Vipul wrote:I have a query Gurus, Saw a Pakistani talk show on Siachen and was thinking had the war resulted in more fronts getting opened how well was the Army equipped? All our Bofors Guns (working and canibalised to assemble 125+ in working conditions) were concentrated just in the Siachen Theater. We also did not have enough artillery shells and had to do an emergency air-lift from Israel and Russia, we did not have Smerch or the Upgunned M46 then and Pakistan had a big edge in long range guns and rockets. I know war does not mean just a long range artillery duel but does still plays the big role in sanitising the front for advancing the armoured/infantry movement so want to know how would it have played out on multiple fronts?
Vipul - there are couple of interleaving points at play here.
The movement and concentration of troops in the Kargil Sector was done with the express understanding that India will not cross the LOC nor will it expand the conflict in other areas (like we did in Lahore in 1965). Yes, we had put in place measures to ensure that we were not caught off-guard anywhere else. For example, 6 Mountain Division (which is AHQ reserve) was stationed just south of Zoji La pointing at POK primed for offensive action. This meant PA could not afford to thin troops for Kargil Sector. Also, General Malik in his book on Kargil mentions that all IA formations (especially, Strike Formations) were on couple of days stand-by to cater to larger conflict, if required.
Given the above background, IA had moved Bofors guns into the sector to achieve the laid down directive from political leadership. This was a calculated move. Had the plan been to NOT restrict ourselves to Indian side of LOC, the plans would have been different.
Having said that, only FOUR Medium Regiments of Bofors were inducted from outside - this would amount to 72 odd guns. And for plains, 130 mm guns would have done just fine. IA has never been short of guns - what we have lacked is guns of Bofors type and their modern variants.