It was to be a debate on the various offensive/defensive options available for both IA and PA. It was spearheaded by
@Signalian @Gryphon @Joe Shearer with
@Nilgiri providing graphical representation of various IA and PA formations on maps. Various mods also invited but they were not too keen on the idea and the whole thing fizzled out. Let me find its thread and share.
@PanzerKiel
This was the thread.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/retaking-kashmir-after-70-years.603628/page-20
Perhaps it would be reasonable to call it a discussion, rather than a debate; it was essentially an effort to update our information regarding the larger formations, an effort that would show us where the mass of the armed forces was concentrated.
@Nilgiri has mentioned drilling down to a more detailed level than the division; this is not a comfortable proposition, for two reasons.
First, it is inappropriate; recall that I was providing all the information about the Indian Army, and recall also that there are numerous 'friends' among the Indian members who would be all too willing to cry 'foul' (that they themselves do not have even a clue as to what is going on is, to them, neither here nor there; they are here as good IT cell warriors with clearly defined objectives, and military analysis and information gathering - for private purposes - or discussions on military history have nothing to do with those objectives).
Second, it is best to let fanboy imaginations range unchecked; an example is the ardent desire expressed to conquer Kathiawad by Aerial Effect Vehicles, and the associated question as to the availability of Indian Army troops on the peninsula. It had apparently been decided that there were none, so a conscript army landed on the beaches and mounted on hovercraft would sweep through the area, herding all armed police and other forces before them, before dealing a death-blow to the kaffir in his lair in Ahmedabad.
The discussion started with sober members such as
@Gryphon and
@Signalian, who were able to control their patriotic exuberance long enough to part with the formation names and probable locations. However the possibility of enthusiasts hijacking the whole discussion and taking it off to what I understand are war-gaming software packages like DCS, where great battles have been fought and won, and great conquerors and liberators have made their appearance, was clearly present. Don't want to be there..
What next?
Let's see what people want to do.
I also tried to pitch in, however appeared to me that everyone lost interest.....
To be honest, it was slightly different.
Our inputs were not initially clear enough for conversion into situation maps, and there was a bit of back-and-forth between
@Nilgiri and ourselves before the picture became clear, and he got something to work with. That led to a gradual erosion of interest and a drop in momentum.
When
@PanzerKiel suggested that this be continued, I was reluctant only from one point of view: that of drilling down below division level. The reasons for that are the personal consequences, and also the sheer volatility of the present situation.
There is a major reform going on, some of it good, most of it indifferent, and a small part that is enough to destroy the military, and permanently undermine the national defence situation. Doctrine has been hauled out of its dusty recesses, and has lost its usual position as a destroyer of officer careers for those who fail to understand it or to master the expression of it sufficiently ably to impress the instructors.
So that is a second reason why I was reluctant to go into too much detail.
As a personal exercise, the mapping of the force requirements for a constrained by major principles kind of defence has been done, offline. In doing that, the exact analogy between the position of the Indian Army in Kashmir, and the PLA in Xijang leapt out of the pages. Both control a high-altitude plain; both have to take to advancing through ravines and stream-beds to take the fight to the enemy; both face an enemy very comfortable in its location within a low-altitude plain, bursting at the seams with excellent road networks. We could do with more roads parallel to the division line between the two combatant forces, in Kashmir, but we have started doing it, both in Kashmir/Ladakh and in the north-east.
There is also an effort at assessing the realistic force requirements of the para-military forces fronting the Army in the guarding of Indian borders. One surprising metric that emerged, just to give an example, is that the frontage covered from Himachal to Arunachal is roughly 40 rifles per km.; about a platoon + for every km of border. Since people can't work around the clock, this effectively means a platoon every 3 kms! Still an astounding ratio. [EDIT: This omits the overlapping high-altitude jurisdiction of the ITBP, whose strength of 90,000 (approx.) is spread across 3,500 kms. of border, another 25 per km., effectively another 25 per 3 kms. The total coverage between them and the SSB works out to 65 jawans per 3 kms., the equivalent of two platoons]. All this without counting the BSF, responsible for guarding the entire border between India and Pakistan, 3,300 kms, and another 740 kms of Line of Control (LOC), that comes to except for certain segments in Kargil and in Siachen, directly handled by the Army, {edit and 4,200 kms between India and Bangladesh}; the BSF coverage comes to 31 jawans per km., or effectively 31 jawans (a platoon) per 3 kms.
[EDIT - These numbers also give us an idea of the priorities set for the two borders, the ones with Pakistan and with Bangladesh, and the one with the PRC. The Myanmar border, guarded by the Assam Rifles, is the last of India's land borders, and is an open, porous border, that is best handled by close cooperation with the Myanmar Armed Forces, one reason why we hunker down and accept the irritation of the Bangladesh authorities at our close working relations with the Myanmarese.[END EDIT]
We have those numbers deployed today, as we read and write these, and do not need harum-scarum ideas to supplement our forces. Indeed, the exercise mapping the borders, the actual force requirements, is hoped to yield scope for reduction, but
@PanzerKiel has taken the wind out of the sails of this exercise by giving us the logic behind several real-life scenarios.
So the exercise is still going on, but in the absence of encouragement and the apprehension of hostility, in private, behind closed doors.
