What's new

Capping the ‘Volcano’: Indian Military Action against Pakistan?

BanglaBhoot

RETIRED TTA
Joined
Apr 8, 2007
Messages
8,839
Reaction score
5
Country
France
Location
France
Ali Ahmed
Research Fellow, Institute of Defense Studies and Analyses


No exception need be taken for an Indian Air Chief to liken the regional security situation to a ‘volcano’ in his speech at the Air Force Day parade. He said, ‘“(The) current security scenario is like a volcano and may test your skills any time without warning. These times require swift action and commitment.” It can be inferred that the Air Force’s task of executing ‘surgical strikes’ in case of the next grievous terrorist provocation weighs on its Chief’s mind.

The occasion is meant to show case preparedness of the force to under-grid deterrence. This helps with deterring such a terror attack only in case the linkages with the Pakistani Establishment are assumed to be significant. That two serving military officers with the ISI figure on the red corner alert for their involvement in Mumbai 26/11, suggests that such linkages exist. The Establishment would not like to chance an Indian reaction. They would therefore keep such linkages under control.

What of the non-state actor and unauthorized linkages? Deterrence is meant to impact this player indirectly, by ensuring that the Establishment maintains surveillance, if not control, over the non-state actor. That no incident has occurred for the past nearly two years indicates that the strategy is working to an extent. When queried during his meeting with the press after his speech, the Air Chief clarified that his mention of ‘volcano’ was due to the security situation appearing as ever ready to ‘explode’. This implies that the threat persists, in effect, that even as the Establishment may be impressed by India’s preparedness, the non-state actor may be less so.

This owes to the non-state actor having acquired an autonomous agenda and capability. The linkages with the state are now only in so far as the state is useful in furthering mutual interests. Were these interests to diverge markedly, the non-state actor could embark on its own. This message has been broadcast to the Pakistani Establishment over the past two years through bomb attacks across Pakistan, the latest one being in Karachi. This explains Pakistani reluctance to rein in the non-state actors targeting India.

While the Establishment can be taken as being suitably deterred, it does not automatically follow that India is safer. The non-state actor can, under certain circumstances, instead use India’s hair trigger preparedness for its own purposes. Take the scenario in which it triggers an Indian military retaliation, now made more plausible by the Air Chief. It may not necessarily see the outcome as averse to its interests.

Pakistan may absorb such a strike or hit back. In case of the former, the right wing can make headway accusing the Pakistan Army of having ‘bangles’ on, the ultimate insult in South Asian culture to manhood. In case of the latter, it could still hope to profit from any escalation internally by exploiting uncertainty. If floods can expose the government, military operations would certainly be more telling.

Mumbai 26/11 was taken to have an Establishment signature since Pakistan wanted to divert Obama’s pressure by a South Asian crisis. This time Pakistan has managed to ward off similar pressure to act in FATA, coincident with operations resulting from the ‘surge’ across, citing the floods. Therefore, not having any reason, it is unlikely that this time round the provocation would have links into the Establishment. Therefore, if India were to execute retaliatory ‘surgical strikes’ at a minimum, it would be playing into the hands of non-state actors.

In other words, India’s quandary is that what is deterrence for the Establishment, serves to embolden the non-state actor. This then calls into question the military response option.Military retaliation has utility if it can induce Pakistan to finally act against anti-India non-state actors.

From the double-game with which Pakistan warded off US threats in respect of the Taliban earlier, it is evident that India cannot succeed. Instead, a lurch to the right may occur in Pakistan, quite as planned by the non-state actors in collusion with their partners in the Establishment. This way India would create a threat where none currently exists.

The limitations of the military option should logically then bring to fore other options India has. Hardliners would suggest India pay Pakistan back in the same coin through intelligence operations. It can at best exact a price. Chaos in Pakistan is useful only to the extent India is willing to clean up, along with the international community. This is not so. Besides, precedence elsewhere and in India proves that getting off the ‘intelligence tiger’ is usually difficult.

The second policy option suggests itself, that of progressing the peace process. Externally, the latest stand-off in the UN with Pakistan, and internally, not taking the eight points initiative further, such as by appointing the promised interlocutors, indicates that this lacks urgency. Inattention may yet prove the Air Chief prophetic.

Musharraf’s revelations to Barkha Dutt bare the motives of Pakistani proxy war. It is instrumental yet. Outsourcing Indian security to the Pakistani Establishment, in terms of controlling the non-state actors, requires at a minimum, engaging with it.

Capping the ‘Volcano’: Indian Military Action against Pakistan? by Ali Ahmed
 
The guy doesn't mention anything clearly.

What a waste of time.

What part have you found difficult to understand?

This is one of the most lucid enunciation of Indian options vis-a-vis the neighbor.

1. IAF is contemplating surgical strikes and its repurcussions - it leads to either war or Pakistan becoming more extremist.

2. He mentions the non state actors and how they have by a quirk of circumstances come to occupy more sway than they should.

3. The only option is to clinch peace and the Indian establishment has been dragging its feet over it, something he is advising against.
 
Crap thinking.....

Indian Military cannot do surgical strikes in Pakistan as Pak Army will take it as full scale war..

indian Military need to think out of box here....There is no option of surgical strikes.....either go on full scale war or tell your nation truth....

:pakistan:
 
I think our SOP's wrt to IAF Violation are quite clear and in any case bandits with saffron color will be shot down.If however they launch payload and escape quickly then we will reciprocate.Any government which does not send back a strong message would fall in days.In simple words India can't do ****.All India can do is perhaps cry and go to UN/US.That's about it.Indians are chicken ****.India is not America.
 
What part have you found difficult to understand?

This is one of the most lucid enunciation of Indian options vis-a-vis the neighbor.

1. IAF is contemplating surgical strikes and its repurcussions - it leads to either war or Pakistan becoming more extremist.

2. He mentions the non state actors and how they have by a quirk of circumstances come to occupy more sway than they should.

3. The only option is to clinch peace and the Indian establishment has been dragging its feet over it, something he is advising against.


In other words he is speaking like Bharat verma advocating attacking Pakistan
 
I think our SOP's wrt to IAF Violation are quite clear and in any case bandits with saffron color will be shot down.If however they launch payload and escape quickly then we will reciprocate.Any government which does not send back a strong message would fall in days.In simple words India can't do ****.All India can do is perhaps cry and go to UN/US.That's about it.Indians are chicken ****.India is not America.

Yes ur right India is not America which was on the brink of losing the war in Afganistan. Buddy India has its own way to tackle its problems and it knows how to deal with pakistan and This is not the India of nineties. Pakistan must come out that mindset and Think of better ways to engage India.:sniper:
 
In other words he is speaking like Bharat verma advocating attacking Pakistan

The world appears to you as you choose to see it. If you look at the article as one advocating war you will find your morsels, otoh if you look at it as one pushing for peace you will yet again find support.
 
Yes ur right India is not America which was on the brink of losing the war in Afganistan. Buddy India has its own way to tackle its problems and it knows how to deal with pakistan and This is not the India of nineties. Pakistan must come out that mindset and Think of better ways to engage India.:sniper:

I think you People Don't understand

A country which cannot make a good NEEDLE how is she able to make and run a NUCLEAR and missile programme...

THINK.......

come with any answer....??

NO

Let me tell you
It is the hate against INDIA which always pushing us forward in the field not with very much speed but slowly and affectively...
And if you try anything stupid it will be end of you anyway

We don't fear death and you dont want to think about it..

We have nothing to lose as we have already lose many things and you have a lot to lose...Think about it

As far US is concerned the relation between us and US is not like relation between you and us

we will go beyond every limit to save PAKISTAN if we have to sacrifice our every thing because we love PAkISTAN :pakistan:
 
I think our SOP's wrt to IAF Violation are quite clear and in any case bandits with saffron color will be shot down.

not sure about the indian sop in that contigency.. it may not stop an arm chair general but it stymies PAFs options

If however they launch payload and escape quickly then we will reciprocate.

even as payload hits pay dirt?

Any government which does not send back a strong message would fall in days.

Any govt with sends back a strong message will fall even sooner

In simple words India can't do ****.

extend you an invitation to Indian rail tracks early morning between 5 and 7, indians can do **** and apparently a lot of it

All India can do is perhaps cry and go to UN/US. That's about it.

otoh you say bandits will come in, on the other you secretly hope they dont and the gandhi topis go to UN?

Indians are chicken ****.

if indians are chicken then pakistanis are what chickens have for lunch.

India is not America.
exactly.. the fact is 2 yrs on since Mumbai when you guys thought you had pulled off a stunner, no repeat.
 
we will go beyond every limit to save PAKISTAN if we have to sacrifice our every thing because we love PAkISTAN :pakistan:

what if the costs imposed on that endeavor are punitive? even by your low standards..
 
we will go beyond every limit to save PAKISTAN if we have to sacrifice our every thing because we love PAkISTAN :pakistan:

You talk about sacrificing everything and still save Pakistan at the same time:lazy:
 
man u guys talk like true patriots and i really appriceate it but ther is a lot of deffecrence when it comes to reality cauz............. hypothitically assume india was attacked by non state actirs from pakistan and india in reply does a surgical strike and pakistan makes it into a fully blown war............... Now india can support the war machine since it has huge economy..... but can pakistan sustain its war at the current seniario it will push pakistan to the stage what sudan or somalia kind of economy if a war happens ....... because in 1999 just for artiliaries it nearly cost 5 core per day ( cost of the shelling done by bofers )
before u type please do think.....................
 
man u guys talk like true patriots and i really appriceate it but ther is a lot of deffecrence when it comes to reality cauz............. hypothitically assume india was attacked by non state actirs from pakistan and india in reply does a surgical strike and pakistan makes it into a fully blown war............... Now india can support the war machine since it has huge economy..... but can pakistan sustain its war at the current seniario it will push pakistan to the stage what sudan or somalia kind of economy if a war happens ....... because in 1999 just for artiliaries it nearly cost 5 core per day ( cost of the shelling done by bofers )
before u type please do think.....................

yes i agree with you that our economy is nnothing compared to India's but read this

Nuclear doctrine of Pakistan

The nuclear doctrine of Pakistan is the nuclear strategy policy stated by Pakistan to be used in the event of a war, particularly against India.

In the event of a war between Pakistan and India, the Indian numerical superiority in men and conventional arms is likely to overwhelm Pakistan. In a deteriorating military situation, when an Indian conventional attack is likely to break through Pakistani defenses, or has already breached the main defense line causing a major setback to the defense, which cannot be restored by conventional means, the government would be left with no other option except to use nuclear weapons to stabilize the situation. India's superiority in conventional arms and manpower would have to be offset by nuclear weapons. The political will to use nuclear weapons is essential to prevent a conventional armed conflict, which could later on escalate into a nuclear war.

Pakistan's nuclear doctrine therefore is based on the first strike option. In other words, the Pakistani government will use nuclear weapons if attacked by India even if the attack is with conventional weapons. With his experience of a graduated nuclear response, Professor Stephen P. Cohen feels that Pakistan would use what he calls an 'option-enhancing policy'. This would entail a stage-by-stage approach in which the nuclear threat is increased at each step to deter India from attacking. These stages are as follows:

1.A public or private warning.
2.demonstration explosion of a small nuclear weapon on Pakistani soil.
3.The use of (a) nuclear weapon(s) on Pakistani soil against Indian attacking forces.
4.The use of (a) nuclear weapon(s) against critical but purely military targets on Indian soil, probably in thinly populated areas in the desert or semi-desert, causing the least collateral damage.
Some weapon systems would be in reserve for the counter-value role. These weapons would be safe from Indian attack as some would be airborne while the ground based ones are mobile and could be moved around the country.


Nuclear doctrine of Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Back
Top Bottom