Cold Start Doctrine against China?

[Decklander]

I thought all that was done for stronger defenses. Why do we need to CSD for China in the first place? In fact they should have something like CSD since they claim Arunachal as their land. I thought CSD was specific to pakhana-land since we wanted to punish them in a swift manner owing to the conventional difference in our capabilities.

The aim of CSD against Pakistan or China is to deny them strategic advantage which is due to the lay of the land of Pakistan and better Infra of China. In case of Pakistan, the aim to strike them with such ferocity and at such quick pace that they run out of option by the time they are able to move their reserves forward to stop these IBGs. The aim is to fight a short high intensity war to completely dismantle war fighting capability of Pakistan before world pressure forces a ceasefire and to occupy territory as bargain for kashmir dispute resolution. this can proceed to full dismemberment of Pakistan provided our political leadership gives a go ahead. As I told you guys earlier, the main deep insursions into Pak and its dismemberment will be done by main Strike corps only.
CSD has two parts, first part is to cross IB in force thru IBGs within 48-72 hrs of getting a go ahead for war and second to shorten the time of inducting strike corps into their launch areas from present 21 days to under ten days. The aim of shifting our weapon dumps closer to borders is for this very reason.

 

[DivineHeretic]

The aim of CSD against Pakistan or China is to deny them strategic advantage which is due to the lay of the land of Pakistan and better Infra of China. In case of Pakistan, the aim to strike them with such ferocity and at such quick pace that they run out of option by the time they are able to move their reserves forward to stop these IBGs. The aim is to fight a short high intensity war to completely dismantle war fighting capability of Pakistan before world pressure forces a ceasefire and to occupy territory as bargain for kashmir dispute resolution. this can proceed to full dismemberment of Pakistan provided our political leadership gives a go ahead. As I told you guys earlier, the main deep insursions into Pak and its dismemberment will be done by main Strike corps only.
CSD has two parts, first part is to cross IB in force thru IBGs within 48-72 hrs of getting a go ahead for war and second to shorten the time of inducting strike corps into their launch areas from present 21 days to under ten days. The aim of shifting our weapon dumps closer to borders is for this very reason.

CSD will not aim to dismember Pak. Atleast thats not the military objective. What happens due to politics is another matter.

And about the CSD, the first assault will not be conducted by the IBGs, but rather by the pivot corps. Their role in the initial phases is to engage the Pak forces already near the border and tie them down, allowing the IA IBGs to cut into relatively unprotected zones with raw speed. As the war moves on, the pivot corps, supplemented by the reinforcements would relieve the frontline IBGs and secure the occupied territories. The decision to continue or stall would then be political.

But I have some serious misgivings/doubts regarding CSD. Since this is not the appropriate thread, I'd like to PM you my concerns. Will that be Ok?

 

[Yusuf]

India's China doctrine is certainly not based on CSD. We don't have IBGs. Our strategic objectives against Pak are different from those agsinst China. The terrain is different too. India's china doctrine seems more like try to hold as far as possible and use the strike corpse to make an ingress to counter for any territory lost to China and reclaim on the table. Basically maintain status quo.

 

[Yusuf]

CSD will not aim to dismember Pak. Atleast thats not the military objective. What happens due to politics is another matter.

And about the CSD, the first assault will not be conducted by the IBGs, but rather by the pivot corps. Their role in the initial phases is to engage the Pak forces already near the border and tie them down, allowing the IA IBGs to cut into relatively unprotected zones with raw speed. As the war moves on, the pivot corps, supplemented by the reinforcements would relieve the frontline IBGs and secure the occupied territories. The decision to continue or stall would then be political.

But I have some serious misgivings/doubts regarding CSD. Since this is not the appropriate thread, I'd like to PM you my concerns. Will that be Ok?

You can discuss CSD in the CSD thread

 

[DivineHeretic]

India's China doctrine is certainly not based on CSD. We don't have IBGs. Our strategic objectives against Pak are different from those agsinst China. The terrain is different too. India's china doctrine seems more like try to hold as far as possible and use the strike corpse to make an ingress to counter for any territory lost to China and reclaim on the table. Basically maintain status quo.

As of now, neither side has the ability to occupy each others territory, let alone win the war. The numerical balance of troops in the region is almost 1:1, which rules out any surprise Chinese assault, as they'd have to move several divisions to the frontline. And in any case, the Chinese ability to maintain supplies is deeply suspect once hostilities commence. Particularly because the first missile strikes by us will be on their logistics lines.

Then there is the mountaineous terrain, which reduces and to an extent nullifies cruise missile and AC strikes. Note that only Brahmos as of now has a variant that can be used in mountains effectively.

 

[Yusuf]

As of now, neither side has the ability to occupy each others territory, let alone win the war. The numerical balance of troops in the region is almost 1:1, which rules out any surprise Chinese assault, as they'd have to move several divisions to the frontline. And in any case, the Chinese ability to maintain supplies is deeply suspect once hostilities commence. Particularly because the first missile strikes by us will be on their logistics lines.

Then there is the mountaineous terrain, which reduces and to an extent nullifies cruise missile and AC strikes. Note that only Brahmos as of now has a variant that can be used in mountains effectively.

I feel its China which has a CSD style doctrine against us. Major focus in the Ladakh and Arunachal sectors. See if they can cut anything and then go to the table. To counter this, india is raising strike corpse to get done Chini territory ourselves to bargain on the table.

 

[DivineHeretic]

I feel its China which has a CSD style doctrine against us. Major focus in the Ladakh and Arunachal sectors. See if they can cut anything and then go to the table. To counter this, india is raising strike corpse to get done Chini territory ourselves to bargain on the table.

To be able to use blitzkrieg, CSD or whatever anyone terms it, the commanders need the following things in their favour.
1) Tactical suprise.
2) Local if not theatre level superiority in terms of troop numbers and equipment.
3) Effective CAS and air superiority
4) secure Supplies and reinforcement.

The CSD and the Blitzkrieg are dependent on these 4 pillars. Without one, the offensive collapses. The Chinese do have superiority in terms of number of troops and equipment. But it is not at a level to satisfy the minimum requirements needed, especially given the mountaneous terrain.

They can generate the required numbers by moving divisions from the mainland, but then they lose the 1st objective, i.e. Suprise. To add to that the soldiers need to acclamatise in order to be able to fight. This again requires a week at the minimum.

CAS is very difficult, as is artillery support. The mountaneous terrain is a nightmare for PGMs and CMs alike, and only our BRAHMOS has been modified to engage targets behind the mountain. Then there is the problem of differentiating the friendlies from the enemies engaged. Normally the airstrikes preceed the actual attack, but in CSD, it will call for CAS, that too danger close to destroy any obstacle. In plains it is a problem, in mountains it will be a nightmate.

Then the issue of supplies arises. Surely the Chinese will not achieve their objective in 72-96 hrs, to enable them to fight without any logistics backup.

Thus as I said, both sides are locked up, and neither has any overwhelming advantage over the other.

 

[Decklander]

CSD will not aim to dismember Pak. Atleast thats not the military objective. What happens due to politics is another matter.

And about the CSD, the first assault will not be conducted by the IBGs, but rather by the pivot corps. Their role in the initial phases is to engage the Pak forces already near the border and tie them down, allowing the IA IBGs to cut into relatively unprotected zones with raw speed. As the war moves on, the pivot corps, supplemented by the reinforcements would relieve the frontline IBGs and secure the occupied territories. The decision to continue or stall would then be political.

But I have some serious misgivings/doubts regarding CSD. Since this is not the appropriate thread, I'd like to PM you my concerns. Will that be Ok?

You need to educate yourself about the Pivot corps of IA and also the composition of IBGs. IBGs have been formed from these very Pivot corps. Every Pivot corps has four divisions, One division is deployed in fwd area, while three are held in reserve. As stated before, PA has offensive defensive deplyoment, while IA has defensive deployment on the borders. IBGs have been created from the defensive elements of these Pivot Corps with offensive capabilities. So now each Pivot corps has One division deployed in defence, One division acting as IBG and two divisions in reserve. Jaipur based command of IA was created for just this very reason. And for the self styled tank warfare specialists, The IBGs will have a major force of Arjuns.

 

[Decklander]

I feel its China which has a CSD style doctrine against us. Major focus in the Ladakh and Arunachal sectors. See if they can cut anything and then go to the table. To counter this, india is raising strike corpse to get done Chini territory ourselves to bargain on the table.

Many times when you arrange and compare two armies, you forget the overall battle picture. PLA is nearly alone against India with nearly non employable PLAAF due to terrain while we Indians can do heliborne assaults, they can't. How do you expalin that we have already deployed two new Para SFs batallions on China border? What use do they have and what are they going to do? THINK???

 

[Yusuf]

Many times when you arrange and compare two armies, you forget the overall battle picture. PLA is nearly alone against India with nearly non employable PLAAF due to terrain while we Indians can do heliborne assaults, they can't. How do you expalin that we have already deployed two new Para SFs batallions on China border? What use do they have and what are they going to do? THINK???

Chinese blitz is going to be in the form of missiles. They will take out (try to at least) our forward bases and render our airstrips useless. The other thing is their rapid mobilization using their massive infrastructure. Heir target will be to get some in AP and some in Ladakh. Indian strike corps is for countering that and make sure we have a chunk of their land to talk as equals on the table.


What I would like I discuss here is what areas the Indian strike corps will target as a relative soft spot that India can take?

 

[DivineHeretic]

You need to educate yourself about the Pivot corps of IA and also the composition of IBGs. IBGs have been formed from these very Pivot corps. Every Pivot corps has four divisions, One division is deployed in fwd area, while three are held in reserve. As stated before, PA has offensive defensive deplyoment, while IA has defensive deployment on the borders. IBGs have been created from the defensive elements of these Pivot Corps with offensive capabilities. So now each Pivot corps has One division deployed in defence, One division acting as IBG and two divisions in reserve. Jaipur based command of IA was created for just this very reason. And for the self styled tank warfare specialists, The IBGs will have a major force of Arjuns.

My understanding earlier was that the IBGs will be formed by disintegration of the Strike corps itself, and not from the Pivit corps as you pointed out. This is backed up by reports from before 2010-11.
Example: Cold Start, Cold Progress | Spotlight | The Stimson Center | Pragmatic Steps for Global Security

However, according to recent ones, the IBG will be formed like you said, i.e from the pivot corps itself. Example India Military Eyes Combined Threat

This does point out that either there is confusion regarding IBGs all around, or the IA has changed the concept of CSD in the meantime. The change in doctrine is more likey IMHO. My reason for believing so is that the earlier concept of holding corps was recently changed to pivot corps, which brought the newer concept of IBGs.

And BTW, with only 248 Arjuns confirmed as of now, i.e. 4 regiments, I cant see how the Arjun will form the major tank force. Even the IA has stated that Arjun will perform defensive roles only. Though I would love to see it ripping into Alkhalids and T80, but cant see it happening unless a policy cahnge comes into effect.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Double post.

 

[JBH22]

Indian strategy is very clear, once china is in war again US,Japan,Taiwan, Indian just send troops to do everything she want to do.

You must be feeling the same inferiority complex then because here its the other way round it is said that next war with Pak and China will step in

Let's wait and watch. Anyway its a fact that we lag in all aspects when compared to China.

 

[Decklander]

My understanding earlier was that the IBGs will be formed by disintegration of the Strike corps itself, and not from the Pivit corps as you pointed out. This is backed up by reports from before 2010-11.
Example: Cold Start, Cold Progress | Spotlight | The Stimson Center | Pragmatic Steps for Global Security

However, according to recent ones, the IBG will be formed like you said, i.e from the pivot corps itself. Example India Military Eyes Combined Threat

This does point out that either there is confusion regarding IBGs all around, or the IA has changed the concept of CSD in the meantime. The change in doctrine is more likey IMHO. My reason for believing so is that the earlier concept of holding corps was recently changed to pivot corps, which brought the newer concept of IBGs.

And BTW, with only 248 Arjuns confirmed as of now, i.e. 4 regiments, I cant see how the Arjun will form the major tank force. Even the IA has stated that Arjun will perform defensive roles only. Though I would love to see it ripping into Alkhalids and T80, but cant see it happening unless a policy cahnge comes into effect.

Till date on this side, I have not been proven wrong. Yes I can't substantiate my posts with press clippins, but when did I claim that my source of Info is press clippings. Wait, Just like the truth about our INSAS gun, like our IFG, Like our metallurgy and much higher muzzle pressures, This statement too will come true.
BTW, when has any strike corps of IA been moved to ops area during peacetime? Do they ever do such a move? What happens if they do so? Do we need to inform PA about their move for excercises well in advance?
IBGs are formed from within Pivot corps only. This is my final statement, take it or leave it.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Chinese blitz is going to be in the form of missiles. They will take out (try to at least) our forward bases and render our airstrips useless. The other thing is their rapid mobilization using their massive infrastructure. Heir target will be to get some in AP and some in Ladakh. Indian strike corps is for countering that and make sure we have a chunk of their land to talk as equals on the table.


What I would like I discuss here is what areas the Indian strike corps will target as a relative soft spot that India can take?

There is little reason to believe that the strike corps will attack as a single unit on a single soft spot. The force structure for the two mountain divisions alongwith the induction of artillery regiments and now the Brahmos regiments indicates that our counter offensive will probably be spread along multiple ingress points with weak defences.This will allow faster capture of territory while preventing a complete stall incase an ingress point grinds to a halt.

I wouldnt know the areas where such ingress will be more probable but one factor will certainly be critical in selecting the site-the ability of the logistics to supply the Strike corps, either by air or by ground. This is absolutely critical.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Till date on this side, I have not been proven wrong. Yes I can't substantiate my posts with press clippins, but when did I claim that my source of Info is press clippings. Wait, Just like the truth about our INSAS gun, like our IFG, Like our metallurgy and much higher muzzle pressures, This statement too will come true.
BTW, when has any strike corps of IA been moved to ops area during peacetime? Do they ever do such a move? What happens if they do so? Do we need to inform PA about their move for excercises well in advance?
IBGs are formed from within Pivot corps only. This is my final statement, take it or leave it.

My statement was never a comment on your accuracy or error regarding the IBGs and their formations. What I pointed out was the varying reports emerging about it. I have no way of verifying either report and is not my intention to do so.

And as far as Strike corps movement is concerned, during Wargames they do indeed Move very close to the border. The actual ops area is unknown to anyone of us, though speculations and indications are available. To avoid misunderstandings, as happened during brasstacts in 86-87, it is a policy of informing the PA in advance ofour intended exercise,if conducted near the border.

IBGs maybe formed from strike corps or pivot corps, not my concern. Its operationalisation and overall force structure and ORBAT is.

 

[Yusuf]

The IBGs were always from the pivot corps and never from the strike. He idea wasti convert the defensive corps into an offensive one with a limited mandate till the big boys came.

 

[DivineHeretic]

The IBGs were always from the pivot corps and never from the strike. He idea wasti convert the defensive corps into an offensive one with a limited mandate till the big boys came.

This is where the confusion lies. The majority of earlier articles and reports on CSD i.e. Pre 2010, claim that the strike corps would be disintegrated into the IBGs. Note that until then there was no concept of pivot corps.
Only after the introduction of the pivot corps, and subsequent denial of existence of CSD itself, did reports of IBGs being formed from pivot corps emerge.
This clearly outlines that a change in doctrine was effected midway. The final implementation is as per Decklander, but the intial plans werent this.

 

[Decklander]

@Yusuf, Longback in IN, I was trained to take off from broken runways, taxi tracks and also from semiprepared runways. We have very quick drying cements and the material is deposited within the airbase in case of chance of a war. You guys have no idea on how we actually work once the GOI asks us to prepare for war or start the end game. Once An emergency due to external threat is declared, it allows us thru our constitution to make every men/women of India to be used as an asset for the nation. The individual property ceases to be individual and becomes state owned. Any officer can walk into a building and take it over alongwith manpower to support war effort. I am sure this will come to you people as a shock, but this is what our constitution says. Pls read it. In case of war, you might see me walk in to your office and force you to dig trenches and carry weaponloads. Don't get surprised than as I am still a war reservist.

 

[ice berg]

Dear Members,

We all know that India has CSD against Pakistan; similarly do we have any strategy against China? Or does China have any strategy against India.

Regards,
Vishwarupa

Yes, China has a strategy against India. She is called Pakistan.