Can India strike Pakistan?

[pankaj nema]

Pakistan has been the NET looser post 26/11. It has been cornered like never before by India and the International community, add to that INSULTS like

1. being called ''AF- PAK'' by USA .for a country that has been madly craving PARITY with India ever since it was born and now being clubbed with Afghanistan .
2 .The economy which has collapsed and is being run on charity. the begging bowl has become much bigger.
3. The advances of taliban and increased terrorism which has made terrorism as Pakistan's SOLE IDENTITY and is called a Failed state
4. The kerry lugar aid bill passed by US congress with several humiliating conditions which pak army quitely accepted.

However inspite of all these pakistani losses India must retaliate in the event of a another terror strike. according to a P Chidambaram interview on NDTV Last time too there were several countries which asked India to retaliate.
I think GOVT has taken everything in account before saying {and also making USA say} very clearly that India will not exercise restraint again
By the way what happens to India's prestige and image if we dont retaliate .
Dont we become the laughing stock of the world by keeping quite.

 

[Solid Beast]

India and civilization for that matter should bank on Pakistani opposition movements before firing a single shot into Pakistan. I can sincerely tell you all that the outlook and forecast of Pakistan is changing, give people hope and a hand in partnership and Pakistan can be a friend to India and a scourge to Taliban with the right people in place.

A stable, secular leadership is what Pakistani's want and what will be good for India and the world.

 

[Modernwarfare]

India and civilization for that matter should bank on Pakistani opposition movements before firing a single shot into Pakistan. I can sincerely tell you all that the outlook and forecast of Pakistan is changing, give people hope and a hand in partnership and Pakistan can be a friend to India and a scourge to Taliban with the right people in place.

A stable, secular leadership is what Pakistani's want and what will be good for India and the world.

Well put. But when comes to 'india' all pakistani political entities share one voice against india. India doesnt want to mess with balochistan as it might end up as another bangladesh, which will aggravate the situation to the worse for Pak.
the current rulers of the army and ISI want war, saw an interview by hamid gul in youtube (watch?v=0eiBptl-lrI) , he says even if india retaliates along the LOC and the terror camps this time Pak will melt the silicon valley in to smoke(bangalore). if Gilani cannot assure on 26/11 and is not control of the state, india has to view these threats seriously.

 

[tarunraju]

A stable, secular leadership is what Pakistani's want and what will be good for India and the world.

Sadly that's not demonstrable. In phases of political stability during the '80s, Pakistan could afford bigger strides at destabilizing India. It spent a chunk of its wealth it accumulated between '47 and '64 on a war against India, which pretty much ended Pakistan's inspirational dream run as an emerging Asian economy.

Successive leaderships have shown that anti-India sentiment is still very strong. Everyone from politicians to the media feast on this sentiment.

 

[Solid Beast]

Well put. But when comes to 'india' all pakistani political entities share one voice against india. India doesnt want to mess with balochistan as it might end up as another bangladesh, which will aggravate the situation to the worse for Pak.
the current rulers of the army and ISI want war, saw an interview by hamid gul in youtube (watch?v=0eiBptl-lrI) , he says even if india retaliates along the LOC and the terror camps this time Pak will melt the silicon valley in to smoke(bangalore). if Gilani cannot assure on 26/11 and is not control of the state, india has to view these threats seriously.

Very valid points. I will try to engage them.

1). The Pakistani "opposition" as you know them in mainstream existence are nothing but opportunistic cancers. The opposition I speak of mainly exists in the diaspora and most are willing to uphold the oath of safeguarding the interests of Pakistani's instead of putting them in peril in the face of a burgeoning India and a disappointed international community.

2). There are multiple cataclysmic shifts occurring not only within the Pakistani political minority within the country but mostly across the world. The international community must place emphasis on these Pakistani's who have seen first hand the destruction that can take place with barbaric ideologies fueling a small yet dynamic populace.

3). We must understand as Indians and Pakistani's that rejoining as one nation is impossible, with the past 60+ years of bad history no one has the power of re-writing it. But some do have the power of altering the current destructive path Pakistan is undergoing.

4). Hamid Gul and his counterparts have destroyed Pakistan, the sooner the mainstream of Pakistan realizes this, the quicker we can get to sitting at a nice round table and working out our petty differences.

5). India must safeguard her populace from Pakistani administration no doubt, but conventional war is a language of the past millennium. Pakistan is the most willing in this category to wage war and Indians must realize that this is a position of weakness, a serial killer who has run out of victims and is about to be sentenced to death will only seek more death before the game is up.

6). Pakistan and India can in realistic terms be a strong partnership if elements of the disenfranchised and disillusioned of Pakistan be given ample voice and reason on a global symposium for the rehabilitation of Pakistan and South Asia.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

With Army more or less running the country the common man's concerns are ignored the vast majority of Pakistan "common people" may want a better life and peace in the region but this is not what the army wants, it has become two class society the ruling army controlling the wealth and the majority of the nation in the underclass, there has been a few times in Pakistan's history where a middle class could have emerged the opportunity was lost for different reasons.

 

[tigerhill]

Here are my observations


1) Will we have any clear strategic objectives while striking pakistan??
No, Afterall, there is very little economic infrastructure,
Even if we debilitate, the pakistan army or air force, terrorism will still continue,
as all the terrorists need is an AK series weapon

2) It makes no sense to strike pakistan, as we will be using our precious resources on pakistan which should actually, be built up for china

3) Strike we will, for sure, but not overtly, covertly

4) Help the secessionist movements in sindh, punjab etc,...Supply them with logistics , etc

5) Create a strong proxy in afghanistan

6) We must not get entangled in a war with pakistan....If we ever have to go to war with pakistan, it must be only after 15 or so years

7) Right now the time is to prevent war with china by being prepared for one

That is the way forward...Let the economy grow, Dont become emotional, rather think logically

Afterall in 20 years time, very few nations will be able to say anything to us

 

[Solid Beast]

Solid Beast - 11:18 AM 23-01-2010
I agree. But I advise Indian leadership to think in broader scopes.

tarunraju - 11:31 AM 23-01-2010
It already does. Otherwise there we would have gone to war after 26/11.

I do see this blatant reality as a positive, mostly in the sense that India is not only ready to lead by example, but that India is tired of the status quo. All I am suggesting is that the international community and India in particular not only shun the current administrations who adopt power and sway in Pakistan but that they look for alternate means of leadership for Pakistan and promote it. Destruction of a nation will have too many strange reverberations and implications for these times. India and wise Pakistani's must destroy the ideology fueling the present Pakistan, and not the nation itself.

 

[Modernwarfare]

Very valid points. I will try to engage them.

1). The Pakistani "opposition" as you know them in mainstream existence are nothing but opportunistic cancers. The opposition I speak of mainly exists in the diaspora and most are willing to uphold the oath of safeguarding the interests of Pakistani's instead of putting them in peril in the face of a burgeoning India and a disappointed international community...

2). There are multiple cataclysmic shifts occurring not only within the Pakistani political minority within the country but mostly across the world. The international community must place emphasis on these Pakistani's who have seen first hand the destruction that can take place with barbaric ideologies fueling a small yet dynamic populace.

3). We must understand as Indians and Pakistani's that rejoining as one nation is impossible, with the past 60+ years of bad history no one has the power of re-writing it. But some do have the power of altering the current destructive path Pakistan is undergoing.

4). Hamid Gul and his counterparts have destroyed Pakistan, the sooner the mainstream of Pakistan realizes this, the quicker we can get to sitting at a nice round table and working out our petty differences.

5). India must safeguard her populace from Pakistani administration no doubt, but conventional war is a language of the past millennium. Pakistan is the most willing in this category to wage war and Indians must realize that this is a position of weakness, a serial killer who has run out of victims and is about to be sentenced to death will only seek more death before the game is up.

6). Pakistan and India can in realistic terms be a strong partnership if elements of the disenfranchised and disillusioned of Pakistan be given ample voice and reason on a global symposium for the rehabilitation of Pakistan and South Asia.

your pointers looks very positive. But does diaspora influence national politics? they are just a voice and none take them seriously. i have met only a few like-minded pakistanis as you, who want the change in the right direction. if there needs a change you have to change how young children are tought history in schools. there is so much anti india sentiment in children, when they grow up its nearly impossible to change it. well... i just saying its tough amd winding road in this direction.

 

[Solid Beast]

With Army more or less running the country the common man's concerns are ignored the vast majority of Pakistan "common people" may want a better life and peace in the region but this is not what the army wants, it has become two class society the ruling army controlling the wealth and the majority of the nation in the underclass, there has been a few times in Pakistan's history where a middle class could have emerged the opportunity was lost for different reasons.

The military has always reigned over Pakistan because of the superiority complex that exists within small minds. Amidst the background of a new dawn will India find a Pakistani partnership that is ready to dash into the future with a message of not only growth, but real peace. Peace can only be established upon mutual assurances of a singular path...Pakistan and India's futures are tied not only in history but for all implications, great and small, in the future tense. The military and political establishment can be reigned in and be brought under control only when it has exhausted it's current ideologies and strategies of political Islamism and terrorism.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

The military has always reigned over Pakistan because of the superiority complex that exists within small minds. Amidst the background of a new dawn will India find a Pakistani partnership that is ready to dash into the future with a message of not only growth, but real peace. Peace can only be established upon mutual assurances of a singular path...Pakistan and India's futures are tied not only in history but for all implications, great and small, in the future tense. The military and political establishment can be reigned in and be brought under control only when it has exhausted it's current ideologies and strategies of political Islamism and terrorism.

SB the army may not want to give up their power so easily?? A recent example is Benazir Bhutto's assasination.

 

[Agantrope]

SB the army may not want to give up their power so easily?? A recent example is Benazir Bhutto's assasination.

It seems a stable democratic govt will make the pakistan more effective against terrorism. But it seems even PA is under the command of ISI. All the security agencies and forces are turning out to be rogue.

 

[Vyom]

I do see this blatant reality as a positive, mostly in the sense that India is not only ready to lead by example, but that India is tired of the status quo. All I am suggesting is that the international community and India in particular not only shun the current administrations who adopt power and sway in Pakistan but that they look for alternate means of leadership for Pakistan and promote it.

Your views are highly commendable friend, given the fact that people in Pakistan are generally not considerate of India's problems arising out of fallacies of their nation. I am not sure, however, how India or any other nation can look for alternate means of leadership in Pakistan. All we can hope is that people in general get out of the illusion that India is bad and they must hate India, and that they would not support any political group who wants to ally with India.

IMO people like yourself in Pakistan need to make desperate attempts to clear air about India there. People of Pakistan must realize that India is not their enemy and that a destabilized Pakistan is against the interest of India. That is one point. Another point is facilitation of people to people contact to increase trust and understanding between people of the two nations. The third point is democracy must be strengthened at all costs in Pakistan and army's control over power must be reduced subsequently...people must press for these issues.

People in Pakistan should also realize that there are inevitable dangerous roads ahead if they tie the relation of Pakistan and India with the issue of Kashmir.

Destruction of a nation will have too many strange reverberations and implications for these times. India and wise Pakistani's must destroy the ideology fueling the present Pakistan, and not the nation itself.

I totally concede to this argument. But it is completely in the hands of people of Pakistan to save their nation from descending into such depths from where return becomes extremely difficult. India may not be able to do much in this regard, but may be Indians can.

P.S. I suggest forming a group of like-minded people and then making efforts according to your capacity to counter the present ideology in Pakistan.

 

[pankaj nema]

The people of pakistan, civil society, judiciary and all other peace loving folks are totally
POWERLESS against the pak army and ISI.

Since army and ISI are hell bent on fighting with India where is the prospect for durable peace.

The enemy is Pak army,NOT pakistani people

 

[ppgj]

@Solid Beast

hi Solid Beast

greetings first.

i really appreciate your refreshing and constructive approach. your optimism, though appreciable from any angle, somehow in the given circumstances look a little far fetched (see bottom).

sorry, that is not meant to be rude but rather a result of historic pakistan's action and inaction.

2 events in the immediate past standout for a case study of pakistan (among many).

1. Kargill war.

inspite of starting at the back of indian PM'S famous(?) handshake with your then PM, Pakistan kept saying it is mujahideen and not the army which infiltrated india (an understood, unsigned trust that existed between the 2 armies was broken) and yet army medals were presented to the men killed in action (god bless their souls) as martyrs!!

why did your PM had to rush to Clinton and implore him to help out?

DECEIT!! pakistan has perfected it.

What could india have done?

it could have easily opened a new front on the frontier to start a full blown war but it did not. because india and indians (including members here) have nothing against people of pakistan. many even cherish and remember them as brothers.

india even called your president (gen. Musharraf) for talks at Agra to break the dead lock. it broke because your president refused to acknowledge terrorists as so!! he called them even as "FREEDOM FIGHTERS".
tell me what can india do?

the previous NDA regime (supposedly hindu nationalist, even in indian eyes) instituted various CBM's to smoothen the path. Baby NOOR (she became a darling in india), and many kids like her came to india and had their
surgeries done and went back with fond memories.

india gives preferential treatment to pakistan trade. it is Pakistan which refuses to trade!!

there have been many more initiatives. i rather not reflect on them lest this becomes an essay, which i intend not to write.

2. Mumbai - 26/11

india saw its worst ever terror strike in its history in scale, method and operation. it was the most chilling experience. i myself have seen it non stop on indian channels for days (losing sleep, in the bargain).

you know the whole thing so i don't go into the details.

let's see how pakistan reacted (ofc. not pakistani people). DENIAL, MORE DENIALS and EVEN MORE DENIALS. when right thinking pakistani journos uncovered one of the terrorists, they denied even that!! only later to admit, albeit with no chance to deny any more, the fact.

dossiers became the order of the day but the culprits are either roaming about freely or cooling themselves to good hospitality under the 'supposed' arrest and remand.

DECEIT!! again?

What could india have done?

it was a fit case to strike back. india did not.

even europeans and americans were surprised by our reaction. US def sec Mr. Gates praised india for that only a few days back as have many others.

..............................

there have been countless attacks and tens of thousands of indian deaths at the hands of terrorists. it is well documented where they come from, where they train and what their aims are.

it is sad to 'note' your country has taken the most unwanted title of 'epicentre of terror'. due to twisting of history and minds of the people by the successive govt's and ofc the overarching army of pakistan, innocence has been taken away from the children. the policies adopted by both are biting the people back as also the rest of the world.

a link of interset - http://blog.dawn.com/2010/01/21/music-vs-militancy/

sad to see innocent people including women and children die for no reason.

why? - can not be answered now because it is part of history now.

can it be undone? - hopefully.

this is where i find your comments most refreshing and rather appealing (inspite of the dark times).

i sincerely hope you will do your bit like Nadeem Parachas, Irfan Hussains, Kamran Shafis, Ahmed Rashids, Asma Jehangirs, Pervez Hoodbhoys (whom, i really respect) and bring about a change in your society and a better
future for the battered people of an otherwise lovable country.

wish you and your people all the best and a happy days ahead.

thanks for your patience. i really admire your posts. look forward to your posts.

P.S : btw, where is qsaark? miss his posts.

 

[anoop_mig25]

no political will

Going to war with Pakistan was, is and will be a political decision. So the right question to be asked is "Is India have political Will to attack Pakistan"

no i dont think indian has any political wiil to fight as our army isn`t ready till 2015 or any later year as admitted by our coas itself.plus our political leaders whom ever it be ,belonging to any party , are fool they only badmouth each other don`t have any longterm thinking.look how chinese policy makers think about future.


Here is editiorial form arun prakash former chief of navy staff(i may be wrong)

When Prussian theorist Carl von Clausewitz’s commented that war is a tool for achieving political aims, or “merely the continuation of policy by other means”, he was not trying to define war. By placing state violence in a political context he was, actually, attempting to rationalise an otherwise irrational act. This throws up the question: to effectively plan and conduct war, must a senior military leader also have expertise in politics?

A predictable reaction would be one of horror, since we in India pride ourselves on a strong democratic tradition underpinned by our apolitical armed forces. But this issue has assumed salience in the light of intense and unfair media criticism directed, in recent times, at our military leadership for allegedly speaking out of turn. The military will happily face enemy fire, but is, unfortunately, rendered “hors de combat” before the Parliament, media and the public because of government and self-imposed restraint. But should the political leadership or security establishment not come to its rescue in such morale-sapping situationsIf the armed forces are to remain apolitical (and they must), the government has to provide them a layer of insulation, not just from the rough and tumble of politics, but also from the barbs of some sections of an ill-informed media. The best way to achieve this would be to do what the other democracies in the world have practiced for decades: subsume the armed forces headquarters within the central bastion of the government by making them an integral part of the Ministry of Defence. This is a huge breach in our national security edifice that the new NSA must redress at the earliestReverting to the Clausewitizian tenet mentioned earlier, one assumes that it would be eagerly embraced, both, by Indian statesmen as well as our national security managers, because it clearly upholds and reinforces the principle of civil control over the armed forces. And yet our politicians have historically baulked at issuing guidance and directions to the country’s military leadership for any operation since Independence.

The absence of a strategic culture in India has been under discussion for over a decade now, since the American analyst Tanham published a monograph on the subject. An emergent line of thinking attempts to make a virtue of this critical inadequacy in our culture, society and political leadership. This thought-process seeks to deride grand strategy or the quest for a coherent long-term vision per se on the grounds that unpredictable threats, changing priorities or compulsions of India’s capricious politics would disrupt it, at some stageThe diagnosis of strategic myopia at the top is substantiated by an account, which says that when the government ordered the unprecedented mobilisation of India’s million strong army, post the Parliament attack, the army chief asked for specific directions. He was allegedly told at the highest quarters: “baad mein batayen ge” (“you will be told later”). A year later the forces were de-mobilised, with the nation no better off, and the chief no wiser! This seemed to consecrate Narasimha Rao’s priceless comment that “not taking a decision is also a decision.”

Our bureaucracy and diplomats are fond of blaming the Indian politician’s limited horizon for their failure to evolve a long-term vision in any area. While the democratic process in our country does demand that a politician devotes sufficient time to micro-issues relating to party, Parliament and constituency, it is for this reason that huge bureaucracies exist to deal with issues such as intelligence, foreign affairs and securityThe diagnosis of strategic myopia at the top is substantiated by an account, which says that when the government ordered the unprecedented mobilisation of India’s million strong army, post the Parliament attack, the army chief asked for specific directions. He was allegedly told at the highest quarters: “baad mein batayen ge” (“you will be told later”). A year later the forces were de-mobilised, with the nation no better off, and the chief no wiser! This seemed to consecrate Narasimha Rao’s priceless comment that “not taking a decision is also a decision.”

Our bureaucracy and diplomats are fond of blaming the Indian politician’s limited horizon for their failure to evolve a long-term vision in any area. While the democratic process in our country does demand that a politician devotes sufficient time to micro-issues relating to party, Parliament and constituency, it is for this reason that huge bureaucracies exist to deal with issues such as intelligence, foreign affairs and securityThe diagnosis of strategic myopia at the top is substantiated by an account, which says that when the government ordered the unprecedented mobilisation of India’s million strong army, post the Parliament attack, the army chief asked for specific directions. He was allegedly told at the highest quarters: “baad mein batayen ge” (“you will be told later”). A year later the forces were de-mobilised, with the nation no better off, and the chief no wiser! This seemed to consecrate Narasimha Rao’s priceless comment that “not taking a decision is also a decision.”The Chinese leadership is now within sight of two objectives which they obviously set for themselves at the end of the Civil War in 1949; firstly, to establish military and economic dominance in Asia, brooking no rivals; and secondly, acquiring nuclear weapons capability at the earliest. Having achieved both, the Chinese strategists have turned their gaze seawards.

Gwadar deep sea port in Pakistan and the Hambantota container terminal in south east Sri Lanka are just the early manifestations of an India-specific Chinese grand-strategy which encompasses the creation of a set of footholds in the Indian Ocean region to facilitate its implementation. If the planning and gestation period of these projects is 8-10 years, one can imagine how long ago this strategy was conceptualised.n the case of Pakistan, its strategic brains-trust is the directorate-general of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). While this agency may evoke fear and revulsion in India, one has to acknowledge the vision and planning skills which have enabled it to produce an unending series of Machiavellian plots and plans to subvert, destabilise and balkanise India.

An operation of the kind launched by the ISI on 26/11 in Mumbai would have required planning, reconnaissance, intelligence-gathering, training and rehearsals over a period of 18 months to 2 years. We need to remember that this attack was only a sub-plot in the much larger grand-strategy of inflicting “a thousand cuts” on India which has been underway for the past decade, and must have been evolved by the ISI 20-25 years ago.

With adversaries like these, the new NSA must use all the cards dealt to him. Continued exclusion of the huge intellectual and planning resources of the armed forces out of the national security decision-making process would be akin to voluntarily donning a pair of blinkers — and refusing to take them off.

http://http://www.indianexpress.com/news/inhouse-expertise/572654/

 

[Yusuf]

There is no doubt on Indias ability to wage war against Pakistan. Nukes or no Nukes.
india doesn't need to start a war with Pakistan after a terror strike. But then it has to retaliate with precision strikes even if they are on empty tents just to make sure that Pakistan and the terrorists know that india will strike back. The onus of starting a war will not be on India.
As it is the US has said India will not show patience next time and it doesn't expect it either. Any effort by pakistan to widen the conflict will be scuttled by the US saying Pakistan had to stop the terrorists.

Good intel is a must. Get precise info about terrorist leaders like Saeed and kill them in a daring and overt manner like the Israelis. It will put fear in the heart of terror leaders who comfortably sit in their dens and send convert innocent kids by brainwashing into terrorists and send them to do the dirty job.

 

[Tamil]

I bet GOI will go on in the path of Diplomatic ways only for a decade or more till our internal security and ingeniousness of defense equipment is produced largely..!

 

[Yusuf]

Tamil, what your saying has no bearing on Indias preparedness to go to war.

 

[ajtr]

Why people here beating war drums.india has categorically seen twice ie in 2002 when hawks were in power and 2008 when congress was in power---bottomline is indian politicians as matter of fact dont ve balls to wage war on pak.and all these talks of cold start doctrine is just like building castle in air.when india doesnt even ve enough artillery guns and mechnaised forces how an they implement it.

War is no solution to terror attacks emnating from pak but sure covet war is solution.pay by the same coin and deny it.