Pak should be ready for collateral damages if they fire: BSF

[Zebra]

http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/pak-should-be-ready-for-collateral-damages-if-they-fire-bsf-115010100415_1.html

Press Trust of India | Jammu
January 1, 2015

Asserting that BSF never fires "first" towards the Pakistan side along the International Border, the force today said the neighbouring country should be ready to suffer collateral damages if the Indian side retaliates.

"If Pakistan rangers fire on us, we will also fire on them. If they suffer collateral damages (in our action), they (Pakistan) should be ready for that," Inspector General (IG) of BSF, Jammu Frontier, Rakesh Sharma told reporters here today.

Sharma was speaking to media persons at a function held to pay homage to constable Shri Ram Gawaria who died yesterday when Pakistan violated ceasefire along International Border (IB) in Samba sector by firing on a BSF patrol party. Four Pakistan rangers were killed in retaliatory firing by BSF.

Asked whether there were instructions from the Centre to give befitting reply to Pakistan, the IG said, "There were already clear instructions in the past as also this time and will continue in future too."

"But we never open fire on Pakistan first. You have seen that we have never fired first on the Pakistan on IB. If we are being fired upon, we will not sit silent...We will retaliate," the IG said.

The IG termed yesterday's firing by Pakistan as an act of frustration.

"See how Pakistan rangers have snipped the patrol party of BSF. This is utter frustration of Pakistan as they are not getting an opportunity to infiltrate into this side."

Asked about the reason behind the continuance of the firing incidents from across the border, Sharma said, "Whenever there is an internal problem in Pakistan, they try to engineer ceasefire violations in a bid to divert attention of its general public there-- both on LoC and International Border. This is their deliberate conspiracy."

"It is beyond our comprehension why Pakistan is resorting to firing on our borders. One reason is that their internal disturbances as their internal situation is very bad in wake of terror attacks there and may be to divert the attention of the public," he added.

 

[Redhawk]

Quite right! If units of the Pakistan Rangers fire on units of the Indian Border Security Force (BSF) and the BSF returns fire and there is collateral damage and collateral casualties on the other side, the Pakistan Rangers only have themselves to blame and will have to live with the consequences. Whoever provokes the situation is the one who has to live with the damage and casualties sustained by his own side.

 

[dastan]

Is there a scope for a limited conventional war? Are we heading towards it?

 

[Nicky G]

So the Paki media is spinning the story that those killed were ambushed at a flag meet.

Is there a scope for a limited conventional war? Are we heading towards it?

Kargil. Pakis don't seem to have any problems continuing after being repeatedly defeated.

Most importantly, the Pak generals with their cosy lives don't care about their people or soldiers as long as they enjoy the luxuries and ever increasing budget. They don't have the guts to actually use anything really serious nukes.

 

[ezsasa]

I have a feeling that these cross border firings will not stop. In fact my worry is that they will escalate this even further when they want to move on from TTP, assuming at some point TTP will be eliminated and they will have move on to the good Taliban which their military will not like to do.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

Is there a scope for a limited conventional war? Are we heading towards it?

Any war with Pakistan will quickly escalate. All we can have is skirmishes. Till US is Afghanistan they will not allow any war.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

Kargil. Pakis don't seem to have any problems continuing after being repeatedly defeated.

I don't think their will be another Kargil. The last Kargil has taught them that such foolish endeavor will not be accepted in international community.
Also sane civilian leadership (e.g. incumbent one) will not risk another war.

 

[Nicky G]

I don't think their will be another Kargil. The last Kargil has taught them that such foolish endeavor will not be accepted in international community.
Also sane civilian leadership (e.g. incumbent one) will not risk another war.

I didn't mean to suggest another Kargil is likely, merely that the bluster of Pakis that a war would escalate to a nuclear one is simply that, bluster. A limited conventional war is entirely possible though unlikely.

As for sane civilian leadership, wasn't the same leadership in place during Kargil? Sharif was fooled into complacency by his generals, one in particular. Although your point about US not allowing a major conflict while they occupy Afghanistan is entirely valid.

 

[Screambowl]

I have a feeling that these cross border firings will not stop. In fact my worry is that they will escalate this even further when they want to move on from TTP, assuming at some point TTP will be eliminated and they will have move on to the good Taliban which their military will not like to do.

Possibly yes, the skirmishes will linger on and after TTP-Fazlullah and factions of TTP punjab is cornered, they will increase the strength of battalions on eastern front and so the skirmishes. The real threat is their proxy ops inside India . But again, unless until they stop distinguishing Good and Bad terrorist for continuing proxy war in India, there will remain elements in Pakistan which can any time bite them back too.

The real threat is their proxy war on India, not Skirmishes.

 

[Rowdy]

Possibly yes, the skirmishes will linger on and after TTP-Fazlullah and factions of TTP punjab is cornered, they will increase the strength of battalions on eastern front and so the skirmishes. The real threat is their proxy ops inside India . But again, unless until they stop distinguishing Good and Bad terrorist for continuing proxy war in India, there will remain elements in Pakistan which can any time bite them back too.

The real threat is their proxy war on India, not Skirmishes.

What counter ops (offensive) will India take?

 

[Screambowl]

What counter ops (offensive) will India take?

Most probably, India will deal with them diplomatically , but offensive diplomacy, involving other countries like US and the EU, as Pakistan Military's doctrine is to bleed India by hundred cuts, so they are not going to leave terrorism as a tool of their interest. Rest we need to give more freedom to our counter intelligence, POTA must be brought back, NCTC must be implemented within one year time.

 

[Redhawk]

"It is beyond our comprehension why Pakistan is resorting to firing on our borders. One reason is that their internal disturbances as their internal situation is very bad in wake of terror attacks there and may be to divert the attention of the public," he added.

This is probably right. The Pakistani military is trying to divert public attention away from Pakistan's internal situation, including operations against the Taliban, in the wake of the Taliban terror attack in Peshawar. Provoking skirmishes with their arch-enemy, India, along the international border is a convenient distraction for the Pakistani public.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

I didn't mean to suggest another Kargil is likely, merely that the bluster of Pakis that a war would escalate to a nuclear one is simply that, bluster. A limited conventional war is entirely possible though unlikely.

Kargil was actually planned after Pakistan lost Siachen conflict in around 1986 (citation needed). In Kargil the whole Pakistani aspect was based on mujaheddin fighting. This BS can't be applied again. No one will believe it. Only dumb generals will attempt it again.

As for sane civilian leadership, wasn't the same leadership in place during Kargil? Sharif was fooled into complacency by his generals, one in particular.

Their is a idiom Once Bitten, Twice Shy. Mr. Sharif is a smart person. In 1999 he got carried away it won't happen again. He knows a point that if there a war with India and if Pakistan looses its the end of the PM's carrier even his life may be in danger so he won't risk it.
Even Pakistani generals are not that stupid. If Mr. Shari gets fooled again he doesn't deserve to be the PM.

 

[Ray]

It is good that for a change India has taken a proactive attitude instead of its decade old passivity.

Till now, Pakistan could get away with whatever it did, since all Govts had the baggage of wanting to 'normalise' relations with talks, notwithstanding the damage Pakistan did.

It was Mrs Indira Gandhi who did not carry this baggage of Gandhian peace be with you attitude and extending the other cheek.

And it now appears that Modi and his Ministers too have jettisoned this Gandhian baggage and not carry it on their shoulders like beasts of burden that other PMs were ingrained to believe they were.

I didn't mean to suggest another Kargil is likely, merely that the bluster of Pakis that a war would escalate to a nuclear one is simply that, bluster. A limited conventional war is entirely possible though unlikely.

As for sane civilian leadership, wasn't the same leadership in place during Kargil? Sharif was fooled into complacency by his generals, one in particular. Although your point about US not allowing a major conflict while they occupy Afghanistan is entirely valid.

Kargil can always happen even if such a conflagration as we are noticing did not happen because given the terrain and the deployment, there will always be gaps in the defence that can be exploited by Pakistan, and should I say, not impossible for India either.

It is time to shed the 'defensive' mindset, grown out of fear of failure and international criticisms. It is time to be confident of oneself and be able to send a message that if Pakistan feels that they can always get the upper hand, then they are mistaken.

That attitude, as far as Indian is concerned, is what is indicative of a 'sane and mature' leadership and not the whimpering bleats and lying supine type of attitude that we saw in the past.

At the same time, I will give it to Nawaz Sharif that he has displayed greater sanity on the Indo Pak relations than the other coots who adorned that chair in salwar kameez or in Khaki. But then the civil leadership has never been the real leaders of Pakistan. That is what queers the pitch.

 

[Virendra]

This prepares for PA a very good excuse - that their resources are divided and thinned out in fighting Taliban etc on western front and India on the eastern at the same time.

 

[Nicky G]

Kargil was actually planned after Pakistan lost Siachen conflict in around 1986 (citation needed). In Kargil the whole Pakistani aspect was based on mujaheddin fighting. This BS can't be applied again. No one will believe it. Only dumb generals will attempt it again.

I am aware of the background of Kargil, or Pak's rationale for it. I remember hearing a general of India who talked to Musharraf, who said in as many words that since India took Siachen, they wanted to take Kargil.

No one believes Pak anyway, but US continues to provide them aid to suit their own end. A limited war won't change that in my understanding.

I submit that you are over-estimating the intellect of Pak generals. As our defense minister was recently quotes, "Pak doesn't seem to learn any lessons".

Their is a idiom Once Bitten, Twice Shy. Mr. Sharif is a smart person. In 1999 he got carried away it won't happen again. He knows a point that if there a war with India and if Pakistan looses its the end of the PM's carrier even his life may be in danger so he won't risk it.
Even Pakistani generals are not that stupid. If Mr. Shari gets fooled again he doesn't deserve to be the PM.

Again, I must bring up our defense minister who seems to have reached the conclusion that Pak simply does not learn any lessons. In my limited understanding, they still seem to be under the impression that we won't escalate beyond a point and they are pressing us.

Clearly its not the end of a career for Pak to lose to India. Sharif and Musharraf are prime examples of that.

I simply do not have as much confidence in the intellectual caliber of Pak leadership, be it civilian or military that you seem to have.

As for whether Sharif deserves to be PM or, its not as if Pak is teeming with alternatives, no matter how much noise Imran Khan makes.

The way events are developing, sooner rather than later a conflict will escalate. Already we have news of Pak moving its army to replace Rangers (will post link later). So lets see how this develops.

Kargil can always happen even if such a conflagration as we are noticing did not happen because given the terrain and the deployment, there will always be gaps in the defence that can be exploited by Pakistan, and should I say, not impossible for India either.

It is time to shed the 'defensive' mindset, grown out of fear of failure and international criticisms. It is time to be confident of oneself and be able to send a message that if Pakistan feels that they can always get the upper hand, then they are mistaken.

That attitude, as far as Indian is concerned, is what is indicative of a 'sane and mature' leadership and not the whimpering bleats and lying supine type of attitude that we saw in the past.

At the same time, I will give it to Nawaz Sharif that he has displayed greater sanity on the Indo Pak relations than the other coots who adorned that chair in salwar kameez or in Khaki. But then the civil leadership has never been the real leaders of Pakistan. That is what queers the pitch.

The way to deal with Pak is to keep them so busy that they don't have the chance to create trouble. Otherwise, we will always be on the defensive as you put it.

International pressure, to be blunt, I see little indication that much has changed. Yes we get news that we are responding more forcefully, clearly that is not enough to deter the Pakis, so we must escalate further. I don't see that we have much choice in the matter.

Again, how really is this leadership that much better? I am all for Modi but I am yet to see any real departure from the past. I understand that things don't change in a jiffy, so lets see how things develop.

Sharif is saner than the alternatives, but not sure how reliable he is both in terms of his intent and influence.

This prepares for PA a very good excuse - that their resources are divided and thinned out in fighting Taliban etc on western front and India on the eastern at the same time.

So thin them out further and have them pour more into their western front if you know what I mean.

 

[dastan]

I'd say the current tone of response from Indian side is most apt and rationale. Retaliate with 'double force', as described by parrikar himself, whenever there is a provocation and rest just focus on getting our economy back on track. Just look at amt. of defence deals cleared since the new govt have taken power, with plenty yet to come, in a bid to stay relevant in arms race pakistan will starve itself to death.

 

[Nicky G]

India hits back at repeated ceasefire violations, Pakistan seeks talks

"This is the first time they have targeted a BSF man who was patrolling on the zero line. We are used to firing attempts at our BOP's, but this was unacceptable. Even their team patrols on the zero line, but they have never come under fire from our side," said DK Pathak, DG, BSF. Pathak on Thursday briefed Union Home Secretary Anil Goswami about the prevailing situation along the border.

So this was something new.

"They were forced to call us for a flag meeting and even tried to reach out to the DGMO and the defence secretary. When that failed, they contacted DIG, BSF in Delhi. This time, we resorted to five times heavy firing," said a senior BSF official.

Great. My point however is that things will cool down and a few days / weeks later we will have more nonsese from them.

When our top leadership says something to the effect 'we will make their adventurism too costly', clearly we have not hit that threshold.

I understand this is one aspect in much larger plays and even larger Indian geo-political scenario and no one is asking for random, thoughtless action, but I sincerely hope some long term plan is in place to effective put an end to these type of situations.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

No one believes Pak anyway, but US continues to provide them aid to suit their own end. A limited war won't change that in my understanding.

I submit that you are over-estimating the intellect of Pak generals. As our defense minister was recently quotes, "Pak doesn't seem to learn any lessons".

Sir, when you say limited war exactly what do you mean by that?

 

[Nicky G]

Sir, when you say limited war exactly what do you mean by that?

I believe there are well established precedents for what is a limited as opposed to a total war. Limited in scope, objective, capabilities used etc. Though as I started, to my understanding Kargil would be considered limited war though obviously there would be levels of escalation till we hit that mark of conflict.

Moving away from just Kargil, considering Pak is tied up on its western front, how do you rate their ability to escalate on the east? Clearly, their limit would be much lower than India's at the moment. To me, we should be pushing them much harder if only for that.