Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 06 May 2013 13:12

Would the Chinese actions make the IA case for an MSC stronger or would it result in our Babus becoming even more cautious in releasing the funds?

anirban_aim · Post by **anirban_aim** » 06 May 2013 22:26

RIP, Salute and Respects:

Col Vasanth Venugopal

Subhashini Vasanth

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 07 May 2013 01:39

Surya wrote:mohit sharma did not die in an ambush per se.

He and his men had to tackle 25 odd highly trained and equipped (possibly SSG) infiltrators in the Haphruda forests who were already in position.

the terrain is hard and the effing place has also been a jinx for the SF.

A lot of valiant SF men have died in that god forsaken place but each one fought superbly and made the SF proud

Surya: I just read this old piece in Rediff about another exemplary officer killed in the Haphruda forests. Major Sudhir Walia. It brings a lump in your throat, alongwith seething anger whenever you read one of these articles

http://specials.rediff.com/news/2004/jul/19walia1.htm

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 07 May 2013 05:02

Sudhir Kumar was killed with his buddy Kheem Singh in that raid. I knew him personally from the time when he was posted in Delhi before he went to join his unit at Kargil and a part of me died with him when I got the news of his death.

schowdhuri · Post by **schowdhuri** » 07 May 2013 05:54

Folks will be glad to know that army units are controlled by the army (from today's Telegraph):

The army has pointed out that apart from the ITBP, forces in eastern Ladakh comprise armoured, mechanised infantry and mountain infantry units — elements that will be the mainstay in a confrontational situation. All these units are under the army.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130507/j ... YhNS9rrZdg

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 07 May 2013 08:58

Raja Bose wrote:Sudhir Kumar was killed with his buddy Kheem Singh in that raid. I knew him personally from the time when he was posted in Delhi before he went to join his unit at Kargil and a part of me died with him when I got the news of his death.

I am sorry for your loss

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 07 May 2013 09:05

add Captain Jasrotia 9 SF to the list of SF victims of the @%$@%%$ Haphruda forest

He got badly shot up in the spine and hung on for a few days

his condition visibly moved then then COAS - who ordered whatever needed to save him.
sadly could not prevent the loss

what a gallant officer.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 May 2013 09:36

prahaar wrote:Would the Chinese actions make the IA case for an MSC stronger or would it result in our Babus becoming even more cautious in releasing the funds?

These actions will finally dispel any notions of peaceful rise of China...the fact of the matter is that the Chinese have resorted to bullying tactics for quite sometime now and this had led to the force increment along the LAC. This latest round of sun-tzutiapanty will force the government hands and silence all the peace-nick types. It is good that Chinese are revealing themselves at this stage.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 May 2013 09:41

schowdhuri wrote:Folks will be glad to know that army units are controlled by the army (from today's Telegraph):

The army has pointed out that apart from the ITBP, forces in eastern Ladakh comprise armoured, mechanised infantry and mountain infantry units — elements that will be the mainstay in a confrontational situation. All these units are under the army.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130507/j ... YhNS9rrZdg

I have heard not too flattering stories about the performance and conduct of ITBP battalions in some other sector along the LAC...the units did not discharge their duty as per the requirement. Don't know whether it can be generalized across all ITBP formations.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 07 May 2013 11:33

rohitvats wrote:
schowdhuri wrote:http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130507/j ... YhNS9rrZdg
I have heard not too flattering stories about the performance and conduct of ITBP battalions in some other sector along the LAC...the units did not discharge their duty as per the requirement. Don't know whether it can be generalized across all ITBP formations.

To be fair we're evaluating ITBP for a role its not meant for. Its a border police organization.

For scouting, observation, recce, skirmishing, ambushing & managing incursions, we need Scouts Battalions.

We had Dogra Scouts, Garhwal Scouts, Kumaon Scouts, but IA hard pressed for CI started using them as Infantry Battalions. Only Ladakh Scouts were left untouched, and they performed admirably at Kargil, however were too few.

Based on their success, Arunachal Scouts and Sikkim Scouts are raised.

http://sikkimnow.blogspot.in/2013/01/re ... begin.html

IA needs to better use Scouts Battalions rather than try getting into border policing. More Scouts Battalions need to be raised.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 May 2013 11:47

tsarkar wrote:we're evaluating ITBP for a role its not meant for. Its a border police organization.

You've hit the nail on the head with above statement...ITBP is a police force which is not geared for the type of action required on LAC. And hence, the lacunae and short-fall in performance. And it is exactly why IA has been asking for operational control of ITBP. And which ITBP has resisted because it will make life really tough for the ITBP fellows out there on LAC.

For scouting, observation, recce, skirmishing, ambushing & managing incursions, we need Scouts Battalions.We had Dogra Scouts, Garhwal Scouts, Kumaon Scouts, but IA hard pressed for CI started using them as Infantry Battalions. Only Ladakh Scouts were left untouched, and they performed admirably at Kargil, however were too few.

Sir, I beg to disagree.

On the Uttarakhand-Tibet border, both the Garwhal Rifles and Kumaon Regiment have a Scouts Battalion each for the sector. In the Sugar Sector (HP-Tibet Border), there is a Dogra Scouts Battalion.

Based on their success, Arunachal Scouts and Sikkim Scouts are raised.

Good move.

IA needs to better use Scouts Battalions rather than try getting into border policing. More Scouts Battalions need to be raised.

True words. But our envisaged role for Scouts is a bit different and this is (IMO) one reason for such low numbers - except Ladakh Scouts.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 07 May 2013 12:58

tsarkar sir,

Scout Battalions are in addition to Standard Line Infantry Battalions in an Infantry Regiment and are in fact slightly larger than the later. They are the only infantry units in the IA which by nature of their role remain static and are fed manpower from the Regiment to which they belong. IIRC, Garhwal Scouts are based out of Joshimath and Kumaon Scouts out of Dharchula. The reasoning is that local chaps know the terrain, local dialects, adept at weathering the conditions and would be at home, in war. This is unique all along the Chinese frontage.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 May 2013 13:09

vaibhav.n wrote:tsarkar sir,

Scout Battalions are in addition to Standard Line Infantry Battalions in an Infantry Regiment and are in fact slightly larger than the later. They are the only infantry units in the IA which by nature of their role remain static and are fed manpower from the Regiment to which they belong. IIRC, Garhwal Scouts are based out of Joshimath and Kumaon Scouts out of Harsil. The reasoning is that local chaps know the terrain, local dialects, adept at weathering the conditions and would be at home, in war. This is unique all along the Chinese frontage.

I did not want to go into specifics but you've elaborated it nicely...

These battalions are in addition to the Orbat of (I) Mountain Bde at Joshimath. Also, these are trip wire forces whose role is to keep track of Chinese, warn of the any advance/attack and stay back to hit at the rear areas of the PLA logistic lines - if required. These men are amongst the most highly trained mountain warfare troops and would put any trained mountaineer to shame with their skills.

BTW, there are some other 'elements' with mongoloid features also stationed in this sector...runs before Surya-ullah lathi charges.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 May 2013 14:04

What happened here?

Vaibhav - did you delete your post?

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 07 May 2013 14:19

Rohit,

Let's discuss this offline. You can mail me.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 07 May 2013 14:43

vaibhav.n wrote:Rohit,

Let's discuss this offline. You can mail me.

Even I had to delete my reply to your post...

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 07 May 2013 15:27

^^ Rohit & Vaibhav, you're correct that Scouts are the only static battalions in IA. Also agree on their local knowledge of the terrain and fighting for home & hearth. You're right in their staying back in case of occupation.

However in the 90's Scouts served in the valley. I do not know whether entire battalion went or whether some officers. If memory serves right, only Scouts Officers & OR wear the Scouts shoulder patch.

If my understanding is correct, only Ladakh Scouts has been given regimental status and number of battalions expanded. Only Arunachal Scouts has a second battalion under raising while Dogra/Garhwal/Kumaon are a single battalion.

Ideally the area should be manned by Ladakh Scouts rather than ITBP. I'm surprised that an area as sensitive as DBO is patrolled by ITBP instead of Ladakh Scouts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karakoram_Pass

A potential China-India-Pakistan tripoint at Karakoram Pass is referenced in a 1963 boundary treaty between China and Pakistan concerning the Trans-Karakoram Tract, but India was not party to that treaty nor any tripoint agreement. The current de facto tripoint is about 100 km west of the pass near Indira Col in the Siachen Muztagh, where the Actual Ground Position Line between Indian and Pakistani forces meets the border with China.

Holding the Karakoram Pass to Indira Col gives India the strategic foot hold in that region. Losing that will lose the Indus watershed completely.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... der_88.jpg

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 07 May 2013 16:04

Alongwith V K Singh's departure, sadly the "transformation" to theater commands seems also to have been bid sayonara

http://www.rediff.com/news/special/comi ... 111012.htm

Regardless of everyone's favorite paltan to do the job (Why not deploy the Indian Navy in Pangong Lake?) the lack of infrastructure is our biggest Achilles heel as it prevents rapid concentration of forces. Even with a MSC in place, if it's going to be forced down a straw we are in for it.

Finally, the theater command concept seems of limited value if it does not have a heavy IAF input to it.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 May 2013 22:26

TSarkar, is there anything to the idea that the border patrols are with paramilitary police organizations to reduce the chance of conflict? I recall reading something along this lines when the BSF was raised in early 60s.
So maybe the powers that be thoguht BSF along TSP borders and ITBP along the Himalyan borders was the way to go?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Tibetan_Border_Police

Presently, Battalions of ITBP are deployed on Border Guarding Duties from Karakoram Pass in Ladakh to Diphu La in Arunachal Pradesh, covering 3488 km of the India-China Border. Manned border posts are at altitudes as high as 21000’ in the Western, Middle & Eastern Sector of the border. ITBP is a mountain trained force and most of the officers & men are professionally trained mountaineers and skiers. The force is under an expansion plan in order to provide relief to its troops from constant deployment in high altitude areas under dynamic and professional leadership of Sh Ranjit Sinha, IPS.

The border posts manned by ITBP are exposed to high velocity storms, snow blizzards, avalanches, and landslides, besides the hazards of high altitude and extreme cold, where temperature dips up to minus 40 degree Celsius. ITBP conducts Long Range and Short Range patrols to keep an effective vigil on inaccessible and unmanned areas on the border.

Looks like they do an awesome job in challenging environment.

In hindsight the problem is China's mindset. It wants to humiliate and dominate its neighbors. And it repeats this whenever they have a leadership change.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 07 May 2013 23:36

Ramana,

The ITBP does a very good job and is rightly regarded as the toughest among the rest of CPF's. They are deployed at extremely high altitudes under austere conditions and do so without the huge Logistical and Combat Service Support that IA formations come with organically. It is a feat unparalleled. There are ITBP Platoon Houses some 60-70Km trek on a goat track from the last Road head at 15-16K ahead of Joshimath.

Tsarkar Sir,

Scouts Battalions have been on previous occasions termed as ''Aggressive'', Thus I guess the MoD mandarins idea to have ITBP take up border management role. Ladakh Scouts in addition to having a battalion at Siachen also provide much needed support the local formations around 14 Corps AoR, thus have a higher number of battalions.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 07 May 2013 23:43

Laddakh Scouts are also one of the lightest armed formations. They carry very little ammunition with them. According to one account of Kargil war, soldiers from this unit were forced in to hand to hand combat and using rocks in 1-2 instances because of this. Don't know about the rest, but calling them 'aggressive' doesn't really gel with their image.

They are comparatively more mobile and nimble in mountains for sure, but their utility in pitched battles is rather limited. IMHO onlee.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 08 May 2013 00:05

ramana wrote:TSarkar, is there anything to the idea that the border patrols are with paramilitary police organizations to reduce the chance of conflict?

Border Patrols are like beat constables, to maintain a presence, and to deter/arrest/worst case shoot the occasional smuggler/spy. BSF & ITBP cannot conduct any sort of offensive or defensive combat operations. They're simply not trained for that. All they can do is hold the line until conventional combat troops arrive.

On the other hand, Scouts offer the capability to survey, recon (sometimes inside enemy lines), probe, skirmish, ambush & managing incursions. A police force cannot do this. A beat constable cannot take on a terrorist, we need Anti Terrorist Squad for that.

vaibhav.n wrote:Scouts Battalions have been on previous occasions termed as ''Aggressive'', Thus I guess the MoD mandarins idea to have ITBP take up border management role.

We're fooling ourselves if we do not aggresively monitor our neighbours. The purpose of aggresive patrolling is to deter enemies from any mischief. That they can be flanked and attacked themselves.

In this case, the tents could've been flanked and an Indian Post established between the Chinese tents and supply lines, detering the trucks from re-supplying them. Abandoning the Chumar Post will further reduce our visibility on Chinese movements.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 08 May 2013 04:54

From newKerala.com: Japanese army chief visits India's Eastern Command HQ

Kolkata, May 7 : Japan's Chief of Army Staff General Eiji Kimizuka visited the Eastern Command Headquarters at Fort William here Tuesday and discussed issues concerning security and enhancing military ties between the two armies.

General Kimizuka interacted with Eastern Command chief Lt. Gen. Dalbir Singh during his one-day official trip to Kolkata.

"The two discussed issues concerning security, enhancing military ties between the armies and other issues of mutual interest," according to a defence press release.

General Kimizuka is on a four-day visit to India from Sunda

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 May 2013 09:11

^^^Interesting that the Japanese Army Chief should go to Eastern Command - one command which is responsible to taking on the Chinese in its entirety. Should raise some hackles in China.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 May 2013 09:48

Tsarkar, I can see the case of the ITBP in Ladakh coming under Ind Army as it is patrolling a hostile border now. Similar to Assam Rifles which is a paramilitary organization under Ind Army chain of command.
Thanks for making it clear.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 May 2013 10:16

ramana wrote:Tsarkar, I can see the case of the ITBP in Ladakh coming under Ind Army as it is patrolling a hostile border now. Similar to Assam Rifles which is a paramilitary organization under Ind Army chain of command.
Thanks for making it clear.

It mans the border in HP-Tibet and Uttarakhand-Tibet sector as well.

Rupak · Post by **Rupak** » 08 May 2013 10:20

Rohit
More than one friend with direct experience has described at the ITBP as "unprofessional" and "cowardly".

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 May 2013 10:31

Rupak wrote:Rohit - More than one friend with direct experience has described at the ITBP as "unprofessional" and "cowardly".

Rupak - and that is what I've heard.

Basically, the problem is this - they are a police force and that is what governs their mindset. And how they conduct themselves. They are neither trained nor equipped to deal with situation as obtained on the border. Once the balloon goes up, they have no stake in the game. They are there for the sake of being there.

vaibhav.n · Post by **vaibhav.n** » 08 May 2013 16:22

vaibhav.n wrote:Scouts Battalions have been on previous occasions termed as ''Aggressive'', Thus I guess the MoD mandarins idea to have ITBP take up border management role.

We're fooling ourselves if we do not aggresively monitor our neighbours. The purpose of aggresive patrolling is to deter enemies from any mischief. That they can be flanked and attacked themselves.

Tsarkar Sir,

AFAIK, the ITBP deploys around 3-4 Battalions in the 4 Sub-Sectors (My info is a bit dated) and is supplemented by the Army and they are located alongside eachother in most locations. The Army and ITBP both carry out Area Patrols. On the chinese side also it's paramilitary People's Armed Police that man's the border. The question is whether we would like to define the LAC as an 'Active' boundary like the LC, and should be manned accordingly by the IA exclusively which is a valid point but requires some josh between ones political loins. When it comes to the Chinese the entire national security apparatus seems to suffer from spasms and it is here where the faultlines lie not with the forces which defend it.

What I fail to understand is how is this the ITBP's fault alone for allowing the incursion, the chinese seem to brazenly undertake similar incursions all along the disputed areas under exclusive Army control too right from Murgo, Pangong Tso, to Chamoli Dist.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 May 2013 17:01

vaibhav.n wrote:<SNIP> On the Chinese side also it's paramilitary People's Armed Police that man's the border.

Slight correction. It is the Border Defense Regiment which mans the border. PAP is for internal duties. Although, lot of mothballed PLA formations simply shed their PLA uniform and took up that of PAP.

<SNIP>

What I fail to understand is how is this the ITBP's fault alone for allowing the incursion, the chinese seem to brazenly undertake similar incursions all along the disputed areas under exclusive Army control too right from Murgo, Pangong Tso, to Chamoli Dist.

I don't think you can fault the ITBP for not being able to deter the Chinese. That is the result of Indian policies on such matter. It is not as if they (or IA) can simply shoot at the PLA patrols to deter them. The rules of engagement do not allow this to happen. The issue raised by IA is about better border defense management. And hence, have asked for ITBP to be placed under their operational control.

member_23629 · Post by **member_23629** » 08 May 2013 17:04

ramana wrote:Tsarkar, I can see the case of the ITBP in Ladakh coming under Ind Army as it is patrolling a hostile border now. Similar to Assam Rifles which is a paramilitary organization under Ind Army chain of command.
Thanks for making it clear.

Babus in home ministry won't easily allow bringing ITBP under army. They protect their turf.

member_23629 · Post by **member_23629** » 08 May 2013 17:07

Rupak wrote:Rohit
More than one friend with direct experience has described at the ITBP as "unprofessional" and "cowardly".

My close relative was in ITBP till a few years ago. He bought some apartments from under-the-table gains and took early retirement.

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 09 May 2013 02:00

Rupak wrote:Rohit
More than one friend with direct experience has described at the ITBP as "unprofessional" and "cowardly".

Hi Rupak,

This is such a rare sighting! So I will take any excuse, including picking a fight, to get to talk to you

ITBP's perceived level of professionalism is no reason for disqualifying it from retaining primary ownership of guarding the border - I have heard similar things about BSF from Army wallahs for a long time now, and yet it was BSF border posts in Kargil that were not evacuated in winter and subsequently infiltrated on. It may be uncharitable of me, but I can't help feeling that all these insinuations about ITBP somehow being responsible for the recent incident are a turf building exercise by the Army. Especially since I am not explained how the Army would have managed anything differently or better, and I still remember a certain incident with an Arty unit that did not exactly come across as a paragon of professionalism.

In fact, I can think of a great counter example with the current situation. So we hear about a permanent bunker built by the Army being taken down. Now the Hindu Baniya in me thinks, what about putting up a fatela ITBP tent over there with a couple of slovenly and unprofessional ITBP types hanging on to a pair of binoculars? Would they be able to do 80% of what the best Army types do in similar situations, and come across as a lot less threatening to boot?

To me, this whole incident is actually quite revealing in how there are other Indian institutions besides the Army which are very competent with their jobs, and that this is a situation where getting the Army involved in a big way would have made the situation worse. But speaking more broadly about the attitudes expressed on BRF, I feel that a poorly resourced ITBP jawan has as much call on my respect as a soldier in the Army (or indeed a diplomat or bureaucrat). All of them have revealed sins, but inspite all of that India still prevails.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 09 May 2013 03:29

Heavy logistic movement gave away Indian army's positions in Chumar to China: sources

New Delhi, May 8: Movement of heavy logistics, including surveillance equipment, by the army may have given away the location of its positions in Chumar in Ladakh region to the Chinese troops which started raising protests on it.
These positions are located at key heights at a place called Zhipugi Arla in Chumar area and from there, the Army troops were able to look deep inside the Chinese erritory including some of its important road links, government sources said.

After the location of the position was compromised, the Chinese side started demanding that they be dismantled as they were built in violation of an understanding between the two sides against construction in disputed areas, they said.

The sources said following Chinese protest, the Indian side has only "taken-off" a "tin-shed" construction done in Chumar on April 18.

During the flag meetings between the two sides on the issue, the Chinese side was adamant that India dismantle its positions in Chumar before it could consider withdrawing from the Depsang Valley in Daulat Beg Oldi sector where they had pitched their tents since April 15.

The two sides held more than five flag meetings on the issue and agreed on Sunday evening to withdraw their troops to the pre-April 15 positions.

vic · Post by **vic** » 09 May 2013 09:59

It is well known in Para Military Circles that Chidambaram increased their budget so heavily that they are unable to spend it with both hands. Bosses have their hands in the till. Purchase of 9mm sub machine guns and assault rifles for around Rs. 600 crores is a prime example of useless purchases.

member_23047 · Post by **member_23047** » 09 May 2013 11:38

rohitvats wrote: It mans the border in HP-Tibet and Uttarakhand-Tibet sector as well.

They are deployed at Sikkim-Tibet border as well. There is a Sector HQ here at Gangtok headed by a DIG (Gangtok Sector).

Rupak · Post by **Rupak** » 09 May 2013 19:19

YI,
Great to see you on the board. Perhaps an offline discussion would be more suitable on the subject.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 09 May 2013 21:36

a) other than questions of professionalism ( abt which there can be a difference of opinion) , the sharing of command /reporting is not good for a area where there is no clear demarcation of territory.

b) I think a few years ago a indian partol had intruded into percieved chinese side... the patrol was rounded up, stripped of their weapons and sent back to indian territory? So we did have a precedent on how to handle a intruding patrol which decides to become a little more permanent.

c) the chinese statecraft is much superior to Indian and we should admit it. irrespective of how many MSC's u add, or how much artillery u bring in ... the various organs of the state have not learnt to work in tandem towards a common objective. this will be our weakest link more than anything else.

koti · Post by **koti** » 11 May 2013 01:39

Is this mentioned before??
Army to replace Maruti Gypsy

member_26535 · Post by **member_26535** » 11 May 2013 07:04

Replace Gypsy with Safari ? Should it not be a lighter vehicle .. say AXE or an equivalent ?. If 800Kg is the requirement as per this report, then how is safari a fit ( 1920 Kg Per Wiki ) and 2610 Kgs for scorpio.. ? Even the Axe looks to be in the 2500 Kgs range. Am I missing anything ?