Cold Start: A Pakistani perspective

[p2prada]

It's similar to the IA's Mercury Thunder network. But, you could say AFNET is a more advanced version.

 

[Daredevil]

Cold-starting Pakistan

Cold-starting Pakistan

Thursday, January 22, 2009
By Ikram Sehgal

"Cold Start" is the Indian military doctrine meant to allow rapid deployment Special Forces units "to strike Pakistan within hours of any terrorist attack on Indian soil. It assumes that militants from Pakistan, and not home grown Indian radicals, are responsible for any actions". Such a rapid response would not allow time for diplomacy, Stephen Cohen, who helped India in the formulation process, maintains "cold start" was developed with the help of external strategists, borrowing heavily from Israeli tactics, notably from the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.

The assumptions of the new Indian Doctrine are: (1) to act offensively against Pakistan for any perceived acts of strategic destabilisation of India, proxy war and terrorism (2) move away from India's defensive mindset of last 50 years (3) prepare to undertake offensive military operations at the outset (4) undertake offensive operations short of the nuclear threshold (5) vast majority of Indian public will support any war putting Pakistan into place and forces it "to desist from proxy war and terrorism against India."

Pakistan's assumptions about cold start are: (1) offensive operations commencing without giving Pakistan time to bring diplomacy into play and (2) such offensive operations will not cross the nuclear threshold or prompt Pakistan into crossing it. India implies that, should Pakistan opt for crossing the threshold, the onus would lie squarely on Pakistan. The assumptions by New Delhi are dangerous: (1) the ability to hold limited portions of Pakistan with military might and (2) use this for political leverage against Pakistan. Holding of Pakistani territory will be unacceptable, triggering a ground war as well as a possible nuclear exchange.

Exercise Vajra Shakti further developed the cold start doctrine. "Against the backdrop of a Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Warfare threat from Pakistan, Special Forces were employed in pre-emptive strikes for furtherance of offensive operations by a Pivot Corps employing an infantry division, armoured regiments and an independent mechanised brigade from its own resources. Envisaging swift, day and night operations, offensive strikes were supported by advanced C4I (Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence) network and systems, including establishment of a Force Multiplication Command Post for integration and flow of real-time information to combat units, collected by satellites, UAVs, aerial reconnaissance, radar networks, communication intercepts etc. Digital photographs of "the enemy areas" were transmitted real time to forward combat units, facilitating speedy decision-making by Commanders, the commencement of network-centric warfare in the Indian Army. Information-dominance of the battlefield was practiced by use of electronic warfare systems. The Indian Aerospace Force (IAF) role was paramount, providing 130 sorties for this Exercise in reconnaissance, fighter aircraft strikes, attack helicopter and Special Forces operations. "With lessons learnt in Ex Vajra Shakti, the other pivot corps of the Indian Army were similarly exercised."

Rumours are afloat about a game plan where India will conduct surgical strikes against "known" terrorist camps, and Pakistan will helpfully turn the other cheek. Our rather helpless response to daily "Predator" attacks, bluster rather than any substance, has given weight to this belief. Bob Woodward's book "Bush at War" describes how, agonising over how to convince Pakistan, the US hierarchy was nonplussed by Pervez Musharraf's "ready and willing" acceptance of all seven US demands without even a murmur. Was diplomatic pressure recently brought on Pakistan to fall in line in the "supreme" interest of the "war against terrorism," the logic being that since only "terrorist" targets were to be engaged this was in "Pakistan's interest"? Wonder of wonders, for once we did not roll over and play dead! Our rulers probably calculated that the people of Pakistan would give them short shift.

Initiating preliminary actions of their "Cold Start" Doctrine, the IAF was geared into a "first strike" mode. Picked up by our intelligence, the PAF responded by a "show of force" on "high alert." A dense fog then engulfed most areas of the likely military options. During this time-lag some strategic reserves were extricated from FATA and rushed eastwards, that "window of opportunity" for India passed. Mere coincidence that three Strike Corps are in "winter collective exercise" mode in the Rajasthan Desert? That too carrying their first- and second-line ammunition? Movement of their Amphibious Brigade and dumping of fuel for forward deployment of troop-lifting helicopters has also been detected.

Pakistan's history is replete with strategic blunders of monumental stupidity, we have only been saved by tactical successes achieved by the great sacrifices and outstanding bravery of our soldiers, sailors and airmen, those who have actually taken part in action, and not just talked about it. Some morons thought up the "Defence of the East lies in the West," and we left East Pakistan defenceless. Subsequently some more morons came up with the "Afghanistan gives us strategic depth" concept and we are now in trouble up to our eyeballs on our western borders. Those who think that "the defence of the South lies in the North," i.e., putting the bulk of our Armed Forces protecting our main population centres and communication in the Punjab and AK, may be theoretically correct in a long-drawn-out war, in the short Indo-Pak version it is stupid, monumentally stupid, particularly in the face of the known Indian deployment.

To quote my article on the 2002 crisis, "Talk of a limited Indian offensive across the LoC in "hot pursuit" or the targeting of Mujahideen training camps in Azad Kashmir means to contain the battleground to Kashmir, the premise being that all the other Strike Corps are then positioned to go on the offensive if Pakistan does not opt for limited war and goes on an all-out offensive. With all 3 Armoured Divisions and 4 RAPID Divisions, with 2 out of 5 Independent Armoured Brigades concentrated in Rajasthan, the resource allocation makes the offensive targets obvious, either along the Jaisalmer-Rahimyar Khan axis or along the Barmer-Mirpurkhas axis. No ground offensive being possible in the desert without heavy air cover, their air deployment suggests that the focus of attack could well be in the deep south (Western and Southern Commands), the same principle applying for a combined heliborne, para and/or amphibious operation. Both the Indian Strike Corps have been reinforced with additional Divisions with integral Helicopter Attack Squadrons, Engineer, Artillery and Air Defence Brigades. Jodhpur has a concentration of heavylift MI-8/M-17 helicopters, could be supplemented by the 50th Independent Parachute Brigade air-lifted by AN-32s from Agra, attempting helicopter troop transportation/amphibious LST landings with XXI Strike Corps going for a link-up. The Indians have been practicing this. The area between Badin and Sajawal east of the Indus thus becomes vulnerable."

My recent article was based on their 2002 ORBAT, a number of my friends corrected me that this was outdated, the Indians had restructured their ORBAT in 2005. Not surprisingly, the "South-Western Command" was created at Jaipur, in line with the IAF's existing South-Western Command. Western Command has an additional 9 Corps created at Yo1 and RAPID Divisions have increased from 4 to 5, all concentrated in the Rajasthan Desert. Furthermore a new Artillery Division has been raised. Their likely main thrust remains the deep South Barmer-Mirpurkhas axis with secondary effort in the Jaisalmer-Rahimyarkhan area. The "COLD START" Doctrine is in keeping with the likely fulcrum of their offensive.

As night turns into day, the Indians will put their main effort in the deep South. 18 Div was almost overwhelmed in 1971. Two brigades of 33 Div were force-marched from the Rahimyarkhan area to stem the rot. Only the outstanding courage of individual unit commanders like Lt Col (later Brig) Mohammad Taj, S J & Bar (44 Punjab now 4 Sindh), saved Pakistan when "the barbarians were at the gate" in Chhor and Umerkot on Dec 12, 1971. Taj was symbolic of many brave officers who went up and down the line in the Thar Desert exhorting the rank and file, the line held. It was touch and go for a couple of days! Later, no one did more than Lt Gen Lehrasab Khan as Commmander 5 Corps for improving our defences in the area but even his soldierly persistence did not succeed penetrating military obduracy to get the resources in men and material required for the Chhor-Badin-Sujawal area. Kayani must ensure that this time around we have enough in the Thar Desert and the adjacent coast. Our existence is a zero-sum situation, can we afford to take chances?

The writer is a defence and political

analyst. Email: [email protected]

 

[Daredevil]

Fast and furious

Fast and furious

Sandeep Unnithan
March 27, 2008

It was a costly lesson in futility that the nation can do well not to forget. Soon after the attack on the Parliament on December 13, 2001, an outraged government ordered the largest mobilisation of the armed forces since the 1971 war. The army amassed on the border waiting for the order to go across.

The order never came because it had taken the army three weeks to mobilise—enough time for the United States and the rest of the world to pressure the Indian government to desist and for Pakistan to mirror Indian deployments and wave the spectre of a nuclear conflict.

Two years after Operation Parakram ended in an ignominious 10-month deployment, followed by a withdrawal, the army pulled out Cold Start, a radical new strategy to deal with such contingencies. The challenge: Could the Indian Army launch an offensive within 72 hours of being told to do so? It has spent the past four years finetuning it. Last week at Pokhran they unveiled just how well they had tuned the war machine for a jump-start.

The Thar desert reverberated with the roar of an exercise appropriately termed Brazen Chariots. Heavily armoured Mi-35 Hind helicopter gunships darted back and forth, T-90 tanks advanced, kicking up plumes of sand and Bofors howitzers moved into position.

War had broken out between Red Land and Blue Land. In the darkened underground command post of a ‘Blue Land’ division, Major General P.G. Kamat studied his key objectives: the capture of the Danwar base 40 km deep inside Red Land. Held by a brigade of enemy troops it housed a major communications hub.

Within hours of the conflict breaking out, the armoured division spearheaded by T-90 tanks was wheeling across the desert towards Danwar. Sukhoi-30 MKIs, MiG-27s and MiG-21 Bisons streaked overhead, bombing and strafing enemy fortifications with precision guided munitions and air-toground rockets. Bofors howitzers spewed devastating fire—100 guns fired on a single target in a 1 km box— and the newly-acquired Smerch rockets rained a devastating salvo of rockets 90 km away, each weighing nearly a tonne.

All lines of enemy defences were attacked simultaneously in day and night operations. In three days, aircraft and artillery had smothered targets with 450 tonne of ordnance, clearing the field for the tanks and infantry combat vehicles to move in and capture the smoking battle ground. “At the end of the destruction,” Kamat concluded wryly, “there is nothing left for us to occupy.”

This shock and awe scenario recently played out in the desert was the army’s sixth major wargame since it unveiled its new strategy in 2004. The Pakistani military attaché was not invited to the display which took place before 103 observers from 59 countries. (See graphic: A new doctrine)

Held just 30 km from the nuclear test site, the exercises were another test of the world’s only doctrine which envisages fighting a limited war under the nuclear overhang. It changes the army’s mindset from that of carrying out a defensive operation to an outrightly offensive one and refocuses the aim of a future conventional conflict from destroying the enemy’s war machine to destroying his will to fight.

The idea of swift manoeuvre operations is as old as Sun Tzu and, first implemented by the Germans during the Second World War as the Blitzkrieg, is new to the Indian Army. During the two week-long 1971 War, it had marched 4 km into Pakistani territory.

The new doctrine was born out of the failure of military mobilisation during Operation Parakram in 2002 and Pakistan exploiting a nuclearised environment to continue a proxy war. It aims to deter Pakistan from escalating its proxy war—either through assassinations of important political leaders or mass casualty attacks.

The army has two types of corps (a concentration of nearly one lakh troops) operating on a sword and shield principle. Ten holding corps are tasked with defending territory, and three are strike corps or swords—tasked with offensive operations into enemy territory.

In the army’s old doctrine, the holding formation would be first deployed on the border and would then wait for the strike corps to arrive from their bases several hundred kilometres in the hinterland. Under the new doctrine, the shields, or the holding formation, will be mobilised within 72 hours.

They will attack the enemy without waiting for the arrival of the strike corps. The attack can occur anywhere along the international boundary and at a place and time of its choosing. In the past four years, the army has tinkered with various combinations of Cold Start—manoeuvres in deserts, in the plains of Punjab, offensives launched by the strike corps and pivot corps and airland battles along with the air force.

“By readying itself in time for any military operation, the army is giving the political leadership more options,” says Gurmeet Kanwal, director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies. The decision to go to war will still be a political one and Cold Start is only one of the many options the army brings to the table, even if it is unsure of it being accepted.

“Today, the army is ready to launch an offensive virtually from the line of march, but is the political and security decision-making apparatus coping with advancements on the ground?” asks a senior army official. The National Security Council, meant to study all the options and advise the prime minister on options in a crisis, has not met in five years.

As the saying goes, no plan survives contact with the enemy and Cold Start may be no exception. The primary concern is whether a conventional war, however limited, is possible in a nuclearised environment. “There is always space for conventional war below the nuclear threshold (the point above which the adversary will launch nuclear weapons),” says Lt-General Noble Thamburaj, general officer commanding, Southern Command.

The development of the doctrine seems to have contradictory effects. “On the one hand, it seems to increase the range of options available to the political establishment by allowing gradations in the use of force between none and a massive Parakram-like mobilisation in response to provocations from Pakistan. On the other hand, if the new doctrine were fully operationalised, it makes the resort to force more likely. Depending on the nature of the provocation or future crisis, the existence of Cold Start as an option could increase public pressure on the government to use force in response to a specific incident,” says Walter C. Ladwig from the Oxford University and an author on a paper on the doctrine.

Different strokes

Old strategy

Mobilise, build-up, hit. Offensive power instruments like air force, army and the navy operate sequentially.
It took 12-22 days to mobilise formations for offensive operations.
Pivot or holding corps would get into position and wait for strike corps to arrive. Logistics pause.
Different zones of enemy defences addressed sequentially.

Cold Start

Hit, mobilise, hit harder. All offensive power instruments—air force, army and navy—attack tactical and strategic targets simultaneously.
Operations start within 24 hours.
Pivot corps already in position, launch operations without waiting for arrival of strike corps. Day and night operations with no logistics pause.
All enemy zones are attacked simultaneously.
Analysts also point out to its inherent weakness. Pakistan’s strike formations are closer to the international border and can be mobilised in just 24 hours.

Over the past decade, it has put in new counter strategies including creating a corps reserve for each of its four holding corps.

Moreover, an operation launched by a holding formation, without waiting for the strike corps, could actually weaken the line leading to a counter attack from the other side.

The innovative mobilisation strategy may take years to fully realise because the army is not yet adequately mechanised—a prerequisite for mobile warfare. “You cannot fight mobile, high-speed wars if you have an unmechanised army. The formations that are to initiate Cold Start are all infantry with a bit of armour and some armoured brigades. The strike formations are strike only in name as only about 40 per cent of the three strike corps are mechanised (troops in armoured personnel carriers),” says defence analyst Ravi Rikhye.

The Indian Army has inducted impressive firepower like the Smerch, radars, satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles that ensure continuous coverage of enemy territory. “Technology has enabled us to reduce our attacking ratios from 9:1 (nine troops for every enemy soldier) to 2.5:1,” says Thamburaj.

Yet, the speed of technology induction may not be keeping pace with the fast-paced doctrine. The army has a long equipment wishlist and is wrestling with a grave shortage of helicopters to speedily insert troops behind enemy lines, an essential aspect of fast-paced operations.

It needs to airlift a brigade (3,000) troops, which requires at least 100 helicopters but the MI-17s operated by the IAF can only ferry half a battalion or 400 troops. Equipment shortage also plagues the creation of three new Independent Battle Groups under each strike corps.

However, the mere existence of such a doctrine could contribute to deterrence. “Pakistan would not necessarily be able to count on slow mobilisation times or outside intervention from the United States to prevent a retaliation to a given provocation in the future,” says Ladwig.

“Cold Start is a bit like the stock market. If you have the capacity to take risks, you will make good gains, but if you’re unwilling to take them, you can choose the low-risk option of putting your money in a fixed deposit with steady returns,” says former vice chief Lt-General Vijay Oberoi. A conundrum which the decision makers must take into account.

 

[jackprince]

Until our Netas and Babus rise from their slumber and give our army what they desperately need the Cold start is likely remain in Cold storage. Army is under equipped in artillery, APC/IFVs, Copters and even tanks! How can it mobilize fast if it doesn't have the necessary equipments?

 

[Antimony]

Reply to Dave and Brig. Ray

I hope that it has not been held up by huge egos. Joint and equal ranked Officers must surely bang heads together on this and get it sorted out. Now Pakistan is on the back foot, due to 'operations' somewhere else, this is exactly the right time for India to strengthen LoC and make it watertight. "While the cat's away the mouse will play"

Dave,

Inter services rivalry is common in most countries and India is no exception.

That is the reason why the CDS concept too is floundering and cosmetic.

I don't think India will attack Pakistan now, since it will 'upset the apple cart' and the toey toey she is playing with the US!

Dave/ Ray Sir,

AVM Patney has written a series of articles in series of articles ( for e.g., here http://www.idsa.in/publications/JDS/JDS1(2)2007.pdf) against the need of always thinking either in terms of Joint Operations or in terms of a Chief of Defense Staff. He says that the 2 concepts are mutually exclusive, though he says that he is for Joint Planning of operations during war and during peacetime.

His view on the post of CDS:
Excerpt

The arguments presented in favour of the institution of CDS are one sided and as a consequence exclude the other possibilities for achieving jointness and efficiency in the armed forces of India. There was no article that represented a view that jointness is desirable but it is premature to think of a CDS at present or that the institution of CDS will be counter productive. Also, it is worth noting, as mentioned by many authors in the journal, that although the Group of Ministers recommended the creation of an Integrated Defence Staff (IDS) to be headed by a CDS in 2001, the then Prime Minister Vajpayee accepted the establishment of the IDS but postponed the appointment of the CDS. The situation remains the same today even after a new government under a different Prime Minister came to power in 2004. The IDS is headed by Chief of Integrated Defence Staff to the Chiefs of Staff Committee (CISC) and reports to the Chairman, Chiefs of Staff Committee (COSC). Thus, two Prime Ministers have not deemed it fit to institute a CDS. This cannot be without good reason.
It is worth noting that there are a number of individuals who are of the conviction that a CDS will cause more harm than good.

His view on "Jointness"
Excerpt:

We live in an age of specialisation. Jointness is indeed a laudable concept. Operational efficiency and effectiveness, however, should not be sacrificed at the altar of supposed jointness.
.
.
.
It has often been stated that, in modern conflict, joint conduct of operations is essential to bring about the needed synergy. A caveat may be in order. A single service operation is a valid operation of war and, at times, will be the option of choice. Similarly, occasions could arise where one service or the other is not actively involved in the combat. Again, the relative importance of the role played by different services could vary markedly. All these aspects will take on adverse significance if they are not preceded by joint planning.

IMO, Air Marshall Patney did not go adequetely into how his view of joint planning would help in a dynamic battlefield scenario, where ground units need to operate cohesively with air units, at least in this series of articles

I am certainly not willing to call the thinking of such a highly decorated officer as mere ego. But ig this is the view shared by IAF top leadership, then it does seem to be at odds with the way the Army is thinking about Cold Start

Until our Netas and Babus rise from their slumber and give our army what they desperately need the Cold start is likely remain in Cold storage. Army is under equipped in artillery, APC/IFVs, Copters and even tanks! How can it mobilize fast if it doesn't have the necessary equipments?

The Cold Start also needs cooperation between the different services for the new formations to work effectively. I agree cooperation of babus is needed to procure equipment needed.

Netas (most of them, I am not talking about Dr. Singh or PC or Mukherjee) understand jack squat. All they need to know is

1. This will be seen as a strong move.
2. Strong is good, it gets votes
3. Pakistan will not attack so you will not die

 

[raider]

This is quit laughable. Cold start? What happened in 2002? What happened after the mumbair episode? You guys might claim what you might but the pakistani military brass is prob. laughing right now at your ideas.

 

[pyromaniac]

This is quit laughable. Cold start? What happened in 2002? What happened after the mumbair episode? You guys might claim what you might but the pakistani military brass is prob. laughing right now at your ideas.

yeah I bet they are laughing all the way to the United nations and world bank when they are desperately begging them for money to try to keep up with India. Did you even read the article? It clearly states that India only started rethinking their strategy after 2002 and are probably still in the process of Fine tuning.
As far as why India did not attack Pakistan after what you guys did in Mumbai, it was a combination of restraint and lack of certain equipment. Make no mistake, if India had crossed into Pakistan occupied Kashmir no one in the world would have even batted a eyelid, you should count your lucky stars that India did not invade your country.

 

[Singh]

Hello Raider, Please make an introduction thread here. Members Introductions - Defence Forum Of India | DFI |

This is quit laughable. Cold start? What happened in 2002? What happened after the mumbair episode? You guys might claim what you might but the pakistani military brass is prob. laughing right now at your ideas.

Cold Start is the name given to the strategy that the Indian Armed Forces will apply in case of a war with Pakistan. I shall not waste time explaining it, its better if you read up on it.

In 2002 after the terrorist attack by Pakistanis , there was no war. After Mumbai terrorist attack by Pakistanis, there was no war.

I believe the Indian govt. has adopted an unwritten policy of not declaring war in response to terrorist attacks, I am not in favour of it though. What you are not able to grasp is the fact that its the democratically elected govt. that calls the shots in India and not the Armed Forces, Armed Forces merely performs its duties when the call comes from the Govt.

If the Pakistani top brass are laughing at the Indian Strategy than this great news for India, of course. India has been performing war games at the western borders for several years to fine tune its "Cold Start" doctrine and hone its network-centric capabilities.

If Pakistan continues its spirally descent we may witness the effectiveness of Cold Start doctrine sooner than later, although I wish there is no war ever.

 

[Antimony]

This is quit laughable. Cold start? What happened in 2002? What happened after the mumbair episode? You guys might claim what you might but the pakistani military brass is prob. laughing right now at your ideas.

Hello Raider,

1. Please go to the Introductions thread and intriduce yourself. It is common courtesy on this board. All our Pakistani posters do the same
2. Cold Start came about in 2004, as a doctrinal response to 2002
3. About Mumbai - you sure you wanted an attack on your country and a following MAD situation over a few hundred sq. km?
4. Lastly, to understand what the Pakistani leadership is thinking, go right ahead to the beginning of the thread and read what Shaukat Quadir has written. After all, that is the objective of this thread

If you have to contribute anything, by way of thoughts, analysis, research papers, publications, go right ahead.

Else, lay of the trolling and flame baiting

 

[Ray]

Antimony,

Patney's ego is bigger than the Himalayas!

This Jointness fig leaf has been going on from the days of my becoming a company commander.

 

[Antimony]

Antimony,

Patney's ego is bigger than the Himalayas!

This Jointness fig leaf has been going on from the days of my becoming a company commander.

Good Morning Sir,

Up early today or this is the usual time for you?

Can I ask you about your opinion about the recently published Joint Doctrine? It may still be a fig leaf but it seems now they want to make it a nicely formalized, talked about fig leaf

 

[Ray]

This is quit laughable. Cold start? What happened in 2002? What happened after the mumbair episode? You guys might claim what you might but the pakistani military brass is prob. laughing right now at your ideas.

Not that there is a requirement to answer your post since, it contains nothing substantial or knowledgeable, but nonetheless a penny for your thoughts.

It is true that the Pakistani military brass laughs - but at itself. Indeed, they do as they are doing in Swat or they did in Kargil. It is time that they stop being the source of laughter for others (coups at the drop of a hat or what Sehgal has written that Pak 18 Div was nearly written off and two Pak Brigades were forced march to the rescue since they did not even have transport) and instead get professional.

What happened after the Mumbai terrorist attack? The Pakistanis could not hide behind their usual refrain that Pakistan was not involved. They had to accept that it was Pakistan that was the Mother of international terrorism, which is otherwise a well known and well established fact.

Pakistan has been forced to take the culprit to task and the DAWN editor in a interview gave a startling revelation that Hafiz Saeed is actually a conduit for the US in interaction with AQ and hence all the pussyfooting!!

Wars are not fought out of pique. In Pakistan, it is done so as has been the case every time and hence their defeat repeatedly and they have always been saved by international diplomatic intervention. Wars are embarked upon after being duly deliberated upon.

India does not have to go to war against Pakistan. It is itself at war with itself. SWAT, Taliban, AQ, Balochistan, Seraiki movement, Jiyo Sindh, Balwaristan and so on. Pakistan is also bankrupt and being kept afloat with US money, US arms, IMF and WB loans, which Pakistan is in no position to even service!! It has already become a surrogate of the US and it has to obey whatever the US orders including allowing Predator attacks on its sovereign soil at will!!

One could go on, but this will do for now.

Time will tell who will have the last laugh.

 

[Kumar]

Ray Sir,

I had read in a cold start analysis that it is still not adopted by the Indian Army due to differences between the 3 services. is this true?

 

[raider]

Not that there is a requirement to answer your post since, it contains nothing substantial or knowledgeable, but nonetheless a penny for your thoughts.

It is true that the Pakistani military brass laughs - but at itself. Indeed, they do as they are doing in Swat or they did in Kargil. It is time that they stop being the source of laughter for others (coups at the drop of a hat or what Sehgal has written that Pak 18 Div was nearly written off and two Pak Brigades were forced march to the rescue since they did not even have transport) and instead get professional.

What happened after the Mumbai terrorist attack? The Pakistanis could not hide behind their usual refrain that Pakistan was not involved. They had to accept that it was Pakistan that was the Mother of international terrorism, which is otherwise a well known and well established fact.

Pakistan has been forced to take the culprit to task and the DAWN editor in a interview gave a startling revelation that Hafiz Saeed is actually a conduit for the US in interaction with AQ and hence all the pussyfooting!!

Wars are not fought out of pique. In Pakistan, it is done so as has been the case every time and hence their defeat repeatedly and they have always been saved by international diplomatic intervention. Wars are embarked upon after being duly deliberated upon.

India does not have to go to war against Pakistan. It is itself at war with itself. SWAT, Taliban, AQ, Balochistan, Seraiki movement, Jiyo Sindh, Balwaristan and so on. Pakistan is also bankrupt and being kept afloat with US money, US arms, IMF and WB loans, which Pakistan is in no position to even service!! It has already become a surrogate of the US and it has to obey whatever the US orders including allowing Predator attacks on its sovereign soil at will!!

One could go on, but this will do for now.

Time will tell who will have the last laugh.

Funny you bought up the swat issue since the pakistani army defeated the taliban in a matter of a week. Dont be fooled while the indian army has more troops than the US does in a territory less than the size of iraq and still can barely manage could keep a lid on the freedom movement there. Claim what you might but why are the protesters still raising the pakistani flag and burning the indian one??? Balochistan, seriakistan or w/e claim what you might but india still has alot more freedom struggle going on (a common activity amonst 3rd world country). Indias cold start action is based off of attacking pakistan with full political support, If I remember correct your media and politicians claimed that the pakistani intellegence service were involved. Then were did cold start fit in? Why did you guys fail to take action? In 2002 india played a stage drama infront of the whole world then blinked

 

[Antimony]

Funny you bought up the swat issue since the pakistani army defeated the taliban in a matter of a week. Dont be fooled while the indian army has more troops than the US does in a territory less than the size of iraq and still can barely manage could keep a lid on the freedom movement there. Claim what you might but why are the protesters still raising the pakistani flag and burning the indian one??? Balochistan, seriakistan or w/e claim what you might but india still has alot more freedom struggle going on (a common activity amonst 3rd world country). Indias cold start action is based off of attacking pakistan with full political support, If I remember correct your media and politicians claimed that the pakistani intellegence service were involved. Then were did cold start fit in? Why did you guys fail to take action? In 2002 india played a stage drama infront of the whole world then blinked

Hey Raider,

Do you understand who you are talking to?

Ray retired as a Brig. in the Indian Army. He is a decorated combat veteran who has led troops in Kargil and a highly respected member on various military forums. He has probably forgeotten more about Kargil and warfighting that either you or I would ever be likely to know. So show some respect to him and to any other Military Professional on this board. We would do the same for Pakistani Officers, if they visit this board.

Next, we are discussing about Cold Start here. If you want to rant about Kashmir, there are other threads for that, go there and we will talk with you there.

And lastly, what will it take to get it into your head that Cold Start did not exist in 2002?

By the way, Pakistan deafeated the Taliban in a week? Seriously? And I suppose you killed Baitullah Mehsud too...

 

[ahmedsid]

Okay, People Keep Sarcasm outside and answer to the Point and dont try to flame. Raider take a note!

 

[Fighter]

Hey Raider,

Do you understand who you are talking to?

Ray retired as a Brig. in the Indian Army. He is a decorated combat veteran who has led troops in Kargil and a highly respected member on various military forums. He has probably forgeotten more about Kargil and warfighting that either you or I would ever be likely to know. So show some respect to him and to any other Military Professional on this board. We would do the same for Pakistani Officers, if they visit this board.

Next, we are discussing about Cold Start here. If you want to rant about Kashmir, there are other threads for that, go there and we will talk with you there.

And lastly, what will it take to get it into your head that Cold Start did not exist in 2002?

By the way, Pakistan deafeated the Taliban in a week? Seriously? And I suppose you killed Baitullah Mehsud too...

Its just his opinion. He didnt use harsh word did he. So its not disrespect.

By the way Ray is a fine person. He has my respect.

 

[Jeypore]

Ray

Cold Start has decreased the time for offensive operations because those formations which are to implement the same are bang on the border.

From what little that I have read about Cold Start, it certainly does not decrease the offensive operation, infact it increases. The platoons/small groups (What ever the army terms for it) would be mobilized at the border very quickly and attack in the given enemy targets with certain miles and to retreive back to the border.

Therefore, the Cold Start will not deliver the desired result and the time taken to make up the shortages will dictate the time when a war can be launched.

The Cold Start would deliver the desired results, for example attacking the terror camps in Kashmir. But the real problem (again from what I have read) is it is good on paper, but our army is not capable yet in accomplishing the actual cold start senario. One example is after the Parliment attack, in the cold start senario we were to mobolize our army (including heavy equipment, tanks, etc...) within 7 to 15 days at the Pakistanie border, and we were incapable of doing that, and Pakistan got the upperhand on that whole fisaco.


Cold Start is a good viable solution to the problem for India, but the armed forces needs to better trained and equiped inorder to accomplishing this strategy.

 

[Antimony]

Jeypore

From what little that I have read about Cold Start, it certainly does not decrease the offensive operation, infact it increases. The platoons/small groups (What ever the army terms for it) would be mobilized at the border very quickly and attack in the given enemy targets with certain miles and to retreive back to the border.

I think what he is talking about is decreasing the time for Offensive operations, which it certainly will. He is not talkning about decreasing offensive ops themselves.

The Cold Start would deliver the desired results, for example attacking the terror camps in Kashmir. But the real problem (again from what I have read) is it is good on paper, but our army is not capable yet in accomplishing the actual cold start senario. One example is after the Parliment attack, in the cold start senario we were to mobolize our army (including heavy equipment, tanks, etc...) within 7 to 15 days at the Pakistanie border, and we were incapable of doing that, and Pakistan got the upperhand on that whole fisaco.

Cold start was not in existence then.
After the December 2001 attack, it took us a long time to move our strike forces into position, which they were not meant to do in the first place, since we had a defensive doctrine.

Cold Start emerged out of the analysis of that failure (if we can call it that), along with the realisation that a determined strike using the strike corps may bring forth nuclear retaliation.

Cold Start first surfaced around 2004 (I think) and since then is in the process of refinement

 

[Ray]

Funny you bought up the swat issue since the pakistani army defeated the taliban in a matter of a week. Dont be fooled while the indian army has more troops than the US does in a territory less than the size of iraq and still can barely manage could keep a lid on the freedom movement there. Claim what you might but why are the protesters still raising the pakistani flag and burning the indian one??? Balochistan, seriakistan or w/e claim what you might but india still has alot more freedom struggle going on (a common activity amonst 3rd world country). Indias cold start action is based off of attacking pakistan with full political support, If I remember correct your media and politicians claimed that the pakistani intellegence service were involved. Then were did cold start fit in? Why did you guys fail to take action? In 2002 india played a stage drama infront of the whole world then blinked

Pakistani Army is yet to defeat the Taliban. Defeat is indicated by having an environment where there is peace and the administration is in place.

This report from Al Jazeera as late as July 2009 does not indicate tranquillity has returned and hence the claim of having defeated the Taliban is a trifle too premature.

Although Yusuf Reza Gilani, Pakistan's prime minister, last month declared that the Taliban fighters had been "eliminated" in the region, frequent skirmishes continue.

At least two soldiers and 14 pro-Taliban fighters were reportedly killed in clashes in NWFP on Sunday, officials said.
Taliban in Swat

If you mean that India has more troops in Kashmir than US has in Afghanistan and is barely able to contain the insurgency there, then one has to understand that in Kashmir, Pakistan sponsored terrorist are being sent in regularly and it is these people who are being taken on.

Next, you have to understand as how terrorism that is fuelled by infiltrators has to be addressed. Such infiltrator induced terrorism has to be tackled in a tier system and tier system means on the Line of Control and in successive layers within so that it works as a sieve. It is obvious that if mathematically accounted for, it will take up troops. Further, there is an adage used by all Armies in the world, including the Pakistan Army – Mountains eat up troops!

India is a democracy and we are sensitive to use the maxim of using minimum force since they are our own citizens, which you have seen on TV protesting. Unlike what was done in Balochistan or is being done in SWAT or what was done in Sri Lanka, where a hammer is used to kill a fly, we do feel sincerely that it is not the way to subdue own citizens and also because being a democracy that is not remote controlled by our Army, we don’t have such macabre privilege.

The Muslim flag is often mistaken as the Pakistani flag. Even when protesters protest against the government in other parts of India, they do not lift the national flag! It is also fashionable in a democracy to ‘blackmail’ the government with all tools of intimidation to obtain their demands. Same as in SWAT; they blackmailed the Pakistan govt on the issue of Sharia for peace and then renegades.

The US has not been successful as much as India because they don’t have a tiered system since they do not have that many troops to deploy given their commitments elsewhere including Iraq. Their technique is different. They are very conscious of the body bags and have no hesitation pulverising opposition with overkill incorporating all weapon systems including air and artillery.

In contrast, India does not use air or artillery or tanks since it will have heavy collateral damage where innocents will be killed or their property destroyed. Hence, this is compensated and made up by boots on the ground. Also, the US has no compulsion is killing or causing heavy collateral damage as those who suffer are not their citizens.

Pakistan follows the US technique or using air and heavy lethal weapons causing area destruction and heavy loss in lives to the population as was displayed in Balochistan and now in SWAT and other parts of NWFP. But unlike the US, Pakistan is using such destructive systems and platforms against their own people.

I am afraid the Cold Start concept as understood in that article from Pakistan is a bit paranoiac. It has nothing to do with Kashmir or striking at terror camps. The terrorist camps targeting Kashmir are mainly based in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. Anyone knowing the terrain would realise that the Doctrine being based on IBG i.e. mechanised forces, just cannot operate in mountains and hilly terrain! If indeed India were to hit terror camps with the SF and they being located in mountainous POK, it would indeed be extraordinary that they would be a part of the Cold Start Doctrine!!

If you are talking about Op Parakrama, it may also interest you to know that the US impressed upon India that should India attack, it would bring the fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan to a standstill since Pakistan’s cooperation would not be there for the US and would not abate the War on Terror which was also affecting India. The Cold Start Doctrine eliminates the long mobilisation wherein Pakistan can go to international players to intervene.

It is after the issues of Op Parakrama that the Cold Start doctrine came into being and not before! It was done to circumvent the delay in mobilisation, wherein Pakistan got ample time to use diplomatic manoeuvres to get international players to prevail upon India.

As far as insurgencies in India, unlike Pakistan not all are in such a mode. In Pakistan, but for the Punjabis, every other people are in a belligerent stand!!