Two and Half Front War Scenario

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 10 Jan 2018 00:57

I think its time to revisit the Two front war scenario that the services are preparing for.

In order to make sense of what is being talked about I suggest we create short chapters on:

1) Geopolitical situation from now to 2030
2) Relative military power of China, India, and Pakistan
3) India's frontier problem : Two front and internal security
4) China Front: What changes will reduce China factor?
5) Pakistan Front : what changes will reduce Pakistan factor?
6) Internal Security: Naxal and Islamist jihadis, regional issues fed by opposition parties. What changes will reduce this factor?
7) External Powers meddling : West - Political and religious card, Islamist - Sunni bloc, Shia bloc, who else? What changes will reduce this factor?
8 ) Nuclear role
9) Conclusion

These can be in this thread with hash tag #1 so on and so forth.

First a few pages of data gathering I would like these summarized.
Remember the scenario is decade long.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby shiv » 10 Jan 2018 19:31

Ramana has made the first post of something that can only lead to an encyclopedia if we are serious. The scope is huge and there can be no summary because every point will have details of multiple possible scenarios and the interaction of such multiple scenarios with others can only lead to a geometric progression in the number of variables.

While I cannot predict anything, I would like to make a comment on "war" in general - since the thread is about war, and I see this form a historic perspective of wars in general.

Historically different cultures have evolved a concept of total war, continuous war, 1000 years war, "aar-paar ki ladaai" etc. In fact such wars led to long term misery but not always total destruction when weapons were merely swords arrows and battering rams. Things got worse with muskets and cannon but still not bad enough for enough countries to realize where warfare was heading. Ultimately the advent of machine-guns, motorized weaponry and air power were all used twice in Europe - in WW1 and WW2 and by the end of WW2 Europe at least had understood the futility of "total war".

But the US had not understood and the newly "independent nations" had not figured out how costly "total war" can be. The US, after dreaming about total victory in a nuclear war, found its hands tied by USSR nukes and attempted "total war" in Korea and Vietnam and failed. Total war of the "aar-paar ki ladaai" genre was no longer working. After those wars. India and Pakistan got into a semblance of "total war" in 1965 and 71 and both countries understood that such wars could not last more than a few weeks. It speaks volumes for the amount of money and life burnt up by the powers of WW 2. Israel and its Arab neighbours attempted total war and nothing much changed other than local victories.

Once every nation has machine guns, armoured vehicles and planes - total war becomes very costly for both, or all sides - even if one side is a superpower. If you add nuclear weapons to the mix - total war cannot last long without some serious miscalculations on more than one side. And sure enough no one has attempted total war with all the weapons at their disposal against an enemy who is a peer - or even with a large fraction of the strength.

It was ramana who made me aware of something I had suspected but my mind had not gelled. It is about accidents. Accidents typically are avoided if one party makes an error. Most often the error is a combination of 2 or more parties. For "total war" or a 2 front total war, more than one nation have to make serious errors of judgement.

Of course no nation can talk of "all out war" with another country that has nuclear weapons without considering the outcome of the use of nuclear weapons. So an "all out" "two front" war that someone imposes on India will have to be by parties who are somehow willing to risk nuclear war. And I don't see India starting such a war. As far as I can tell - by 1980 Pakistan had already decided that they cannot win all out "aar-paar ki ladaai" against India and they have, since then resorted to asymmetric war, but have still been afraid enough of India to not only hold out a nuclear threat - but to hold some powerful ally in a close embrace.

None of Pakistan's powerful allies have shown any penchant for entering into all out wars with significant powers. I want to point out a long term narrative on this forum of describing the US as a global power who will take on anyone any time - aided by myth building like "Behind every MacDonalds is a McDonnell". It is my view that China too is busy building up a myth of invincibility to match the US. they have figured out the US game and are copying it. Both those powers are unlikely to willy-nilly enter into a costly conflict even with India (or Pakistan or NoKo) if there is a chance that the myth of their power is busted - leaving them shamefaced and weaker after the war. The US has already weakened itself to some extent.

But all this does not mean that there can be no war or that India will not come off doing badly in a war. the ONLY solution is to keep arming ourselves and end up being one of the top military powers in the world. But when 10 nations do that - the chances of something going wrong is high. Of all the larger powers - India is the only country who has not helped to build up another power who can later become a competitor. the US did that to Iran, China and Pakistan. China did that to NoKo and may regret Pakistan. Strong powers have sought to subsidize their strength by using "allies" by arming them militarily but in the long term there is no guarantee that this will last. Only India has not done that. yet. We seem vulnerable, but on the other hand our responsibilities are cut out and crystal clear- we have to depend on ourselves. Which also means we must be internally strong and just and we cannot cheaply hanker for external wars to take over territory and expect a walk-over.

Sorry if I have digressed...

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 10 Jan 2018 20:27

you are right ‘it will lead to an encyclopaedia if we are serious’. Again a good opportunity for us to bring rigour and serious posting to BRF.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 10 Jan 2018 20:29

I think we should start by limiting the scope. Let’s drop this nuclear bogey nonsense and blackmail by Pak. So on the two fronts it becomes a conventional war. The half front we are already fighting so it’s a question of what additional capacities we need for it.

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 862
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ParGha » 10 Jan 2018 20:39

Let us be clear about one thing: preventing a two-and-a-half front war is more desirable and winnable than fighting a 2.5 Front War.

History proves that fighting a two-front war is almost always a losing proposition (Napoleon between Brits+Portuguese in the south and Rus+Prussians in the north, Germans between France in the south and Russians in the north, Marathas between Hyderabad and Abdali etc); history also provides a template for avoiding this disaster (Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact of 1941 that allowed the Soviets to first defeat the Nazi Germany and they pummel the Japanese).

India has sama, dana, bedha and danda to prevent such an alliance from forming, and it needs to concentrate on the prevention rather than the cure. India's first line of defense against a 2.5 Front War are diplomats of the MEA, the economic-planners and regulators at the MFin, the intelligence agencies and the CAPFs of the MHA. Most of the discussion on how they can achieve their objectives really belong in the strategery forum -- but we can discuss specific military enablers that can assist the diplomats and the intelligence agencies on this thread.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62932
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Singha » 10 Jan 2018 21:44

what is this 0.5 and who invented it? earlier it was 2.0 front war.

also one must see TSP as extension of the chinese front, albeit they are not so keen to spill blood on behalf of peking unless there is a guaranteed and huge payoff. low cost stuff like a precautionary mobilization to tie down a certain number of indian units, but really their threat vector in conventional terms is very low. we have to protect the J&K front thats all, leaving the rest empty poses little risk.

we ought to stop these delusions and prepare seriously for a 1.0 front war vs Cheen than find excuses why we cannot handle 2.5

handle the big dog and the 1.5 small critters will scurry away on their own.

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 862
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ParGha » 10 Jan 2018 21:56

shiv wrote:While I cannot predict anything, I would like to make a comment on "war" in general - since the thread is about war, and I see this form a historic perspective of wars in general.

Historically different cultures have evolved a concept of total war, continuous war, 1000 years war, "aar-paar ki ladaai" etc. In fact such wars led to long term misery but not always total destruction when weapons were merely swords arrows and battering rams. Things got worse with muskets and cannon but still not bad enough for enough countries to realize where warfare was heading. Ultimately the advent of machine-guns, motorized weaponry and air power were all used twice in Europe - in WW1 and WW2 and by the end of WW2 Europe at least had understood the futility of "total war".

But the US had not understood and the newly "independent nations" had not figured out how costly "total war" can be. The US, after dreaming about total victory in a nuclear war, found its hands tied by USSR nukes and attempted "total war" in Korea and Vietnam and failed. Total war of the "aar-paar ki ladaai" genre was no longer working. After those wars. India and Pakistan got into a semblance of "total war" in 1965 and 71 and both countries understood that such wars could not last more than a few weeks. It speaks volumes for the amount of money and life burnt up by the powers of WW 2. Israel and its Arab neighbours attempted total war and nothing much changed other than local victories.


Doc, yours is a very Western European / American narrative up there. It doesn't stand up to factual scrutiny.

The Mongols, armed with swords and arrows and battering rams, killed more people than all the wars of the musket and cannon (Gunpowder Age) combined. The nations ruled by the Mongols learned "total war" back when the objective of most European wars was taking the enemy commanders (usually one's own cousins) hostage for ransom/marriage: The Mongols were conscripting millions of Chinese and Persians as sappers/pioneers to destroy their own civilizations' canal-works and creating millions of sq-kilometers of grasslands for the Mongol Pony, and Russian princes stood waiting as third-class vassals to the Khans.

Koreans and the Vietnamese have always lived under the shadow of the Chinese behemoth (or whoever was ruling China -- Mongols, Manchus, etc), always trying to maintain a semblance of independence. They knew "Total War" quite well, fighting bitter and near-suicidal wars against the Chinese; the Koreans had been under Japanese occupation well before WW-II, millions of Koreans were conscripted into Japanese armies, and many of the Japanese industrial facilities were in Korea and Manchuria, so they understood industrialized warfare quite well.

In 1965 Premier Zhou En Lai proposed that the Pakistanis should fight a "Peoples War" and offered to arm them to that effect; President Ayub Khan promptly balked at the idea of arming Sindhis, Balochis and other non-Pakjabi/Paltu-Pasthun peoples. It was very much possible for them to drag out the war for years with Chinese assistance, but it would have completely changed their feudals+fauji+mullah run society into a Maoist society. So he decided to sue for a ceasefire. The Indian decision to accept the ceasefire was the result of faulty intelligence (where the IB and DMI overestimated the Pak artillery and POL reserves) and mistrust between field and Staff officers (especially Indian artillery and Staff officers).

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 10 Jan 2018 22:08

Singha wrote:what is this 0.5 and who invented it? earlier it was 2.0 front war.

also one must see TSP as extension of the chinese front, albeit they are not so keen to spill blood on behalf of peking unless there is a guaranteed and huge payoff. low cost stuff like a precautionary mobilization to tie down a certain number of indian units, but really their threat vector in conventional terms is very low. we have to protect the J&K front thats all, leaving the rest empty poses little risk.

we ought to stop these delusions and prepare seriously for a 1.0 front war vs Cheen than find excuses why we cannot handle 2.5

handle the big dog and the 1.5 small critters will scurry away on their own.


I think its 0.5 front which is internal front (Naxals, Million mutinies and Islamist in that order) war that will be activated if it gets to Two Front war.
China wont fight alone anymore.

we ought to stop these delusions and prepare seriously for a 1.0 front war vs Cheen than find excuses why we cannot handle 2.5

handle the big dog and the 1.5 small critters will scurry away on their own
.


This is bluster and shows you have not understood the problem.

Recent civilizational battles were Terrain, Talikota and Panipat 1,2, & 3.

Tell me were they just skirmishes or game ending encounters?

I submit Indian side approached them as regular battles not as game changers.

You have jumped to conclusion without walking the walk.
If conclusions will be presented first then there is no need to participate.

Thanks for all the inputs you want to contribute or just shoot breeze.

Yes Shiv, its encyclopedic in scope and I want to bring back the rigor that BRF was famous for.
By the way how do you read an encyclopedia?

By reading the chapters eventually you can read the encyclopedia.

This is the biggest vulnerability for India and hence I would like this to be studied.

ParGha is right. How to avoid is the question? To get there one must understand the question!!!

This thread tries to understand the question.

Akshay, By I have already limited the scope by giving the 8 topics to get to the conclusion. Its needed and doable.
The biggest barrier to rise of India is to break the shackles of geographical and political containment imposed as a condition for Independence and end of colonial rule.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 10 Jan 2018 22:41

Shiv, If you read the Operational Art thread you realize that Napoleon with his new way of fighting war. Earlier the Thirty years War ended in 1648 with Treaty of Westphalia. If you read the history of that war it was numerous skirmishes and hardly any large armies.

Napoleon changed the war business by using large armies of about 100,000 and with maneuver warfare. To prevent a repeat after Waterloo modern weapons were designed especially the needle gun by the Germans and later the machine gun. The tank came to counter the machine gun. So on and so forth or as Germans say und so weiter (usw)

A Deshmukh
BRFite
Posts: 262
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 14:24

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby A Deshmukh » 10 Jan 2018 22:43

IMHO: 2 & 1/2 front war scenario looks unrealistic if Modi Sarkar continues another 5 years.

Different Conflict scenarios:
1/2 internal war:
this requires a lot of mobilisation of naxal or internal trouble makers.
but with money being tracked now, and naxals and other insurgencies (not counting J&K in this 1/2) are reduced now.
what can happen:
i) a lot of riots where Muslim majority (bengal, Assam, UP)
ii) Dalit and other caste (Jats, Maratha, TN, Gorkha), fissures - riots
iii) Commie states - KL, WB
iv) Khalistanis
v) multiple terrorist attacks.
With CRPF, CISF, NSG in good strength, not sure if these situations will bog down the army.
there can be plenty of press and attention grabbing but will not affect the army, navy or AF significantly.

1st front TSP:
TSP is going down economically. with more time, the differential increases, making a full scale conflict triggered by Pak more and more unlikely.
Most likely we will get more proactive.
In 2017 we killed 100+ uniforms. this can increase. war of 1000 cuts in reverse. LOC becomes more hot and porous from our side. battle of attrition will continue.
maybe salami slicing in reverse. we capture a few peaks every year. (but less likely).
atags and other guns will only increase our capacity to hurt deeper, without crossing any nuclear red-lines.
will we go in and break TSP into pieces in the next 15 years? imo - unlikely. I dont see a good cost-benefit. we gain not much. controlling TSP territory only increases our pain with no gain.
we will continue to sponsor their insurgencies - balochistan, making TSP weaker from inside.
PoK - we may move in into PoK to cut off CPEC but that would be just to make a point with Chin that CPEC passes Indian territory wo our permission.

2nd Front Chin:
This will be a real threat from now on.
Chin has been stared down in Doklam. They know India is an alternate leader in Asia. They want to be numero uno.
They will initiate a conflict aka 62 to cut us down to size.
Himalayan conflict will not be winnable for them. We are well prepared here comparatively.
they are investing heavily in their Navy.
IMO we will see a conflict involving parallel attacks
- navies
- virus attacks.
- maybe shooting down sats or planes.
- maybe undeclared biological virus attack or something asymmetric.
conflict will not cross our nuclear red-line, but meant to hurt standing of our strong leader, thinking would be similar to how 62 destroyed Nehru's leadership in the 3rd world.
- internal mir jaffers will be in full flow to blame Modi for the conflict.
Our retaliation options include - blowing their pearls (Lankan, Maldivan, Gwadar ports), blocking CPEC by liberating PoK, well below their red-lines.
Undeclared attack must be retaliated in like manner (do we have the capacity?).

In the near term (< 2019) I think Doklam-like situation will repeat, but triggered by Chin, where they are more prepared.

Need more depth on the lines of the 9 chapters mentioned in the first post.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 10 Jan 2018 22:52

Yes Ramana sir , you have given a good terms of reference. Let’s stick to those. You have already mentioned chapters with terms of reference so Shiv Sir’s encyclopaedia comment and your reading encyclopaedia chapter by chapter fits in very well.

Good idea. Let’s try to keep discussion on the 8 items in terms of ref and get some ground rules for the thread.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby shiv » 10 Jan 2018 22:52

Pargha I think you misunderstood my post. Total war has been there forever but it was not until WW2 that total war exhausted all sides completely. My belief is that it was the destructiveness of the weapons on BOTH sides that reached a point where there could be no outright victors. With nukes on 2 warring sides any total war will leave no victors. Hence I predict that the future will hold something less than total war. Unless you describe what Pak is doing right now as total war. My definition of total war is entire nation, all weapons. Include nukes.

Misra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 95
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 09:03

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Misra » 10 Jan 2018 23:07

any exhaustion from war, total or not, is likely to be short lived—perhaps on the order of a few generations, e.g. mahabharata or kalinga. this is because conquest is a very human desire (usually expressed in a myriad routine ways) and until this desire is understood universally—esp by non indics—total wars are probably likely to keep occurring from time to time

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 10 Jan 2018 23:12

A.Deshmukh same comments as to GD. You are solving the problem. What is the scope of the problem is needs to be defined.
I bet the court of Rama Raya had similar solutions before the problem was defined. I don't want history repeated.

BTW your part should be in conclusion to answer Pargha question of how to prevent the 2.5 Front war?

Shiv again bear with me and let the process go forward. In essence you are ruling out war due to factors you bring out.

If you notice Nuclear factor is Chapter 8 ) just before conclusion Chapter 9).


My thinking is same as Pargha how to prevent that Total War. It will not be not by our self realization but the opponent being made to realize the futility. And we will come to that.

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 862
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ParGha » 10 Jan 2018 23:48

Singha-ji,

The Paks are quite keen to fight, and they have large pools of excess and unemployable man-power to spill plenty of blood. 1948, 1965, 1971, 1999, 2011-Present prove this point. Of course, all of it melts away when Indians go on the offensive and threaten their fauji-feudal-mullah setup in Pakjab.

It is the Chinese who won't fight unless there is guaranteed and huge pay-off, and they are very cautious about losing their own people especially after generations of One Child Policy.

The Chinese will do low-cost nuisance stuff to support Pak, like moving a mechanized regiment around Ladakh in 1999 or harassing BOPs in 1965, but they won't bleed for the Pakistanis; the Paks, otoh, don't need much of an excuse to fight Indians. India absolutely cannot afford to trade space-for-time in populated border areas of Jammu and Punjab, so that ties down plenty of Indian troops in defensive positions on the Indo-Pak front.

For the Indo-Tibetan front you need lots of light-infantry backed by artillery and Air Force (i.e. Mountain Division ORBATs), but for the Indo-Pak front you need lots of tanks, IFVs, SPAs, etc. So how can you simply prepare for a 1.0 Front War against China? OTOH, arming for a 2.5 Front War is both extremely expensive and has the dangers of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy as the good doctor pointed out. So one must be nimble and proactive in avoiding the situation, and yes, sometimes a carefully controlled limited war is also a solution to avoiding a larger war.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby shiv » 11 Jan 2018 07:22

As regards the geopolitical scenario in the next 12 years - here is what I think

1. India: India will remain inward looking. The majority Hindu population has for a long time felt butt-hurt about the way their sensitivities have been handled. But this is going to be projected as an anti-Muslim and anti-Christian bias. In my view this is not true - Hindu anger is directed at secular politics and not minority groups. However - the leaders of "secular politics" are going to fight for survival by branding the majority community as Nazis. This will have outside support from Pakistan and from the US and many Western nations. Agitations funded from outside will become the norm. I foresee the fight as getting dirty - but It can only lead to a crushing of fake secular forces. You cannot have the twin contradictory planks of cursing Hindus for caste and then worrying about Hindu unity as caste divisions (which are so useful for secular politics) fade. What this means is that India is not going to be starting wars to take over PoK or Aksai Chin. Any military action started by China or Pakistan in these areas will be spun as a weak government making war to divert attention away from domestic issues. India will have to grow out of huge colonial issues - and healthcare will be one of them where the hangover of "Western style healthcare" is hampering broader healthcare. This will have to be a revolution and it will be a painful one because Indians are just getting into the throes of mental decolonization.

2. Pakistan as a nation is accustomed to being in a chronic condition of state failure. Education, healthcare and basic needs are not going to touch a huge number of people but no one will really care. Those who starve and die will starve and die, But the elite and military will continue to arm themselves with nuclear weapons and probably invest early and heavily in robotics/AI and unmanned military hardware to harass India. In 12 years we are not going to see too much change IMO. One of Pakistan's biggest sponsors - the US despite noises is still funding Pakistan and even if they stop now - the have "fed Pakistan" to keep Pakis going till 2028-30. Once before, the US had "ditched" Pakistan, but in a decade or so Pakistan was back in the US's good books an even became a "most favoured non-NATO" ally.

3. China is trying to topple the US from the latter's position at the top of the heap. The US has no stomach to fight China, but China too will not take on the US directly. It will simply seek to increase influence and power. The Chinese would probably be unwise to get into a hot war - but who knows - they may be tempted to take part in a little conflict simply to copy the US which thrives on continuous involvement in wars. Whether that will involve India or not is difficult to tell.

India, China and the US will be among the "big 3" in the world on which security and economies will depend. Their interest in peace will be paramount. But given that war is essential for many economies (as they are arms exporters) - peace is not going to come easily. As I see it - the number of countries in the world where war can "be sparked" by military-industrial economies is shrinking. Sooner or later - any arms sold to anyone can have a blowback on arms producing nations. But nations like the US- whose economy depends on war and military exports and campaigns will want war and that is a big hole of uncertainty.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 11 Jan 2018 07:38

Very thought provoking.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby RoyG » 11 Jan 2018 10:56

2.5 front is going to come out of our own playbook Arthashastra in which there is a gradual move up the escalation ladder from silent to overtly limited kinetic. Nuclear weapons prevent gate crashing. You have to turn a subset of the population against the King and get them to open the door for you. You do this through economics and disruptive high level attacks.

When the king is powerful within his fort, insurrectionists are considered a nuisance. But if you assassinate high profile figures within the kings administration and then blockade the fort you shock the administrative machinery. All of a sudden the nuisance becomes a power-broker within the king's domain. The community within the walls that these insurrectionists come from band together and serve as a stable pole within the chaos. All the gains made by the central administration can evaporate in a matter of months.

With a very well trained well armed army camping outside the walls disrupting finance, its only a matter of time before the draw bridge comes crashing down aided by disruptive elements. All they do at that point is storm in and neutralize the initial defenses and then slowly withdraw. Anymore, and the invading army will suffer terrible losses. All this is enough to convince all the vassal states to switch over to the opposing camp.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4139
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Karthik S » 11 Jan 2018 11:48

We are at 0.5 war right now, we've been at it since 2004 at a massive scale. A civilization can withstand and fight external enemies, but one that's weakened internally will be destroyed. EJ, Jihadi, communism, western ideals and so called modernity all are the 0.5 war we are fighting. As on date they are winning.

Was it Churchill (India's Hitler) who said it, if I convince and make you to think like me, if I control your mind, I am a victor. If you see what's happening with EJ, "bhai"wood, "rationalism", westernization, this is exactly what's happening.

Unless we are ready to fight and win this war at any cost, ANY external 1.0 or 2.0 front war will be difficult to win with jaichands colluding with external aggressors.

Geopolitical situation in next 12 15 years. From what we see, more and more are slowly realizing about all the above, ofcourse there are plenty who think being secular etc is cool, but let's hope they remain a minority. With BIF's increased aggression and people's realization about it, will most likely lead to a collision course. But their support machinery, ecosystem is way powerful than ours. Can't say our people have govt's support in addressing this, but that's another discussion.

One way to seek parity with regards to foreign machinery and ecosystem is build a strong economy. Two of the countries with best (pun intended) human rights accord are KSA and cheen. We all know apart from few magazines making some comment, no ecosystem will dare go beyond a point in even criticizing them. We can be fairly confident that our economy will touch $10T if not 12 or more as estimated by few. Will any sane country fight an industrial and full scale war with 3rd largest economy in the world? Highly unlikely.

WRT pakistan, as Mr Fatah said, pakistan is a state of mind not a country. It must be outwitted than outfought. For some reason I believe CPEC may be a blessing in disguise for us. The benifits of which will be enjoyed by whiskey sipping punjabi generals, meanwhile the "pure landers" have to put up with godless imperialistic cheens, (how many visas already). I don't see how that can go without any "incidents". An overpopulated medieval minded country with no vision apart from harming the kafirs next door. With increased pressure comes increased suppression of the helpless and needy, leading to increased disdain especially among non-punjabis. To unify country, pakis may be tempted to wage a bigger war, but how far will this materialize is another matter.

Our first aim, to have a geopolitical situation favorable to us in next decade or so, should be to win the internal 0.5 war soon and completely. Build an internally strong and unified civilization identity based country (somewhat similar to Japan) that is closing in on top 2 countries in GDP figures.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19553
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Philip » 11 Jan 2018 13:13

The next decade is going to see intense naval activity in the IOR,where China with its "string of pearls" strategy is attemptingto encircle India by bases/mil facilities in client states.Pak,the Maldives,Djibouti,Sri Lanka,Burma and Bangladesh have been targeted.Of these Djibouti is a fait accompli,Gwadar being too commercial-the search has found another spot Jiwani,even closer to Chahbahar than Gwadar,which will be a full-fledged mil. base for China. In Sri Lanka,is has acquired H'tota for 99 yrs,plus tens of thousands of hectares for a Chin SEZ which will be a de-facto Chin settlement housing lakhs of Chins and of course tens of thousands of Chin soldiers and mil. personnel to "protect them"! The same plan exists for Gwadar/Pak. It is trying to obtain atolls in the Maldives to be turned into full-fledged island bases as it is doing in the Indo-China Sea. At BDesh and Burma,mere port facilities/logistics/repair facilities will suffice for its maritime forces.On current form,it is unlikely that these two countries will allow Chin. bases/squatting as the Lankans,Maldivians and Pakis are doing.Burma has its own ethnic Rohingya crisis and BDesh its own Islamic militancy for the pot to be stirred further with Chins squatting on their territory.

It is for a v.forceful Indian diplomatic effort to stall the Chin plans in the Maldives and Sri Lanka.The Lankan political elite,including the Rajapakses, are almost totally a bunch of wankers whose ghoolies can be squeezed hard to make them come around.In the event of a "no-show" of cooperation from both the Maldives and the Lankans,we must prepare for the 'final solution",the takeover of the Maldives and turning it into an Indian protectorate. For Sri Lanka,the solutions are best kept hidden. It will hoever require a two-pronged offensive by both Indian soft power through iinvestment in the island and the stick of mil. power in the NEast. These two entities sitting in our "backwaters"are crucial to removing that "half" of the 2.5 scenario.The chain of pearls will be broken and the Chins will be hard put to counter IN/IAF attacks against their maritime shipping and naval forces in the IOR with only a base on the Paki coast which could be easily bottled up by IN subs.This also brings into focus the need for a full-fledged island base/facilities in Lakshadweep just as the Chinese are doing in the ICS atolls.Runways capable of operations of all types of naval and IAF aircraft,berthing facilities of frontline warships and subs and shore facilities to support the same.More surveillance bases should also be set up oin some islands,some with remote
sensors like those being used for our coastal defences atop lighthouses.

A diplomatic offensive should also be made with all IOR littoral nations and everaging wherever it is possible for us to have naval/logistic facilities.We still have nations in Africa who prefer us to the Chins and must leverage the same.A close relationship with S.Africa is essential as the Chins are trying to pluck them onto their side.SA is crucial not becos of its geo-strat. location but becos of its vast min. wealth,esp. that of raw material critical to the defence industry.The IN's budget has to be hugely enhanced for us to be able to dominate the IOR.If not,we could see a permanent presence of a Chin CBG along with accompanying N-subs in our "backwaters",threatening our own maritime lifeline,using the above mentioned bases.The ned is for at least 36-40 subs and a 250 vesel strong navy.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 11 Jan 2018 21:43

Philip, You have the inclination and mind to study the naval picture.

Can you start summarizing the Pak Navy and the PLAN that would be assigned to IOR? And look at the bases they would operate from. And what maritime strike aircraft could be involved?

Tsarkar can you guide this part?

Say two to three weeks?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19553
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Philip » 11 Jan 2018 22:06

Ok. Will try.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 11 Jan 2018 22:17

Thanks. I knew you would step up to your favorite area. Don't put all the day a yet. Compile it and let tsarkar look at it before posting.

I want some volunteers for the other areas

- PLA forces and TSP.
- next the air component.
I want RoyG to look at Pak and Chines Intel covert action capabilities.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 13 Jan 2018 03:50

For the sceptics here is Gen. Rawat statement today:

viewtopic.php?p=2244624#p2244624

Peregrine wrote:Will call Pakistan’s nuke bluff if tasked to cross border: Army chief

NEW DELHI: The Army on Friday said it will not allow an expansionist China to intrude into Indian territory at any cost, while roundly dismissing Pakistan's reckless threats about its tactical nuclear weapons being an effective counter to India's conventional military superiority.

"China is a powerful country but we are not a weak nation...We will not allow our territory to be invaded by anyone. We are prepared," said Army chief General Bipin Rawat, in the backdrop of the People's Liberation Army needling India with as many as 415 "border transgressions" across the Line of Actual Control (LAC) last year, which also saw the 73-day face-off at Doklam and 215 other troop confrontations.

Speaking in the run-up to the Army Day on January 15, Gen Rawat also said "Pakistan's nuclear bogey" will be thoroughly exposed if it actually comes to a war with the western neighbour, which often brandishes its short-range Nasr (Hatf-IX) nuclear missiles as a battlefield counter to India's `Cold Start' strategy of swift, high-intensity conventional attacks into enemy territory. "We will call their bluff. If given the task, we will not say we cannot cross the border because they have nuclear weapons," he said.

The Army chief was sceptical about US President Donald Trump's stern warning to Pakistan against harbouring terrorists leading to any concrete change on the ground as far as India was concerned. "We will have to do our own job," he said, adding the US had its own "compulsions" to maintain relations with Pakistan.

But even as Indian Army continues its punitive fire assaults to "inflict pain" on Pakistan Army for actively abetting cross-border terrorism and infiltration, with the latter suffering "three to four times more casualties", Gen Rawat said his force was "shifting its focus" from the western front to the "northern borders" with China.

"Yes, China has become assertive and is exerting pressure. But we are capable of (militarily) handling this assertiveness along the border...the terrain is to our advantage," he said. Though the government is dealing with China in a holistic manner, with the diplomatic engagement "going well", India should take care to ensure its neighbours like Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Myanmar, Bhutan and Afghanistan "do not drift away" from it. "We have to see we are not isolated against China in this region," he said, also referring to the emerging "quadrilateral" with the US, Australia and Japan in the Indo-Pacific maritime domain.

As for the heightened tensions along the 4,057-km LAC, which stretches from Ladakh to Arunachal Pradesh, Gen Rawat said: "contacts" (troop face-offs) were on the rise because the two armies had stepped-up their patrols. "There are differing perceptions about the LAC with overlapping claims. But we have bilateral mechanisms to diffuse tensions and avoid clashes," he said, adding that the DGMO-level hotline between the two armies was also on the anvil now.

"We made all efforts to ensure Doklam (near the Sikkim-Bhutan-Tibet tri-junction) did not lead to a conflict. But if it had escalated, we were prepared for it," he said. Indian troops had blocked Chinese soldiers from constructing a road towards the Jampheri Ridge in south Doklam in mid-June, which had led to the 73-day eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation before the rival troops finally disengaged on August 28.

As earlier reported by TOI, Chinese troops have established a permanent presence in north Doklam, with the construction of two helipads, upgraded roads, scores of pre-fabricated huts, shelters and stores to withstand the chill in the high-altitude region since then.

"This is disputed territory between Bhutan and China. There has been a reduction in the strength of Chinese troops there. But there is the possibility that they could come back (in force) after the winter. We have to wait-and-watch," he said.


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 13 Jan 2018 05:16

Brilliant speech. Vindicates this thread.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15487
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Karan M » 13 Jan 2018 05:40

Gen Rawat looks like the kind who can throw down with guys half his age and make them regret even contemplating it.

Image

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15487
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Karan M » 13 Jan 2018 05:48

Ramana - also please see Gokhale's securing India the Modi way.

In that he mentions Doval and Modi favor quick action, and zero committee rubbish when push comes to shove. They want quick decisions and trust field commanders to do the right thing. At Pathankot, bypassing the CCS stuff, Doval & service chiefs made the decision to quickly deploy NSG to the base within hours given HRT chances & need for quick action. Doval apparently still seethes at the IC-814 story.

Book also shows how GOI opened up its purse for $3 Billion emergency arms procurement post Uri incident. And how the services now have much improved financial freedom to order spares, items etc for operational preparedness. Add the HAL investment in spares for Su-30, Jag etc serviceability & focus on DRDO programs to deliver operational missiles quick. I think all this is factoring into the services renewed faith in GOI and the support they need to protect national interests.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15487
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Karan M » 13 Jan 2018 05:57

Ironically, all this makes the chance of a war possible if some idiot in PRC judges that under Modi India might become too strong in the coming years to actively contest.

He also mentions that at Modi's signing in itself, representatives from the Tibetan Govt & Taiwan were both present, a not-so-subtle first. In contrast to prior PMs, it was Modi who walked up to Xi, took him by surprise and suggested a de-escalation path & PRC reluctantly followed suit. And India held firm on the ground and in talks.

In short, Indian leaders & establishment are behaving confidently, uncharacteristically standing up for Indian interests and this is frustrating the PRC to no end.

With current MIC trajectory plus full time Defense Minister, who has been brought in from a commerce position dealing with Indian industry, it is but a matter of time, before MII actually starts delivering beyond the big ticket DRDO programs and starts broad-basing across MSME/SME as well with better policy.

Another huge step is opening up ammo manufacture to private sector, with some 200000 rounds of FSAPDS ammo for T-90/T-72 up for grabs. Meanwhile, the DRDO program for a follow on 125mm round is also in progress & 66000 rounds for building up immediate stocks for our T-72/T-90 fleet are already in induction as are many Refleks rounds.

If folks think this is not a viable approach in ODS, US went to war with M829 rounds and a handful of M829A1 (only 2 per tank, these were called Super Sabot) and the plan was to use Super Sabot against heavy T-72s while M829 was used against everyone else. Later on, it was discovered M829 itself was sufficient.

Point is with improvements in night fighting (most T-72s now have Thermal sights, TISAS, if not new FCS) & basic ERA plus new radios & fire fighting gear. T-90s/T-72s are getting new commanders sights with thermal imagers. T-90s problematic Gunners sight has a unit in trials from BEL.. Arjuns have been made operational and are receiving new Ammo & LAHAT has also been modified while a new DRDO round is also headed for trials.. the list of iterative advancements continues.

If this GOI remains in power, our conventional warfighting capabilities will take a huge step up. The data backs this up, irrespective of all the motivated articles from the Pubby's and Shooklaws.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15487
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Karan M » 13 Jan 2018 06:06

About internal security etc, I am more sanguine about the long term, rather than the short term. The present Modi govt has opted for a soft touch, letting all the EJ-Left-mullah types openly rabble rouse, the Hardiks, Mewanis etc cause caste rabble rousing etc. I present this being the consequence of Modi being in power, but not yet fully in charge of the apparatus & if he forces the apparatus to take action, he will lose track of the main plank on which he was elected, the development story & the manner in which UPA lost that plot. Its important to understand the average Indian is still not thinking beyond RKM & many cases he/she is caste/creed focused & will not look at the bigger picture which BRF/middle class obsess over. So BJP is focused on gaining power in as many states & retaining it & focused on the immediate basics - no massive terror strikes, building up institutional capability etc to run the economy, military etc.

If the gamble pays off and the NDA returns in 2019 (Dilbu anti-jinx please), then we will see the Indian state actually take far harder positions on internal security & things will improve by leaps and bounds for BRF angst etc.

But even now, its pretty clear the hard improvements in national security are fairly obvious. By now, given hammering TSP is getting on border, you can imagine how state of affairs is being steadily changed. Incremental steps but changing the overall policy one step at a time, from the "we are all one, turn the other cheek 24/7" crap espoused by UPA era IFS/MEA folks.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 14 Jan 2018 04:25

KaranM Thanks.

Now write which threats you are addressing? 8)

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 947
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby KrishnaK » 15 Jan 2018 00:54

shiv wrote:As regards the geopolitical scenario in the next 12 years - here is what I think

1. India: India will remain inward looking. The majority Hindu population has for a long time felt butt-hurt about the way their sensitivities have been handled. But this is going to be projected as an anti-Muslim and anti-Christian bias. In my view this is not true - Hindu anger is directed at secular politics and not minority groups. However - the leaders of "secular politics" are going to fight for survival by branding the majority community as Nazis. This will have outside support from Pakistan and from the US and many Western nations. Agitations funded from outside will become the norm. I foresee the fight as getting dirty - but It can only lead to a crushing of fake secular forces. You cannot have the twin contradictory planks of cursing Hindus for caste and then worrying about Hindu unity as caste divisions (which are so useful for secular politics) fade. What this means is that India is not going to be starting wars to take over PoK or Aksai Chin. Any military action started by China or Pakistan in these areas will be spun as a weak government making war to divert attention away from domestic issues. India will have to grow out of huge colonial issues - and healthcare will be one of them where the hangover of "Western style healthcare" is hampering broader healthcare. This will have to be a revolution and it will be a painful one because Indians are just getting into the throes of mental decolonization.
That internal caste/regional political convulsions are thought of as a threat in the same sense as an invasion from outside threatening the union is telling. It is par for the course to point at external threats to subdue internal differences or threaten to tar those differences as traitorous activity based on outside support (incidentally an exact copy of the Pakistan playbook - if you're a true muslim you must listen to me else you're a traitor). That isn't going to work anymore than it has elsewhere. Internal politicking is a part and parcel of running a massive and diverse country like India. So long as there's no organized violence against the state, the usual method is co-opting to diffuse anger, not refusing to entertain the grievance entirely. India has managed to well on that score and will continue to despite mis-steps. Organized violence will have to be dealt with, but those actors will also have to be accommodated, if they're to put their weapons down and not be a constant sore in the body politic. Castigating them as traitors acting at the behest of the outsiders (even if that be true) isn't going to help the cause. Laldenga went from a guerrilla leader to the CM of Mizoram. Having sections of the political system that sympathizes with such actors is actually a benefit - Prachanda went from insurgency & taking about inevitable warfare with India to participating in the political mainstream ending a decade long insurgency. IIRC this was facilitated by the CPI-M.

3. China is trying to topple the US from the latter's position at the top of the heap. The US has no stomach to fight China, but China too will not take on the US directly. It will simply seek to increase influence and power. The Chinese would probably be unwise to get into a hot war - but who knows - they may be tempted to take part in a little conflict simply to copy the US which thrives on continuous involvement in wars. Whether that will involve India or not is difficult to tell.

India, China and the US will be among the "big 3" in the world on which security and economies will depend. Their interest in peace will be paramount. But given that war is essential for many economies (as they are arms exporters) - peace is not going to come easily. As I see it - the number of countries in the world where war can "be sparked" by military-industrial economies is shrinking. Sooner or later - any arms sold to anyone can have a blowback on arms producing nations. But nations like the US- whose economy depends on war and military exports and campaigns will want war and that is a big hole of uncertainty.
That the US economy depends on war and military exports can be very easily dismissed by looking at the US stock market. But facts are not needed when grievance will do. The US stumbles from one war to another because of its military heft. That has been built up because of having the largest economy around and the need to protect that and trade with its allies. Its allies have been comfortable with letting the US take care of headaches while they enjoy their socialist lifestyles. The advantages weren't just extended to its allies - India & China have gained immensely from the US led international trading order. However this is already beginning to trend down. A situation where countries with consensus on the broad vision - a rules based international order where legitimate grievances are handled by negotiation without resort to revisionism, form a balanced group, where the US doesn't stand out because of its economic and military heft will go a long way towards reducing such mis-steps. No single party has the wherewithal to start wars unilaterally. India is already participating in such a group and will continue to increase its part.

2. Pakistan as a nation is accustomed to being in a chronic condition of state failure. Education, healthcare and basic needs are not going to touch a huge number of people but no one will really care. Those who starve and die will starve and die, But the elite and military will continue to arm themselves with nuclear weapons and probably invest early and heavily in robotics/AI and unmanned military hardware to harass India. In 12 years we are not going to see too much change IMO. One of Pakistan's biggest sponsors - the US despite noises is still funding Pakistan and even if they stop now - the have "fed Pakistan" to keep Pakis going till 2028-30. Once before, the US had "ditched" Pakistan, but in a decade or so Pakistan was back in the US's good books an even became a "most favoured non-NATO" ally.
I do not think Pakistan can continue indefinitely on the path it's on. For it to be a financially viable country, the army's grip will have to be broken. Politicians on that side of the border are amenable to co-option.

China alone is by far the biggest danger. The second largest economy might well grow to be the biggest one and is politically opaque. That alone will force other countries into an alliance against it - led by India and the US. I believe that's capable of bottling up China till its current political system meets its eventual demise. The CPSU is no more and there was a time when even the US thought the Soviet Union was going to win the race.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15487
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Karan M » 15 Jan 2018 04:46

ramana wrote:KaranM Thanks.

Now write which threats you are addressing? 8)


I will break it out by your original starting post in a follow on one. Organize my thoughts better and post. What you are asking for is a complete forecast. Best to take a hard look and address in concise bullet points (IMHO).

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby shiv » 15 Jan 2018 07:43

KrishnaK wrote:That the US economy depends on war and military exports can be very easily dismissed by looking at the US stock market. But facts are not needed when grievance will do. The US stumbles from one war to another because of its military heft. <blahblah> The advantages weren't just extended to its allies - India & China have gained immensely

Utter blather. Anyone can tear down someone's opinion without having to put in any thought about what the thread asks. I will use my right to reply.

Disconnecting the US's continuous need to fight wars to expend large part of its huge economy on the military by bringing up the stock market bogey is specious nonsense. The US is sinking mainly because it cannot keep away from wars and needs to have enemies and adversaries to survive so Americans can rationalize to themselves that they are the best and the enemies are trying to bring them down. Americans have to keep hating someone or the other. Nixon, Johnson, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush Ombaba - every single one of them did that - but why blame a president - it is the US way. Keep kicking some weakling's butt and then say "We are wealthy because of our stock market" , Like they say "Denial is a river in Egypt"

Saying that "India gained" from the US with the statement "The advantages weren't just extended to its allies - India & China have gained immensely"is laughable nonsense like thanking Pakistan for teaching us about internal security. I am sure the US too and all patriotic rahrahrah Americans are deeply grateful to Osama bin Laden for showing them how pathetic their own internal security used to be while they went and kicked every piddly little nation while steering clear of any adversary who might actually hurt that stock market. One has to be steeped in admiration and gratitude to smokegetsinyoureyes USA to box oneself up in this type of blinkered fairy tale.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby shiv » 15 Jan 2018 09:20

ramana wrote:2) Relative military power of China, India, and Pakistan

This is too broad a topic to be summarized easily. Dozens of discussions on here and on other media do actually summarize the answer as follows:
China>India>Pakistan


The only discussion is whether we agree with this or not.

Logically, if China>India>Pakistan, then China+Pakistan>India

Nuclear weapons are the joker in the pack that are intended to keep wars at a conventional level. There are a hundred different ways war scenarios can be played out while "wargaming" so anything I say will simply be my thoughts based on my reading. No one needs to agree with me - the post is not intended to upset anyone in particular.

1. Will India attack China occupied Tibet? Unlikely
2. Will India attack Pakistan: Sooner or later Pakistan will take more hits from India. Most likely short, sharp retaliations
3. Will China support Pakistan in an active military campaign? We have to prepare for the fact that like the US chose to send the 7th fleet in 1971, The US warned Pakistan about Indian movements in 2001, and the Chinese cooked up a border incident involving sheep in 1965 that they will seek to dilute any Indian advantage. Nations may support India, but they do not want to see Pakistan go down.
4. Will Pakistan attack India? Most certainly terrorist attacks and support to any dissident group in India is assured. Any dissident or frustrated political party in India can and will get support in Pakistan. Is this "internal security" or is it "external"?
5. Will China attack India: The possibility of a border incident cannot be overlooked. As I see it the LAC was not manned by India and even with minimal manning the Chinese had a free run. As India beefed up its border forces, there were more encounters with the Chinese. After Doklam - the Chinese will beef up their presence. So some incidents are highly likely. Will these lead to all out war. Probably not. My guess.

end summary

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 15 Jan 2018 19:16

Karan M wrote:

Point is with improvements in night fighting (most T-72s now have Thermal sights, TISAS, if not new FCS) & basic ERA plus new radios & fire fighting gear. T-90s/T-72s are getting new commanders sights with thermal imagers. T-90s problematic Gunners sight has a unit in trials from BEL.. Arjuns have been made operational and are receiving new Ammo & LAHAT has also been modified while a new DRDO round is also headed for trials.. the list of iterative advancements continues.

If this GOI remains in power, our conventional warfighting capabilities will take a huge step up. The data backs this up, irrespective of all the motivated articles from the Pubby's and Shooklaws.


What about NVG for the poor infantry ? If we have to be ready for war we need that asap.

VKumar
BRFite
Posts: 425
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Mumbai,India

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby VKumar » 15 Jan 2018 19:26

Today signed online petition for BPJ. Infantry is being neglected. The soldier as a total fighting system concept has to be pursued.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 15 Jan 2018 19:46

VKumar wrote:Today signed online petition for BPJ. Infantry is being neglected. The soldier as a total fighting system concept has to be pursued.


Good. See the whole fighting concept FINSAS is not immediately needed - its ideal but we are used to much less than ideal. But we certainly need decent NVGs, BPJs, Helmets, water bottles, shoes, mess tin, blanket etc. the NVG itself is critical. The last 4 items can be got in months from pvt Indian suppliers who are suplying some of these to western armies !

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 15 Jan 2018 19:52

Another thing necessary for a 2.5 front war is a signifcant increase (several multiples) in militray hospital capacity, doctors, medicines, medical equipment, evacuation choppers, air ambulances, rehab facilities. We will have huge casualties and we must be fully prepared for them and invest seriously in medical facilities. We will need huge increase in capacity in Articial Limb centre also. Maybe set up two more. These issues must be properly planned for.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50220
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby ramana » 15 Jan 2018 21:29

Add to that antibiotics mfg capability. One way is to expand capacity to supply world with generic antibiotics which retains capacity in case of the 2.5 war scenario.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Two and Half Front War Scenario

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 15 Jan 2018 23:33

Karan M wrote:Gen Rawat looks like the kind who can throw down with guys half his age and make them regret even contemplating it.

Image


Some jokers in the media and some idiot MPs have already tried to take him on. On that note I see we have an ex home minister who keeps making stupid statements 'muscular action in Kashmir has failed'. His ex cabinet colleagues including PM have been on record suggesting Paki infiltrators were 'just some unknown miscreants wearing Paki uniforms'. In a 2.5 front war this qusiling echelon also needs to be handled. Strategies have to be prepared to deal with this. Information warfare will be as critical as kinetic warfare.

I submit that in this war scenario the power of propoganda and media influence will play a bigger role than ever before and we really have to figure this out.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dhyana, Eric Leiderman, Gyan, Kakarat, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 46 guests