Posted on 06/13/2002 6:20:02 PM PDT by AM2000
KOLKATA: At least a month before the Indo-Pak war crescendo reached its peak, the Indian military high command had reportedly told the parliamentary standing committee on defence that the country had only a wafer-thin edge over its enemy in terms of military capabilities and that it would be unwise to go to war against Pakistan.
A prominent member of the defence standing committee told TNN on Wednesday that in separate presentations in April, the Army, Navy and the Airforce had reported that India's superiority over Pakistan's military was barely 1 : 1.2 and India's superiority had come down from the level of 1 : 1.7 which it had during the 1971 war.
The committee member, who agreed to talk to TNN only after de-escalation of tension between the two countries began, claimed that irrespective of its hard posturing, at no point in time had the Centre taken any decision to go to war. Its sole objective had been to draw the attention of the international community and to mount pressure on Pakistan, he claimed.
The military headquarters had in fact observed that Pakistan had superior capabilities in several areas, specially in the field of missiles, the committee member claimed. All the major cities in India are within the reach of Pak missiles and number of strategic targets as well as number of people likely to be affected are much larger than those in Pakistan.
The military headquarters had also informed the defence standing committee that ever since the troop mobilisation along the Indo-Pak border reached its peak, the military was incurring a daily expenditure of Rs 60-70 crore. Also, since the December 13 terrorist strike against the Indian parliament, the total expenditure incurred by the military was a whopping Rs 4000 crore.
Standing committee members were also told that given the ground realities, a short surgical strike, either against terrorist camps in Pak occupied Kashmir or against strategic targets in Pakistan, was not possible. The war was bound to be a prolonged one unless interrupted by a nuclear strike or heavy international pressure, representatives of the Army, Navy and Airforce reportedly said.
Free Republic is funded solely by donations from readers.
Donations and official correspondence should be mailed to:
Free Republic, LLC, PO Box 9771, Fresno, CA 93794
Support Free Republic by secure credit card.
Send PayPal direct to JimRob@psnw.com
India, like the U.S., is basically peaceloving. In such countries, the military brass cares deeply about its troops and tries to protect them from wars which risk high casualties. Historically, the U.S. has also had its share of generals who give reasons why not to fight.
I think the military are simply angling for a bigger budget!
Pakistan has the same problem but it means a lot less because they're defending.
India can completely wreck the Pakistani state, to the point where its continued existence as a country is unlikely (i.e., reduce it to something like the Taliban's Afghanistan in 1999-2000), with a naval blockade which India already has the capability for. But that would take time to work - 4-5 months - with both too many possibilities for foreign intervention and Pakistani retaliation, and more importantly, it wouldn't feed the egos and careers of a major domestic interest group - the Indian Army.
So many Americans knowledgeable concerning military matters didn't take India's posturing seriously.
The military headquarters had in fact observed that Pakistan had superior capabilities in several areas, specially in the field of missiles, the committee member claimed. All the major cities in India are within the reach of Pak missiles and number of strategic targets as well as number of people likely to be affected are much larger than those in Pakistan.
Long-range air-to-air missiles don't shoot down nuclear tipped missiles in flight to Indian cities. The general is saying Pakistan has enough nuclear weapons to deter an attack by India.
The Indian startegy post that is to 1) isolate Pakistan and make it a pariah state 2) commit US to make a choice between India and Pakistan. The attack on Parliament was the first opportunity to start the brinkmanship. The idea was to put so much pressure on Pakistan that it starts to behave in an irresponsible manner. The Pakistanis know what Indians are trying and Indians know that Pakistanis know what Indians know but Pakistan still were forced to respond as they were cornered. It responded by giving out a nuclear threat. And this is what the Indians wanted. It served the following purposes
1) It immediately created global alarm which resulted in furious diplomacy
2) Focus shifted from Kashmir terrorism to nuclear terrorism - the first is acceptable or tolerated by US but not the second one. It HAD to act and stop it.
3) Iron clad guarantee obtained from Musharraf to stop terrorism - for all times to come
4) India has not yielded an inch in its diplomatic position. Pakistan has lost its remaining reputation and use as a reliable ally to US.
5) It did not want a war - it has a LOT to lose - Bombay skyline , world class Hi-Tech industry , huge manufacturing industry , large dams etc . Its a country on a roll and not interested in war. Pakistan is in shambles and quite ready to commit suicide with all males ready to die and get served by 77 virgins. A large army is meant to scare not fight and the first person who blinks - loses.
These are principles of ware found in ancient Indian texts like Arthshastra - how to divide enemies , make friendships and punish enemies. The Indian leaders are masters of this machiavellian strategy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.