INDIA’S NEW "COLD START" WAR DOCTRINE STRATEGICALLY REVIEWED

**Ray** · 22 Jan 05, 07:10

Colonel,

1. “That is something I've never understood, Sir. India is a power of its own. China stood alone and condemned by the world over Tibet. The Croats got away with mass murder in Krajina that they now claim as their own. I would argue, Sir, that India do not claim land in perpetuity not because of lack of Indian power or support but because of Indian morality”

You raise an interesting issue.
Unlike what anyone may say, I still feel that while we have made some great strides in all fields, we are still far from being any power that can **** its snoot at the world.

True, China couldn’t care less about what others feel about Tibet. In a Communist regime that controls the population, there can be no open dissent. In a democracy, there is not only dissent but also the opposition is always trying to score brownie points and even trying to bring the govt down. It is common in India.

In China, the people could do with little. In a democracy where people can go out into the world, they see progress and when they return they show photos and give anecdotes. This raises hopes in all and they demand the same to be done to them and thus there is political and social unrest, which does nothing good for progress. In China, the common man could not go out into the world; only the political hacks, who even if they saw the good things in the outside world, would not bother since any ideas of others doing well could cause dissent and they (the party hacks) would lose everything. In a communist country where the media is controlled, nothing but the praise of the govt is printed and it showed how great the country is. Therefore the people were contended. If the people are contended and all the basic needs are met (even if luxuries are not), that country need not worry about what other country thinks of them.
That is the difference between India and China.
Croatia and others could do what they liked. It was not because they could do what they liked. It was because the US allowed. It was in the US interests. The Defence Policy Guidance clearly lay out that it was in US interest to squeeze Russia so that it does not challenge the US supremacy as the ONLY global superpower. Poland, Bosnia, Croatia were the ‘starters’. I always wondered why the US supported the Moslems against the Christians. When I read the DPG, I got the answer. The US interest was more important that minor issues as religion. Then fell the other East Europeans into the US net. The latest prizes are Georgia and Ukraine. Therefore, it doesn’t surprise me that Cheney has said that US sights have now been aimed at Belarus!

India will be allowed to go her way against Pakistan when it serves the US interests. Right now Pakistan is more important to ensure Iran totters and Afghanistan is totally in the bag (the Caspian pipeline is to go through Afghanistan to the Gwadar port – Testimony of Unocal head in the US Congress Commission on Oil). Have you noticed that Osama who was supposed to be ‘smoked out’ is no longer of interest? Osama has served his purpose.
India’s hobbyhorse of standing on a high morality pedestal bores me.

2. “I don't know about India wanting to take Pakistan but there are strong arguements for India to destroy Pakistan.”

Indeed there are. But who wants a near failed state to add to our problems? Another issue is that India does not want to increase the tote of Moslem in its population piggybank.
Further, from the little that I know of the Moslem psyche, it is a psyche that is self destruct. The Sunni Shia hatred is more steep than the Hindu Moslem disconnect. This inward hatred of Islam will ensure that Pakistan breaks up on its own with India’s high morality platform unscathed. Wait a little. The US will do so once Pakistan serves the US purpose. The War on Terror is a War on Islam. The DPG states that no nation should be in a position to challenge the US. The only people who can challenge the US is Islam as a untied entity or ummah. The have manpower, they are well versed in the tactics of a terrorist, they are buying up all sophisticated arms and technology (Saudi), they have the money, they have invested a lot of it in the US and European economy and they are a great lot who know the art of deception. It may surprise you that many of the tactics used in the army is written in the Quaran or its interpretations. Are you aware that when you go to say the prayers on Id, you do not return by the same path by which you had gone? Isn’t it the same diktat for patrolling? Route out should not be the same as Route in!
Therefore, Islam is the target of the US. Pakistan will self destruct because of inherent anomalies in the interpretation of Islam amongst them.

3. “Sir, I would argue that India takes far more hits than it delievers. I know of no other powers that would tolerate Kragil and an attack on Parliment.”

Only a nation that has patience and resilience can take more hits than that is necessary. The fallout of the blasted morality high horse. We were mobiulised and no matter what one may say, the US told India to take it easy and look busy since the US required Pakistan in its long-term goal of it War against Islam.

4. “I would counter, Sir, aside from the threat of tossing nukes, who would care?”

You are welcome. But Might is right in today’s world.

5. “Sir, India is being accused of American style attrocities. Being nice is no protection from rumours.”

Why? Have we used the airforce or tanks? Have we razed down Srinagar or Baramullah as the US has done to Fellujah? Personally, I have no time for rumours spread by people of the ilk as our very own Aryan.

Imagine, what can you do with people like Aryan who believe that the DNA test is not worth holding a candle for vis a vis the Quaranic injunction which states “ four Muslim adult male witnesses, about whom the Court is satisfied, having regard to the requirements of tazkiyah al-shuhood, that they are truthful persons and abstain from major sins (kabair), give evidence as eye-wi tnesses of the act of penetration necessary to the offence” ((Chapter 1 Clause 8 B, Ordinance No. VII of 1979)"

Science has no value. Religion is supreme. Ancient customs are paramount because God says so! What is the answer for such obscurantism? And imagine that the person is training to be an anthropologist or some such science! I am sure he would have done better as a illiterate Mullah because his brains are only tuned to illiterate and obscurantists modes.

Fortunately, such religious bilnkered zealots and religious Johnny come latelys are mainly amongst the poorer class. There are many fine Moslems who while not shunning the injunctions of Islam are trying to bring modernity into Islam.

**Blademaster** · 22 Jan 05, 08:43

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

1962 Sino-Indian War and what it cost India in political clout.

A fleet of bombers equilavent to B-52s and an arsenal of cruise missiles and Daisy Cutters and MOABs would do the trick for less risk and money and accomplish more than Cold Start forces could.

Creating Cold Start forces would require a lot of money and reorganisation for little value over long term. I say get a fleet of bombers and retain the current IA structure the way it is b/c by the time the bombers finish or fail to finish, the current IA forces would be up to task and ready to take on the Pakistani forces.

Do you see what I'm trying to say?

**Officer of Engineers** · 22 Jan 05, 13:10

Originally Posted by Blademaster

A fleet of bombers equilavent to B-52s and an arsenal of cruise missiles and Daisy Cutters and MOABs would do the trick for less risk and money and accomplish more than Cold Start forces could.

No, it wouldn't. An entire wing of B52s could not do what 1 brigade could do. Force the enemy to stand and fight.

**Officer of Engineers** · 22 Jan 05, 15:35

Sir,

My thanks for your reply. Always enjoy reading a thought out response.

Originally Posted by Ray

Colonel,

You raise an interesting issue.
Unlike what anyone may say, I still feel that while we have made some great strides in all fields, we are still far from being any power that can **** its snoot at the world.

Sir, but India did **** its snoot to the world. The nuke tests.

Originally Posted by Ray

True, China couldn’t care less about what others feel about Tibet. In a Communist regime that controls the population, there can be no open dissent. In a democracy, there is not only dissent but also the opposition is always trying to score brownie points and even trying to bring the govt down. It is common in India.

In China, the people could do with little. In a democracy where people can go out into the world, they see progress and when they return they show photos and give anecdotes. This raises hopes in all and they demand the same to be done to them and thus there is political and social unrest, which does nothing good for progress. In China, the common man could not go out into the world; only the political hacks, who even if they saw the good things in the outside world, would not bother since any ideas of others doing well could cause dissent and they (the party hacks) would lose everything. In a communist country where the media is controlled, nothing but the praise of the govt is printed and it showed how great the country is. Therefore the people were contended. If the people are contended and all the basic needs are met (even if luxuries are not), that country need not worry about what other country thinks of them.
That is the difference between India and China.

Not anymore, Sir, this current Chinese generation knows what they have as compare to their parents' generation. Just looking at the difference between the coastal cities and the Chinese interior, they've been exposed, Sir. They know what they want.

I would defer to your expertise about the Indian populace.

Originally Posted by Ray

Croatia and others could do what they liked. It was not because they could do what they liked. It was because the US allowed. It was in the US interests. The Defence Policy Guidance clearly lay out that it was in US interest to squeeze Russia so that it does not challenge the US supremacy as the ONLY global superpower. Poland, Bosnia, Croatia were the ‘starters’. I always wondered why the US supported the Moslems against the Christians. When I read the DPG, I got the answer. The US interest was more important that minor issues as religion. Then fell the other East Europeans into the US net. The latest prizes are Georgia and Ukraine. Therefore, it doesn’t surprise me that Cheney has said that US sights have now been aimed at Belarus!

The US is good ... but not that good. The US screwed up in Kosovo and allowed the Russians a big hand. Bosnia and Croatia were German creations, not American, in order to weaken a Russian proxy, a Greater Serbia, in favour of a German proxy, a Greater Croatia.

Originally Posted by Ray

India will be allowed to go her way against Pakistan when it serves the US interests. Right now Pakistan is more important to ensure Iran totters and Afghanistan is totally in the bag (the Caspian pipeline is to go through Afghanistan to the Gwadar port – Testimony of Unocal head in the US Congress Commission on Oil). Have you noticed that Osama who was supposed to be ‘smoked out’ is no longer of interest? Osama has served his purpose.
India’s hobbyhorse of standing on a high morality pedestal bores me.

I again defer to your expertise but it does make the Americans sound alot better at this cloak and dagger stuff than they actually are.

Originally Posted by Ray

Indeed there are. But who wants a near failed state to add to our problems? Another issue is that India does not want to increase the tote of Moslem in its population piggybank.
Further, from the little that I know of the Moslem psyche, it is a psyche that is self destruct. The Sunni Shia hatred is more steep than the Hindu Moslem disconnect. This inward hatred of Islam will ensure that Pakistan breaks up on its own with India’s high morality platform unscathed. Wait a little. The US will do so once Pakistan serves the US purpose. The War on Terror is a War on Islam. The DPG states that no nation should be in a position to challenge the US. The only people who can challenge the US is Islam as a untied entity or ummah. The have manpower, they are well versed in the tactics of a terrorist, they are buying up all sophisticated arms and technology (Saudi), they have the money, they have invested a lot of it in the US and European economy and they are a great lot who know the art of deception. It may surprise you that many of the tactics used in the army is written in the Quaran or its interpretations. Are you aware that when you go to say the prayers on Id, you do not return by the same path by which you had gone? Isn’t it the same diktat for patrolling? Route out should not be the same as Route in!
Therefore, Islam is the target of the US. Pakistan will self destruct because of inherent anomalies in the interpretation of Islam amongst them.

Alot further sighted than what I am used to - the immediate tactical picture.

Originally Posted by Ray

Only a nation that has patience and resilience can take more hits than that is necessary. The fallout of the blasted morality high horse. We were mobiulised and no matter what one may say, the US told India to take it easy and look busy since the US required Pakistan in its long-term goal of it War against Islam.

But the US would be powerless to stop any punitive action.

Originally Posted by Ray

You are welcome. But Might is right in today’s world.

Sir, I would argue the Honour that comes with that Might plays a big part in the world. Look at the major forces in the world today. How many do not subscribe to Honour? Some alot more than others but all adhere to the premise of a professional army.

Originally Posted by Ray

Why? Have we used the airforce or tanks? Have we razed down Srinagar or Baramullah as the US has done to Fellujah? Personally, I have no time for rumours spread by people of the ilk as our very own Aryan.

Imagine, what can you do with people like Aryan who believe that the DNA test is not worth holding a candle for vis a vis the Quaranic injunction which states “ four Muslim adult male witnesses, about whom the Court is satisfied, having regard to the requirements of tazkiyah al-shuhood, that they are truthful persons and abstain from major sins (kabair), give evidence as eye-wi tnesses of the act of penetration necessary to the offence” ((Chapter 1 Clause 8 B, Ordinance No. VII of 1979)"

Science has no value. Religion is supreme. Ancient customs are paramount because God says so! What is the answer for such obscurantism? And imagine that the person is training to be an anthropologist or some such science! I am sure he would have done better as a illiterate Mullah because his brains are only tuned to illiterate and obscurantists modes.

Fortunately, such religious bilnkered zealots and religious Johnny come latelys are mainly amongst the poorer class. There are many fine Moslems who while not shunning the injunctions of Islam are trying to bring modernity into Islam.

Sir, that was my point. There's an old saying in the West, if you're going to do the time, you might as well do the crime. We have this discussion before. Within the confines of the GC and the issued ROEs, I would show no mercy. I would stick to the letter of the law, but not the spirit.

**Anoop C** · 22 Jan 05, 18:14

Colonel, if I may take the liberty of opining on a question to the Brig.

You ask how Pakistan can be sure what the rate of Indian advance will be and whether they will over-estimate it and lower their nuclear threshold. My answer is - historical knowledge (there have been 3 full scale wars) and extrapolation to the current force levels being fielded. In the past, even with 2 Corps worth of action in 1965, the final territorial capture was not very significant - certainly no cause for nuclear weapons use. 1971 may not be a valid comparison because the IA's aims in the Western theatre were very modest to begin with.

As I see it, the major implication of Cold Start is - we can embarrass the PA before the international powers broker a cease-fire i.e. we have the ability to undercut the OODA cycle of diplomacy. Now that may not seem like a valid war-aim, but as you pointed out, the effect of the 1962 war on the politicians and the general populace lasted long after the actual war. The effect on the PA will be nothing short of an electric prod, if we can pull it off.

**Anoop C** · 22 Jan 05, 18:37

Two aspects of the reorganization required for Cold Start need to be discussed at greater length - placing some air assets in the IA's hands and procuring land nearer the border to house the additional elements of an IBG.

Some other random thoughts for the professionals to critique:

Conventional wisdom holds that an air attack must precede a large scale ground attack - to keep the defender's heads down, destroy their radar network and disrupt the lines of communication.

I submit that the opposite is true for a Cold Start type of operation. Starting off with an air attack signals the attacker's intentions unmistakably and causes loss of at least operational surprise, if not strategic surprise - simply because air attacks without follow-on ground attacks are not the norm in the Indo-Pak context. The Pak decision making is extremely simplified - put all units on alert at once. There will be no element of uncertainty about India's intentions.

Contrast that situation with the movement of a couple of battalions of infantry with engineer elements - does Pak know for sure where they are headed and what their intentions are? They could be headed for an exercise, for rotation, or for attack; there's no way to know for sure. The relative time lapse of their reaction vis-a-vis the Indian action is greater than it would be for an air attack simply because of the uncertainty factor. Infantry movement can be masked by artillery shelling elsewhere along the border - a common occurrence along the LoC, thereby not raising any alarm.

So where does the air-force come into play? It comes into play when the Pakistanis respond by rushing forces to meet the Indian offensive - offering lines of communication and supply to be disrupted by air power - implying, if all goes well, that the IAF need be called in only after some consolidation has occurred on the ground.

Does this explain the apparent contradiction that a joint forces doctrine is being enunciated by a single service, namely the Army (or in the Colonel's words, why isn't the IA talking to the IAF)?

Looking forward to your reactions, sirs.

**Blademaster** · 22 Jan 05, 18:48

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

No, it wouldn't. An entire wing of B52s could not do what 1 brigade could do. Force the enemy to stand and fight.

But that's the whole point. We don't want the enemy to stand and fight. We just want to kill the enemy in numbers, doesn't matter which ones , civilians or military and scream to Pakistan and to the rest of the world,"Yeah you bastards, take that!" and then go home. If Pakistan does something stupid like bombing a city, well, in a matter of hours, Pakistan would be history. If Pakistan captures some land which I highly doubt since we have far better recon than Pakistan and can readily detect whether Pakistan is going to launch an ground attack that can hold ground since the Kargil War, and take those forces on. I'm somewhat depressed by the time I am typing this. If Pakistan did attack and keep land, using the Kargil War as an example, India is not gonna go into Pakistan territory deep and take land. India will just tackle those forces possessing Indian territory and force them out b/c GoI leaders are too chickenshits to launch an invasion into Pakistan in fear of a nuclear strike and anger from US.

If we are not going to capture land or go into deep territory b/c we fear an nuclear strike, then what's the point of forcing the enemy to stand up and fight?

With what Ray and Anoop are talking about like having a stable Pakistan, well they need an army to keep order and law.

If another attack like Parliament takes place, I would just bomb the crap out of PAF airfields and planes and depots, Pakistan navy ships, bases, and harbours, Pakistan oil refineries and depots, power generating plants, anything of value that can be bombed from air delivered precision bombs.

If you want the enemy to stand up and fight, for some reasons, the current structure of IA can easily do the job but combined with a fleet of bombers, they can kill the enemy a lot faster and more efficiently.

The only value of Cold Start I can readily see is invading Pakistan so quick that they don't have time to launch their nuclear options. But that's a mighty tall order and very very hard to pull off.

I am not talking about replacing the current IA with a fleet of bombers. What I am talking about is adding a fleet of bombers and leave the current structure of IA alone, ie, 3 strike corps backed up by the 8-9 holding corps. The current structure of IA can force the enemy to stand up and fight, it is just that the fleet of bombers will do the killing blow and a lot more faster and efficiently than Cold Start forces.

**Jay** · 22 Jan 05, 19:18

Blade,
I think the main objective for cold start is not to defeat the enemy, but to teach a lesson to the enemy in this case, Pakistani Army and a warning to Chinese.

If you are using fleet bombers its open outright war and defn you can expect nukes. The whole point is to show the world and Pakistan what IA is capable to do with out a nuclear response.

**Anoop C** · 22 Jan 05, 19:45

Blademaster,

Just for the record, I am not arguing for a stable Pakistan. I only insist that India neither pick up the responsibility to ensure a stable Pakistan, nor pick up the tab for restoring law and order to the various fragments of erstwhile Pakistan. We have neither the time nor the ability to do so. One of the possible consequences - in the event of a collapse of the Pakistani state - is large scale migration of people from Sindh to India, if only to get away from the resulting chaos due to break down of law and order and to escape the impending water crisis. We don't need that kind of headache.

To address your other remark about the large scale bombing of Pakistani military installations as a punitive measure. Most Pakistani (and Indian) military installations, except in the Thar, are sited in close proximity to large civilian populations. Indiscriminate bombing causes larger civilian than military casualties and provides justification for Pakistan to respond in kind on Indian civilian population centers. You'll note that their short range (50 km) SSM batteries will serve this purpose nicely. The problem with this approach of targetting each other's population is that it ensures both countries have climbed way too far on the escalation ladder for Cold Start to have any meaning - namely, public opinion on both sides will force the govts. and the armed forces to continue the battle in a cycle of punitive steps.

As I understand it, Cold Start is all about being able to disengage on IA's terms, after we have achieved the political objective of punishing the PA and letting the domestic chips in Pak fall where they may. We do not want to be caught up in a cycle of ever increasing violence, because our aims would not be met.

However, the idea of taking down a PN ship is attractive from this point of view - makes a point and avoids civilian casualties. The task is to locate a PN ship in the vast ocean.

**Ray** · 22 Jan 05, 20:35

Soi many issues.

I think I will download and then give it a shot.
But then not tomorrow, Busy. One day soon.

it is 01o4 hours now and so I will have my dinner and go to sleep,

Note 01 o4 AM.

**Officer of Engineers** · 22 Jan 05, 20:39

The same here, Gentlemen,

I've got a snow storm coming and I've got to get my horses in and the chores done. Will respond when possible.

Have to admit that this is fun, trying to see what you're seeing and then try seeing the same through the InA's eyes.

I've got to stop posting at BRF, people are picking my bad habbits.

**Jay** · 22 Jan 05, 21:11

Yep, They are expecting 6-12" snow this weekend here in Cleveland

**Ray** · 23 Jan 05, 06:15

I love snow.

Little less a blizzard.

And a BIG No to an avalanche! They look lovely from a distance, though. It is like see a slow motion 3D movie in Technicolour and Vistavision with Dolby sound on Bose speakers!

**Officer of Engineers** · 23 Jan 05, 18:51

Sir,

You didn't just have to shovel 200 feet of it.

**Ray** · 23 Jan 05, 20:05

Colonel,

No.

Saw Bridge on the River Kwai?

Officer will not do manual labour!

OK that's for the books.

Fortunately, I was the CO then and so I was spared the hassle.

You sure would have fabulous muscle.

Thinking of joining the WWF?

Thread: INDIA’S NEW "COLD START" WAR DOCTRINE STRATEGICALLY REVIEWED

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Similar Threads

Analysis: Chechnya

‘US had designs on Iran before Iraq invasion’

Is the world getting better?

Academics in Uniform

Articles and links for the Military Professional

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions