Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12913
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby negi » 31 Oct 2010 08:50

India has never been ready for war leave alone two front war, if war of dossiers and chai pakora qualifies then of course we can even take on the mighty USA . Now I do not believe in spinning scenarios or even doing this bean counting as to how many fighters/tanks or men we can field against China or anyone, however what does serve as a data point is the way we have fought wars in the past, err.. sorry tried to not to fight wars in the past. This thread is a big joke for how can we even talk about fighting a two front war given the way we handled Kargil ? Of course usual suspects can come out with zillions of excuses for the way the fck up was handled and case would be closed but then won't the same flimsy excuses hold true for future ? So why worry have curry. :lol:

These thumb twiddlers don't do a squat when a jawan or two gets killed in unprovoked shelling in rajaouri and poonch, if wearing a uniform and being armed qualifies as readiness for war then even a kid who dresses up for fancy dress competition in kindergarten is ready for one.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby rohitvats » 31 Oct 2010 11:11

RamaY wrote:^

Rohitvats ji

Thanks for the information. I never claimed that I am knowledgible in military affairs. I am just asking questions. Please be patient with me.


No Sir, you're not asking questions - you're making uninformed comments and that is what gets my goat.

If IA wargamed a two-front war as early as 1959 and made appropriate recommendations, the fault completely lies on political leadership and state of economy. Lets give the benefit of doubt to the political leadership till say year 2000.


IA has always wargamed the 2-front scenario in every contigency - it is but obvious that they should do so. The pertinent point is this - what has been India's capability to meet a two front scenario and what objectives would it set for itself. The objectives would have been limited earlier - but with newer raisings and more potent force structure - the envelope of objectives would be that much greater.

As for the political leadership - it is not lost on anyone that we tend to be reactionary in nature. So, it took political leadership 25+years to sanction what was conceived in 1985-86. The requirement and solution has always existed.

AFAIK starting sometime in 1998, the NDA govt allocated about Rs40,000 crore towards capital expenditure for armed forces. How many items IA procured since then towards its preparedness? (This is not rhetorical question). In addition to that GOI has been allocating funds for various procurement programs.


Can you please tell me what does 40K Crores or USD 10 Billion (assuming 40:1 X-change rate) buy for the Services the size of Indian Armed Forces? And what was the state of the Armed Forces post the 'lost decade' of 90s? Why did COAS General Malik made the statement that we'll fight with whatever we have?

All the money received so far - and the amount given back to MOF - has been used to get in place the basic systems and get the stock upto warfighting level - which were missing. Remember the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Theory - needs, wants and desire? The forces are in the process of balancing the three here. Now that there are funds and political leadership is cognizant of the situation on the LAC - it has authorized the raising of newer formations.

Let me share another anecdote - as per Army Plan 2000, conceived in 1985, Indian Army was to reach very high levels of Mechanization - with something like 3 Armored, 7 Mechanized and 7 RAPID Divisions+10 Mountain Divisions. Had this plan seen the light of the day - Pakistan would have been sorted out in a quick 7-10 days war. The effort to give more teeth to Pivot Corps being attempted now as part of Cold Start - would have already in place.But where do we stand?

I agree that majority of delays are from GOI side. Are there any instances the armed forces delayed the procurement process for non-technical reasons?


I think there are enough - but is that why IA cannot take NA in a jiffy? No, that is not the case.

In all these scenarios, the feeling I get is that it is always the fault of political leadership or terrian. A million person strong army always needs $0'B equipment and atleast 5 year preparation time to do anything. I question this premise, causing the takleef.


It is the job of the Service Chiefs to tell the GOI about their opinion of the matter - Manekshaw did that in 1971 and ensured we did not end up with egg on our face. Another COAS made a bold plan to take NA in 1987 - the political leadership chickened out. IA lined up enough firepower to thrash PA in June 2002 - Political leadership again backed out.

As for the requirement of funds and time to prepare - well, unless you provide resources in timely manner, how do you think one is supposed to prepare and execute the task as per own objectives? Can IA launch assault on NA tomorrow if required -Yes, it can. But do we have resources - to take the task to its objective in two weeks - I think not. In one month - may be yes. Can GOI ensure one month time frame to the Services? If the answer is no, then what is required to compress the time frame? Resources - something like Mountain Strike Corps with integral air assault elements. Think of ability to land troops behind the enemy and not slog throug the mountains.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2235
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby abhik » 31 Oct 2010 11:22

on simple pooch, if the existing strike Corps(3 in no.) are being made into independent divisions(8 in no.) then why a new whole strike Corp instead of strike divisions?

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby rohitvats » 31 Oct 2010 11:23

abhik wrote:on simple pooch, if the existing strike Corps(3 in no.) are being made into independent divisions(8 in no.) then why a new whole strike Corp instead of strike divisions?


Sir, what is the basis of your assumption about Strike Corps being converted to 8 IBGs? (that is what you meant, right?).

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby ramdas » 31 Oct 2010 11:41

Rohitji,

What is the likely outcome of a two-front attack by Chn-pk say, next year ? I learn from posts by some here that Oct-Dec is the only feasible time for that...Is a repeat of 1962 likely in that case ? Some say the gap now is worse than in 1962...or will it drag into a long and bitter conflict ?

As for nuke deterrence, if enough A-III's are inducted, we shld be able to keep chn out of an active shooting war, given the right political leadership

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby rohitvats » 31 Oct 2010 11:51

ramdas wrote:Rohitji,

What is the likely outcome of a two-front attack by Chn-pk say, next year ? I learn from posts by some here that Oct-Dec is the only feasible time for that...Is a repeat of 1962 likely in that case ? Some say the gap now is worse than in 1962...or will it drag into a long and bitter conflict ?

As for nuke deterrence, if enough A-III's are inducted, we shld be able to keep chn out of an active shooting war, given the right political leadership


Sir, you ask a very deep question and to be honest, I don't have an answer.

For the scenario you paint to develop will require extraordinary developments and I don't forsee that happening.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby ramdas » 31 Oct 2010 13:57

Rohitji,

Chn-Pak have everything to gain by an attack. Chn puts down a potential competitor for the nxt 100 yrs...and pak no doubt takes any chance to atack India. Especially true of the gap is more than 1962. Maybe, they could force us into a surrnder where we promise not to make any nukes ? Like Japan, except with tsp/chn as masters ? This is possible if the gap is greater than 1962...we can then be forced into a development/human rights mode rather than a mode that pursues nukes/mil power...it will be a huge tragedy for our civilization...

1) What rational reason do you have to believe that this is extremely unlikely to happen ?

2) Regarding the gap : how true is this assertion (even by the likes of Lt.Gen. H.S. Panag) that the gap now is worse than 1962) ? How much of it is rhetoric ?

The only thing that can save us is the clear will that faced with a use vs lose condition for our nukes, we shall use them...even the puny deterrent we have now, would probably damage China's economic rise substantially. A-III and A-V seem to be the key..as they get deployed, the likelyhood of what I outline above recedes....There however, is no substitute for total militarization of our country if we truly have to guarantee our succesfully overcoming all possible challenges...

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

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby shiv » 31 Oct 2010 15:27

ramdas wrote:1) What rational reason do you have to believe that this is extremely unlikely to happen ?
<snip>
The only thing that can save us is the clear will that faced with a use vs lose condition for our nukes, we shall use them...even the puny deterrent we have now, would probably damage China's economic rise substantially.


You have answered your own question.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby ramdas » 31 Oct 2010 16:16

Shivji,

This is where political credibility and political will is a must......

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2235
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby abhik » 31 Oct 2010 18:16

rohitvats wrote:
abhik wrote:on simple pooch, if the existing strike Corps(3 in no.) are being made into independent divisions(8 in no.) then why a new whole strike Corp instead of strike divisions?


Sir, what is the basis of your assumption about Strike Corps being converted to 8 IBGs? (that is what you meant, right?).


Mostly noise from cold start ... like this INDIA’S NEW "COLD START" WAR DOCTRINE STRATEGICALLY REVIEWED
...Media, reports indicate that the new “Cold Start Strategy” visualizes the use of eight “integrated battle groups”...

Anyway I'm not really aware how much this has been implemented.
But my contention was if your are raising one corp(comprised of say 2 divisions and some more) worth of strike forces, then why not divide the two between two geographical areas i.e N.E and J&K, surely that would give more flexibility?

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby rohitvats » 31 Oct 2010 21:05

abhik wrote:
Mostly noise from cold start ... like this [url=http://www.southasiaanalysis.org//papers10/paper991.html]INDIA’S
NEW "COLD START" WAR DOCTRINE STRATEGICALLY REVIEWED[/url]


There is no clarity on the composition of IBG nor how they are going to materialize.

As for converting assets of Strike Corps into these IBGs - I think the understanding is that Strike Corps will remain and IBG will be held by Pivot Corps. These IBG will provide offensive capability short of deployment of Strike Corps.

But my contention was if your are raising one corp(comprised of say 2 divisions and some more) worth of strike forces, then why not divide the two between two geographical areas i.e N.E and J&K, surely that would give more flexibility?


The idea is to provide a 'punch', a 'fist'. By placing them under one Corps HQ, the same is achieved. These are seperate from holding Corps on LAC - which are also being beefed up with respective Mountain Divisions.

vivekmehta
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 18:19
Contact:

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby vivekmehta » 01 Nov 2010 14:32

can someone name a country other then US

which has dismembered a country (Pakistan), Added new territory ( Sikkim) and dispatched troops for foreign operations Sri Lanka , Maldives . in last 40 yrs.

if answer for this is INDIA . then why do we consider our self so weak. Elephant has started moving may be somemore years and we will definitely be considered in top military powers.

new doctrine on 2 front war already signals the sift in approach from passive defense to aggressive defense. we might not be 100% ready right now but there is a intent and approach to fight two front war .

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2935
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby Kanson » 01 Nov 2010 17:49

Some see India through the lens of 1971, others see India from the angle of 1962. Recently there is no spectacular shows to pride with. The constant infiltration, low level fights with intruders for infinity without any solution at sight and China's aggressive posture with shiny toys against not so well prepared status of IA with constant commentary of commanders sharing insights of non-matchable arms race with China gives a negative feeling, in general.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2935
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby Kanson » 01 Nov 2010 17:56

Question to everyone. If suppose we amassed a huge amount of Artillery say 2000(whatever number pleases you) pieces against Pak and another equal or more amount against China can change the nature of two front war? Can the Pak be subdued on the mere show of such Artillery pieces while taking China ? I'm asking such show of might will deter Pak from harbouring any such devious machinations against us while we are engaging China? In that case will this leads to releasing of more men from Western borders for N and NE?

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2935
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby Kanson » 01 Nov 2010 18:35

ramdas wrote:Dear Kanson,

Indeed deploying A-II in arunachal is a good signal on one hand. Two issues, however, exist. One inextricably links conventional to nuclear conflict when chn is involved (more so in a two frnt situation):

1. The nuke deterrent in the form of A-II deployments may be vulnerable to conv. attack, esp. in a sitn where our conventional inferiority is worse than in 1962. This factor is more pronounced in a two front situation. What if the nukes are in danger or being lost in conv. enemy action ? In other words, a use it or lose it situation ? Our doctrine must make clear that faced with such a situation, or faced with large territorial losses to a conventionally stronger adversary, we would use nukes irrespective of the ensuing repurcussions. This threat, if credibly conveyed, would go a long way in making the other side avoid pushing us into a corner, or trying todisarm us, etc.
Of course what you say is true. This is not unique to India alone. All N powers face this challenge. As i said, the N war business is more of a gamble than actually conducting war. That is the gamble India willing to take. While China was explicit in proclaiming any attack on her N weapon will be retaliated with N weapon, India's NFU policy is not such aggressive. The argument is that it creates enough space for "sorting out things" in the conventional realm than resorting to Nuclear war.

But, going by your argument, if the situation demands, and India is prepared to play that game, India can communicate such change in its N posture as you prescribed directly to China on one to one basis at appropriate time as Pak done to India, than declaring that to whole world by bringing out such policy change openly. By this the change is very specific to China and could be maintained more discreetly instead of raising the alarm. By this, i'm trying to point out, India can play the game in whichever way she wants and was not so heavily burdened by the declared NFU policy which is your point of contention.

2. A-II has had reliability issues in 2009. Of course, the May 17, 2010 test did restore some confidence. More testing is needed. After all, why are Prithvi type missiles tested nearly 50 times, Brahmos 20 times, while we are stingy with tests of the Agni series ?
Yes, more testing is needed and this problem stated is common for any missile. But the picture doesn't ends with Agni-II. We have China specific Agni-III and then Agni-V, Shourya and so on. These missile development and deployment acts as deterrent is my opinion.

3. A deterrent that is credible today need not stay so,unless constant efforts are on to improve it qualitatively and, in our case where a small arsenal is involved, quantitatively. that tsp is itself may end up having a larger arsenal means that we must go for a large quantitative upgrade as well. We have stressed too much on minimality of the deterrent. the stress should be on credibility. in general, the more paranoid the state is on these matters, the better.
Yes, Agreed. If you have noticed, our development was continuous except for the brief period during emergency. Right after testing the first device, we separated Tritium in late 70s. Tried to test FBF device in early 80s under IG. Started Thermo- Nuclear program and future gen N weapons program during mid 80s. To be precise I think, it is the year 1985. A paper presented in 80s that was linked in this forum shows that we are interested in bunker buster too. Weaponised the device from late 80s. Upgrade the weaponisation from one version to another throughout the 90s(WOP by Chengappa). If my memory is right, the book reported upto 3 generation of weaponised devices in the Indian arsenal during 90s. Gulping the CT, we generated more nuclear material for the bumb from 90s through 00s from civil reactors. And going by the "rumour" the "development" was noted and quoted still 2008, the year marked a decade from POK-2 test. So if you go by the yardstick, our development was continuous and with the available information there is no need to show concern on quality or quantity of the N arsenal. Of course, even if you believe in Dr. Santanam's assertion, as the research is continuous, you can expect that the noted problem if any could have got solved. Minimality and Credibility are acrobatics with words needed for sipping tea with foreigners while denying to share the exact figures of our N arsenal, in my opinion.

ramdas
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 21 Mar 2006 02:18

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby ramdas » 02 Nov 2010 13:32

Dear Kanson,

1. While the N-war business is indeed not about conducting war, it should not be viewed as a gamblling game/sport. It is about serious uncompromising preparation. Is that evident in our case, as of the next one year ? Explicitly, or implicitly, it must be made clear to chn/pak that faced with a use/lose situation with our nukes, we shall use. Deploying A-II (our only deterrent as of now) in a forward area without the political will to take the above mentioned stand is like the 1962 "forward policy" backed by zer strength. We know the consequences of Chacha Nehru's idiocy at that time.

2. As A-III, A-V get deployed, the deterrent gets more credible. This is very true. More so once the MIRV variants start coming out. I myself believe that if all goes as per schedule with no political delays, in 5 years, we should be immune to the two front scenario,conventional inferiority notwithstanding. But this is in the future (even if it is the not too distant future).

3. As of today, are A-III deployed ? From what I know, it is in production, ready for induction. Is there open source evidence that these are actually deployed ? For instance, going by what we saw with A-I, there shld be two more user trials before evidence pf deployment surfaces.

4. Same as 3, with Shourya. It seems to have gone underground after the 2008 tests. None in 2009-2010 as per open source.

Willy
BRFite
Posts: 283
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 01:58

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby Willy » 02 Nov 2010 15:05

ramdas wrote:Dear Kanson,

1. While the N-war business is indeed not about conducting war, it should not be viewed as a gamblling game/sport. It is about serious uncompromising preparation. Is that evident in our case, as of the next one year ? Explicitly, or implicitly, it must be made clear to chn/pak that faced with a use/lose situation with our nukes, we shall use. Deploying A-II (our only deterrent as of now) in a forward area without the political will to take the above mentioned stand is like the 1962 "forward policy" backed by zer strength. We know the consequences of Chacha Nehru's idiocy at that time.

2. As A-III, A-V get deployed, the deterrent gets more credible. This is very true. More so once the MIRV variants start coming out. I myself believe that if all goes as per schedule with no political delays, in 5 years, we should be immune to the two front scenario,conventional inferiority notwithstanding. But this is in the future (even if it is the not too distant future).

3. As of today, are A-III deployed ? From what I know, it is in production, ready for induction. Is there open source evidence that these are actually deployed ? For instance, going by what we saw with A-I, there shld be two more user trials before evidence pf deployment surfaces.

4. Same as 3, with Shourya. It seems to have gone underground after the 2008 tests. None in 2009-2010 as per open source.



The Shourya is most probably the Agni-V or a variant.

Willy
BRFite
Posts: 283
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 01:58

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby Willy » 02 Nov 2010 15:10

The period from now to about 2015 will be crucial. Its only around 2015 that we might see some major gaps in the armed forces will start to be bridged viz artillery,submarines,aircraft etc etc. China knows that. Some research scholar had pointed out sometime back that there might be a border war with China around 2012. Guess thats the time we will be most vulnerable what with dips in fighter sqns and all.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2935
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby Kanson » 02 Nov 2010 20:49

ramdas wrote:Dear Kanson,

1. While the N-war business is indeed not about conducting war, it should not be viewed as a gamblling game/sport. It is about serious uncompromising preparation. Is that evident in our case, as of the next one year ? Explicitly, or implicitly, it must be made clear to chn/pak that faced with a use/lose situation with our nukes, we shall use. Deploying A-II (our only deterrent as of now) in a forward area without the political will to take the above mentioned stand is like the 1962 "forward policy" backed by zer strength. We know the consequences of Chacha Nehru's idiocy at that time.
I just shared my views. Professionals at SFC and higher command knows more about the weakness and strength and being professionals we can take it that they fully know to play the game well.
2. As A-III, A-V get deployed, the deterrent gets more credible. This is very true. More so once the MIRV variants start coming out. I myself believe that if all goes as per schedule with no political delays, in 5 years, we should be immune to the two front scenario,conventional inferiority notwithstanding. But this is in the future (even if it is the not too distant future).

3. As of today, are A-III deployed ? From what I know, it is in production, ready for induction. Is there open source evidence that these are actually deployed ? For instance, going by what we saw with A-I, there shld be two more user trials before evidence pf deployment surfaces.

4. Same as 3, with Shourya. It seems to have gone underground after the 2008 tests. None in 2009-2010 as per open source.
A-iii is ready for induction. That mean it has completed the development. So it is ready for deployment if the situation demands. Any improvements if any that is sought out throu' user trial can be added later. Shourya test trials was not even reported so it could follow the same route.

Prabu
BRFite
Posts: 396
Joined: 22 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: In the middle of a Desert

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby Prabu » 13 Dec 2011 15:52


jimmy_moh
BRFite
Posts: 179
Joined: 14 May 2009 12:33
Location: LOC

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby jimmy_moh » 13 Dec 2011 16:05

sir is it anything regards to 2 front war

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50624
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby ramana » 15 Dec 2011 22:37

M.L.Sali India-China Border Dispute

Published in 1998

Can someone pdf this book?

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby manum » 15 Dec 2011 23:16

ramana wrote:M.L.Sali India-China Border Dispute

Published in 1998

Can someone pdf this book?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88RtMNLpX6I

try this...it works

abhinavjo
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 99
Joined: 11 Nov 2010 20:09
Contact:

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby abhinavjo » 16 Dec 2011 01:39

manum wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88RtMNLpX6I

try this...it works


Too time consuming :twisted: , have to leaf through every damn page yourself and press download. Any quicker way available?

manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby manum » 16 Dec 2011 01:53

There are many google books down loaders, you choose what suits you...to get a book free of cost, either you go to Gigapedia.org, or you download it from google books the way I suggested...

Time consuming! try buying the book...

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9275
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby Yagnasri » 16 Dec 2011 05:19

RamaY wrote:
tejas wrote:Once you take POK what do you do with all the ROP population who live on (infest) the land ?

Rhetorical question ...

India has 2nd largest muslim population.


actual locals are of course Indian Citizens and non locals now being settled there are to kicked out to Pakiland.

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15946
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby SwamyG » 24 Jan 2012 08:34

http://the-diplomat.com/2012/01/17/indi ... ed-threat/

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh may have told the country’s parliament last month that he doesn’t expect an attack by China, but India’s military is taking no chances.

The world’s second-largest army, which celebrated its 64th Army Day on January 15, is on the cusp of implementing a major transformation in its organizational structure and war strategies to meet a possible combined threat from China and its ally Pakistan.

The change follows more than half a decade of annual exercises involving one of India’s three strike corps and a desert corps, which have engaged in operations to fine-tune a strategy that would enable India to take Pakistan by surprise.

Under this concept, the defensive corps close to the border with Pakistan have been re-designated “pivot” corps, and have been handed enhanced offensive elements under integrated battle groups (IBG) that consist of division-sized forces comprising armor, artillery and aviation assets designed to swiftly hit Pakistan before the strike corps, located deeper inside India, would be able to mobilize.

This is supposed to offer India the so-called “cold start” option, under which the IBGs would swing into action in less than 48 hours.

Speaking to me for Indian broadcaster NDTV last week, Indian Army Chief Gen. V.K. Singh explained the concept, although he refrained from actually referring to it as “cold start.”

“Our aim was to make the army more agile, more lethal, more responsive, and networked army that is able to meet with the future threats,” he said. “To that extent, certain steps were laid down. One of the things we looked at was the restructuring of our organizations into groupings that will take place in battle. So, we have validated these. Certain changes have come about because of our validation in test bedding. These are coming into effect.”

The transformation study, carried out under Singh while he was commanding the Eastern Army as part of a previous assignment, started validating the concepts from 2010. As the Times of India noted, Exercise Vijayee Bhava (Be Victorious), for instance, practiced blitzkrieg-style operations to hit the enemy hard at short-notice. According to the paper, it essentially revolved around the armor-intensive 2 Corps.

However, the two-month-long Exercise Sudarshan Shakti, conducted in November and December of last year, not only took the concept further, but added several new dimensions to India’s war-fighting theories. For the first time, the Army successfully used its satellites and UAVs to provide a real-time picture and information of the war zone to battlefield commanders.

In addition, real-time links between sensor and shooter were tested, which enabled commanders to make decisions instantly, even as information was being shared among platforms and personnel.

Led and implemented by the Indian Army’s biggest and most lethal formation, the 21 Corps, the exercise witnessed the participation of over 60,000 troops and 300 tanks and brought together all elements – including air power – on one single platform. The air power on display reportedly included combat jets like the Su-30 MKI, Jaguars, MiG-27 and MiG-21, AWACS and helicopters.


But if “Sudarshan Shakti” was meant to authenticate India’s new war fighting strategy against Pakistan, a series of changes in the Northern and Eastern Commands of the Indian Army have quietly taken place over the past four years aimed at reorganizing India’s preparedness against China. As mentioned earlier, two new mountain divisions raised for deployment on the China frontier are now ready, which has added teeth to the Eastern Command and allowed the Army to reorganize a Reserve Corps into a full-fledged formation against China.

The reality is that although India has three “strike” or offensive corps aimed at Pakistan, it still lacks a dedicated offensive formation against China, regarded by the military as the bigger threat. A projected plan to raise a Mountain Strike Corps (since the terrain along the Chinese frontier is super high altitude) is currently pending with India’s Finance Ministry since it involves massive investment, to the tune of over $10 billion dollars, over the next five years. The Defense Ministry as well as the Army HQ is, however, hoping to kick-start the process of raising this formation sooner rather than later.

“At the moment we’re a threat-based organization. We’re moving towards a threat-cum-capability based one. And as the years go by, we will become a totally capability-based force,” Singh told me. “It has various implications like what kind of equipping norms you have, what kind of training that you do, what kind of resources you have to rapidly deploy to various places. So these are things that are being put into effect now, and by the time we see the result, it will take some time. It’s not that overnight we can change something.”

As I mentioned in my analysis following Army Day last year, the latest shift is aimed at strengthening the Army’s capabilities to fight what one general has called a war on “two and a half fronts” – a reference to possible simultaneous confrontation with Pakistan and China in addition to being deployed in a counter-insurgency situation internally :evil: .

So far, the four wars between India and Pakistan and one between India and China have been standalone conflicts, but Indian strategic thinkers say a future scenario under which close allies China and Pakistan launch a joint offensive against India is a distinct possibility. The Indian Army therefore wants to be ready for such an eventuality. And the way forward, the Army has concluded, is to become a fleet-footed force capable of quick mobilization and deployment.

According to an Indian military handout, the transformation “envisages seamless integration of available forces without the constraints of inflexible ‘commands.’"

“So far, each command and formation operated well within its prescribed boundaries and deployed the combat as well as support services only within its own jurisdiction,” the handout noted. “The transformation, however, seeks to break down these artificial boundaries to minimize losses and increase optimal utilization of resources. So in the years to come, the Indian Army will move from a 'command-based' deployment to a 'theater command' format where the 'front' or the spearhead will be seamlessly integrated with resources in the "depth" or the rear.”

Most senior military commanders agree that such massive exercises, which put to test both men and machine, help hone the skills of various frontline formations. Inter-services synergy based on advanced technology has been on the rise in the past five years and is therefore a major gain for the Indian military since future wars, whenever they take place, will be swift, short and fought under a technology-intensive umbrella.

Nitin Gokhale is Defence & Strategic Affairs Editor with Indian broadcaster, NDTV 24×7.

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1436
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby Christopher Sidor » 28 Jan 2012 19:01

^^^^
Why is the IA being used in counter-insurgency, when we have paramilitary forces like CISF, CRPF, etc ? Another aspect why have we not had a army exercise in the east, north-east and northern sectors comparable to, Sudarshan Shakti and this time aimed at PLA/PLAAF capabilities ?

dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1057
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby dinesha » 10 Jul 2018 16:50

The sobering arithmetic of a two-front war
https://www.orfonline.org/research/the- ... front-war/
Notwithstanding the drawbacks that come with a bean-count, the analysis presented in this report disabuses the claim that the Indian military is ready to fight a two-front war, chest-thumping from some politically-motivated actors aside. It has become a trite observation by now that India, with its threat environment of two potentially collusive nuclear revisionists, ought to be spending more than 1.62 percent of its GDP on the military. If military spending continues to be what the trend has been in the past few years, the Indian government may have to contemplate dramatic measures to bolster national security in the face of a two-front threat.

One such measure could be the introduction of cheaper yet potent alternatives such as tactical nuclear weapons into the conventional deterrence mix (a subject whose detailed discussion is beyond the scope of the current report). Purely looking at defence-economics aspects, this is desirable in terms of cost effectiveness (low marginal cost of production). However, this is not to say that such a step would be without significant political and military-planning costs. On the political end, for TNWs to be effective, command-and-control would have to be devolved to corps commanders, and the no-first-use posture would have to be abrogated. On the military planning end, conventional and nuclear war fighting capabilities have to be integrated in the joint doctrine of the Indian armed forces, and the military has to be trained and equipped to operate in a post-yield event environment.

Whatever be the remedial measures to be taken in the future, what is more worrying is India’s loud proclamations about having arrived as a global power when – as it became clear through the preceding analysis – it has hardly been matched by increases in its hard-power. Deng Xiaoping once exhorted his nation: “Hide your strength, bide your time.” India’s strength continues to be hollow while biding time has become an exercise in futility.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Are We Ready for a Two-front War ?

Postby nachiket » 10 Jul 2018 23:34

I'm locking this old thread. Please use this newer one instead: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7624&start=200


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests