The overwhelming belief in most India drawing rooms and minds seems to be "India cannot afford a war". Probe a little deeper, and you realise that Indians are petrified of war because of the inconvenience it will cause them. Most Indians also believe that we cannot go to war against a 'nuclear' Pakistan.
All arguments are likely false -- Pakistan wants us to believe that India cannot afford a conflict. I believe that India can afford a conflict -- and a well thought through conflict can actually significantly handicap pakistan.
India's strengths come from a number of drivers:
The economy is one -- despite a slowdown, India's economy is orders of magnitude larger than the pakistani economy and also significantly more robust. Recent commodity price drops -- especially oil -- are also working in our favour.
Second, despite gaps in Indian military firepower, the scales are tipped in our favour. Certainly in conventional terms and perhaps nuclear (despite Manmohan's best efforts at emasculating Indias forces).
Third, is geography -- Pakistan is far more vulnerable to being totally wiped out vis-a-vis india.
So prima facie, India is much better off and use of force must be strategically calibrated to build on these advantages. As a direct result, India should probably not go for a conventional attack doctrine, instead, it should launch surgical strikes against terror camps and perhaps some nuclear installations.
Pakistan would like us to believe that they'd retaliate with nukes; for fear of escalating the conflict, they likely wont because while a Pakistani offensive could wipe out a few cities, an Indian response could take out the entire state. It is this asymmetry (driven also be geography) that India is ignoring. As an aside, forgetting our strengths and going abegging, Manmohan style, are natural for India. I still, for example, do not know why we've not turned off the sluices on our Baglihar dam?
Back to the topic, the worst outcome of a Pakistani retaliation is the wipeout of a city or two -- perhaps Mumbai and Ahmedabad (the ISI has too many friends in Delhi, they wont target the capital). The loss, though horrific, is frankly something India can easily absorb (I live in Mumbai, in case readers assume i am being flippant) and easily mount a counter offensive that takes out all major Pak centers.
It is this possibility -- and this possibility alone -- that will dissuade even the most psychotic of paki army guys to think twice. In other words, India needs to start bulking up her nuclear arsenal -- and do so visibly to give her a very strong deterrent.
As the cold war has shown, the risk of total annihilation tends to keep people sane.
As further signals, India should also make highly visible efforts to 'nuclear protect' her cities -- such as purchasing Patriot systems etc.
In the face of strong preparedness, any pakistan's response is likely to be totally conventional.
Neutered of a nuclear response, pakistan can do precious little.
Whatever the direction of the conflict -- India must also ensure one more thing: that by the end of this conflict, India claims back territory from pakistan -- perhaps even large chunks of PoK. This is critical to inflict a psychological blow to the pak ISI-military-jihadi complex.
India needs to keep this in mind. That we wont is our tragedy.
Of course, all these scenarios make significant assumptions:
1. That blue turban and his jokers can think
2. That they have guts
3. that the 'death by a thousand cuts' they have launched against our armed forces has not dhimmified them and neutered our nuclear response.
4. That India will work with good guys like the israelis; all they need is a place for their kFir's to refuel and fly with out boys to Kahuta.
All in all, India is in a strong position to deliver a significant, crushing blow to Pakistan.
Given blue turban's -- and his government's -- multiple anatomic deficiencies (absence of a mind, spine and guts), however, these assumptions are not likely to hold. It is unclear whether even a BJP-led government will have what it takes to make such chanakya-like decisions.
Thoughts and comments welcome.
8 comments:
Any war with Pakistan will invariably involve China, one way or the other. So, when you compare the economical advantage you've weigh against its potential cost to China, and how far we can sustain it. China, or for that matter America, will certainly not let Pakistan evaporate completely. I doubt the Pakis will use nukes, but the Chine will supply weapons, and perhaps even military expertise in any limited war. An all-out-war seems impossible to me. And with the Congress so dependent on Muslim votes while being saddled with record deficits...the war ain't gonna happen.
I'm thinking that we could ratchet up an insurgency war of our own in Pakistan, and give Pakistan a taste of its own medicine. I'm sure you remember what happened to urban Sindh in the 1990s. Just as Pakistan used Khalistan to set neighboring J&K on fire, likewise we could use a rebellion in Sindh as a conduit to Baluchistan, with which we don't share any direct border. If Pakistan retaliates -- well, let's just say that political repercussions in India won't be helping the Congress Party. And that brings me to an even worse problem -- our Enemy Within. The Congress and the Left constitute a 5th Column within India, deliberately handicapping the nation while engaging in vote-pandering in the quest for their political survival. Indeed, the Congress Party's actions show they value their party's survival more than the country's, as they see the country merely as a platform for the survival of their party, which matters to them above all else. We have to find a way to defeat this Enemy Within, otherwise they'll constantly undermine any attempt to solve our regional problems.
AGWorld - the kind of war you are advocating is actually one that India cannot afford. (precisely for this reason - and I suspect to gain popularity Manmohan's boss lady will launch such a war near the elections).
We should help Pakistan collapse under the weight of it's internal contradictions (a VP Singh phrase) - we should do three-four Kashmir's to Pakistan for the one Kashmir they have done to us. Here is the list
1- Pashto nationalism
2- Baloch nationalism
3- Sindhudesh
4- Seraikistan
Islam is not a good enough glue to hold this artificial construct together - only American defence aid and Saudi dollars are the glu so far. but with resolute Indian actions - this glue can come unstuck
Agworld has missed a very important point while advocating a conventional war against Pakistan. As it is consumed by pure hatred towards India, Pakistan does not care whether it's wiped out of existence or not, if, in its view, it can cause significant damage to India through a nuclear attack. The nuclear weapons in Pak hands are like a stone in a madman's hands. It, therefore, wouldn't hesitate to drop (let's say) 2 nuclear bombs on Mumbai and Ahmedabad. The damage to 2 of the economic nerve centers of India would put back India by 2 decades. Who knows which theory is right? How can we put our bets on Pakistan's prudence?
Hence, the best course to follow is what Arun Shourie has suggested.
-Satya
Although I like your posts, I strongly disagree with you. In the unlikely event of nuke strikes, India has "much more" to loose than Pakistan - the two Indian cities, Mumbai and Ahmedabad, are worth much more than whole of Pak
Secondly, the more time we do "nothing" the more progress we can make economically and increase the gap between India and Pak. One needs to remember that in a "death by 1k cuts" Pak is bleeding more than India - look FATA regions.
Finally, I think India has been playing a substantial role in bleeding Pak by providing "moral support" (and maybe financial too) to terror directed against Pak. This is the most imp. reason for opening so many "consulates" in Afghan region (placewise, its not worth opening one embassy). Where do you think the Baluchis and FATAs get funding for running jihad ?
In the eventuality of a war between India and Pak, India may suddenly find that most parts of its North East has declared independence and Arunachal is under the Chinese troops.
Whats more, N Ram of The Hindu, Prannoy Roy of NDTV and Duruddesi of Ibn will tell us that we just cannot afford two wars at the same time and so forget about taking on the Chinese.
Quite possible.
Have to agree with Ghost writer and Murty.. must sap Paapistan slowly and steadily but surely.
Also one 200KT ~ 1MT jhatka in the middle of Arabian Sea in peacetime might threaten the Paapis to some extent.. what thou say??
Agree with comments.
We are not at war with the Pakistani State. Why? Because there is no Pakistani State. There is the ISI. There are the Tanzeems. There is the Army. All these are atually the same, except for the uniforms, medals, and English skills. 80% of Pakistan hates Islamabad/Pindi.
I don't understand why some Indians want to give this motley collection of fools the legitimacy it so desperately craves for!!
Anyway, read the PDF "Give Peace a Chance" here:
http://brmsrr.blogspot.com/2008/12/give-peace-chance-nkomerath.html
Its the best, funniest, and most truthful paper on pak by someone who has been tracking pak for 2 decades. THE piece to read. For all Indians. Stop this gutter IBN-NDTV-Suzanne Roy vomit that currently passes for analysis.
Post a Comment