Should India Join the Combined Task Force?

[Yusuf]

The US would love India to join this group as it would help ease a lot of it burden.India sits at a good geographical location as well. Since the primary aim of this CTF is anti terror ops, the US could then well ask for logistics support that is has always sought from India which India has repeatedly denied.

Indian concerns will not be addressed by joining this group as far as terror goes. we are more interested in piracy and have on our own taken adequate steps to prevent that.

Unless there are other benefits for India,i dont see any reason as to why india should join this group.

 

[Ray]

UN mission has one country as head of command at a given time, yeah?. It can be under a nice blue flag, but a member country always heads up the command. we can put a lipstick on a pig , but its still a pig. CBT 150 deal can be under a pink flag similarly but for logistics purposes , one member country will have to be in command. UN missions are a form of a law enforcement deal ( hence peace keeping mandate) and not really militray missions.

The bane of my contention is ( with Tshering22) , how the hell is someone being in command for logistics purposes on a law enforcement mandate, turn into a threat for sovereignty... false pride in my opinion.

No.

A UN Mission has the UN at the head.

The Local command is made up of all the nations participating.

While they can be from any country, they are to take instructions from the UN.

The UN mission need not be only peacekeeping, under Article 7, it can be Peace Enforcement. A vast difference!

All UN missions deploying the military are military operations, or else why have a military UN Mission?

Since you use Palin's allegory, the bottom line is - One can put a lipstick on a pig, but one has to understand what is a pig and what is lipstick, in the first place.

Palin also saw Russia from her window (sic!)! And so she thought that was good enough to be an 'expert' on Russia!

Why should any country want to be supplying logistics? Everyone has a different logistical difference. It is like the MRE intially given to the Indian troops by the UN, wherein there was beef, cornflakes, bacon and bread. Indian troops could not eat it and so it was wasted, till MRE from India was substituted.

 

[Ray]

The US would love India to join this group as it would help ease a lot of it burden.India sits at a good geographical location as well. Since the primary aim of this CTF is anti terror ops, the US could then well ask for logistics support that is has always sought from India which India has repeatedly denied.

Indian concerns will not be addressed by joining this group as far as terror goes. we are more interested in piracy and have on our own taken adequate steps to prevent that.

Unless there are other benefits for India,i dont see any reason as to why india should join this group.

While not coming under the US Flag, India can cooperate and retain its identity.

That is why we have the joint naval exercise, to increase the inter-operability.

 

[Yusuf]

While not coming under the US Flag, India can cooperate and retain its identity.

That is why we have the joint naval exercise, to increase the inter-operability.

Yes and that has been going on anyways. So there does not seem to be a necessity to join any such group for the moment.

 

[Ray]

I am sure there is coordination at regular intervals and when any ship is going in against the pirates so that there is no overlaps in effort.

That is where inter-operability works.

Closest Cooperation does not mean being under any other country's Flag and yet, it remains a loose unified command with all countries as independent and sovereign partners.

 

[JayATL]

No.

A UN Mission has the UN at the head.

The Local command is made up of all the nations participating.

While they can be from any country, they are to take instructions from the UN.

The UN mission need not be only peacekeeping, under Article 7, it can be Peace Enforcement. A vast difference!

All UN missions deploying the military are military operations, or else why have a military UN Mission?

Since you use Palin's allegory, the bottom line is - One can put a lipstick on a pig, but one has to understand what is a pig and what is lipstick, in the first place.

Palin also saw Russia from her window (sic!)! And so she thought that was good enough to be an 'expert' on Russia!

Why should any country want to be supplying logistics? Everyone has a different logistical difference. It is like the MRE intially given to the Indian troops by the UN, wherein there was beef, cornflakes, bacon and bread. Indian troops could not eat it and so it was wasted, till MRE from India was substituted.

this getting pointless... the UN does not have anything called a UN army. If multiple countries are involved in region under a UN peacekeeping force. There is always ( on a rotation basis if need be) one command structure. a OPERATIONAL command ( i.e. UN control) is different from a logistics command. The only command that US will have with the 150 is logistics driven. Incorrect on all UN missions are militray mission again. they make have militray players in the theater - that's because you cannot send FBI agents, CBI agents or local police from every country to patrol these missions. they are not trained in such ways...besides laws of countries don't allow them to have any jurisdiction as such. UN is not a body of local police departmental of the world.

Why supply logistics? because its vast oceans. logistics is not limited to MRE's , which in this case would be an non issue. intelligence gathered form one source needs to be parsed to others and 100 other similar information.

Lipstick on a Pig is a US colloquialism not Palin's that pre-dates her and the election cycle.. It was used, if you need to know, by Obama first in the primary, in the ast political election cycle . Palin is a moron- i agree .

United Nation forces comprising contingents of 29 countries were sent to Congo in 1960 to restore legitimate government, which had been overthrown through a coup d'etat. Pakistan provided logistic support during movement of troops to and from Congo and inland movement to the United Nation troops

 

[JayATL]

Marine piracy increased 10% in 2010, according to IMB

Philippines News.Net
Wednesday 19th January, 2011

The International Maritime Bureau released a report showing a record number of seafarers were taken hostage in 2010 and urged the international community to take more action to tackle the threat.
The International Maritime Bureau (IMB) released a report Tuesday showing that marine piracy has increased in 2010, with a record number of hostages taken.

In 2010, pirates took a record 1,181 hostages and staged 53 successful hijackings, 49 of which occurred off the Somali coast, according to a report by the IMB.

The number of hostages taken during the year marks the highest number since 1991, when the International Maritime Bureau first began monitoring piracy on the high seas.

The latest figures are "alarming" the group warned, as they show that international patrolling of the Indian Ocean by various navies has proved ineffective at tackling the threat.

http://www.philippinesnews.net/story/733448


-----------------

PS. when they use term international ( because I know someone here will ask or state it) does not mean The CTF 150. Rather they mean different countries . the Indian ocean is vast and not all comes under India's jurisdiction.

 

[Ray]

this getting pointless... the UN does not have anything called a UN army. If multiple countries are involved in region under a UN peacekeeping force. There is always ( on a rotation basis if need be) one command structure. a OPERATIONAL command ( i.e. UN control) is different from a logistics command. The only command that US will have with the 150 is logistics driven. Incorrect on all UN missions are militray mission again. they make have militray players in the theater - that's because you cannot send FBI agents, CBI agents or local police from every country to patrol these missions. they are not trained in such ways...besides laws of countries don't allow them to have any jurisdiction as such. UN is not a body of local police departmental of the world.

Why supply logistics? because its vast oceans. logistics is not limited to MRE's , which in this case would be an non issue. intelligence gathered form one source needs to be parsed to others and 100 other similar information.

Lipstick on a Pihg is a US colloquialism not Palin's that pre dates her and the election cycle.. It was used, if you need to know, by Obama first in the primary, in thelast political election cycle . Palin is a moron- i agree .

My friend, this is not getting pointless.

It is merely clarifying issues that you seem to not understand .

Indeed, the UN has no Army. It used to be called UNEF (UN Emergency Force).

First of all, you require understanding MILITARY OPERATIONS. I am amazed that you do not understand that no operations can be launched without logistic. Therefore, I am at wits end to understand as to how there can be an Operational Command without logistics.

Who has told you that the command is under a rotational basis? The command is tenure based.

Incorrect that all UN missions are military? You amaze me. I am astounded how you wish to sidetrack. I had said all UN military Mission, be it peace keeping or peace enforcement, and where the military is employed are all military operations of the UN.

Anyone with a modicum of knowledge is aware that UN military mission are quite different from, let us say, UNICEF. Isn't that obvious? But military operations in all its ramifications and hues remain a military operation and if under the UN Flag, it is controlled by the UN and all such forces are subordinate to the UN.


Lastly, if it might help, I was earmarked as the Commander of the Indian UN Brigade in Somalia and had quite some interaction on the issue.

As far as logistics and vast oceans, what exactly are you meaning?

Refuelling and victualling?

As far as the pig and the lipstick, I maintain that unless one understands what is a pig and what is a lipstick, one just goes round and round like Tony Lumpkin! Then it becomes pointless, the word which is your favourite.

 

[Ray]

Peacekeeping, as defined by the United Nations, is a way to help countries torn by conflict create conditions for sustainable peace. UN peacekeepers—soldiers and military officers, civilian police officers and civilian personnel from many countries—monitor and observe peace processes that emerge in post-conflict situations and assist ex-combatants in implementing the peace agreements they have signed. Such assistance comes in many forms, including confidence-building measures, power-sharing arrangements, electoral support, strengthening the rule of law, and economic and social development. All operations must include the resolution of conflicts through the use of force to be considered valid under the charter of the United Nations.

IDP camp in Sudan resulting from the Darfur conflict. The Charter of the United Nations gives the Security Council the power and responsibility to take collective action to maintain international peace and security. For this reason, the international community usually looks to the Security Council to authorize peacekeeping operations. Most of these operations are established and implemented by the United Nations itself with troops serving under UN operational command. In other cases, where direct UN involvement is not considered appropriate or feasible, the Council authorizes regional organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, the Economic Community of West African States or coalitions of willing countries to implement certain peacekeeping or peace enforcement functions. In modern times, peacekeeping operations have evolved into many different functions, including diplomatic relations with other countries, international bodies of justice (such as the International Criminal Court), and eliminating problems such as landmines that can lead to new incidents of fighting.

The meaning of the term peace enforcement is often misunderstood. Consider that when soldiers are performing enforcement actions under a UN Security Council mandate, they are still called peacekeepers. The term's origins are found in the UN Charter under Chapter VII and Articles 39, 41, and 42. Article 47 goes on to outline the procedures for managing "breaches of peace and acts of aggression". It establishes a Military Staff Committee to manage the armed forces placed at the disposal of the UN Security Council.

 

[Ray]

Having tried my best to explain the UN ops; and the meaning of command under one Flag and the difference of being under the UN Flag, let us return to the topic.

Lastly, one must understand what military operations entails.

It is not conducive to the discussion by using the word, 'pointless', if one does not understand what military operations entail.

Another point one forgets is the 'ethos'. One cannot superimpose the way US addresses an ops to the manner how India approaches an ops.

Somalia is an example.

 

[Ray]

Pakistan will join any organisation so long as they can milk them.

Let us leave them out as any force for reckoning.

 

[Ray]

Why supply logistics? because its vast oceans. logistics is not limited to MRE's , which in this case would be an non issue. intelligence gathered form one source needs to be parsed to others and 100 other similar information.

Intelligence is a G Matter and not a Logistic issue at all.

 

[Ray]

United Nation forces comprising contingents of 29 countries were sent to Congo in 1960 to restore legitimate government, which had been overthrown through a coup d'etat. Pakistan provided logistic support during movement of troops to and from Congo and inland movement to the United Nation troops

Give the link and hopefully I will be able to answer.

Did they only send military personnel for logistics alone? Possible.

IAF provides helicopters and transporters too. They too thus could be termed as helping on logistics, and at the same time, it does not take away the fact that Indian troops are also involved in peacekeeping!

 

[Armand2REP]

Pakistan mercenaries make up a large part of UN peacekeepers, second only to India in Congo.

 

[JayATL]

1. I said " ( on a rotation basis if need be) . i.e if multi year project then one peace keeping 'member ' country can rotate out, thereby giving up command

2. Perhaps the wrong choice of a word by me , as in " operational command". Operational command vs. Logistics command and what I meant by in this specific case is that the UN can tell the member armies what the mission parameters are but can't tell them how to game plan it within those parameters. When I cited the UN as an example originally, I was reminding the poster that just like we don't give up our sovereignty on a UN deployment , specifically, when being under a logistic command of another country- then why look at the CFT 150 as a threat to sovereignty or lack of maintaining of one's independence ? example : United Nation forces comprising contingents of 29 countries were sent to Congo in 1960 to restore legitimate government, which had been overthrown through a coup d'etat. Pakistan provided logistic support during movement of troops to and from Congo and inland movement to the United Nation troops

UN mandate is :
Create a secure and stable environment while strengthening the State's
ability to provide security, with full respect for the rule of law and
human rights;
b) Facilitate the political process by promoting dialogue and reconciliation
and supporting the establishment of legitimate and effective
institutions of governance;
c) Provide a framework for ensuring that all United Nations and other
international
actors pursue their activities at the country-level in a
coherent and coordinated manner.

Again all this was the larger point- that being,you can be a part of CFT150 and allow US to have command in terms of logistics and it does not mean giving up sovereignty.


3. UN Military missions- although called militray missions- they are more of law enforcement or defensive mission, and perhaps we debating at the margins here. In my eyes- NON UN peacekeeping force have more of a militray role to it. eg kosovo

 

[Ray]

Bangladesh, India and Pakistan are the top contributors to the UN Missions.

They are regular soldiers.

 

[JayATL]

Give the link and hopefully I will be able to answer.

Did they only send military personnel for logistics alone? Possible.

IAF provides helicopters and transporters too. They too thus could be termed as helping on logistics, and at the same time, it does not take away the fact that Indian troops are also involved in peacekeeping!

the point in there and let me find that link again, I had several windows up and closed my browsers... is that UN gave a ' country' , in this case Pakistan logistical control over support to other nations.


here it is, I was randomly researching for info. it is a Pakistani source- i don't know if they would lie over something so insignificant http://www.pakistanarmy.gov.pk/AWPReview/TextContent.aspx?pId=50&rnd=193

 

[Ray]

JayATL,

I have explained as best I could.

It is not possible to make someone who has no idea of military operations or of the mode of mounting UN operations to understand, more so, if one is fixated.

No offence meant.

The UN operations are very complex since it has govt interest also to be kept in mind as also the UN task.

 

[Ray]

the point in there and let me find that link again, I had several windows up and closed my browsers... is that UN gave a ' country' , in this case Pakistan logistical control over support to other nations.


here it is, I was randomly researching for info. it is a Pakistani source- i don't know if they would lie over something so insignificant http://www.pakistanarmy.gov.pk/AWPReview/TextContent.aspx?pId=50&rnd=193

Here is what the link states:

United Nation forces comprising contingents of 29 countries were sent to Congo in 1960 to restore legitimate government, which had been overthrown through a coup d'etat. Pakistan provided logistic support during movement of troops to and from Congo and inland movement to the United Nation troops. Pakistan Army Supply Corps (ASC) organized the whole operation in a meticulous manner. It continued uninterrupted from 1960 to 1964 with four Independent Army Supply Corps companies, each consisting of about 100 personnel. The movement control entailed move through sea, air, rail, riverian and road transport.A systematic organization was created to ensure foolproof administrative arrangements for transportation of troops, weapons, equipment, stores and rations throughout Congo in unfriendly environments. Pakistani troops thus performed the assigned task with professional skill and devotion which earned them applause across the world.

Army Service Corps is a logistic organisation.

So, logistic it shall provide.

 

[Armand2REP]

Bangladesh, India and Pakistan are the top contributors to the UN Missions.

They are regular soldiers.

Regular soldiers do not illegally trade ammo for gold and ivory to the rebels they are supposed to be stopping.