RUPEE NEWS: Recording History, Narrating Archives, Strategic Intellibrief Analysis: Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | اخبار روپیہ

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | RUPEE NEWS | December 27th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |

Indian Generals and Commanders have been punctiliously, meticulously and diligently planning for an exercise in futility– the so called “Cold Start Strategy“. Stephen Cohen and others have been coaching the Indians on how to use the threat of a Cold Start  Strategy to threaten and intimidate the Pakistanis into kowtowing to the Indian diktat. It has not worked and it will not work. Pakistan’s War College has scrupulously and diligently run all the permutations of possible combinations in an India Pakistan conflict. Every conceivable action by India has been preempted and planned for. This was completed in 2003. A lot of water has gone down the Indus since 2003. The “Hamas Strategy” (named after the defense of Lebanon after Israel tried to take it over) also forms a basis of the protection of Pakistan from any Indian attack. Pakistan has designed its defense based on the possible attacks from India. A robust missile program and a huge tank force are colossal impediments to the Cold Start Strategy. Pakistan has an advantage in tanks and missiles right now. It also has Nuclear weapons and the vehicles to deliver them. Within a few more years Pakistan will have an advantage in numbers and quality in the Air Force also. Pakistan has planned 150,000 reservists to go deep into Indian territory and wreak havoc on the Supply Lines, destroy the infrastructure and destabilize the country. 10 militants kept Mumbai hostage for 60 hours. Imagine 150,000 reservists aided by millions inside India.

The American War College also ran several scenarios and all of them ended in Nuclear Conflict.

 Pakistani response to “India’s Cold start strategy”: Limited strikes against targets vs Hot War leading to Nuclear Armageddon

Delhi’s headstrong attitude is unwise. India mistakenly believes that it could take the US post-9/11 route for dealing with the problem of terrorism: a brow beating approach, with the threat of use of force. Delhi must understand that Pakistan and its people want peace. However, Pakistan will fight terrorism within the parameters of international and national law. The post-2007 Pakistan, with a strong commitment to the rule of law and citizens’ rights, will play by the rules. Delhi needs to go beyond ‘browbeating.’

India needs to adopt a more constructive attitudein dealing with the post-Mumbai crisis. There is no international ‘browbeating’ route that will yield any results for India. Pakistan must be engaged on the bilateral track.

If Delhi persists in taking the international route at the cost of bilateralism, Pakistan-India relations will be badly hit. If such an unwise approach is prompted largely by political expediency, given 2009 is an election year for India, whether the Congress will get any additional votes is still unclear. What it will certainly not get is security and stability, which is desperately needed.Nasim Zehra is an Islamabad-based national security strategist

No Pakistani could ever allow Indian troops to enter Pakistan and occupy a strategic area in a so called limited war. The Cold Start Strategy is a variation of India’s plan to take over Lahore in 1965. It did not work then, and it will not work with a Nuclear armed Pakistan that has thousands of medium and long range missiles which would annihilate an advancing army before the Nuclear option could ever be exercised. Plus Pakistani has over 500 Al-Khalid tanks which would surely slow down an Indian advance.

India’s Strategic Military Objectives Needs to be Made Clear: India’s strategic military objectives need to:

• Shift from capturing bits of Pakistan territory in small scale multiple offensives to be used as bargaining chips after the cease fire.
• Focus on the destruction of the Pakistani Army and its military machine without much collateral damage to Pakistani civilians.
• All the three armed forces have to synergise operations towards destruction of the Pakistan Army as it is that which enslaves Pakistan, impedes democracy in Pakistan and indulges in military adventurism against India, including proxy wars and terrorism.
• “India’s Defence Policies and Strategic Thought: A Comparative Analysis (reviewed on SAAG website as Igniting Strategic Mindsets in Indians:; SAAG paper no. 657 dated 09-04-2003)

India has been practicing its emerging Cold Start strategy in the border opposite Kasur. Under this strategy, up to four Integrated Battle Groups could move rapidly across the border and occupy a strategic chunk of Pakistani territory up to the outskirts of Lahore in a “limited war”.

 For Pakistan, there is no concept of “limited war”. Any war with India is seen as a total war, for survival. It risks losing everything the moment India crosses its border, and will likely react by attacking India in force at a point of its own choosing under its own Offensive-Defensive strategy. (That is probably why it is moving some of its Strike Force infantry divisions back from the Afghan border to the Indian one.) As the battles escalate, Indian’s numerical and weapon superiority will become critical. If no external intervention takes place quickly, Pakistan will then be left with the “poison pill” defense of its nuclear weapons.

The consequences of such action are unimaginable for both countries and the world…

The NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) conducted an analysis of the consequences of nuclear war in SouthAsia a year before the last stand-off in 2002. Under two scenarios, one (with a Princeton University team) studied the results of five air bursts over each country’s major cities and the other (done by the NRDCalone) with 24 ground explosions. The results were horrifying to say the least: 2.8 million dead, 1.5 million seriously injured, and 3.4 million slightly injured in the first case. Under the second scenario involving an Indian nuclear attack on eight major Pakistani cities and Pakistan’s attack on seven major Indian cities:

NRDCcalculated that 22.1 million people in India and Pakistan would be exposed to lethal radiation doses of 600 rem or more in the first two days after the attack. Another 8 million people would receive a radiation dose of 100 to 600 rem, causing severe radiation sickness and potentially death, especially for the very young, old or infirm. NRDC calculates that as many as 30 million people would be threatened by the fallout from the attack, roughly divided between the two countries.

Besides fallout, blast and fire would cause substantial destruction within roughly a mile-and-a-half of the bomb craters. NRDC estimates that 8.1 million people live within this radius of destruction.

Studies by Richard Turco, Alan Robock, and Brian Toon in 2006 and 2008 on the climate change impact of a regional nuclear war between these two South Asian rivals, were based on the use of 100 Hiroshima-sized nuclear devices of 15 kiloton each. The ensuing nuclear explosions would set 15 major cities in the subcontinent on fire and hurl five million tonnes of soot 80 kilometers into the air. This would deplete ozone levels in the atmosphere up to 40 per cent in the mid-latitudes that “could have huge effects on human health and on terrestrial, aquatic and marine ecosystems.” More important, the smoke and sot would cool the northern hemisphere by several degrees, disrupting the climate (shortening growing seasons, etc.) and creating massive agricultural failure for several years. The whole world would suffer the consequences.

An Indo-Pakistan war will not cure the cancer of religious militancy that afflicts both countries today. Rather, India and Pakistan risk jeopardizing not only their own economic futures but also that of the world by talking themselves into a conflict. The world cannot afford to let that happen. The Indian and Pakistani governments can step back from the brink by withdrawing their forces from their common border and going back to quiet diplomacy to resolve their differences. The United States and other friends of both countries can act as honest brokers by publicly urging both to do just that before this simmering feud starts to boil over. Shuja Nawaz is the author of Crossed Swords: Pakistan, its Army, and the Wars Within (Oxford University Press 2008) and the forthcoming FATA: A Most Dangerous Place (CSIS, January 2009). He can be reached at www.shujanawaz.com

NATO war: UK 1880 defeats in Afghanistan

Rescueing the Pashtuns of Afghania from Afghanistan

Erase the Durand Line

Delhi has forgotten the lessons of August 14th 1975 when the Rakhi Bahni was forcing the Indian agent to give up Bangladeshi sovreignty to India. A few Bangladeshi patriots got rid of Shaikh Mujib Ur Rehman and left his body in the streets of Dhaka for days.

Pakistanis/Bangladeshis were deceived into electing a traitor as their leader in 1971. It was a few young Bangladeshi officers who killed him and brought his farcical presidency to an end in August 1975. Once again we have an Indian/American agent sitting in the President’s House. The anger in Pakistan is palpable. What happens next is anybody’sguess. The Pakistan Army is under great pressure to engage in operation against Afghan and Kashmiriresistance. If it submitted or even half submitted to that pressure, the war would be fought on the soil of Pakistan. As a nation we must persevere is asserting that resistance is legitimate occupation is not. We are proud and we must show pride in our stand against occupation everywhere in the world. The USA has already recognised the bankruptcy of its position and is withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan. The Indian position in Kashmir is even weaker but it is sustained in it obduracy by collaborators in our ranks who we put in position of leadership. Yet, I am hopeful that India will give us a chance to liberate Jammu and Kashmir sooner than any one expected or imagined.The writer is Director of London Institute of South Asia. India Awaits Green Light for Raids on Pakistan By Usman Khalid

India knows that it can never win a conventional warfare because of the Nuclear Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). However it still harbors notions of winning a sort of a mini war. India may think it has a Cold Start Strategy, but it may end as a hot nuclear war. Indian Defense planners cannot guarantee that a limited strike wil not escalteinto a full fledged war. A full fledged war witha nuclear armed labor may destroy both countries.

Much of this so called “cold Start Strategy” is based on the Israeli strategy which it tried to implement in Lebanon. Israel was unable to implement its objectives in Lebanon and had to withdraw even from the Litani River. Israel failed to achieve its goals in Lebanon. In Lebanon, Israel was unable to stop the barrage of missiles from Lebanon even on the last day. Many consider this Israel’s defeat.

In 2003 Pakistan dismissed the Cold Start Strategy.

Pakistan studying ˜Cold Start Doctrine” of Indian Army

Islamabad – Pakistan said that it is closely studying the implication of the ˜Cold Start Doctrine, which according to media reports here was sought to be implemented by Indian Army during the 2002 border tensions with Pakistan.

Pakistanâ’s Defence spokesman Maj Gen Shoukat Sultan said even though Pakistan do not feel threatened by the doctrine, it was studying its implications. ˜Cold Start Doctrine” meant launching lightning ground and airstrikes and take over of the enemy country without giving much time for the rival army to hit back. According to media reports, Indian Army considered the implementation of the cold start after massing the troops along the Pakistan borders during the tensions that followed the attack on the Parliament in December 2001.

˜We cannot out rightly ignore the cold start doctrine, but we strongly believe that it is not a viable proposition in the case of Pakistan, ISPR chief told reporters while answering a question. ˜This could perhaps work for a banana republic or for that matter a small state, where operating under this doctrine foreign forces could land one fine morning without any warning and fulfil the objective by capturing strategic positions, he said, adding that Pakistan’s case was altogether different.

Though this aspect is a subject of detailed analysis in a separate paper the following observations can be made:

• Pakistan has declared that it will go for nuclear strikes against India when a significant portion of its territory has been captured or likely to be captured. Secondly, when a significant destruction of the Pakistani military military machine has taken place or when Pakistani strategic assets (read nuclear deterrent) are endangered.
• India’s “Cold Start” war doctrine does not seem to be allowing Pakistan to reach at the above conclusions by indulging in deep long range penetrative strikes.
• The Indian doctrine seems to be aimed at inflicting significant military reverses on the Pakistan Army in a limited war scenario short of a nuclear war.
• Nuclear war fare is not a “commando raid” or “command operation” with which its present military ruler is more familiar. Crossing the nuclear threshold is so fateful a decision that even strong American Presidents in the past have baulked at exercising it or the prospects of exercising it.
• Pakistan cannot expect that India would sit idle and suffer a Pakistani nuclear strike without a massive nuclear retaliation.
• Pakistan’s external strategic patrons can coerce or dissuade both sides to avoid a nuclear conflict, but once Pakistan uses a nuclear first strike no power can restrain India from going in from its nuclear retaliation and the consequences for Pakistan in that case stand well discussed in strategic circles. Pakistan would stand wiped out.

The idea of becoming subservient to India is abhorrent. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto
Pakistan’s JF-17 Thunder Fighter Plane. US sanctions and external existential threats forced Pakistan to go nuclear
Neglected issues for the new Pakistani government. Eliminating food, fuel subsidies, keeping out the IMF, stopping the US drones, and halting the Indian & Afghan mercenaries coming from across the border
Beyond the Pakistani made JF-17 Thunder Fighter Plane, Chinese made J-10s. When will PAF acquire the J-11s
Pakistan defense based on missile nuclear deterrent hataf shaheen babar and abdali
Pakistan’s 500 Al-Khalid tanks have been in production since 2001. Newer generation tanks now being exported via IDEAS 2008
Has Indian been thrown out of Tajikistan? Why was Russia angry at India?
The declining Indo-Russian relationship. Delhi scrambles for new arms sources but they come with strings
American loose nuclear devices cause concern in Pakistan. The US must improve its control processes
Al Khalid Tanks
a missile program that is the envy of South Asia.
Pakistan a US ally faced American sanctions and developed its own JF-17 Thunder fighter which will move towards the 4thgeneration fighters of the world and opens up an export potential worth billions of Dollars 
Northern Areas are part of Pakistan and were never part of Kashmir
Why did Buddhism disappear from South Asia? A summary of Buddhist Hindu wars 
KASHMIR Junagarh & Manvadar Kashmir and Junagarh is Pakistani territory  
Kashmir: Does the article of accession exist? 

The Pathans of Pakistan
Moderate Muslim are building fantastic iconic structures. Bigots are blind to Islamic science & technology. Muslim progress is hidden because Islamphobes are cannot bear to see Muslim modernity

Erase the Durand Line
The Pakistan Bilawal will inherit in 2014

 LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | December 27th, 2008 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ |Save/Share