Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Patrick Cusack · Post by **Patrick Cusack** » 20 Jun 2010 03:03

I am expecting a 3 front war - will not exclude Bangladesh.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 20 Jun 2010 03:51

brihaspati wrote:Why actually fight where they expect India to fight? Why the need to sweat over how to match up to supply capacity of the Paki+Chinese on Kargil and AP? Will it not be much easier to penetrate further south into the thin Paki neck entering the Valley etc. Turn the two front war into a two front war for them too. Attack from southern sea-board and recognize the Balochs as an independent nation as you go up north, just hold on Kargil. Keep ready attack formation just south of the Islamabad access and wait until the southern front comes up. Hold the lines in the east only. Explore raising hell in the Myanmar-Kunming sector.

We can turn the heat in balochistan provided we have special forces who have been trained in unconventional warfare(soldiers who can link up with indigenous forces,train them,equip them and guide them in operations deep behind enemy lines.These soldiers will need to know the local languages and dialects in order to deal with these gureillas for eg baloch dialects would be very handy .They should also be knowledgable as far as the culture of indigenous people is concerned).

These kind of units would be a force multiplier.Just imagine one squad of soldiers leading upto 1000 gureillas behind enemy lines.And if you can supply them with right kind of weaponry such as MANPADS, ATGMs and IEDs they could inflict huge amount of damage.Another advantage of such approach would be that you would have very good quality intelligence coming your way because you are working with so many local people.

But currently according to my knowledge India has no such units in its armed forces till now who can work with indigenous forces behind enemy lines.India's special forces are trained only for Direct action,Raids and reconnaisance roles only.By not undertaking the unconventional warfare role they are not realising their true potential.

Similar units can be raised against Chinese where operators are proficient in both tibetan and chinese dialects.In fact we already have SFF.It can be given an additional role of organising gureillas in Tibet in case of full scale hostilities instead of just carrying out raids and reconnaisance.

By the way India has some experience in organising indigenous people for gureilla movements in past although in these cases RAW was the lead agency instead of Indian military establishment.Also these were mostly ad hoc efforts and unconventional warfare lessons learned through these campaigns were never institutionalized.The first campaign that comes to mind is the formation,training and equipping of Mukti bahini prior to the 1971 war.I think it was tremendously effective in sapping the morale of paki army and also degraded their fighting capability.They even managed to liberate large parts of countryside in bangladesh.It was only after a very tough struggle that pakis managed to control the mukti bahini and by that time Indian army was ready to roll in.

Another example would be the training of LTTE in its initial phases.You can say anything about LTTE but their fighting capability was never in doubt.For almost 2 decades they were in control over large parts of Sri lankan territory.

Both Mukti bahini and LTTE were highly effective and took a tremendous toll of manpower and morale on their opponents.Pakistani army in the case of Mukti bahini.Sri lankan army and IPKF in the case of LTTE.

Hence it is high time that unconventional warfare training is imparted to atleast some special forces units.Language and cultural instruction for the targeted indigenous people should be made a part of the curriculum for these units if this is not the case now.

Vivs · Post by **Vivs** » 20 Jun 2010 06:23

Let's not forget the PLA Navy. With a base in Gwadar they can blockade oil supplies from the Gulf and even threaten our western coast. So while the IA will have to deal with I guess the Chengdu and Lanzhou military regions that border us, the navy too will have its hands full.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 20 Jun 2010 06:50

To put in perspective.
http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/jun/ ... -india.htm

A committee set up by the Bharatiya Janata Party [ Images ] to study the reported incursion by Chinese army into Arunachal Pradesh's Tawang district claimed that the Line of Actual Control (LAC) has come 50 km within India [ Images ] from the McMohan Line since the Sino-Indian war of 1962.

BJP national secretary Tapir Gao, a member of the team set up by party president Nitin Gadkari [ Images ] which recently visited most Sino-India border areas to study reported incursion by the Chinese army, said that the Chinese were using nomadic tribes to make inroads into India. Indian and Chinese nomads used to graze their yaks and cattle on common grazing grounds since time immemorial, he said, but now Indian nomads were not being allowed to do so by Indian border guards, Gao claimed.
The five-member fact finding committee headed by Bhagat Singh Koshyari, MP, has submitted a preliminary report to Gadkari during BJP national executive meeting in Patna last week. The final report will be submitted in September. Gao said while infrastructure on the other side of the border was being developed, that on the Indian side was taking time because of lack of clearance from forest and other departments. Gao also demanded a thorough probe before granting asylum to Guan Liang, a Chinese youth arrested in Arunachal for entering into India without valid documents last month.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Jun 2010 07:19

Chinese ships have 2 chokepoints and the Chinese know very well that India - using aircraft from the Indian mainland can choke off Chinese shipping at the strait of Hormuz or the straits of Malacca. So there is no cake walk for the Chinese. Only the US has the power to protect its shipping from India in these areas.

The Chinese can only threaten nuclear war if India chokes Chinese shipping off. That is where India needs to be ready.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 20 Jun 2010 07:27

^ Good observation!

That is why India's nuclear posture must include a Mahakala option! Any indication of nuclear threat would result in total destruction. This will ensure that others will do India's job w.r.t PRC.

PRC aggressive posture during India's "clean the toilet" program >> India strangling PRC shipping lines >> Any PRC nuclear moves >> The world is at peril.

Of course, India must offer some carrots to PRC if it shows good behavior during this "clean the toilet" program. Perhaps recognition of PRC claims on Taiwan

would do that.

Tibet, which is a PRC internal dispute between PRC and Dalailama, will remain open. India would remain neutral until this issue is resolved to the satisfaction of both parties.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 20 Jun 2010 07:50

Any scenario will have to take into account possibility of sabotage of road and rail network by Naxals. Consider, for example the road and rail bridges over the Teesta near Siliguri.

The Jawahar tunnel is another link that could be severed by driving in a truck-bomb and blowing it inside.

Also have to consider robustness of telecom infrastructure.

Enemy may well calculate that losing the Kashmir valley or Tawang will be below Indian nuclear threshold.

IMHO, what India needs is the capability to dominate the border areas with guided artillery, stealth drones, guided MBRLs, anti-radiation missiles, man-portable ATGMs, and behind-enemy-lines operations. Also need to be able to knock out enemy satellites on short notice.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 20 Jun 2010 08:11

shiv wrote: That is where India needs to be ready.

An area, where India is not ready yet?

I guess, you are referring more towards delivery vehicles (number and type) than payloads.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Jun 2010 08:54

ShauryaT wrote:
shiv wrote: That is where India needs to be ready.
An area, where India is not ready yet?

I guess, you are referring more towards delivery vehicles (number and type) than payloads.

No no. I meant that in the sense that people who discuss such issues in public need to understand what the armed forces and core decision makers in the GoI understand.

Puublic pressure and public stupidity and ignoance can turn the tide against sensible moves by the government. And the public actually can be phenomenally dense.

For example, time and time again I have heard people from the defence forces and senior defence advisory cadre level people say "Let them think we are weak" That is good for us. Yes it is good in many ways until the public gets so frenzied and upset by the leadership that they start affecting morale. Leadership can be forced to make bad decisions by a naive and innocent public who do not understand the ABCs of posturing and deception which play great role in how the adversary perceives you and affects his thinking.

As a rhetorical point who on this forum would call the current GoI the representatives of dharma? OK if they are adharmic, can they be expected to be dharmic and adhere to NFU which is a paper promise made by GoI? This would be an OT discussion but it indicates the problem with imagining that public statements are an accurate and honest indicator of of private intent.

Like the doctor/preacher/teacher who is a child molester the "Public posture" is "Oh I am such a respectable person". NFU itself is a posture. Anyone who accuses India of posturing will get a lecture on morality, dharma and India's high moral standing. But when push comes to shove - if India nukes someone first who is going ask India "What about that NFU declaration?" It will be too late.

Another example is covert action - say in Pakistan. Every time Pakis kill Pakis, India and RAW are blamed. Imagine, for arguments sake that RAW is really doing all these things. But the minute RAW brags about it the magic is lost. The covert capability is blown. So it must never be known. Not even for jingos to shout "rah rah rah RAW!". But as long as jingos do not get to shout "rah rah rah RAW!" some of them will howl that India is doing nothing and that we are too weak.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Jun 2010 12:25

during kargil was it proven later that the train crash that killed 300+ people near malda had 'links' to people inside a local rop seminary?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 20 Jun 2010 12:44

skher, gyle_s and manish sharma warned for using the term chinks. as has been repeatedly mentioned, it is not acceptable on BR>

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Jun 2010 12:44

Assuming that India does not start a two front war or a one front war that later escalates, I see three ways in which China and/or Pakistan can start a 2 front war with India.

I) The first possibility IMO is least likely - i.e one in which a 19th century Europe type pact between the Chicoms and the Paki army to coordinate an attack on India. Their needs are too different and their vulnerabilities are too different. India has shored up its defences to take advantage of their vulnerabilities. But even apart from that the Chinese cannot "lose" too much to india, and worse they may not be able to control it if Pakistan gets defeated in short shrift and India is left fighting a one front war with China alone. Pakistan is vulnerable to US pressure. China too has other pressures - but more on that later.

II) The second possibility is that Pakistan starts a war and China joins that war "opportunistically". Here again - China will join only if it can see clear advantages for itself that can be met more easily while Pakistan is engaged in war with India. Perhaps China will have to assess that India is struggling against Pakistan for them to sense such an opportunity, but they must also sense tangible gains for themselves. More on that below.

III) This may be the most likely manner in which a 2 front war can start. China starts a war with India and Pakistan joins, hoping to make the most of it, assuming that India will be tied down by China.

For this last possibility to occur there are two important pe-requisites. First, China must hope to gain something from such a war and overall, the losses and pressures it faces should not outweigh the risk of war.

Let me take these two aspects separately

a) Possible gains for China: At a simple level China may seek to punish India or divert the Chinese population from discontent and a crumbling Chinese system (as has been predicted by Bharat Karnad I think in "War with China by 2012).

b) Pressures on China: China is seen as a threat by Taiwan and Japan. China maintains huge force levels along its Eastern coast just for these adversaries. A full scale war with India might entail pulling out of at least some of these reserves even loss of much of them because India will not be a pushover. But more important than material losses is the signal that goes out to Japan and the US, and Russia - i.e that an increasingly wealthy (and internally troubled) China is willing to risk war with a southern neighbour where is faces some major logistics hurdles. That could be construed by China's adversaries as an irrational act so that in the long term all of Chinas other rivals are even more keen to hold China down

So war with India does not come free of other pressures and the Chinese, as long term thinkers will have to take that into account . What is worse is that India could give China a good drubbing and choke off Chinese oil imports eventually leading to China having to consider the use of nukes. Or do a humble downhill ski and declare that the aims have been met. But the diplomatic damage will have been done.

In other words, if China prepares for war with India it must be prepared to risk everything. China's rise, and the Chicom's power could be put at serious risk if there are just 10 radioactive holes in Beijing, Shanghai and Chengdu and a line of sunken naval ships strung across the Indian ocean.

It is another matter that India may have been nuked back to Ramrajya, but at the end of a nuclear war China will not be thinking of India's wounds, it will be busy nursing its own wounds and will have to think how to avoid these wounds even before it embarks on war with India.

If people are thinking how India can avoid nuclear war and escape this fate in a war that is started by China and Pakistan the only way is to try and deter both nations by powerful conventional forces and a survivable nuclear deterrent that should hopefully make them understand that they will be nuked if they get too uppity. If they still attack, the "deterrent" has failed. It has not deterred them. It will have to be used. We will be in a use it or lose it position.

We may be horrified by nuclear war. We may not like to talk about it. But that nuclear war can come on us and we must be ready to nuke back and hurt in ways that are horrifying and murderous. Of course there already exists a "deterrence" thread in which a lot of things hve already been said and discussed.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Jun 2010 16:24

Just another thought.

The possibility of war with Pakistan has been discussed so soooo thoroughly. The only missing link in talking of a two front war is what sort of war would occur with China if it was a border war, rather than a sea war.

First, look at a map and ask where India and China touch each other.

Then ask why there have been practically no invasions of China from India or India from China. Even the all conquering British went all the way around to Hong Kong to rule China. Were they just dumb twits?

There is a reason for all this. The most exciting thing to do is to act out a game where our MBRLs pound Chinese forces and our MKIs dominate (or get shot down). Opportunities to talk about such things already exist in two threads - one the long running "Possible Indian Military Scenarios" thread or even Sanku's story thread. The reason I have objected to that on here is that for realism one has to put in homework and ask not just why there may be war, but where the war can occur. War does not occur on the moon currently because there are no people there. The India China border is a bit like the moon. Inhospitable terrain and treacherous weather. So war can occur only in areas where humans can survive to fight.

All wars that I have heard of last longer than a tennis match. Still the supremely fit tennis match players are stopping every few minutes to get some fluids and sit down for a break. That is a human requirement - rest, food and fluids and an army that can get no rest, food and fluids cannot fight a war that lasts longer than a tennis match.

So apart from the requirement that the terrain should allow humans to survive and fight, the same humans need to have links to where they came from to get food and fluids. Apart from weapons. Exactly where in the India China border region is is feasible for the Chinese to do that most easily. And if the do that which are their chokepoints that can be cut by the simple blockading of a road or destruction of a few bridges. Where is it difficult for India to do that.

Look at a map. Mark the area on a map and think like a Chinese invader may think, and let that invading Chinese be deeply worried for his safety and not be imagining that "Indians are weak" so he takes abundant precautions. Then start talking about where and how an attack may occur. And given his constraints what can be his realistic goals? In the absence of little details like these we will be unable to discuss even an India China scenario. Plenty of written history is there about the Indian China war - so there is no dearth of material to inform oneself about such details. And tools like Google earth can make you at least an armchair expert. But please give me a break and do not start talking war scenarios where the parts that need actual research and information are ignored and left out.

This is why I was having such a big rant at the start of this thread. It is just as easy to say "Lets talk of war on the moon". Why do we not talk of war on the moon? Because we are not kids. We are brainy. We know there are no people on the moon." He he he! Don't try to fool me - I was not born yesterday."

But when it comes to an India China conflict we think we know a lot. Heck we only know what weapons each country has and nothing else. We don't know the geography, the deployment, the logistics chain, elevation, ambient temperatures in the day, night, when the weather is inclement, when the weather helps them, when it helps us, the geopolitical problems and we want to talk war? Gimme a break!

Please. I believe that a person who seriously wants to do more than say "Lets discuss war on the moon" needs to do the dirty work and say these are the realistic situations where such war could occur, this is the terrain, what do you people think? Not a simple "Lets talk war on the moon". Unfortunately this requires dedicated burning of the midnight oil. Nobody wants to do that. We want to talk of war on the moon and we depend on everyone else in the forum, who may be equally disinterested in doing any serious work to cook up things so we can use the only single bit of knowledge we have - the awareness of weapons likely to be used to "discuss a two front war" which "just occurs."

Please spare BRF of this. I have put in too much time on BRF to see this happen without protesting strongly. This is the only goddam forum where we can do a good job, but unless we force that requirement on everyone we won't get it.

sachin_b_k · Post by **sachin_b_k** » 20 Jun 2010 23:46

We need to honestly look at the current situation. We have LOST PoK, we have LOST Askai-Chin, we have lost large swathes of territories adjoining Tibet and NE and our large part of our county (around 50percent of the declared districts) suffer from insurgency by Maoists and NE (supported by Chinese) or Paksitani and Islamic separatists in Kashmir and muslim dominated or inhabaited regions of India (participated by Pakistan). Is that happened overnight? No! Looking at history it happened from even before we regained our Independence from the treachorous and cunning British in the form of Direct Action launched by Muslim League in 1940 which led to unprecended riots against Hindus and Sikhs. In 1947 Pakistan launched war against India to retake Kahsmir and SUCCEEDED in annexing PoK and Askai Chin, the latter which it sold to China. China saw the weakness in Indian leadership and rightly calculated that India will only whimper while it annexes important territories in Indian neighbourhood. It took full control of an independent Tibet, captured large territories near it and the NE. It gave support to the Naga insurgency which is still running strong. It supported the Marxist parties in India and the CPI officially went against the Indian state during the Indo China war and till today the Indian communists justifies Chinese action against India. Our defence minister is afraid of even openly admitting the danger posed by Chinese infrastructure in the North and Northeast, the string of pearls strategy of encircling India, the success of Chinese in acquiring ports in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka (Pakistan Gwadar is anyway 100% Chinese sponsored) for "joint" development, succeeding in getting Marxists in Nepal, re-invigorating the Marxists movement in Indian heartland (the Indian Home Ministry goes out of its way to hide Chinese involvement for fear of public backlash). Our army chiefs calls the Chinese border incursions as due to "misinterpretation" of lines of demarkation. The Chinese have successfully created a proxy nuclear launch pad in Pakistan, whose bankruptcy allows them full manipulation. Pakistan runs terror camps against India in broad daylight, under full gaze of our great American friends without any action except for some general statements in Indian media which are rubbished by their other statements of the great Paksitani sacrifices in the war on terror. We Indians have not been able to retake PoK, Askai Chin, Tibet, NE territories. We are in constant danger of loosing Kashmir, Arunachal; some or most of these territories are shown by various govts and google shows as disputed. These are the facts. So the two front war is not a figment of imagination. It is going on a subsurface level. Even in the Kargil intrusion, the Chinese were in the loop by Pakistanis (our intelligence had tapped the conversation) and there were reports that they had mobilised troops to keep India on backfoot in that sector. China is planning to provide Pakistan with two MORE nuclear reactors. So clearly it sees Pakistan as a great strategic tool against India. Obama has officially called on G-2 idea and China to settle South Asian disputes (read India Pakistan), which he diplomatically avoided answering by the Indian press. He has acknowledged the economic leverage Chinese have over US economy. Russia has officially shown more interest in speaking with a common voice with China then India. All these are facts. Pakistan economy is in shambles. Its deficit is three times its foreign reserves which are a paltry 16billion$ (one fifteeth of India). Yet it spends comparable levels to India in size of military, army, air force, submarines, advanced warning systems, missiles, nukes. Pakistan psychology is single track and is to humiliate India by annexing Kashmir first and then disintegrating it. Pakistani military training is second to none and its strategic planners are busy 24x7 in detecting chinks in Indian armour. Pakistani diplomatic skills are evident in its ept handling of 9/11 crisis and turning it into its advantage. It is playing a superpower and another rising power to its advantage. US is supporting Pakistan for its geopolitical interests and the Chinese out of sole strategic interest to keep India under check. THese are the facts. So when we analyse the issue of two front war we need to start from these facts. Witness the huge public protests which erupt in Srinigar and other valley hotspots over feeble issues. Does one remember the drowning of two local Kashmiri women which was successfully spun by separatists as rape and murder by Indian security forces and the protests turned violent and continued for weeks. These protests are highly significant as they give India a bad image in foreign press. A disputed Kashmir, human right violations abuses against India are backgrounds kept alive by Pakistani strategic planners at great expense. Why? For the sole purpose of annexing Kashmir by hook or by crook. Its not a question of if but only when they will launch another bold assault similar to Kargil. In Kargil, Pakistan seriously miscalculated foreign (American) reaction and did not take China into confidence (but only afterwards did Musharaf fly to China). The Pakistanis learn from their mistakes. THis time they have offered the carrot of Afghanistan as a strategic tit a tat with American silence on Kashmir adventure. The Chinese have been taken into confidence. Chinese have already made Sikkim and Arunachal as disputed territories and have made all the infrastructure easy for quick mobilisation. Our Indian leadership has responded sluggishly and meekly. The promised border infrastructure is progressing at snails pace and is no match for the Chinese. Our army cold war doctrine is only in infancy stage and its weaponary is more or less equal to that of Pakistanis. So the element of surprise and concentrated attack by Pakistan on Kashmir valley coupled by the separatists support and Chinese covert (NOT open only mobilisation NO attack) will help them make deep inroads in Kashmir valley. The Pakistanis will call this as a reaction to Indian border adventurism and only as an act of self defence. The Chinese will officially call India and Pakistan to settle the issue with dialogue. Unofficially they will warn India of punitive actions and loss of significant territory and face in its North East and Laddakh. The Americans will press us as usual to exercise restraint. We Indians anyway are the least to react with nuclear weapons (assuming they are actively deployed). Paksitan will be careful to keep the conflict local (the Paksitani cold start) and America will make it clear it wants neither the Pakistan nor India to exercise the nuclear option. Note that it will dare not invoke the Chinese (they have always been a level higher than the squibbling Sout Asian nations for the Americans and the world at large). Our leadership will as usual and along predicted lines promise stern action on the "intruders" and at the same time promise to exercise restraint in not escalating the conflict. So, again thousands of our non commissioned officers will be sent to the war zone without adequate backup, strategy or weapons. But this time the Indian army will have to spend a large force in North and northeast for preventing Chinese adventurism as well. The Air force will await green signal from our Cabinet meet on security for clearance to bomb the Pakistani intruders. But the matter has reached the United Nations and it has called for a ceasefire under American and Chinese pressure. The Russians have been bribed into silence by the Chinese. All this is within 72 hours, thats the time frame. We loose large parts of Kashmir valley. Cease fire is declared by UNSC and our great foresighted strategic gifted Congress leadership accepts it. Most of our armchair analysts will squirm about the above but sadly this analysis is the most near truth. Read it carefully, Pakistan have turned the cold war doctrine on us with ofcourse the blessings and guidance of our Chinese friends. China believes in the wooden termites who continously eat the wooden structure without the guard outisde knowing and then with a small blow the whole structure crumbles down. Are our armed forces not aware of it? They dread it and hence they brought out the issue of two front war but our myopic polical leadership has no time for it. They want to even involve then in tackling Maoists which is like getting more entangled in the internal quagmire leaving even more leverage to the Pakistani and Chinese strategists.

Bharath.Subramanyam · Post by **Bharath.Subramanyam** » 21 Jun 2010 03:39

Some ideas which have been going on my head for some months now. Correct me if I am wrong:

One of the strong points of Western neighbor is anti-aircraft defense and many Ghauris/Ghaznis they claim to have. All their Ghauris or Ghaznis will be kept in maximum of 20 or 30 places so that they can be launched with "big bum". Based on the huge sectarian problem, will they keep it in Karachi, Sind or Balochistan ? Due to anti-Punjabi population & possibility of revolts, they will avoid Karachi & Sind. As Balochistan is very huge, they may have few there.

They would not like to trust the Pakhtoons & non-listening Talibs, so the chances of being there is very remote. Most of their "big bum” should be in Punjab, POK & NA. Ghauri/Ghaznavi will be big is size and will be transported in a big Rail wagon or a big truck. Even the launcher will be the same huge size, isn’t it?

i. If we have good satellite sensing and keep a two or three satellites continuously focused on our neighbor, we can know in real-time basis where these 20 or 30 places are. There is a certain height in the atmosphere for a satellite from where it will always be moving with the earth at same rate, so it can be focused 24/7 on a certain region. Then, is it possible to take out the entire Ballistic & cruise missile launching capability of our western neighbor in a single swoop with our high precision Brahmos ?

ii. They would have expected this and would have done some other counter measures for it? What would be their ideas to avoid this?

iii. Even if we can't launch our high precision missiles at first go, I thought of an idea which might be workable. Gurus, correct me if I am wrong. We have a short range weapon which has pin point accuracy (I don't want to name it here). If some insurgents get these pin-point short range weapons and are very close to missile launchers, can they be taken out? Is this possible, or it is just pure fantasy? I am willing to be corrected. Of course the major issue would be take these weapons (which I think has a weight of almost a well built man) in to our neighbors territory and be near the launchers (don’t want to quantify the word ‘near’, publically).

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Jun 2010 07:57

sachin_b_k wrote: The Pakistanis will call this as a reaction to Indian border adventurism and only as an act of self defence. The Chinese will officially call India and Pakistan to settle the issue with dialogue. Unofficially they will warn India of punitive actions and loss of significant territory and face in its North East and Laddakh. The Americans will press us as usual to exercise restraint. We Indians anyway are the least to react with nuclear weapons (assuming they are actively deployed). Paksitan will be careful to keep the conflict local (the Paksitani cold start) and America will make it clear it wants neither the Pakistan nor India to exercise the nuclear option. Note that it will dare not invoke the Chinese (they have always been a level higher than the squibbling Sout Asian nations for the Americans and the world at large). Our leadership will as usual and along predicted lines promise stern action on the "intruders" and at the same time promise to exercise restraint in not escalating the conflict. So, again thousands of our non commissioned officers will be sent to the war zone without adequate backup, strategy or weapons. But this time the Indian army will have to spend a large force in North and northeast for preventing Chinese adventurism as well. The Air force will await green signal from our Cabinet meet on security for clearance to bomb the Pakistani intruders. But the matter has reached the United Nations and it has called for a ceasefire under American and Chinese pressure. The Russians have been bribed into silence by the Chinese. All this is within 72 hours, thats the time frame. We loose large parts of Kashmir valley. Cease fire is declared by UNSC and our great foresighted strategic gifted Congress leadership accepts it. Most of our armchair analysts will squirm about the above but sadly this analysis is the most near truth.

This is astrology. Not analysis. And isn't the conclusion very simple?

Pakistan and China attack
India unable to withstand pressure
India does not use nukes
India loses

Why do we need an entire thread for a statement that we have already lost? I did say so on page one but my post was deleted because there seems to have been an assumption that some serious analysis would appear from somewhere. I guess this is it.

What sort if response is expected for an astrological prediction? Reassurance that it will not happen that way? Or the performance of a Yagna to stop it from happening?

This unreadable paragraph deficient post is either a political rant about the Congress or it is a chip on the shoulder that someone is supposed to knock down - so he can then be accused of being a Congress supporter and not a patriot. Call me stupid but I see no analysis here that is fit to remain on this forum.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 21 Jun 2010 08:25

sachin_b_k: First, it will be of great help, if you could break your post into paragraphs. Also, it might help you to know the topology of the area called the Kashmir Valley and what does it take for an army to defend this area. A second suggestion for you is to balance your post with some positive aspects of what the Indian nation has accomplished. Sometimes, I wonder, where does all this negativity come from?

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 21 Jun 2010 08:30

sachin_b_k wrote:In 1947 Pakistan launched war against India to retake Kahsmir and SUCCEEDED in annexing PoK and Askai Chin, the latter which it sold to China.

Aksai Chin was annexed by the Chinese, not the Pakis, between 1949 and 1955.

Secondly, in 1947 it was the Pakistani invasion of J&K State, with infiltration in Jammu region starting in August 1947, and a full-fledged invasion of Kashmir region in October.

They were fighting against the tiny 8000-man J&K army, across a more than 500-mile undefended front, but even then these incompetent invaders failed in their objectives. Today we have a formidable defence infrastructure, with 14 Corps in Ladakh, 15 Corps in Kashmir, and 16 Corps in Jammu. Secondly, the terrain rules out "deep inroads" or quick gains, no matter if India initiates military operations or Pakistan tries any misadventure.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Jun 2010 08:32

Bharath.Subramanyam wrote: One of the strong points of Western neighbor is anti-aircraft defense and many Ghauris/Ghaznis they claim to have. All their Ghauris or Ghaznis will be kept in maximum of 20 or 30 places so that they can be launched with "big bum". Based on the huge sectarian problem, will they keep it in Karachi, Sind or Balochistan ? Due to anti-Punjabi population & possibility of revolts, they will avoid Karachi & Sind. As Balochistan is very huge, they may have few there.

<snip>

iii. Even if we can't launch our high precision missiles at first go, I thought of an idea which might be workable. Gurus, correct me if I am wrong. We have a short range weapon which has pin point accuracy (I don't want to name it here). If some insurgents get these pin-point short range weapons and are very close to missile launchers, can they be taken out? Is this possible, or it is just pure fantasy? I am willing to be corrected. Of course the major issue would be take these weapons (which I think has a weight of almost a well built man) in to our neighbors territory and be near the launchers (don’t want to quantify the word ‘near’, publically).

If the weapons are brought out they can be spotted and attacked. But it is certain that Pakistani weapons are stored in underground bunkers. The effects of nuclear weapons are now known well enough for everyone to understand that underground bunkers will survive everything but a direct hit.

For a nuclear weapons user this poses a dilemma. He does not know where the nukes are stored underground so he can never score a direct hit. The only way he can hope to do any underground damage is to use some very large multimegaton weapon. Even with such a multimegaton weapon he cannot be sure that the underground bunkers are taken out - but such a weapons will cause a lot of over ground damage and civilian deaths.

That means that first strike has failed to remove the other person's nukes and those nukes will be launched to devastate your cities. Either way "counter force" - the attempt to "take out" the other persons nukes has a good chance of failure and there will be massive civilian damage.

That is why a counter force doctrine may not be of any use. Aim to get enemy cities and civilians from the first nuke.

Ideally nuclear war must be avoided. But both Pakistan and China must know that in case of a combined attack, India will launch everything it has. NFU be damned. If you are going down, you really must take the other guy down with you.

Just like "Nuclear weapons are not meant to be used - even NFU is "not meant to be followed". Note that the Indian government has always taken the stand that nuclear weapons are not meant to be used. "we stand for uniform denuclearization" Why have nuclear weapons and delivery systems then? Why have a nuclear doctrine?

Obviously someone is telling a lie somewhere. Only Indians believe that lie. Nobody else - certainly not the Chinese, or Pakstanis believe that lie.

If the Chinese or Pakistanis believe that lie - they are playing Russian roulette. The idea of "deterrence" is to make the other party know that they are playing Russian roulette. Oh yes there are other ways of doing the same thing - but this is as valid a method as any.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 21 Jun 2010 10:50

shiv wrote:Just another thought.

The possibility of war with Pakistan has been discussed so soooo thoroughly. The only missing link in talking of a two front war is what sort of war would occur with China if it was a border war, rather than a sea war.

First, look at a map and ask where India and China touch each other.

Then ask why there have been practically no invasions of China from India or India from China. Even the all conquering British went all the way around to Hong Kong to rule China. Were they just dumb twits?

There is a reason for all this. The most exciting thing to do is to act out a game where our MBRLs pound Chinese forces and our MKIs dominate (or get shot down). Opportunities to talk about such things already exist in two threads - one the long running "Possible Indian Military Scenarios" thread or even Sanku's story thread. The reason I have objected to that on here is that for realism one has to put in homework and ask not just why there may be war, but where the war can occur. War does not occur on the moon currently because there are no people there. The India China border is a bit like the moon. Inhospitable terrain and treacherous weather. So war can occur only in areas where humans can survive to fight.

All wars that I have heard of last longer than a tennis match. Still the supremely fit tennis match players are stopping every few minutes to get some fluids and sit down for a break. That is a human requirement - rest, food and fluids and an army that can get no rest, food and fluids cannot fight a war that lasts longer than a tennis match.

So apart from the requirement that the terrain should allow humans to survive and fight, the same humans need to have links to where they came from to get food and fluids. Apart from weapons. Exactly where in the India China border region is is feasible for the Chinese to do that most easily. And if the do that which are their chokepoints that can be cut by the simple blockading of a road or destruction of a few bridges. Where is it difficult for India to do that.

Look at a map. Mark the area on a map and think like a Chinese invader may think, and let that invading Chinese be deeply worried for his safety and not be imagining that "Indians are weak" so he takes abundant precautions. Then start talking about where and how an attack may occur. And given his constraints what can be his realistic goals? In the absence of little details like these we will be unable to discuss even an India China scenario. Plenty of written history is there about the Indian China war - so there is no dearth of material to inform oneself about such details. And tools like Google earth can make you at least an armchair expert. But please give me a break and do not start talking war scenarios where the parts that need actual research and information are ignored and left out.

This is why I was having such a big rant at the start of this thread. It is just as easy to say "Lets talk of war on the moon". Why do we not talk of war on the moon? Because we are not kids. We are brainy. We know there are no people on the moon." He he he! Don't try to fool me - I was not born yesterday."

But when it comes to an India China conflict we think we know a lot. Heck we only know what weapons each country has and nothing else. We don't know the geography, the deployment, the logistics chain, elevation, ambient temperatures in the day, night, when the weather is inclement, when the weather helps them, when it helps us, the geopolitical problems and we want to talk war? Gimme a break!

Please. I believe that a person who seriously wants to do more than say "Lets discuss war on the moon" needs to do the dirty work and say these are the realistic situations where such war could occur, this is the terrain, what do you people think? Not a simple "Lets talk war on the moon". Unfortunately this requires dedicated burning of the midnight oil. Nobody wants to do that. We want to talk of war on the moon and we depend on everyone else in the forum, who may be equally disinterested in doing any serious work to cook up things so we can use the only single bit of knowledge we have - the awareness of weapons likely to be used to "discuss a two front war" which "just occurs."

Please spare BRF of this. I have put in too much time on BRF to see this happen without protesting strongly. This is the only goddam forum where we can do a good job, but unless we force that requirement on everyone we won't get it.

You are absolutely right Shiv.We are not working on the details.Most of the posts are devoid of any sort of detailed analysis.According to me the main purpose of this thread would be to provide solutions for dealing with the two front war.

However if we are unable to do a detailed analysis of the problem then we won't be able to give the solutions.

Guys we need to work on the force structure of our enemies,the terrain of the border areas where battle is likely,the war doctrines of our enemies if they exist etc.

If we cannot work on these and instead just go on ranting the whole purpose of this thread is being defeated.

sachin_b_k · Post by **sachin_b_k** » 21 Jun 2010 11:10

Shiv wrote : "Why do we need an entire thread for a statement that we have already lost?" Shiv has also been devoting quite a few of his traunts at my writing and intellect abilities, none of which I asked for his feeedback.

Darshan wrote: "According to me the main purpose of this thread would be to provide solutions for dealing with the two front war...If we cannot work on these and instead just go on ranting the whole purpose of this thread is being defeated."
[quote][/quote]
Some other gentlemen in this forum were interested in correcting when exactly we lost Askai Chin and whether it was Paksitan or China who wrested it away from us.

This is a typical myopic way we Indians deel with things. What was the intention of starting this thread? To raise the alarm bells on the precarious position we Indians are : Loosing Kashmir valley due to Pakistani cold start backed by Chinese blackmail.

It seems what some people here are saying is that fine it may be a problem but since we cannot solve it, lets not discuss it. So, we are going to do Bharat Rakshak by wishing away a problem which infact is eating away our very nation and one thought would be the core issue of this site. Not knowing a solution is no reason not to admit the problem. In fact, it should be highlighted thrown up with individuals who have more insight or more well connected with the concerned nation hierarchy. Trying to make fun of one other or picking a few things in a post which may not be 100% grammatically correct is easy. How do we handle conclusions of important issues like the one I highlighted? Making it run into pages serves little benefit to the nation. Propagating the message and synopsis on the main website headlines ofcourse after a proper feedback from the right individuals may raise the ALARM bells among at least a few more people than present. This may be a small step to being a Bharat Rakshak, rather than poking fun in the grammer while ignoring its content.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 21 Jun 2010 11:27

Sachin, I completely support this thread and I have stated earlier as well that this is a much needed thread.What I am saying is that posters should start doing some detailed analysis so that we can correctly identify the challenges that we face and give some solutions.

As far as my statement regarding ranting is concerned it is a general reference.Don't take it personally.I have never complained against your grammar.In fact I commend you for starting this thread.

sachin_b_k · Post by **sachin_b_k** » 21 Jun 2010 16:17

China Determined to Ensure India-Pakistan Nuclear Balance By B. Raman
http://southasiaanalysis.org/papers39/paper3879.html

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 21 Jun 2010 17:29

Here are few points, I feel are needed to be discussed:

1.) Indian power over sea lanes, especially in the arabian sea and Indian Ocean due to both the weaknesses of PN and difficulty of Chinese reach here.

2.) Presuming Political/bureaucratic decisions are taken fast. How quickly the armed forces can mobilise on borders under attack of cruise missiles. Role of Air defence.

3.) Stock of Weapons/ammo/fuel to fight such a two pronged war for one month.

4.) In the later stage when nukes start flying, how safe our bunkers are. Is it safer to make them under mountains? Role of Arihant.

5.) BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, WHAT HAS BEEN NEGLECTED ON BR IS THE SCENARIO OF AFTERMATH OF THIS NUKE WAR. ARE WE PREPARED TO GET UP AFTER BEING N-WOUNDED AND START ALL OVER AGAIN. DO WE HAVE ENOUGH TONNAGE TO MORTALLY WOUND/WIPE OUT SOME OF THE ENEMIES?

I ALWAYS FELT THAT THERE SHOULD EXIST A THREAD ON THE LINES OF "FIGHTING NUCLEAR WAR AND POST NUCLEAR WAR SCENARIO".

"DETERRENCE" THREAD WAS LAUNCHED IN THE LAST DAYS OF "POKHARAN2 FIZZLE THREAD", IN WHICH THERE WERE THREE GROUPS
1. SIZZLE GROUP
2. FIZZLE GROUP
3. NOT KNOWING GROUP

SO WHEN "DETERRENCE" THREAD STARTED IT FOCUSED ON HOW AMERICA-RUSSIA ETC. ARE REDUCING THEIR STOCKPILE. HOW THEY ARE DOWNSIZING THEIR WARHEADS TO 300-475 KT FROM MEGATONS. TRYING TO BRING CONCLUSION THAT EVEN VERY VERY FEW WARHEADS WITH VERY VERY VERY SMALL TONNAGE CAN DETER THE ENEMY AND ENOUGH.

QUITE A FEW TIMES DATA WAS BROUGHT THAT NO ONE CAN KILL OR WIPE OUT THE COUNTRY ENTIRELY OTHER THAN PERHAPS US & RUSSIA.

SINCE LACK OF HAVING "FIGHTING NUCLEAR WAR AND POST NUCLEAR WAR SCENARIO" THREAD I THINK WE CAN DISCUSS THE ROLE OF BIGGER SURVIVABLE NUMBER + TONNAGE OF WARHEADS DELIVERED TO THE ENEMY ALSO.

The simple point being if we can wipe out Pakistan and send China to Pashan Yug [Stone Age] or Kansya Yug Then even after being N-WOUNDED we will be able to survive and grow again. And in this:
a.) Safety of stockpile
b.) Ability of delivery vehicles
c.) Number of warheads
d.) Tonnage of warheads

should be discussed!

sachin_b_k · Post by **sachin_b_k** » 21 Jun 2010 18:46

Paksitan with aid of China has used the nuclear shield as a deterrence against massive conventional Indian retaliation.

The scenario at the heart of this thread is the Pakistani version of the much hyped cold start doctrine backed by Chinese threat (not overt action) to make large gains in Kashmir valley. Pakistan will like to wind this operation up after taking significant territories near LoC. The chances of a nuclear exchange are nil. Hence we should not confuse this or should one say complicate this with involving post nuclear scenarios. This is Pakistani cold start doctrine with Chinese blackmail.

In this they will be assisted by Chinese who will mobilise troops (army and air force) along the north and north east to lock Indian troops in defensive posture. Note the Chinese will not launch attacks but only maintain an agressive/threatening posture. Thats enough to make our army think twice before enlarging war with Pakistan on western front and make our ruling political leadership hesistate into using air force.

Pakistanis have practised this routine during the recently concluded exercise Azm-e-Nau and the even longer air force exercises. Though they called it to counter Indian cold start doctrine, observers felt that it went beyond merely countering Indian forces.

Chinese are trying to get a stranglehold on Indian cyber systems (by getting their telecom giants involved in laying indian infrastructure) and are engaging in cyber warfare. They even succeeded in delaying airforce runways modernisation by some flimsy affidavit in supreme court (Ajai Shukla brought this up in his broadsword blog).

MR B Raman today in his south asiaanalysis forum (referenced in my earlier post) has brought out that Chinese are continuously ensuring nuclear parity between India and Paksitan to blunt Indian two front doctrine, if any and to ensure the two front threat to India.

The Pakistani offensive will be short but intense. It will concentrate on capturing key territory along LoC. The separtists are already tuned to declare this aggression as liberation.

A bankrupt Pakistan but with excellent military equipment disciplined and capable army and air force has teamed up with the cunning Chinese with the sole focus to humiliate India.

The first step is to recognise the immediate and imminent danger of the Pakistani game plan. Then raise the alarm bells and propogate the issue to correct individuals/teams so that they "are forced" to generate the right responses. Why? Just like the 1962 China war, the Indian political leadership will not take any action till the media frenzy forces it to. The media was a bit late in 1962. Hope this time the story and outcome are different. Jai Hind.

You may read this in conjuction with my earlier detailed posts on the background.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 21 Jun 2010 19:05

My 2 paisa...

Any war with PRC would be war of attrition as there is no inherent hatred among these two great nations except to achieve short-term political gains. Even if PRC can repeat a 1962, it would hold India down utmost another 50 years. India can and will live to win another day. That is the nature of Indian civilization.

India must be prepared for the following:
- Air-war>>
* At least 3 layers of Air-Defense regiments from Indo-china borders to Indian heart-lands. This means ~3000+ Akash missiles >> Cost $1.5 to $2B including reserves.
* At least 3 layers of man-pad based Air-defense missiles. This can be called Indira Gandhi Grameena Rakshaka Rojgar Yojana and must employ 10,000 people.
* Two sets of AWACS coverage in addition to smaller heli-based EW coverage.
* At least 200 aircraft in proactive air-defense role.

- Army
* Missile regiments that saturate any offensive formations in Layer 1 - 500KM range. Layer 2 - 300KM range. 500 missiles each.
* MBRL regiments that can penetrate in multiple layers - 30-70 KM ranges.
* Air dropped field guns - India must work with Russia/others to develop a "S-64 Skycrane" type helicopters to position move these guns from place to place.
* Develop hardened logistic routes across Indo-China Borders. This is the most important aspect in any future Indo-PRC wars. India must invest heavily in air-borne mechanized divisions which can be moved from one place to another. I strongly recommend five air-machanized divisions consisting of ~300 birds (5x60 birds = 25 for troops + 10 field guns + 10 MBRLs + 5 air-defense role + 10 gunships) which can deploy a 1000 member force unit with field guns, MBRLs etc to any part of Indo-PRC border within 1 hr and every hour there after. This capability can be raised in 3-5 years with ~$5-7B cost.

- Navy
* Focus on choking PRC shipping lanes using submarines and Navy
* 150 strong air-wing
* 2 AWACS along with tactical EW units
* Akash based coastal air-defense system

In total I would put $15-20B tag on the war preparations with PRC.

That said, I strongly believe that PRC can be reasoned with proper vision, strategy, and a good mix of carrots and sticks...

On the other hand India must fight a smart war against Pakis. I would repeat what I have said earlier. Brahmos and Nirbhay should be mass produced and unleashed without remorse.

Strategy:
- Reserve 3-4 military satellites to monitor and identify all known/suspicious nuke-installations.

- Completely destroy ISI main and regional head quarters on the first day.

- Wiki Dada says there are 10 operating and 7 non operating Air Bases in Paki land - Throw 10-15 missiles in the first round and another 5 each every week as long as the war lasts on each of these air bases.

- Throw 5 missiles at each known military base and ordinance factor in the wave of the war. Throw 2-3 missiles every week there after.

- Completely destroy Karachi and Gwadar ports in the first round.

- Severe all road/raid/energy/communication links between POK/NA and Pawki land.

Resources & Costs:
This would mean ~500 missiles in the first round and ~100+ missiles every week. Of course all these missiles will carry conventional mithai. We are looking at ~$5B cost here (1000-1500 missiles x $1-4M a pop)

After the first wave, India must declare the 50KM width as DMZ and position its MBRL regiments. Again looking at wiki data this amounts to another $2-3B cost (1 unit = $0.5M).

Then reserve around 50-80 Su-30MKIs for additional mop job.

Air defense would be supplemented by ~1000-1500 akash missiles (not units/batteries) = $1B

Total costs (in addition to existing forces) = 5+3+1 = $9B

Reaction:
a) After the first wave Pakistan would launch at least 501 babur and other missiles at India and this would impact ~300-500KM stretch in India's western border. This would mean India has to deploy at least 1000-1500 Akash/Barak/ missiles in Air-defense role.

b) Then Pawkis do what they do best
i) Wake-up their sleeper cells in India. Deploy 100 Rapit Action Force units each containing 1000 fully armed and no-bars-hold complementing local police forces. There will be collateral damage

ii) Raise nuclear threat. Follow Sudhanshu's example. Swear on your mother that there will be no pakistan or its mothers/fathers on the face of earth even if a single nuke-weapon (weather it is real or dirty or medical type) is used against India/Indian-interests.

c) Pawki's 3.5 b*rd parents will come to their rescue. Just tell them that you are targeting Paki terror infrastructure and they are either with us or against us. And keep raining the missiles every week. Tell them that your minimum demands are that Pakis submit POK+NA to India and leave the occupied lands of Balochistan, Sindh, and NWFP/FATA regions.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Jun 2010 19:09

sachin_b_k wrote: raise the alarm bells and propogate the issue to correct individuals/teams so that they "are forced" to generate the right responses.

What you have written looks like this to me

Today:

India faces two front war
unable to respond
India loses

But according to you, you are saying

Tomorrow

India faces two front war
India propogates the right responses
India wins? (or not - you have not stated)

What are the "right responses" that need to be "propogated"? Any idea?

sachin_b_k · Post by **sachin_b_k** » 21 Jun 2010 19:27

Below are a few extracts from "Arms spending: India grows as west shrinks: Deloitte-CII report" by Ajai Shukla Business Standard, 17th Jun 10.

Although the title of the report sounds positive, the content highlights the fact that the present state of Indian defence is not modern. Here are a few key extracts.

Deloitte-CII point out that 70 per cent of this procurement, in value terms, is from foreign sources; Indian companies supply only 30 per cent, the bulk of that as components and sub-assemblies to state-owned companies.

Land systems
The report notes that India’s acquisition of land systems suffered a serious slowdown in 2009. Many of the postponed acquisitions relate to the Army’s $8-billion artillery modernisation programme (called the Field Artillery Rationalisation Plan, or FARP). This aims to induct between 2,700-3,600 guns over the next two decades at a cost of $4.77-6.48 billion.
Procurement has long been initiated for four kinds of guns: air-mobile ultralight howitzers for mountain divisions on theChina border, towed and wheeled 155mm guns for plains infantry and mountain divisions, self-propelled tracked and wheeled guns for mechanised strike formations, and mounted gun systems. These projects, however, have moved very slowly.
Besides upgraded artillery, the report also highlights the proposed acquisition and upgrades of tanks, UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) and 300 helicopters for Army Aviation. India’s obsolescent air defence systems also provide major opportunities to foreign vendors.

Aerospace
The report notes that India is struggling to indigenise aerospace production. Historically dependent upon Russia, the Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to diversify its vendor base for combat and transport aircraft, providing major opportunities for aerospace firms

So if we raise the alarm bells, the above modernisation and much more (not to mention the nuclear subs, aircraft carriers) needs to be carried out on a war footing.The bureaucratic red tapism is a very big hurdle. Public pressure will force the govt for quick albeit a bit expensive much needed modernisation in the key defence sectors. The domestic industry also needs to be boosted for mass production of technologically advanced products. For this the defence policies and private sector participation needs to be brought in tune. Again in this area there is lot of red tapism and vested interests.

So, if a layman like me can think of the way forwards, I am sure the technical competent Indian army airforce and navy personnel (who have to bow down to their political masters and the well connected greeds in their lot) will have a much better, much clearer way of "setting things in order". Any doubts on their capability? I dont think so. What we need to give them is a much more freer hand (free from lethargic bureaucracy, greedy politicians and the vested arm dealers) with much more power to make the right decisions with lightning quick implementation.

Time is a luxury we do not have.

Unless you want to dicuss "How we could have saved the Kashmir valley" on the BR forum in the future.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Jun 2010 19:37

I fail to see what alarms can we raise under this topic that we have not been raising for eons on other threads. Including passionate appeals (by me including) to have the capability of a FU stance w.r.t. Nuclear weapons which will send shivers down the spine.

Demonstrated, deployed ability.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Jun 2010 19:56

I am unable to see how a two front war will be fought by raising alarm bells. How will that defeat a Pakistan that is predicted to finish the war in 72 hours?

What will Pakistan do in 72 hours? If China is merely "threatening" and not attacking how is that different from today? Or yesterday?

I believe that a lot of alarm bells are being rung without being able to add any substance to teh discussion as to exactly where we are considered to be weak. I have seen rants about the congress party, the cold start doctrine and babus, but I am yet to see a single detail of what can happen for us to have this sudden two front war tat we will lose in 72 hours.

OK for the heck of it, let me be obtuse and set up a chip on the shoulder that needs to be knocked down. Lets see if we can get anywhere.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Jun 2010 20:00

Ok I have read Sachin BK's "analysis". I think he is crying wolf. No such thing can occur. We are not going to have any two front war. Pakistan is busy fighting the US's war and no reference anywhere exists to back up sachin bk's erroneous claim that he recent exercise in Pakistan was to counter Indian cold start. That is fiction. We are well prepared for any Chinese moves and any coordinated attack will need weeks of preparation witch will be picked up well in time.

Nothing new is happening. China is arming Pakistan only to hold India back knowing that those mad Pakpigs will fight India directly - a thing that China does not want to do. So where is the question of a two front war?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 21 Jun 2010 20:15

nukavarapu wrote:I wanted clarity from the Jingoes here. I personally feel that Chipanda will never come via Ladakh. Did it ever occur to anyone or is just me that we should take Bhutan, Burma and Bangladesh into equation as well? Chipanda will have very easy time forcing these three to comply. Though Bhutan is our ally, but Chipanda can dictate their terms to them, if the need arises. I personally feel that looking at the geography, Burma and Bangladesh will play a major role in Chicom's invasion.

What China is planning in the north & NE is somewhat similar to what we are planning to do to Pak in the western sector - manoeuvering warfare. It will be like multiple pressure points across the entire border as you said. We cant be complacent anymore of that fact that china will not come through this route or that.

sachin_b_k · Post by **sachin_b_k** » 21 Jun 2010 20:42

IDSA COMMENT
The message from mock battles
Ali Ahmed

May 7, 2010

The well-informed military watcher for Times of India, Rajat Pandit, titled his piece on Pakistan’s recently concluded Azm e Nau III military exercise as ‘Pak wargames to blunt India’s strategy’. This was only to be expected. Pakistan’s understandable pre-occupation over the last four years with counter insurgency on the western front required, in its perception, to be balanced by a professional demonstration against the traditional foe on the eastern front. The manoeuvres, touted as the largest since Ex Zarb e Momin over two decades ago, served the purpose of muscle-flexing directed at India.

The ‘Cold Start’ operational sequencing has received considerable attention. It involves early reaction by pivot corps offensive elements. The inroads made would be exploited by strike corps building up in their wake. Ex Azm e Nau has been designed to counter this. News reports have it that the exercise witnessed the build up of troops from an initial number of 20,000 to 40-50,000 later. This can be interpreted as Pakistan responding to initial Indian offensives with defending formations. Over time, reserves formations - committed in counter insurgency to the West in Baluchistan earlier and NWFP later – are to build up.

Article No.: 1549 Date: 27/04/2010
Exercise Azm-e-Nau-3: An Assessment

Dhruv Katoch
E-Mail-dhruvkatoch@hotmail.com
Maj Gen Dhruv C Katoch, SM, VSM (Retd) is Additional Director, CLAWS

On 10 April 2010, The Pakistan Army started one of its largest ever military exercises code named Azm-e-Nau-3 (New Resolve). It is the largest exercise since the Zarb-i-Momin war-games conducted in 1989 with an estimated 20,000 to 50,000 soldiers from all arms and services participating. Exercise High Mark 2010 which is concurrently being carried out by the Pakistan Air Force (PAF), is being fully integrated with the army field exercise which will continue till May 13. As per Pakistan’s ISPR (Inter Service Public Relations), “the ongoing exercise is a culmination of a long and deliberate process of war games, discussions and logistic evolution of ‘Concept of Warfare’ that is fully responsive to a wide menu of emerging threats”. The process commenced with Exercise Azm-e-Nau-2, conducted in February 2010 and aims to validate the concept of a new defensive doctrine for countering conventional threats. Latest acquisitions in the field of weapons and equipment, intelligence gathering, surveillance, reconnaissance and communication means are also being tried out and tested in Azm-e-Nau-3.
Answering questions from the press, Pakistan’s Director General of Military Training, Major General Muzammil Hussain and their Director General ISPR Major General Athar Abbas said the exercise was part of the continuous process of threat evaluation. As India’s offensive capability was Pakistan specific, having a credible deterrence was a prerequisite to reduce the threat of war. They added that the exercise is being carried out specifically as a response to a possible threat from India and is based on Indian capabilities and not intentions which could change overnight. They stressed that weakness invited aggression while credible capability to hit back deterred war.
The question that obviously begs an answer is ‘why now’? In addition to the troops deployed by the Pakistan Army in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and Baluchistan, close to 1,00,000 troops are currently engaged in fighting a sub-conventional conflict in South Waziristan, Orakzai and Khyber regions. The overall security situation in Pakistan’s two main provinces, Punjab and Sind is grave with incidents of terrorist violence being the norm rather than the exception. So, why the exercise at this time?
Major military exercises are generally held to check the state of preparedness of a force or validate war doctrines and operational strategies. Since Exercise ‘Zarb-i-Momin’ conducted two decades ago, there has been a radical shift in Indian war fighting doctrine which Pakistan has been trying to assess and find an answer to. Exercise Azm-e-Nau is evidently aimed at validating Pakistan’s response to the Indian Cold Start doctrine and was only to be expected. Naming the exercise ‘New Resolve’, is perhaps meant to signal to the Pakistan Army and to the people of Pakistan that the new leadership under Kayani will not kowtow to perceived Indian pressures to dismantle terrorist training camps in Pakistan. Their military leadership has expressed confidence that Pakistan has the requisite wherewithal to effectively counter a swift military campaign launched by India in the conventional domain.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 21 Jun 2010 20:45

>>Azm-e-Nau-3

This can be tackled.

sachin_b_k · Post by **sachin_b_k** » 21 Jun 2010 21:01

Thats the whole problem my friend. We civilians think only in one dimension. Having a threatening China on the north and north east will be a game changer. To counter this double game we need to be adequatley modernised and well equiped which (as pointed out in my previous posts and the existing factual background) we are not due to the strategic myopic political leadership.

Answer a simple question: Did BR predict Kargil? And why not? Because Kargil was an innovative scenario and although highlighted by a few in the lower down in the army hierarchy serving in Kargil, it was not thought of by the higher ups and hence ignored.

I think it is fair to say that BR can do a lot of service to the nation if it actually highlights this scenario by its headlines and putting up a proper article (I am sure there are more learned persons than me in this forum who once convinced can do justice to the presentation). For eg, Ajai Shukla can be convinced to bring it up with NDTV for debate with ex strategic experts of army. That will certainly create public pressure. There will sure be others who can be convinced to highlight the issue in media by their connections.

I have always steered clear of trying to make fun of others comments even though they may be outrightly insulting because by doing that we waste our own time. Whatever queries were thrown at my analysis, I think I have justified by providing reference information. They infact have helped me to further reinforce my analysis. However at the end of the day, a forum is can also be means to lead to a important conclusion and spreading the message to the intended audience.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Jun 2010 21:06

sachin_b_k wrote: Article No.: 1549 Date: 27/04/2010
Exercise Azm-e-Nau-3: An Assessment

Dhruv Katoch
E-Mail-dhruvkatoch@hotmail.com
Maj Gen Dhruv C Katoch, SM, VSM (Retd) is Additional Director, CLAWS

Yaake swamy? Ardha nija andare ardha sullu allave?

A half truth is a half lie.
Dhruv Katoch's article can be read here

http://www.claws.in/index.php?action=ma ... 50&u_id=82
Here is what was left out by sachinBK

There however appears to be an underlying element of uncertainty and concern on the part of Pakistan in terms of its military capability with respect to India and Exercise Azm-e-Nau would perhaps aim at coming up with certain viable options. Pakistan no longer has the means to pose an effective conventional threat to India. While it still retains the ability to continue its proxy war in Jammu & Kashmir, a major terrorist incident in India may well be the trigger to invite a swift and massive Indian response. Pakistan’s options thereafter despite its bravado will remain extremely limited.

Maj Gen Dhruv C Katoch, SM, VSM (Retd) is Additional Director, CLAWS

Sachin why do you want to bluff your way through? This is exactly the sort of Paki half lies we must not have.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Jun 2010 21:10

sachin_b_k wrote: I have always steered clear of trying to make fun of others comments even though they may be outrightly insulting because by doing that we waste our own time..

You can expect people on BR to catch you when you are bluffing saar. Clearly you are using selective Pakistani quotes from Gen Katoch's article to post your own version of the truth even as you continuously complain that you are wrongly being targeted. Poor innocent you? No?

sachin_b_k · Post by **sachin_b_k** » 21 Jun 2010 21:19

Pakistan conducted the exercise to counter Indian cold war start doctrine. Thats what the intention of the extract was from Maj Gen Dhruv (and also from Mr Ali Ahmed and an indirect reference to Mr Rajat Pandit). The rest article from which Mr Shiv is quoting is the analysis/opinion of Maj Gen Dhruv. The intention of the extract was to highlight the intend of Pakistan performing the Azm-e-Nau exercise. Even Maj Gen Dhruv has said, if one reads the article carefully, that the Pakistani exercise needs careful evaluation. (Note that this evaluatio is still pending.)

The Pakistani cold start doctrine with Chinese blackmail is my original idea. In fact mr Shiv is just reinforcing this statement of mine. So everytime Mr Shiv throws dirt at me, I am using it to reinforce my analysis. Anyone who has gone through the posts can see that I have tried to defend my hypothesis consistently. Well, I cannot pinch the Pakistani secret document which may be detailing out this hypothesis.

I think its more important for me to prevent Kashmir valley from falling into Pakistan hands rather than coming back to this BR forum after the loss of Kashmir valley and beating my chest and saying "Told you so!"

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Jun 2010 21:21

sachin_b_k wrote: I think its more important for me to prevent Kashmir valley from falling into Pakistan hands rather than coming back to this BR forum and beating my chest and saying "Told you so!"

I wish you luck saar. Never forget the motto "Satyameva jayate"

Truth will triumph. And please stick to it, wherever you go.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Jun 2010 21:27

nukavarapu wrote:
shiv wrote:We are well prepared for any Chinese moves and any coordinated attack will need weeks of preparation witch will be picked up well in time.
With the kind of infrastructure they have built, I don't think they need weeks. In fact they are already half prepared.

Ok that means they are half unprepared no? What more do they need to do? What sort of attack can occur? Where?

I am not saying this to mock you - but to ask if you can go beyond plain suspicion to fill in some details?

nukavarapu wrote:
shiv wrote:Nothing new is happening. China is arming Pakistan only to hold India back knowing that those mad Pakpigs will fight India directly - a thing that China does not want to do.
In fact I personally believe that Chipanda wants porkis to fight an open war with us. It will be an ideal situation for them. The third always gains in a battle between two.

Yes, and that client state is failing to do that job. In fact that is why Bharat Verma wrote this
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/nervo ... rt/488349/