India Border Watch: Security and Operations

[ramana]

X-post...

Led By Raj Babbar, MPs abandon top-level defence briefing to 'catch flights' - TOI

The meeting began 10 minutes past 3 pm on Wednesday. The defence secretary expressed his inability to give a copy of the presentations to the members present, because the information was highly classified. The Army was the first off the block, with senior officials briefing the MPs on recent flare-ups along the LoC.

And then, without any provocation, Raj Babbar, chairman of the parliamentary standing committee on defence, announced that the meeting was being wound up because some members had to catch their flights.

Though it is still not clear what are the credentials that make this Congress MP from Firozabad chairman of one of the most powerful parliamentary bodies, as he dispersed the Wednesday meeting he looked determined.

According to those present at the meeting, his words conveyed his determination that someone not missing a flight was more important than the classified briefings on security preparedness. Even if embers of a bitterly fought operation in Keran sector was yet to be doused.

It maybe a different show on TV studios and in public, where politicians never lose a moment to beat their chests to announce concerns about national security. Behind the closed doors of the standing committee, there weren't any such concerns. Not one member of the standing committee protested against Babbar's decision.

Officials confirmed that the MPs would get their free business class flight tickets and per diem for attending the meeting. Even if meant that the Army briefing was yet to be completed, or Navy and Air Force couldn't make their presentations. Even if it meant that the LoC is now in the throes of infiltration and violence that has not been witnessed in recent memory.

No words to describe my anger on the apathy that these morons show. I think there should be a law mandating compulsory 2-year military experience for any person who want to become a politician or a sarkari babu, then only they understand significance of security and sacrifices of security personnel.

[Austin]

And then, without any provocation, Raj Babbar, chairman of the parliamentary standing committee on defence, announced that the meeting was being wound up because some members had to catch their flights.

Amazing the commitment Mr Raj Babbar has for important defence briefing being the chairman of standing committee , may be he too wanted to catch a quick flight to Mumbai to get his share of Rs 12 meal

[ashish raval]

^^ who pays for the thickets of these jack @sses for flying. Even Uk pm Gordon Brown used London-Glasgow train while in government or out campaigning !! Cameron and Osborne does the same even today.

[atreya]

More importantly, WHY was this fool made the chairman of a standing committee?

[manjgu]

honestly, it was good he went away. a failed B grade actor talking defense !! f...ing democracy...

[Lalmohan]

this missing body business is clearly part of the plan. pakistan has been denying any involvement from the start - the "we were never there" defense. but fighting took place, even they don't deny that. but if the fighting was done by mujahideen and no bodies were found, it STRONGLY suggests that the bodies were recovered by the TSPA or by mujahideen under the noses of the TSPA or that TSPA==mujahideen, whichever way you look at it.
i am sure the paquis think they are being very clever again...

[alexis]

Infiltration bid: Keran mystery deepens, no bodies, weapons traced

This in variance with this news item which mentions large cache of arms found...
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... -militants

[Prem Kumar]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 985096.cms

Manmohan Singh has the blood of this jawan on his hands. If the Army had been given a free hand to use artillery, call for AF help & not be forced to downplay the Keran incident by the PMO, there is a good chance we would have wiped out the 30 odd pigs. The terrorists wouldnt have survived to fight another day. They wouldnt have tried another infiltration so soon. An Indian mother wouldnt have lost her son to the bullets of a jihadi pig.

[member_23455]

It is an attempt to keep pressure on this sector for a change. To draw some magical correlation between use of artillery and killing everyone in the group is not borne out by the reality of how warfare happens.

[SagarAg]

Infiltration bid: Keran mystery deepens, no bodies, weapons traced

Mystery surrounding the 15-day long gun battle in Shala Bhato in J-K’s Keran sector is only deepening with reports now emerging that not only were dead bodies of the infiltrators not found, but the Indian army has not recovered a single weapon from the encounter site.
:
:
Lt Gen Gurmit Singh, Corps Commander, 15 Corps — under whose operational area Keran falls — confirmed to HT that their prolonged searches for over six days have failed to bear results. “Eight search teams comprising 150 soldiers conducted searches over six days but it appears that they (the terrorists) were able to take bodies and material back,’’ he said in his first interview after the operation was called off on Oct 8.
Search parties including specialised forces and sniffer dogs were pressed into service along 3 km of frontage along the LoC. Singh admitted he was under considerable pressure to produce the bodies he said had been sighted by his troops. He had made this assertion in a press conference in Srinagar on Oct 2.

The question is where did the weapons and the bodies go. Singh says the arms haul made in the adjoining areas of Gujjardur and Fateh Gali was probably taken from the Shala Bhato area. As for bodies, he says, “In principle, I don’t like to claim bodies until I have them in my hand but my troops have confirmed they had seen dead bodies of the terrorists,’’ Singh said, adding, “I even asked them if they had taken photographs and they said, ‘Sir, there was heavy firing, how could we take pictures?’’

It is evident that the battle entered into its 15th day, before it was finally called off, only because of the desperate search for weapons and bodies. Lt. Singh confirmed that the last exchange of fire between his troops and the infiltrators took place on the afternoon of Oct 2. Between Oct 3 and 9, the search teams scoured the dense jungles and ravines looking for fresh graves and areas that had been recently dug up but found nothing.

He said at least 30 to 40 armed terrorists opened heavy fire on Indian posts in Shala Bhato on the precise day the 3/3 Gurkha Regiment took charge on September 24. What is worrying is that the Pakistani army had exact information of the date on which a new army unit had taken charge in the Keran sector.

Equally worrying is the fact that the terrorists managed to come into Indian territory, hold the Indian army down for at least eight, if not 15 days, and then leave without a trace.

This leads to high possibility of a hidden underground tunnel connected to the other side in that area. A thorough search should be done in that area to find and destroy or monitor it.

Is there any equipment/way which can detect an underground path in such a terrain.

[vivek_ahuja]

Singh admitted he was under considerable pressure to produce the bodies he said had been sighted by his troops. He had made this assertion in a press conference in Srinagar on Oct 2
...
Singh said, adding, “I even asked them if they had taken photographs and they said, ‘Sir, there was heavy firing, how could we take pictures?’’

Maybe I am reading into this more than I should, but this sounds so disturbing to me at many levels. Why on earth are our soldiers being asked to take pictures for evidence during ongoing battles? Is it so because:
a) We can show more "evidence" about Paki involvement? But to who? And why? Since nobody in the world cares about such evidence anyway.
b) This incident was embarrassing to the GOI and its appeasement policies and hence now the Army is being made the scapegoat for supposedly flaring up a non-issue?
c) So the Generals can show that they weren't just made a fool of by their enemy?

Either way, its highly suspect in that success is being measured more by such reactive methods (Cut-off left ears, anyone?) rather than through prevention of such intrusions. Preventing an intrusion is a thankless task in today's India with its five-second public memory span. So now we need to take graphic pics during a battle!

What is worrying is that the Pakistani army had exact information of the date on which a new army unit had taken charge in the Keran sector..

This isn't that surprising. Both sides have this info quite as a matter of fact. The issue is that the Paki army hands their military intelligence directly to the terrorists.

Equally worrying is the fact that the terrorists managed to come into Indian territory, hold the Indian army down for at least eight, if not 15 days, and then leave without a trace.

Yeah. That is worrying, in that it sounds like a small nimble enemy running circles around a much larger and inertial military force. But that's just my gut. And my gut has been proven wrong by facts, so I will wait for more info.

[PratikDas]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 985096.cms

Manmohan Singh has the blood of this jawan on his hands. If the Army had been given a free hand to use artillery, call for AF help & not be forced to downplay the Keran incident by the PMO, there is a good chance we would have wiped out the 30 odd pigs. The terrorists wouldnt have survived to fight another day. They wouldnt have tried another infiltration so soon. An Indian mother wouldnt have lost her son to the bullets of a jihadi pig.

It is an attempt to keep pressure on this sector for a change. To draw some magical correlation between use of artillery and killing everyone in the group is not borne out by the reality of how warfare happens.

ToI: Army jawan killed in fresh firing in Keran sector

On September 24, around 35-40 militants had reportedly infiltrated into Keran sector. Of them, eight were killed in the operation that got over on October 8.

Meanwhile, a defence spokesperson said Pakistan violated the ceasefire for the third time in less than 24 hours on Friday morning, as troops from the across the border shelled mortars and fired on forward areas along the LoC in Barasingha, Mendhar and Hamirpur sub-sectors of Poonch district of Jammu and Kashmir.

Pakistani troops also shelled 82 mm mortars. It was after about a month that mortars were fired along the forward posts, the spokesperson added.
The firing started around 8 am and ceased at 5 pm. Pakistani army also opened fire with small automatic weapons, as the Indian troops guarding the borderline with Pakistan took positions, and retaliated with equal calibre weapons, triggering heavy exchanges which are still going on, the spokesman said.

There was no loss of life and property on the Indian side, he added.

Pakistan has been consistently firing along the LoC, though it has stopped shelling mortars. Three civilians along LoC in Poonch district have been injured in the cross-border firing, he said.

I don't understand why it is ok for Pakistan to employ shelling but not for the Indian forces to do the same, or is this not how warfare happens as well? I would only go as far as saying that this not how Indian warfare happens, thanks to very effective leadership.

ToI: Led by Raj Babbar, MPs abandon top-level defence briefing to 'catch flights'

NEW DELHI: The agenda was of utmost importance: "threat perception and preparedness of the forces including incursions on borders". The forum was among the highest in the land—the parliamentary standing committee on defence.

To brief the select members of Parliament at hand were the defence secretary, the director-general of military operations (DGMOs), several other senior officials from the Army, Navy and Air Force. It would have been the highest forum of democracy where the officials would be grilled, and held accountable.

The meeting was significant because of recent developments along the 778-km-long Line of Control (LoC). At Keran sector, the Army had just completed a three-week operation to evict about 40 militants, and at least 10, including four Army personnel, had been killed in Samba on September 26.

The meeting began 10 minutes past 3 pm on Wednesday. The defence secretary expressed his inability to give a copy of the presentations to the members present, because the information was highly classified. The Army was the first off the block, with senior officials briefing the MPs on recent flare-ups along the LoC.

The briefing significantly focused on the Army's assessment of threat perceptions along the border with Pakistan, China, Nepal, Bangladesh etc. Later, the Army made a separate presentation about its operation to evict almost 30 terrorists from Keran sector. As the formal presentations wound up, MPs had several questions — ranging from suspected leadership failure to its links to attacks in Samba.

The MPs expressed their concern over the repeated breach of LoC, India's most militarised border. Senior officers of the Navy and the Air Force were awaiting their turn with classified presentations.

It was 4.30 pm.

And then, without any provocation, Raj Babbar, chairman of the parliamentary standing committee on defence, announced that the meeting was being wound up because some members had to catch their flights.

Though it is still not clear what are the credentials that make this Congress MP from Firozabad chairman of one of the most powerful parliamentary bodies, as he dispersed the Wednesday meeting he looked determined

According to those present at the meeting, his words conveyed his determination that someone not missing a flight was more important than the classified briefings on security preparedness. Even if embers of a bitterly fought operation in Keran sector was yet to be doused..

It maybe a different show on TV studios and in public, where politicians never lose a moment to beat their chests to announce concerns about national security. Behind the closed doors of the standing committee, there weren't any such concerns. Not one member of the standing committee protested against Babbar's decision.

Officials confirmed that the MPs would get their free business class flight tickets and per diem for attending the meeting. Even if meant that the Army briefing was yet to be completed, or Navy and Air Force couldn't make their presentations. Even if it meant that the LoC is now in the throes of infiltration and violence that has not been witnessed in recent memory.

For the record, no member of the standing committee seemed to have missed their flights on Wednesday. Or, did they all actually rush to the airport?

[ramana]

Missing bodies means the intruders were regular troops from TSP and they took them back so they don't get caught range haath. Even my simple mind can figure that out. Why press is pretending like there was no incident? Is it under PMO's whines?

[Philip]

This year's P*ss Prize has evaporated.He must be devastated. The "Remains of the Day" is nothing more than a nostalgic trip to his village in Pak while wearing his PM's turban. I guess we will have to coin a new phrase,a "Manmohan eye" the desi version of the "Nelsonian eye",except that our wonder has both his faculties in working order.Or should we rephrase the name given to the three simians,"see no evil,hear no evil,speak no evil"...? This might be a good line for the souvenir industry what?!

Raj B and his disrespectful MPs should've been given a free drop by the IAF..to Siachen on a one way tkt. Citizens should write to the Pres. and Speaker denouncing such indifference to the sacrifice of our jawans fighting to keep the backsides safe of the scum who represent us. The day will come as a worthy veteran said on telly,speaking on the Kalia outrage and issue and dereliction of duty by the GOI,when the uniformed men and women of India will say "no more" and refuse to blindly sacrifice their lives for the political leadership.MPs like RB and his tribe are simply accelerating that day.

Why did the British finally decide to abandon India? Not because of the Mahatma alone,but when the INA was formed under Netaji's patriotic leadership and Indians fighting for "King and Country" decided that "enough was enough" ,and turned their guns on their hated imperial oppressors. Today a new breed of imperial oppressors have replaced the solar topi and red coat for the Congress cap and white kurta pyjamas /dhotis .

Did the Pakis take back the bodies of the intruders killed or was there a cover up job on our side under orders from Delhi,to let Pak off the hook and allow them to retrieve the bodies? Had the bodies been found and the clear evidence that the intruders were Paki troops,it would've been catastrophic for current Indo-Pak relations.It would've revealed the intrusions as being mini-Kargils along the LOC.It is a legitimate Q as it appears to be the policy of the GOI that "nothing" should derail a "peace in our time" with Pak.This policy of appeasement is becoming so absurd with the turn of events each day that one wonders whether the current dispensation has handed over the nation's security de-facto to Pak and China.

Unfortunately,many media entities have been effectively gagged by the current regime,or are their agents masquerading as the free press.In any other genuine democracy this regime would've been thrown out long ago by a vibrant press on the issue of the tsunami of scams which has looted the nation of hundreds of $ billions at the very least.

[Prem]

Missing bodies means the intruders were regular troops from TSP and they took them back so they don't get caught range haath. Even my simple mind can figure that out. Why press is pretending like there was no incident? Is it under PMO's whines?

I suspect IA was trying to get them alive , lets hope few Rats got caged. Paki cant say anything but whine only after denying their involvement.

[member_23455]

It is an attempt to keep pressure on this sector for a change. To draw some magical correlation between use of artillery and killing everyone in the group is not borne out by the reality of how warfare happens.

I don't understand why it is ok for Pakistan to employ shelling but not for the Indian forces to do the same, or is this not how warfare happens as well? I would only go as far as saying that this not how Indian warfare happens, thanks to very effective leadership.

Do me a favor, please feel free to turn a Mil Issues thread into whatever you want, but if you are going to quote me, don't twist my words for your narrow ends.

This has almost become a meme on BR now:

Incident X happens, and

Poster 1: We should use artillery
Poster 2: We should use 155mm artillery
Poster 3: We should use Mirages +LGBs
Poster 4: We should use napalm
Poster 5: We should use Prithvi/Brahmos/etc.

And so much store is put into media reports. The same media which was reporting until last week that this was a Kargil-II, which talked about a "brigade" being deployed and then magically reduced the number to 500, which talked about "para-shooters" being deployed in the area.

Well, then at least have the diligence to go through what all the media is saying:

Match this

Pakistani troops also shelled 82 mm mortars. It was after about a month that mortars were fired along the forward posts, the spokesperson added.
The firing started around 8 am and ceased at 5 pm. Pakistani army also opened fire with small automatic weapons, as the Indian troops guarding the borderline with Pakistan took positions, and retaliated with equal calibre weapons, triggering heavy exchanges which are still going on, the spokesman said.

There was no loss of life and property on the Indian side, he added.

Pakistan has been consistently firing along the LoC, though it has stopped shelling mortars. Three civilians along LoC in Poonch district have been injured in the cross-border firing, he said.

with this...

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 313_1.html

"They used 82 mm mortars, automatics and small arms. Our troops responded with strong retaliation with same calibre weapons," he added

What difference a little bit of perspective makes...or does it?

[ramana]

RajitO, I dont know you but I know Pratik Das from Usenet days. So no need to go after him. IOW back off. Its not like some one died and made you sheriff.

[member_23455]

^^^^^^^^

Nice to know that you don't know me - The feeling is mutual. The evidence of my words being twisted to come to a conclusion by another poster is there for all to see. If you don't see it, that is unfortunate...seeing that you are the sheriff.

[ramana]

Yes/


All you had to say was they also retaliated with same caliber weapons. No need to make the needless remarks.

[PratikDas]

Ramana ji, thank you for the support. I'll be the first to admit that years spent on BR don't necessarily mean anything while those who have put in years, perhaps decades of effort into study have ended up becoming mods in short time and deservedly so.

RajitO, if the Army were to state that the bodies have been blown to smithereens by artillery, and therefore there is no evidence to put forth for the Raj Babbars in government, I'd be perfectly happy with that.

[Karan M]

More importantly, WHY was this fool made the chairman of a standing committee?

Even Owaisi was part of the std committee on defence as memory serves. Food for thought.

[Aditya G]

Now what is the point of escalation on IB?

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/gunba ... /1186529/0

The prolonged gunbattle on the International Border (IB) in the Jammu region is intensifying with reports indicating that the Pakistani army has stepped in to assist the Pakistani Rangers that was guarding the border so far, prompting India's Border Security Force (BSF) to rush in reinforcements to man the border outposts.

"In the last few days, nine of our personnel have been injured, and one was killed on Tuesday. The Pak army is also helping the Pak Rangers now. We can ascertain this by the kind of firing and shelling being done at the border," said Dharminder Pareek, DIG, BSF, Jammu, adding that the Indian forces were still "thrice in strength".

Sources said the BSF had sent reinforcements to border outposts to counter what could be a long-drawn battle. As many as 400 BSF personnel who were posted on election duty in Chhattisgarh have been rushed to Jammu area.

The BSF has come under intense fire over the past few days — an officer claimed that a single post in R S Pura sector was targeted with over 400 rounds of mortar fire in a day.

Fourteen people, including some security personnel, have been injured so far. There were no signs of the firing abating, with one BSF personnel being killed in the shelling on Tuesday, and as many as 50 border posts coming under attack. Of the total 102 border posts in the Jammu region, 60 have come under heavy shelling in the past week.

Intelligence reports and wireless intercepts available with the BSF suggest that militants may also be involved in what has now become one of the worst ceasefire violations, on the International Border in several years.

Security agencies believe the firing could be linked to mass infiltration attempts, and have identified 32 sites where infiltrations could take place. "The Army informed that the shelling along the border, besides the <a href="http://www.indianexpress.com/news/loc-f ... s/1185985/" target="_blank"> infiltration attempts pointed to the fact that these could be diversionary tactics and part of a larger gameplan. We have intercepts where they are heard discussing plans to attack BSF posts," said a senior officer.

"Since September, we have been getting regular feedback about the concentration of Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Toiba militants along the border in Jammu region. We are witnessing a lot of suspicious movement and increased communication on radio sets," said a BSF officer.

While the Army is keeping a watch on the situation, sources said there is no move yet to send in regular troops to man the border or respond to the situation. Regular briefings on the matter are, however, taking place in the defence ministry.

Meanwhile, the Pakistan military claimed in a statement that India has targeted 27 Pakistani posts in the area in the last two days and fired "almost four thousand mortar shells and fifty-nine thousand rounds of machine guns". It said that two civilians and a Pak Ranger have died while 26 civilians have been injured in the cross-border firing in the last fortnight.

[member_23455]

Because we are back to the trench warfare type attritional cross-border duels of yore, notwithstanding grandiose theories of Kargil-II, Gibraltar-II etc...

[Karan M]

So much for all the be nice to Pak, we have a ceasefire on, type of rubbish spouted by all the WKKs.

[ramana]

X-Post..

To Strike the Right Balance - Lt. Gen (Retd) Syed Ata Hasnain.

Pakistan has upped the ante along the Line of Control (LoC) and the international border in the Jammu sector, and public and media interest in the operations in the Keran sector continues. Despite the Army’s statements and clarifications, there is still some unhappiness at the highest levels. The situation demands greater clarity from those who know the ground and the dynamics and can relate it to the larger issues concerning the position in that State.

Gen. Hasnain then goes about explaining the operations and the the tactics in great details. This should set to rest many doubts and questions raised in our minds.

Also could be The Hindu's way of making up for the Grandmother's tales published by eminent reporters!!!

[Ramu]

Guarding India's border with budget cuts, obsolete equipment

[darshhan]

More importantly, WHY was this fool made the chairman of a standing committee?

Even Owaisi was part of the std committee on defence as memory serves. Food for thought.

What next? Dawood Ibrahim as defence minister.

[darshhan]

I have some questions. The Govt has already failed when it comes to dealing with Pakis. But what about Army Chief Gen. Bikram Singh. Is he also a failure? What will be his legacy? That of a politically correct general with connections in right places but short on Leadership and tactical accumen. The General who goes on to disband what would have been any General's most effective tool against an enemy as vicious as Pakis i.e TSD for the sake of petty rivalry.

Just asking.

[rohitvats]

I have some questions. The Govt has already failed when it comes to dealing with Pakis. But what about Army Chief Gen. Bikram Singh. Is he also a failure? What will be his legacy? That of a politically correct general with connections in right places but short on Leadership and tactical accumen. The General who goes on to disband what would have been any General's most effective tool against an enemy as vicious as Pakis i.e TSD for the sake of petty rivalry.

Just asking.

Tell me this in as clear words as possible

(a) How do you know the general lacks leadership and tactical acumen?
(b) That he has strong political connections and that is all to him?

[darshhan]

RohitVats ji, I haven't made any statement. I am not even expressing my opinion(I still have to form them). I am just asking questions. Just asking.

[negi]

The General who goes on to disband what would have been any General's most effective tool against an enemy as vicious as Pakis i.e TSD for the sake of petty rivalry.

This is not just for rivalry ; you see TSD was actually very effective, from COAS V K Singh's statement it is clear that IA had pretty good grip on things in the J&K and the valley and TSD had a role in stopping all that stone pelting . His statement that successive governments have been paying a ransom to political jihadis in Kashmir to buy peace is a damning statement to come from a COAS. He basically just pulled the towel from GOI's ugly underbelly , surprisingly no chief in the past has spoken of any such under the table dealings and understandably so . General Bikram Singh obviously has been appointed keeping V K Singh's tenure in mind; an outspoken chief who does not take BS and questions a wrong right there and then is not what our kind of government wants at the helm.

[rohitvats]

RohitVats ji, I haven't made any statement. I am not even expressing my opinion(I still have to form them). I am just asking questions. Just asking.

Please don't act like a babe in the woods.

You can either ask a question or make a statement - not pass off a statement like an innocuous question. You should know by now that any snide remark or loose comment on Services will not be tolerated. Much lesser on a Service Chief. You can raise questions and concerns - but do mind your language.

[jamwal]

Since snide remarks are not allowed, let me make some 'statements'. As far as current army chief is concerned, General BS's performance has been anything but good.

His appointment was mired in controversy where babooze and some senior officers in Army conspired to remove General VK Singh by any means possible.

His performance in controlling deteriorating situation on China as well as Paki border is open for every one to see. Pakis and Cheenis have smacked Indian army repeatedly and now Manmohan Singh is going to sign a border agreement written by Chinese.

The leaks and the witch hunt against against General VKS and TSD has been against Indian interests. If General BS was in control or acting in good faith, these incidents which actually harmed image and capabilities of Army could've been avoided.

Lets assume for a moment that his hands are tied by babooze in cvilian gobarment and he can't do anything. In that case, what's the point in him occupying the chair ? General VKS spoke and acted against the corruption and rot in army during his own tenure. What has General BS done till now ?


I realise the need to avoid snide remarks and unsubstantiated allegations against men in uniform, but General BS has been one of the most controversial if not worst Chiefs that Indian army had in recent memory. Now it's entirely possible that all of this is some kind of deep Chanakyan plan meant to fool our enemies and I'm an idiot for writing this. But since there is no such proof and Indian soldiers are dying while Cheeni, Pakis are encroaching. In the meanwhile, the higher brass is happy being MMS in uniform.

Please don't say that the Chief is against all criticism. There have been ample examples where incompetent political appointees have screwed up big time.

[Cosmo_R]

@Jamwal ^^^: "Its a chankian plot". MMS is a tiger disguised as a rabbit. But come the next phone booth, he doffs his wookie attire and dons his 'S' leotards to battle evil doers.

[darshhan]

Please don't act like a babe in the woods.

You can either ask a question or make a statement - not pass off a statement like an innocuous question. You should know by now that any snide remark or loose comment on Services will not be tolerated. Much lesser on a Service Chief. You can raise questions and concerns - but do mind your language.

Rohitvats ji. I am not much of a dancer. So coming straight to the point, it was indeed a question from my side and nothing else. And I definitely do not believe in snide remarks or loose comments. In fact the question I have asked is being asked by lot of people including retired Army officers. Here is one article by Major General Mrinal Suman.

A New Low in Army Leadership

The dawn of 20 September 2013 will long be remembered for the headlines of a national daily of suspect credentials screaming “Unit setup by V K Singh used secret funds to try and topple J&K government and block Bikram Singh”. The day marked the abysmal depths to which Indian military leadership had stooped to tarnish the image of the previous Chief. The current top brass has shamed the nation, the army and the soldiers. Such a precipitous fall in moral and professional ethics has left all serving and retired soldiers aghast.

Allegations of attempted destabilization of the state government by giving a bribe of Rs 1.19 crore to the current Agriculture Minister and blocking Bikram Singh’s promotion are too preposterous to warrant a comment. Apparently, the news of 20 September 2013 is a deliberate leak and a plant.

Although the news report raises many pertinent and worrisome questions, there are two aspects that deserve mention here. The first one pertains to the procedural attributes. It has been discussed in the public domain to some extent. The second aspect concerns propriety and carries the ominous potential of becoming a precedent. Therefore, it merits a far more serious discussion.

Procedural Infirmities

It is claimed that the said report is based on ‘a secret Board of Officers (BOO) inquiry report into the functioning of the Technical Services Division (TSD)’ and that ‘the inquiry was led by Lieutenant General Vinod Bhatia, DG, Military Operations’.

Technical incorrectness of the news item is apparent from the fact that a BOO is ordered to take stock of the facts and take them on record for reconciliation purposes. It carries out no investigations, questions no one and submits no enquiry report. It submits board proceedings. If required, a Court of Inquiry may follow.
Two, it is not understood as to why a BOO was ordered in the first place. Is it the job of the Army Headquarters (AHQ) to carry out an appraisal of the functioning of a unit? What were the compelling reasons for deputing a Lieutenant General for the same? Was it a façade with malicious intents?

Three, the report alleges that TSD was raised by VK Singh in May 2010 and off-air interception equipment was bought to conduct ‘unauthorised’ covert operations. Apparently, initiators of the report are totally unaware of the functioning of the Ministry of Defence (MoD). Raising of a new unit requires manpower, equipment and recurring expenditure. A detailed statement of case has to be prepared by the service headquarters (SHQ) and submitted to MoD. Prior to according sanction, all facets of the proposal including necessity, functioning and funding are discussed at length at various forums and echelons. It is ridiculous to aver that the raising of TSD could be a surreptitious act of VK Singh with mala-fide intentions.

Four, financial powers delegated to SHQ are not absolute and can be exercised only with the prior concurrence of the Integrated Finance Advisor (IFA). IFA scrutinises every aspect of the proposal including acceptance of necessity by MoD. Hence no equipment can ever be purchased underhandedly, as alleged in the news report.

Safeguarding Reputation of Predecessor is a Sacred Obligation

Indian army functions on the basis of well established norms. Norms are unwritten rules which are required to be followed diligently by all members for the continued sustenance of the organisation. They provide a code of expected conduct and thumb rules for guidance. Norms can be descriptive (what to do or ‘Dos’) and proscriptive (what not to do or ‘Don’ts’).

It is a proscriptive norm that a military officer never lets down his predecessor. He is expected to ensure that no aspersions are ever cast on his predecessor’s character and military reputation. All decisions taken by him in good faith must be defended. There are three reasons for the same:-

Decisions are always taken as per the prevailing circumstances and with inputs available at that time. It is very unfair to find fault with them in retrospect with the benefit of the hindsight. One does not know what made a predecessor choose a particular course of action.
A predecessor is never present to defend his decisions. Thus, vilifying him amounts to his trial in absentia. Even Army Rule 180 mandates that any officer whose character or military reputation is questioned must be provided full opportunity for defence.
Most importantly, military as an institution is highly sensitive to the reputation of its leadership. Vilification of the image of the military leadership can upset the vital trust-loyalty equation. When leaders try to malign each other, troops’ wonder if such officers are worthy of their confidence.

It is the first instance that a SHQ has initiated and leaked reports to tarnish the image of a previous Chief. One dreads to think of such an obnoxious practice becoming a trend-setter. Are we going to witness the ugly spectacle of every Chief (or other commanders) denigrating his predecessor? It is a terrible prospect indeed and does not portend well for a disciplined force.

Finally

Whereas even the existence of an intelligence unit should always remain a secret, the army leadership has compromised its operations by questioning its functioning through selective leaks. Many feel that recent cross-border incursions could well have been prevented by TSD. An excellent asset has been sacrificed at the altar of personal vendetta.

More worrisomely, one is surprised at the spinelessness of the senior staff officers who failed to caution an errant Chief. By causing deliberate damage to the standing of the predecessors, the army as an institution is damaging its own credibility. It can prove extremely dear in the long run.

The Army Chief and Army has my complete support. But Support is for seizing initiative against the enemy and not for relinquishing initiative. Support is for hunting the enemy on its own territory and not for becoming the hunted. Support is for an adaptive army which understands the relevance of Covert and 4W warfare in the current scenario and not for some rigid organisation consumed by inertia where senior officers are hostage to their own egos.

[darshhan]

RohitVats ji, I have tremendous respect for you. You are one of the few who has the ability to do original research. I have no qualms in saying that I have learnt a lot from you. Your love and respect for our Military is also extremely commendable and genuine. The work done by you on BRF and elsewhere is truly a labour of love.

But I have a feedback for you. The very same love for our Army also makes you extremely sensitive to any criticism of it(or even mere questioning). Nothing wrong with it. But now that you are a moderator try to be a little bit more tolerant. Otherwise you will end up taking lot of wickets.

[darshhan]

Border Defence Cooperation Agreement (BDCA) between India and China

The Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the ‘two sides’),

Firmly believing that the India-China Strategic and Cooperative Partnership for Peace and Prosperity serves the fundamental interests of the people of the two countries.

Reiterating that neither side shall use its military capability against the other side and that their respective military strengths shall not be used to attack the other side,

Reaffirming that neither side shall use or threaten to use force against the other side by any means nor seek unilateral superiority,

Having accepted the principle of mutual and equal security,

Acknowledging the need to continue to maintain peace, stability and tranquility along the line of actual control in the India-China border areas and to continue implementing confidence building measures in the military field along the line of actual control,

Recognizing the importance of materializing the spirit of the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of India and Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Maintenance of Peace and Tranquility Along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China Border Areassigned on 7th September 1993, the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on Confidence Building Measures in the Military Field Along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China Border Areassigned on 29th November 1996, the Protocol between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on Modalities for the Implementation of Confidence Building Measures in the Military Field Along the Line of Actual Control in India-China Border Areassigned on 11th April 2005 and the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Establishment of a Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China Border Affairssigned on 17th January 2012,

Have agreed as follows:

Article I

The two sides shall carry out border defence cooperation on the basis of their respective laws and relevant bilateral agreements.

Article II

The two sides shall implement border defence cooperation in the following ways


Exchange information-including information about military exercises, aircrafts, demolition operations and unmarked mines-and take consequent measures conducive to the maintenance of peace, stability and tranquility along the line of actual control in the India-China border areas,
Jointly combat smuggling of arms, wildlife, wildlife articles and other contrabands,
Assist the other side in locating personnel, livestock, means of transport and aerial vehicles that may have crossed or are possibly in the process of crossing the line of actual control in the India-China border areas,
Work with the other side in combating natural disasters or infectious diseases that may affect or spread to the other side,
Any other way mutually agreed upon by the two sides.

Article III

Border deference cooperation visualized in this agreement shall be implemented through the following mechanisms:

Flag meetings or border personnel meetings at designated places along the line of actual control in the India-China border areas.
Periodic meetings between officers of the relevant Military Regions of China and Army Commands of India and between departments responsible for military operations.
Periodic meetings of the representatives of the Ministry of Defence of the Government of India and the Ministry of National Defence of the People’s Republic of China.
Meetings of the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China Border Affairs.
Meetings of the India-China Annual Defence Dialogue.

Article IV

In implementing border defence cooperation and to facilitate contacts and meetings between relevant organizations, the two sides may establish Border Personnel Meeting sites in all sectors, as well as telephone contacts and telecommunication links at mutually agreed locations along the line of actual control. The two sides may also consider establishing a Hotline between the military headquarters of the two countries. Specific arrangements shall be decided upon through mutual consultations between the two sides.

Article V

In order to enhance understanding and cooperation between the border defence forces of the two sides, each side may invite the other side for joint celebrations on major national or military days or festivals and organize cultural activities, non-contact sports events and small scale tactical exercises along the line of actual control in the India-China border areas. In addition, the two sides may also conduct joint military training exercises, at Army level, in each other’s country on a regular basis. The theme of such joint exercises will be decided through mutual consultations.

Article VI

The two sides agree that they shall not follow or tail patrols of the other side in areas where there is no common understanding of the line of actual control in the India-China border areas.

Article VII

In case a doubtful situation arises with reference to any activity by either side in border areas where there is no common understanding of the line of actual control, either side has the right to seek a clarification from the other side. In such cases, the clarification shall be sought and replies to them shall be conveyed through any of the mechanisms established under Article III of this Agreement.

Article VIII

The two sides agree that if the border defence forces of the two sides come to a face-to-face situation in areas where there is no common understanding of the line of actual control, both sides shall exercise maximum self-restraint, refrain from any provocative actions, not use force or threaten to use force against the other side, treat each other with courtesy and prevent exchange of fire or armed conflict.

Article IX

The two sides shall implement this Agreement without prejudice to their respective positions on the alignment of the line of actual control as well as on the boundary question.

Article X

This Agreement shall come into force on the date of its signature. It may be revised, amended or terminated with the consent of the two sides. Any revision or amendment, mutually agreed by the two sides, shall form an integral part of this Agreement.

Signed in duplicate in Hindi, Chinese and English languages at Beijing on 23rd day of October month of 2013, all three versions being equally authentic. In case of divergence, the English text shall prevail.

This was agreed during Manmohan's recent visit to China

[darshhan]

^^Looks like Manmohan and Khurshid did not do their homework properly in case of this BDCA. Lt.Gen Prakash Katoch analyses it.

BDCA – Another Self Inflicted Wound

The brouhaha about India having signed the BDCA agreement with China actually is a self-inflicted wound though providing satisfaction to Prime Minister Manhohan Singh that he too inked a border agreement with China, after the Agreement between the two countries on Maintenance of Peace and Tranquility Along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China Border Areas signed on 7th September 1993, another Agreement on Confidence Building Measures in the Military Field Along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China Border Areas, the Protocol on Modalities for the Implementation of Confidence Building Measures in the Military Field Along the Line of Actual Control in India-China Border Areas signed on 11th April 2005 and the Agreement on Establishment of a Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China Border Affairs signed on 17th January 2012.

close analysis of the BDCA actually indicates, it is yet another nail in the coffin of India’s territorial integrity master-crafted by China and acquiesced by our Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and the National Security Advisor. It was amusing to see the spin masters bill-boarding media headlines “India talks Tough” even as Manmohan Singh was enroute to Russia, declaring India will continue building border infrastructure. Forget China blatantly violating earlier agreements, the nuances of this BDCA agreement will tie India in knots.

Article I of the Agreement says the two sides shall carry out border defence cooperation on the basis of their respective laws and relevant bilateral agreements. So has China respected the earlier agreements and why should it do so now? Then which laws are we talking about – Constitution, PMO, IPC, NSA’s to not face up to any intrusion or the Foreign Minister’s law that a 30 kms deep intrusion is to be treated as acne on his face? Which then are the laws of China – that they can walk into Chumar any time and threaten the locals at will?

Article II of the BDCA Agreement requires exchanging information-including information about military exercises, aircrafts, demolition operations and unmarked mines etc without laying down any distances from the LAC. The LAC itself has different perceptions and China has not given any maps of her perception of the LAC. She would not like to either as not doing so facilitates expanding claims, example being claim to Tawang expanded to entire Arunachal Pradesh. So what does the wording of Article II imply?

That India should inform China every time you want to land an aircraft at DBO, do an exercise (up to what depth and from whose perception of LAC?), inform China we are doing blasting (using demolitions) to construct / improve a road – so much so for “India Talks Tough on border infrastructure”! Has the smuggling of wild life articles been thrown in for humour knowing Chinese are obsessed with the Tiger’s teeth, bones, nails, testicles and what have you and the rhino horn as well? Do you expect China to stop such smuggling activity? But, what about the mafia at our end? Are you really going to stop the flooding of Indian markets by Chinese contraband particularly in the northeast knowing full well who constitutes the mafia and whose protection they have?

The cake of course goes to Article VI whose wordings say, “The two sides agree that they shall not follow or tail patrols of the other side in areas where there is no common understanding of the line of actual control in the India-China border areas. Doesn’t this effectively cover intrusions like that have happened in Depsang this summer. The PLA can sit in the intruded areas as long as they want to and construct defences like they did in Srijap earlier. There will be no opposition. This time the Indian public has no cause to get agitated because our wise men (read mice) men have signed this agreement in 1962 fashion good faith that we shall just ignore any Chinese patrol. Hey, but how come we are ignoring Chinese strategic calculations. Since they claim Arunachal as ‘south Tibet’ what stops them sending patrols all the way to Tezpur? Perhaps the Foreign Minister will then make an exception, take notice and host a meal for the Chinamen, this being their private visit.

As regards Article VII that in case a doubtful situation with reference to any activity by either side in border areas where there is no common understanding of the line of actual control, either side has the right to seek a clarification from the other side, do we really need to get a clarification from China? After all that India has gone through, might as well accept the standard response that they have not crossed the LAC and Chinese patrols are very much in their own area. Again, Article IX says that the two sides shall implement this Agreement without prejudice to their respective positions on the alignment of the line of actual control as well as on the boundary question. Which alignment of the LAC are we talking about? Does it include the hundreds of square kilometers of territory that we have quietly ceded to China over the years, over and above Aksai Chin and Shaksgam? Does this include the over 400 square kms of territory ceded in Ladakh alone as has been revealed by Ambassador P Stopden? Does the government have any answer to disclosures by Mr RN Ravi, former Special Director, IB in the Assam Tribune that since 2009 Government of India, for reasons best known to it, has been misleading its own citizens about it territory ceded to China:

By denying the reports of Chinese transgressions along the border, India is only helping the cause of the Chinese.
India has stopped patrolling by the security forces to the India-China-Myanmar tri-juncture to avoid confrontation with the Chinese and by doing so, India has already lost hold over a substantial portion of land.
China is trying to stake claim over the Tatu Bowl, the place where the Dicho river, which originates in Myanmar, meets the Lohit river, by sending out patrol parties well inside India.
China has already started constructing a new road along the Dicho river and if the Chinese plan succeeds, the tri-juncture would come down to eight kms south of the original point.
Earlier, the Indian Army patrols used to go along the Dicho river to the tri-juncture, but the Government of India stopped such patrols to avoid any confrontation.
If the Chinese manage to take over the Tatu Bowl area, they would be able to come to the plains within a short time.
In 2009, the Chinese asked the militants of the North East to come to a common platform to receive help from that country, following which, the chief of the NSCN (K), SS Khaplang has virtually turned the Taga area into a common headquarter of the major militant groups of the region.
As Xinjiang area is close to the Karakoram range, China started coming well inside Indian territory and in recent times, China came 20 to 30 kilometers inside India in that area; there is every possibility of the Chinese cutting off the supply lines from Leh to the Karakoram pass.

The above needs to be viewed in conjunction what China has been doing in eastern Ladakh including intrusions in Depsang, Chumar, constructed a 10 kms road in Pangong Tso area etc. There is little doubt left that India has stopped patrolling the Karakoranm Pass for there is no squeak from the government or the venerable Home Minister. The Defence Minister appears to have no role left in the contentious areas like Ladakh at least.

The emphasis on recognizing the importance of materializing the spirit of the earlier agreements for maintaining peace and tranquility is a joke considering the ease with which China has desecrated them on numerous occasions. The fact of the matter is that as expected Li Keqiang has dealt Manmohan Singh a googly (in connivance our Foreign Minister and NSA) and the Manmohan has swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Even veteran diplomats are shaking their heads in disbelief – another massive foreign policy failure that will go down in black letters to the credit of this government.

How soon China will kick them again is a matter of conjecture. We can then perhaps start thinking about a future BDSCEPT (Border Defence Strategic Cooperation for Enhanced Peace and Tranquility) Agreement. A deeper analysis of the BDCA Agreement in backdrop of disclosures by former Ambassador P Stopden and Mr RN Ravi, former Special Director IB would indicate, it is no less than treason. What we needed was a discussion on why China did not respect the earlier agreements and protocols.

[darshhan]

Brahma Chellaney also rips apart this farce agreement. Manmohan is a disaster as Prime Minister.

Why India’s new border pact with China won’t work

Seeking to compensate for his low political stock at home,Manmohan Singhhas undertaken more overseas trips as prime minister than any predecessor, visiting China multiple times. Yet, India punches far below its weight internationally, while its regional security has come under siege, with his tenure witnessing a sharp deterioration in ties with China.
The highlight of the latest China visit of India’s most-travelled prime minister will not be progress on any of the core issues dividing the two countries but a Chinese-ordained border accord designed to supplant existing frontier-peace and confidence-building agreements that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has undermined through repeated cross-frontier raids and other incursions. No Indian official has explained the rationale for entering into a new agreement demanded by the party that has breached existing border-peace accords with impunity.
New Delhi’s willingness to let China dictate the so-called Border Defence Cooperation Agreement (BDCA) mirrors its broader strategic timidity in permitting Beijing to lay down the terms of the bilateral relationship. China has fashioned an asymmetrical commercial relationship, reaping trade surpluses, even as it stymies any progress on issues of core concern to India.
China’s most-insidious warfare against India is in the economic realm, yet India has done little to stop Beijing from turning it into a raw-material supplier to the Chinese economy and from subverting Indian manufacturing through dumping of goods. Perpetuating such a lopsided economic relationship gives Beijing little incentive to bridge the political divide. It also aids China’s strategy to prevent India’s rise as a peer competitor.
Even as Beijing disturbs the territorial and water-flow status quo, New Delhi won’t leverage China’s growing India-market access to influence Chinese conduct. China, however, does not shy away from mixing politics and business. It has quietly used trade to punish countries it quarrels with. For example, Japanese exports to China, which sank 13.2% in the first seven months this year, have been falling since September 2012, when China began wielding the trade sword over the Senkaku islands dispute.
Singh’s visit will likely yield the usual platitudes about friendship and cooperation while leaving India’s concerns unaddressed. With an unresolved border issue, Beijing has been reluctant to even clarify what the two sides farcically call the line of actual control (LAC). And even as it turns Tibet into the new hub of its dam-building spree, China has brazenly sought to turn the tables on India, accusing it through a state mouthpiece last week of “attempting to reinforce its actual control and occupation of” Arunachal Pradesh through water projects there.
Singh, acquiescing to China’s sidelining of the core issues, told reporters before leaving that, “The two governments are addressing them with sincerity and maturity without letting them affect the overall atmosphere of friendship and cooperation”.
Even by his pusillanimous standards, making a Chinese-dictated accord the highlight of his official visit marks a new low in Indian diplomacy.
Consider the humiliating circumstances that spawned this agreement: PLA intruded deep into Ladakh’s Depsang Plateau by stealth before Beijing embarked on coercive diplomacy, forcing India’s hand on BDCA, whose draft it had sent earlier. In return for China withdrawing its encamped troops from Indian land, India demolished a line of defensive fortifications in Chumar and ended forward patrols in the area, besides agreeing to wrap up negotiations on BDCA, which until then it had baulked at.
The Depsang encroachment inflicted permanent damage to the existing border-peace accords, including the 2005 mutual commitment to “strictly respect and observe” the LAC. Yet, paradoxically, China demanded a new agreement to take precedence over the more equitable 1993, 1996 and 2005 border-peace accords.
Indeed, such was the bloodless victory China scored by deploying a single platoon of no more than 50 soldiers in Depsang that India, in the manner of a vanquished nation, merely offered its comments and suggestions on the Chinese-imposed draft and sent its national security adviser and defence minister in rapid succession to Beijing to commit itself to BDCA’s “early conclusion”.
Now, by personally paying obeisance in Beijing, Singh culminates this mortifying process, lending his imprimatur to an agreement that can only embolden China to up the ante. In fact, since India’s virtual capitulation to Chinese demands more than five months ago, China’s military provocations have included multiple daring raids and other forays across the Himalayan frontier, the world’s longest disputed border.
Via the planeload of journalists he takes, Singh trumpets almost every overseas visit as a diplomatic success. His spinmeisters are also marketing BDCA as positive for India, highlighting features that in reality are dubious.
Why would a new military hotline with China make a difference when a similar hotline with Pakistan hasn’t worked? Given that India timorously deploys border police to fend off incursions by the aggressive PLA, the clause on “no tailing” of each other’s patrols is really applicable to China. But any accord for China is just a political tool to advance its interests, including by lulling the other party into complacency and creating exploitable opportunities.
Singh’s China policy represents a case study in how meekness attracts bullying. BDCA is a symbol of that.

[darshhan]

^^Somebody please tell me who is India's greatest enemy among the names given below. Now I am seriously confused.

1.Pakistan
2.China
3.Congress(I) led by Nehru Gandhi family