Ray

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

Hawk_eye

I am no expert in the art of war, but such a tactic could be very strienous on the Economy and Infastructure of a national army. But India is a Huge country and has a growing economy, so it could be followed.

However, we all know that india has had logistical problems, Will this mean a smaller but more efficent army or a bigger and Less cohesive offensive mechine? The article has some gaps that need to be filled? and Equipment Shortages?

__________________
http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/8...taneditres.jpg

Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds. The latter cannot understand it when a [person] does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses their intelligence.
--Albert Einstein

Ray

You are right.

Newpapers will be newspaper.

A mountain over a molehill.

Reading has to be between the lines.

PaulG

Are the conflicts expected to be short because of the time hostilities start, and how long it is till the nukes are used?

ajaybhutani

it will be difficult for indians to reduce the one million it employs in army till the numbers are reduced from chineese side and pakistani side. For to some extent numbers do matter in the kind of war we might be up to against china( in case of border skirmishes or border war).
What i feel is army is targetting to improve the logistic support without reducing the numbers for as we know the growing economy can help us spend more in the coming years and also if some considerable ice is broken between india and pak we will save some imp money from reduced militarization in kashmir region.

Again looking at what happened in kargil and also after attack on indian parliament. We know that india cannt reply at all to teh stuff paksitan plans. Like we obviously arent into terrorism so no mercenaries /jehadis from our side will go and reply in pakistan. can we do a kind of small scale operation where we go in the paksitani territory and destroy the training camps for terrorists .teh simple answer is the will is missing. Is it the political will which is mising. MAYBE. But again is our army AF navy capable of launching such kind of an offensive. Frankly with the kind of logistics we have they are not well prepared.
The prob with india is that it needs to keep large numbers to defend against big wars .But at the same time it needs to be capable of taking offensives that israelis have done .
We need at least one integrated attack force which can reach the other side of enemy control territory or deep inside it do the job and come back .

Its good that our military thinkers are planning even better but Ray, how much time do u think will they take ( considering the available resources and other restrictions) to create a force they plan to ??

lemontree

The conflicts are expected to be short for some reasons:-

- International intervention before objectives are reached.
- Limiting the thrust into enemy territory so as not to touch the strategic nerve of the enemy, which could trigger deployment of nukes in defence.
- Retailatory in nature.

__________________

Cheers!...on the rocks!!

ajaybhutani

the main idea is to do the job and get away .Even before the enemy realises the damage should have been done and its all peace back again except taht soem nuke plant/militarily strategic infrastructure is destroyed .Its more like acting like a theif . Do the ojb when the enemy sleeps and before he can get up. :D

lemontree

ajaybhutani

By leaner and meaner, it does not mean that we will reduce the present strength of the army. It will not happen for the following reasons:-
- Deployment on western/northern/eastern borders leaves most of the army for a defensive role w.r.t China. Hence, the remaining forces (excluding holding formations) that can be utilised for attack are at par numericaly w.r.t to Pakistan.
- Internal security duties, require the army as the police (due to its inherent deficiencies) is unable to cope with the tasks at hand.
- International obligations, like providing peace keepers for UN missions. We cannot reduce our defences for the sake of these obligations.

By a leaner force, it would mean (IMO) that, the present concept of using the Strike Corps would be re-thought, since the time of deployment from their home bases takes a lot of time, thereby alerting the enemy. It should be understood in the context of the 'cold start' doctrine being alked about. Nuclear capability of our neighbour prevents any deep thrust type of military operations that would threaten the collapse of the enemy, and make him reach for the nuke button. So the solution lies in creating smaller combat groups that would carry out limited operations, that would hurt the enemy but not threaten his existance.

In other words, next time if there is a requirement felt to retaliate at the enemy then there would be no 'deployment on border' statements by the politicians, there will be no Op Parakram. It will be just akraman (attack).

Ajay, the politicians have the will but they have to weigh the consequences of their orders. They will only give the go if victory is certain and own damage 'acceptable'.

Ray

The force is already there.

It is just the question of re-engineering.

lulldapull

The Kargil doctrine as well as the later parliament attack stunt, very clearly demostrated that if India ever crosses the border then pakistan will initiate an all out pre-emptive nuclear strike!

Pakistans nuclear doctrine is slated for a massive first strike to destroy India's secondary reponse as wel as crippling all major Air bases, miliotary bases and naval installations.

pakistan has already amassed between 85 to 120 Warheads and now maintains a strategic edge in terms of the quality and capability of those warheads as well as the delivery platforms.

India has tried twice to brow beat us. It hasn't worked. And the more this continues, then the more they get convinced that unless movement is generated on kashmir, the insurgency will continue in IOK, and the threat of nuclear war will continue.

And there is nothing they can do about it!

ajaybhutani

well leaner has a meaning which signifies a reduction . and so leaner is used to signify that the amry iis not large in numbers.

lulldapull

Heres a little excerpt from one of their own nuke scientists interview, acknowledging this fact!

http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/jun/10inter.htm

The Rediff Interview/Prof Bharat Karnad
'We are great at fooling ourselves'

An NBC report quoting intelligence sources as saying that Pakistan's nuclear arms are greater than India's in number, sophistication and delivery systems has sent shock waves through the country. But Professor Bharat Karnad feels vindicated. A security affairs specialist at the Centre for Policy Research, he has been crying himself hoarse that India's nuclear arms are not just insufficient to match China but are probably incapable of matching Pakistan too.

In a brief interview to Amberish K Diwanji, he explains his position and his fears about India's nuclear arsenal and its strategic weaknesses. Excerpts:

First question. Are Pakistan's nuclear weapons superior to what India has?

I have been saying this for almost two years, since the May 1998 tests. The case I am making is that unless we test, and do so repeatedly, we will not be able to have deployable or usable weapons. We will have computer-designed weapons which can be exploded in computer simulations. But that is not the same as the real thing. Without physical testing, we will never know whether our nuclear weapons work.

We don't have that amount of data, especially on the thermonuclear device. The one thermonuclear explosion we had was a fizzle, which has now been admitted by our top scientists like P K Iyengar. So what data do we have for the thermonuclear weapon, which is a decisive weapon in any nuclear arsenal?

And I have said that if we don't test more, not only are we going to be no match for the Chinese, but we will find it difficult to match even the Pakistanis when it comes to deployable arms. After all, the Chinese have conducted some 50-odd tests and have a whole battery of data to use for comparing their computer simulations and to constantly upgrade their weapons.

Even the Pakistanis have conducted very few tests.

Look, the Pakistanis have imported their entire design and delivery systems from China. They don't need to test. I made this point in great detail at a recent seminar where I said we are not a match for even Pakistan, so why are we talking about China?

Now that the NBC report has come out, everyone is talking about it [Pakistan's superiority]. But earlier it was evident to a few of us. In the nuclear scientific community, many of them know this. But outside that group, I think I am the only one who kept saying [that we are no match for Pakistan]. I then persuaded P K Iyengar for almost a year to go public, which he did recently. He was very reluctant and required a lot of coaxing. But I needed him to back what I had been saying because no one was believing me. I knew I was right, but needed an independent corroboration, which Iyengar provided.

Both the Indian government and the Pakistani government have denied the NBC report.

Let's look at the motivation of the Pakistanis to say they have only a modest arsenal. It is simple: they do not want India to go ahead. It is better for them to say that India is great and has a huge arsenal compared to their small collection, and thus lull us into complacency at which India anyway is very good.

Look at our complacency. We conduct one test and think we have a huge inventory. But it is just the beginning. The 1998 tests were just the beginning because we had a 24-year hiatus when we did literally nothing.

We are great at fooling ourselves. We have deluded ourselves into believing that we don't need to do any of the things others did to achieve deterrence. This has been the Indian tradition, a habit of mind that is difficult to contest.

And it is this habit of mind that makes us believe we have achieved weaponisation?

Very true. When, in fact, the processes of weaponisation are very distinct, very detailed, very rigorous, and ultimately, very physical. Which means that you may do all kinds of computer simulations and sophisticated testing, but ultimately they have to be physically tested.

Arundhati Ghose, former representative at the Disarmament Conference, has said that India does not even have data for computer simulations.

That's right. But you know, ultimately, Arundhati, I and others, we don't have much credibility. But people know we are right.

Do you think there is a witch-hunt against you?

No, not a witch-hunt. I don't want to get into the conspiratorial stuff. But the fact is that my views are not convenient for the government, for the people, for the mainstream leaders of the strategic community. The Jasjit Singhs and K Subrahmanyams have been proven wrong so consistently and so often that they don't think anything is wrong when something like this [the NBC report] is pointed out. They are the ones who opposed any testing after 1974, saying that one test was enough. Jasjit Singh wrote that and Subrahmanyam said before the [May 1998] tests that we don't need any more tests.

Then, after the tests, oh yes, they said that is good and now we don't need any more tests [laughs]. Now, after the ground under him has been weakening, he has said that we may need some tests.

The lesson of this is that the government has advisers who give advice that they think the government wants to hear. This, of course, assumes that these advisers can give that kind of advice. What, after all, are retired officers? They have somehow managed to survive 35 years in service because they do not want to go too much against the grain. So it is clods like us who don't know how to play the game. We give our assessment based on analysis and if the analysis says this is how the chips fall [that is what we say]. If someone can refute the analysis, do so.

The NBC report says India lacks a credible delivery system while Pakistan has one.

I think that is overstating the case a bit. I don't really know...

But the DRDO [Defence Research and Development Organisation] does not have a good track record.

I have said that DRDO does not have a good track record. We have made A P J Kalam into an icon, and the trouble is that in doing so he becomes invulnerable to criticism. Kalam is a tremendous leader of the integrated defence missile project, but you can't then say that he is God's gift to the country.

But you do believe we have a delivery system?

Yes, a rudimentary delivery system, not as rudimentary as the report claims.

But not as sophisticated as what Pakistan has?

No, because Pakistan has been getting Chinese missiles. Everything there is imported. It is a bit like comparing a calculator made in Ghaziabad with one made in Germany. They have imported their stuff whereas we have put together something.

But in the end what matters is the final system.

That is right. What finally matters is whether you have something to use or not, not how good your research base is or how great you are.

Ultimately the bomb has a utilitarian value. It does not have a metaphysical value. We give it metaphysical values such as equating it to the Indian stake in high science. What the heck!

Do you think this report will be a wake-up call to the government?

I am not too sure. Our writings have not done the trick, but as usual, some foreigner says the most banal things and we take it seriously.

How would you place this report in context?

I have been saying the same things, so naturally I won't say this report is wrong. It states all these things that I know and I have written about.

Most of our indigenous weaponisation programmes have not done very well. What needs to be done?

We have very, very good scientists. But we have to let them loose to do the things that they can do. We have the finest physicists, engineers and metallurgists, but we have to give them incentives, you have to get them cracking, not restrain them by holding back funds. After all, nuclear arms do not come cheap.

India wants to achieve superpowerhood on the cheap. Why should anybody accord you big-power status? What are you? You are a beggarly country. You don't even know what your national interests are.

I am very respectful of Pakistan, and I have always said so. Why? Because their margin of error is so little. That is why they don't take any chances. Like the Israelis. You have to beg, borrow or steal to ensure your security. In our case, we think we are a subcontinent and who cares? The drought kills millions, but there is a billion more, so who cares?

That is the difference. I am not surprised that the Pakistanis are so motivated, so dedicated and so resolved to have what they want. Bhutto said, 'We'll eat grass, but we'll have it [the nuclear bomb].' They got it! They got it!

Incidentally, the defence minister has said that India will sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. What do you think?

I doubt it. This government will fall.

The Rediff Interviews

PaulG

Its pretty friggin sick to see paragraphs and sentences like this ending in smiley faces, someone should pick you two (India and Pakistan) up and give ya good slap back to reality i think. Now go feed your people!

rationalist

I can tell you one thing, you have been certainly fooled by this almost 5 year old article by this staunchly anti-BJP guy.
Just look at his this statement:

I doubt it. This government will fall.

In January of 2000 he was predicting BJP govt. would fall. Well that did not happen, BJP completed its full term.

Now that Congress is back in power, I suggest you read his more recent articles!

BTW do you have any idea how Pluronium India could have produced by running 23 of its reactors in the last 4 years alone?

India also modified its Agni to make the range of 700 KM Pakistan specific and they are being inducted for over a year now. Though the short range Prithvi should be able to hit most targets.

lulldapull

let us fight god-damnit!