India Pakistan conflict along LoC and counter terrorist operations

[Knowitall]

Hearing this since I was able to read and write.

The entire philosophy of Indian deaths being avenged by killing terrorists is flawed. You cannot equate Indian lives to that of terrorists and then call it a tit for tat response.

 

[Knowitall]

Two very different questions with no straightforward answers to either I am afraid. I also cannot claim to know exactly why things are the way they are. That said, following is my understanding of the dynamics that in part affected strategic discourse in the country over the last 70-75 years.

First and foremost, in hierarchy of importance is the overall national philosophy wrt foreign policy. India has always positioned itself as a peaceful status quo power with no avarice for territory. It is purely a defensive country that would never attack but respond to provocations. This is a philosophy that has been drilled down right from childhood to higher learning across generations. Think “India has never invaded another country in 1000 years”. The first two generations of political class, taught in UK in a post war left dominated ecosystem were enamored of socialist and left liberal principles and carried their hatred of military aggression and general disdain for armed forces to political decision making in India. Sardar Patel was an exception to the norm and understood ground realities and made pragmatic choices. For the others, ideals were always placed above pragmatism, and hence we had this weird image globally, of a nation that talks peace when the enemy has kicked in its front door. Behind the back of India’s political class, the international political class and intelligentsia laughed at our disconnect with reality. “The land of snake charmers”

This is a cultural phenomenon, and its impact can be felt to this day. Indians in general find it very hard to grasp the concept of being the attacker. Ask yourself, how comfortable you would be with Indian army attacking unprovoked across international borders? How comfortable would people you know be with such an action?

The entire Indian population has been rendered passive and pacifist and are not mentally and philosophically equipped to reimagine an aggressive, forceful India that uses violence as an instrument of state policy. Think of BJP/NDA spokespersons’ commentaries and statements within India. You will find hints of the imprint of this subconscious passivity and reactiveness within their statements. It has been very hard for strategic think tanks and academicians, who are the purveyors of strategic discourse in any country to even advocate or simulate proactive approaches because of the inherent hesitancy of majority of Indians. They fear being mislabeled as hawks. You will not find this strategic hesitancy amongst the think tank community and academia in US, UK.

All of this affects everyone: The Political class, the diplomatic class, the armed forces, the intelligence agencies. It is a self-imposed mental block that narrows field of view to strategic alternatives.

Next, Indian strategic community, the political class and the armed forces have struggled to define strategic objectives. Except for 1948, 1961 & 1971, we have always suffered from ambiguity about our own strategic objectives and therefore by extension the victory conditions or war winning conditions.

Now for an offensive to succeed the two most important preconditions are demarcation of war winning objectives and having a war closure plan. A war winning objective is something that both sides recognize as being decisive to the outcome of the conflict, and forcing the loser into either strategic escalation or into a war closure position.

What is our war winning condition for a war with Pakistan? CSD postulated the capture of 50-70km sliver of land across a broad front. Does anyone here seriously believe Pakistan will surrender or stop fighting just because they lost 70 km of land? What happens if PA continues permanent resistance post IA securing objectives? I would argue that given that PA is (or was) aware that IA objectives only extend to capture of 70 km land, PA would pull back from all nonessential fronts and conserve its forces to ensure permanent sustained combat capability. PA wins just by continuing engagements and showing that they remain a potent fighting force. As for the land, they already know it will be returned post war in negotiations. The victory condition for PA is merely survival without significant loss of combat potential or firepower. This is an example of muddled strategic thought process resulting in poor strategic objective identification leading to poor war outcome. A more effective war winning objective would be either capture of POK (AJK is a Pakistani fantasy, doesn’t exist) and/or destruction of the strike corps of PA. The destruction of Mangla based I Corps & Multan based II corps for example, would severely degrade PA combat capability and render conventional resistance unsustainable against the overwhelming force of IA. PA therefore is forced to either escalate strategically or seek peace. As such it is a decisive event and therefore a war winning objective. Same for annexation of POK, it is a strategic loss for PA and leaves PA with no choice but to either escalate or seek peace. Conventional resistance would be pointless at that point and have no impact on strategic positioning of IA.

I ask the same question for the China front. What would constitute a war winning objective? What is our war winning objective? Are those war winning objective attainable for our armed forces? What would force PLA to rethink the strategic calculations wrt a war with India? Would capturing slivers of land force any change in PLA operations? The way I see it, the only way PLA rethinks operations against IA is the destruction and degradation of PLA forces facing the India theater to an extent that PLA believes current operations would be ineffective and therefore forcing PLA to escalate the conflict massively or back down. These are difficult questions to answer.

Thanks for the reply and to add on to this.

Do you see or expect a conflict arising in the coming days or moths between India-pak-china.

If yes what do you think will be the strategy and objectives of our armed forces and do you expect them to achieve these objectives in the first place.

Also what will be the strategy and objectives of pak and china and will they be able to achieve their objectives.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

Thanks for the reply and to add on to this.

Do you see or expect a conflict arising in the coming days or moths between India-pak-china.

If yes what do you think will be the strategy and objectives of our armed forces and do you expect them to achieve these objectives in the first place.

Also what will be the strategy and objectives of pak and china and will they be able to achieve their objectives.

For Pakistan :
Indian army won't attack first , reason mentioned in the reply by divine heretic very clearly.
Any real conflict , from now on will get triggered only when China fights us .
Pakistan is poised to be handled by

by 10 corp , bhatinda

2nd Corp " kharga "ambala

15 Corp ' chinar' based at Srinagar( can also geared up towards China )

16 corps " white knight " nagrota

12 corps Jodhpur .

11 corps " " at jalandhar

9 Corp , mamun punjab
These corps are based at border right towards Pakistan .
Out of these 3 are in Punjab , 1 in Rajasthan and 2 in Kashmir region , 1 in haryana .
IA expects a push along the line of 65 and 71 hence Rajasthan sector is neglected to some extent.

As for other corps which shall support both Chinese front , they are based in central India like

1 Corp mathura

21 Corp ,'chakra ' Bhopal .
These can support both sides .
Thing is expected to play like 71 war , where plains of Punjab is the front .
They move some units , we move some units and finally ceasefire and back to pre war border.
7 corps are there for Pakistan completely.
Here 1 Corp , 2 Corp and 21 Corp are strike Corp and others holding corps .
Each Corp has 3 to 5 divisions .
1 division has 25000 men .
Strike corps have armoured divisions with them along with artillery also.

Basically strike corps will cut their way through the enemy while holding corps hold enemy advance and at times take part in the offensive battle itself.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

Now for China .
Here things are quite different

14 Corp leh ,
It has 3rd infantry division , 8 mounatin division and a artillery brigade .

17 Corp , mountain strike , panagarh
It has well 59th and 72 mountain division along with armour brigades and artillery brigade .

3rd Corp dimapur Nagaland , it's has 23 infantry division and 52 mountain division , it's For insurgency and quickly responding to arunachal Pradesh .

33 Rd Corp siliguri, 17 ,20 and 27 mountain division with artillery brigade .

fourth Corp , tezpur Assam.
Same mountain divisions etc .
1 thing is very common , artillery and bulk of armour faces Pakistan .( It's obvious )
That 16 Corp at nagrota in Jammu is the real deal in providing armour to ladakh front.
Plus that Corp at mamun in Punjab is now at yol in himacahl Pradesh and is called rising star Corp .
It too has armour component

 

[Knowitall]

@Maharaj samudragupt thanks for the excellent answer really insightful.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

@Maharaj samudragupt thanks for the excellent answer really insightful.

Dhanyawad Bhai ji, divisions and armour plus artillery brigades move among different corps so do not consider them as static even when Corp headquarters are generally static but division etc change their places.

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

Few things not there in 71 was , army aviation of this level , and ballistic missile like Prahaar etc.
Theatre command structure is required so as to increase the coordination between squadrons of iaf and corps of army in the northern borders.
Plus artillery here also includes mbrl and other types , perhaps even ballistic missiles.too

 

[Maharaj samudragupt]

Complete for China we have right now 5 corps along with rising star corps .
So 6 corps , out of which rising star one and the 33rd Corp are quiet powerful

 

[t 90s]

Beggars throwing tantrums.

US need to bomb puckjabi's to oblivion. This nation need to be anhilated from the face of earth for good.

 

[Suhaldev]

Hey people of democracy,

What you think... u will be allowed to modernise your military? really... you want to? no, we won't let you

Setback for Modi, Macron as French Judge Opens Criminal Investigation Into Rafale Deal With India

In an explosive new report, the French website Mediapart says Dassault Aviation signed its first MoU with the Anil Ambani group on March 26, 2015, two weeks before Prime Minister Modi went public in Paris on his decision to buy 36 Rafale jets and scrap the earlier contract for 126 aircraft.

thewire.in

so this dead rat has again come alive... & it's all by purpose

No matter if you have 50 billion defence budget or 500 companies attend your Defence-expo...we won't let you spend that on anything of your wish

Russians have issues when we purchase from others bcoz they had 3 decades of monopoly on Indian defence market.... & their pimps like Bharat karnad/pravin sawhney start barking

Americans have pain in ass when we buy from anyone... even their NATO allies like france

All this Rafale issue is a complex Russo-American creation... media pimps sponsored by both are dirtying the waters

Nothing good happens with this nation

A DYING/SUFFOCATING airforce is in need of aircraft... but all its efforts go in vain...

u know why... bloody hell... bloody bastards made defence procurement a fucking tool of foreign policy... appeasing all white skinned bastards with the carrot of defence contracts

but now those white skinned bastards are playing dirty against each other... & your military modernisation is FUCKEDDD big time...

You people are going to bleed tears from your knees... not very far away

kuch achha nahi hota hamare saath

The editor of media port sits on soros funded ngo.

View attachment 97949

And they siphoned off crores of money from western world in name of helping india.

 

[Jimih]

Hearing this since I was able to read and write.

Another way of saying, "Kanoon ke haath lambe hote hai" jumla

 

[Tridev123]

you are not wrong but I think we need proper foundation before we can make such moves.

i mean infrastructure and military modernisation.

we are lagging on both fronts.

There was one person who had the aukut you are asking for , he didnt say "koyi nahi gussha" , he asked his generals to throw out the chinese. IA then pushed , established forward posts in defacto chinese areas . i am talking about Nehru , dont have to tell you how that went.

honestly i dont care for aksai chin , real prize is Gilgit , we get a new neighbour , can cut off china - pakistan.

but yea its all wishfull thinking.

There is a power disparity between India and China now.
But I am hoping that the gap will reduce in the next decade.
Let's hope China's GDP growth falls to sub 5% in the next few years and stays at that level (not totally baseless premise) because of many factors
1.fallling birth rates and an ageing population
2.the US and the West will no longer tolerate record trade surpluses for China.
The future for Chinese exports is not rosy. China in the past earned most of it
its foreign exchange from unbridled exports to Europe and USA
3.Technological barriers are being erected for China by the Western block as it
being identified as a threat.
To put it in short the international trading and financial environment is not as conducive to China as it was even a decade ago.

The era of Plus 10% growth rates for the Chinese economy is truly over.

On the other hand if India touches 10% growth rate in the next two years or so the Indian economy should gradually catch up with the Chinese economy. If we sustain high growth rates probably within 20 years we might come nearer to China's GDP figures.

Aside from that we might well see a quantum jump in our defence technology levels and manufacturing in the next decade. One major reason could be free access to Western defence technologies. The West needs India to catch up with the Chinese defence potential and become a counter weight in Asia. So our defence sector growth may even surpass our annual GDP growth figures in percentage terms.

There are good grounds to stay optimistic. Rest is up to our people and how hard we work.

 

[Suryavanshi]

What was 1971??

What was Kargik then?
1971 was a different time, more Pro active leaders less turf war.
As much as 1971 or every other war goes all the service branch operated on their own MO.

 

[FalconSlayers]

Pakistan's trade deficit swells by 34%

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s trade deficit widened by 34 per cent in the outgoing fiscal year (FY2020-21) from a year ago, data released by the Pakistan Bureau

arynews.tv

hInDuTvA aNd MoDi BjP rSs DeStRoYiNg EñDiA, PaKiStAn bEcOmInG AsIaN TiGeR eCoNoMy, pAkIsTaN WiLl bEcOmE SuPeRpOwEr bY HeLp oF ImRaNdI KhAnA AnD PiZzA BuSiNeSs oF BaJwA!!!

I mean I have posted back to back news that shows how Porkiland is becoming superpower, why y’all guys give haha reacts? We kafirs should be afraid of the next superpower paxtan.

 

[Automatic Kalashnikov]

What was Kargik then?
1971 was a different time, more Pro active leaders less turf war.
As much as 1971 or every other war goes all the service branch operated on their own MO.

While the army was fighting on ground, the IAF was transporting troops/logistics, providing secure skies and hitting the enemy positions. The navy too had blocked supplies to Pakistan and was prepared to attack their navy if needed. What else would they have done in a low intensity conflict, specially with order to IAF like not to cross the LOC while hitting enemy positions?

We had more proactive military leaders at that (1971) time, if they couldn't do it, I doubt today's leader will be able to achieve it, given the fact they hardly have knowledge about each others domains.

 

[Suryavanshi]

While the army was fighting on ground, the IAF was transporting troops/logistics, providing secure skies and hitting the enemy positions. The navy too had blocked supplies to Pakistan and was prepared to attack their navy if needed. What else would they have done in a low intensity conflict, specially with order to IAF like not to cross the LOC while hitting enemy positions?

We had more proactive military leaders at that (1971) time, if they couldn't do it, I doubt today's leader will be able to achieve it, given the fact they hardly have knowledge about each others domains.

Difference between 1971 and today is the changed nature of warfare, old rugged warfare Vs Modern warfare.
More cooperation and synergy is needed than ever.
In 1971 three branches could afford to work in their own comfort zone and win, now the time has changed.
I hope we can agree on that.

Also Bipin Rawat Sir does not know how to conduct media interviews, this isn't the first time tensions are on the horizon because of his words. Dismissing him as a blabbermouth will be disrespectful, he has been in the forefront of one of the greatest change. Right words Weren't chosen, this all might just be a matter of ego clash. We are rough in our methods and do things in a haphazard manner that has been the norm, this stuff is no different it will be sorted out eventually.
Media wanted to make a controversy out of it and they have got it.

 

[SavageKing456]

WHO map is the ground reality BTW.

Why shying away?

What are you saying?

 

[fire starter]

WHO map is the ground reality BTW.

Why shying away?

POK is legally ours if some one is forcefully squatting on our land doesn't mean that land belongs to him.

 

[Automatic Kalashnikov]

Difference between 1971 and today is the changed nature of warfare, old rugged warfare Vs Modern warfare.
More cooperation and synergy is needed than ever.
In 1971 three branches could afford to work in their own comfort zone and win, now the time has changed.
I hope we can agree on that.

Also Bipin Rawat Sir does not know how to conduct media interviews, this isn't the first time tensions are on the horizon because of his words. Dismissing him as a blabbermouth will be disrespectful, he has been in the forefront of one of the greatest change. Right words Weren't chosen, this all might just be a matter of ego clash. We are rough in our methods and do things in a haphazard manner that has been the norm, this stuff is no different it will be sorted out eventually.
Media wanted to make a controversy out of it and they have got it.

If we are to fight the way we do, that is in a reactive manner, I feel it won't make much of a difference. Even during the Ladakh standoff the IAF and IA should good enough synergy to deploy there and carry out surveillance.

Was it BiRa or some other general who called the services units of IA as "non-combatants"?

Change without having proper knowledge of each others roles (that is what I perceived after that support arm statement and the rebuttal by IAF), is unlikely to happen and even if it does will be interesting to see how beneficial it will be.

Hasn't the general made such outrageous statements quite a few times since becoming a 4-star officer?

 

[fire starter]

One think I have seen that kashmiri Pandits are pussies now only dogras can teach these trashmiri Muslims a lesson. In 1947 dogra army halaled thousands of trashmiri Muslims. It still sends shiver down the spine of Muslims.