and a agency like ISI to deal with a arrogant nuclear armed superpower .We sacrificed a lot but at the same we got plenty of experience in covert warfare which india definitely lacks today.
"Wo kehtay hai na jo hota hai ache ke liye hota hai" Sahi kehtay hain

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

An amendment. If you recall, at one time there was indeed a thought under consideration by Soviets of a full scale invasion of Pakistan. Had that occurred we would have moved in to create a buffer against them.

We don't want to annex Pakistan or any territory from it. Had that been the case, Bangladesh would have been annexed.

The poll options are incomplete. India would have remained neutral and not allowed Soviets a free run either, as you have rightly pointed out

In reality, We did.

Soviets expected India to trouble Pakistan and we had the perfect reason to do so : Punjab Insurgency.

An Indian attack on Pakistan at that time would have ensured its balkanization thanks to Soviet presence across the border which would keep USA and China from intervening.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000518053.pdf

 

[Hellfire]

You have my attention, can you guys reference this?

What reference? Didn't get you.

@somebozo not quoting you as your post is off on a tangent. I merely stated that we would have moved in for a buffer as we were unwilling to allow Soviets on our border

Interesting observations as below, can't certify the truth of the claims of author.

It was published as a chapter in 2011 by Sergey Radchenko in a book he co-edited with Artemy M. Kalinovsky, The End of the Cold War and the Third World:New Perspectives on Regional Conflict based on declassified East bloc archives.

P. 175: The Soviets reportedly shared with the Hungarians India’s plans to attack Pakistan’s Kahuta nuclear facility, according to documents in the Hungarian archives. It is not clear though if the Soviets were only reporting widespread rumours or whether they actually had access to any Indian plans. The rumours were indeed widespread, and K. Subrahmanyam suggests that the Indian proposal for non-attack on nuclear facilities, which he suggested to Rajiv Gandhi, was the consequence of such rumours in the Western media (K. Subrahmanyam, “India’s Nuclear Policy -1964-98: A Personal Recollection,” in Jasjit Singh (ed.) Nuclear India (New Delhi: IDSA/Knowledge World, 1998 [2006 reprint]), pp. 40-42).
Pp. 176-77: In 1982, the Soviet Ambassador to Afghanistan proposed to the Indian Ambassador in Kabul that India should take advantage of the Soviet presence in Afghanistan to retake all of Kashmir, again according to the same document from the Hungarian archives. The Indian leadership apparently shot down this proposal.
P. 181: In a July 1987 meeting, PM Rajiv Gandhi tells Soviet leader Gorbachev that India has been able to apply sufficient pressure on Sri Lanka to prevent it from giving a base in ‘Trinkomali’ to the US.
P. 183: Rajiv Gandhi also discusses the Operation Brasstacks crisis with Gorbachev and tells him that the Indian Army was “itching” to take advantage of the situation and cut Sindh from Pakistan. Though the Brasstacks crisis is well-known, this provides an unusual inside look at Indian thinking, as also an indication of a civil-military rift during the crisis, which has until now been a hypothesis.
P. 186: On 7 March 1989, according to documents from the Mongolian Foreign Ministry archives, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi tells the Mongolian President Jambyn Batmunkh that India was ready to launch a joint Afghan-Indian war on Pakistan if Pakistan attempted to topple the Najibullah regime. The Mongolian President is so surprised “that he even asked the Prime Minister to repeat himself, for fear that something had been lost in translation. Rajiv Gandhi reiterated his readiness to intervene to save Najibullah from Pakistani aggression.” Assuming the documents in the Mongolian archives are accurate, how serious would such a comment be? I would think, not very. I doubt if India had made any serious military preparations, let alone joint military planning or preparations with Afghanistan. At least four divisions of the Indian Army were still bogged down in Sri Lanka, Punjab was still simmering and Kashmir was beginning to boil too. I suspect this was merely some empty bravado, or as Radchenkmo suggests, ‘fantazising’. Nevertheless, some fascinating accounts, which we will not be able to fully corroborate until Indian files are opened.

Considering that the messages sent accross were of Indian occupation officials working with the Soviets; I would think India would relish the opportunity to subjugate Pakistanis into total vassal status, or like the Japanese occupation of China.

Actually, may not be so, as the resultant demographic disbalance will be a nonstarter as I pointed out was in the case of Bangladesh to @That Guy. If a pragmatic view of the Indian Military's strategic thinking (and minor convergence of the civil thinking by mistake to it) is taken, the primary objective remains Sindh/Baluchistan as a source of trouble/disbalance. Gujral's singular act of dismantling all RAW networks and winding up the various projects there followed by Vajpayee's direction to close down all Pakistan oriented black ops was and is a disaster for which we are still paying.

However, in light of the effects of your Afghan policy, the Pakistani policy makers have done the job for us.

I highly doubt india has the resilience and a agency like ISI to deal with a arrogant nuclear armed superpower .We sacrificed a lot but at the same we got plenty of experience in covert warfare which india definitely lacks today.
"Wo kehtay hai na jo hota hai ache ke liye hota hai" Sahi kehtay hain

You shall be surprised about the covert warfare aspect. The realm of special forces is such that all have spectacular achievements to their credit, be it SSG or our SFs. But they will remain buried .... so those who know, will not talk about it.

@Syama Ayas ah you posted the reference quite quickly. Thanks