Indian Army has killed 5 Pakistani soldiers for every one jawan it has lost. What more can it do?

[Dillinger]

The Indian Army is "inflicting heavy pain on the Pakistani side" and using coordinated fire assaults as it tightens the screws on Pakistan along the Line of Control (LoC). In fact, the Indian Army's pressure on the Pakistani army along the LoC has reportedly forced the latter to sound 35 "red-alerts" for its border troops. For its part, Islamabad has been made to pay a heavy price, with the Indian Army revealing that it has killed at least 20 Pakistani Rangers and injured seven more in 2018 itself in cross-border firing along the LoC. However, given that the security forces estimate that close to 200 terrorists are waiting to cross into India and Pakistan's continued violations, are these military actions yielding the results we need? Click here to read the full article

The data available on Pakistani casualties in 2017 and official statements from both sides indicate that at least since September 2016 (when the Modi government greenlit cross-border surgical strikes after the Uri terrorist attack), the Indian Army has been employing a more muscular policy while responding to infiltrations and ceasefire violations. At present, according to news agencies, the Indian Army has been conducting pro-active operations along the LoC. Indian forces have killed 138 Pakistan Army personnel in 2017 in tactical operations and retaliatory firings along the LoC, intelligence sources told news agencies last month. The same sources revealed that the Indian Army lost 28 soldiers during the same period along the LoC.

While the Pakistan Army has adopted a practice of not acknowledging the deaths of its soldiers, if the data is reliable, it begs the question: Why is Islamabad not deterred when the Indian Army has killed close to five Pakistani soldiers for every single personnel it has lost? Why is it that Pakistan continues to violate the 2003 ceasefire agreement?

Here are two future options, one in terms of strategy and another in terms of modernisation, that experts have mooted. Click here to read the full article.

 

[Dillinger]

It would be interesting to see what consensus the forum members arrive at after reading the above article. Whether they agree, disagree, have things to add...

 

[_Anonymous_]

Dukh toh is baat ka hain ki kuch nahin hogaa, bass aisa hi chalta rahegaa.

There's no end game in sight just an interregnum and continuum .

 

[Paro]

Article based on observations made by Christine Fair. She doesn’t love India she just hates Pakistan more.
Only way forward is to either go on an offensive or increase their costs more than they can digest.

 

[randomradio]

They are stressed for funds and we can only exacerbate that.

Keeping their eastern front alive would mean aiding anti-establishment movement on their western front.

 

[nair]

It would be interesting to see what consensus the forum members arrive at after reading the above article. Whether they agree, disagree, have things to add...

Well I seriously doubt the numbers given, These are based on estimates and intel reports, can be right and can be wrong.....

The question need to be asked is, If the data is right, why there was no attempt from Pakistani side to reduce the tensions, Since they have not asked, that means they are ok with the damage, and they plan to inflict more damage to us.... both thru regulars or by their terrorists.... which was evident by the 5 attacks happened in the last 1 week..... We have also lost met in border......

 

[Dillinger]

Article based on observations made by Christine Fair. She doesn’t love India she just hates Pakistan more.
Only way forward is to either go on an offensive or increase their costs more than they can digest.

Fair is one of the experts, yes. The other is Ajai Sahni. Both deal in counter-terrorism, ergo why their views were taken on what would be a tailor-made deterrence for Pakistani sub-conventional warfare. The thing is, if the numbers are right (and we don't have reason right now to doubt the numbers being given by our intelligence officials), we are already imposing a heavy cost and they seem to be digesting it, one way or the other. So, what comes next? Please do share your views on that question.

 

[Notsuperstitious]

Article based on observations made by Christine Fair. She doesn’t love India she just hates Pakistan more.
Only way forward is to either go on an offensive or increase their costs more than they can digest.

We can not end this militarily.

But should that be our objective?

India is a nation state. We exist for our people, their well being and prosperity. That is the larger picture.

The occassional pain pakistan causes is not ideal, but it is also not the end of the world for us. We must be patient and defeat them where it matters most, making our people happier, healthier, wealthier. Isnt that why we exist?

Look at their world image. Look how their internal bloodshed makes their nation building even more difficult. Look at the way they are running away from that land drowning and getting shot on the way. Look at their economy and state of law and order, education and health and governance.

They are losing. We are winning. Why do something drastic? We must maintain the pressure is all.

Look at the larger picture, dont let the provocations blind you to the reality.

 

[Dillinger]

Well I seriously doubt the numbers given, These are based on estimates and intel reports, can be right and can be wrong.....

The question need to be asked is, If the data is right, why there was no attempt from Pakistani side to reduce the tensions, Since they have not asked, that means they are ok with the damage, and they plan to inflict more damage to us.... both thru regulars or by their terrorists.... which was evident by the 5 attacks happened in the last 1 week..... We have also lost met in border......

This could be true, that they are willing to absorb the casualties. Which is why the question: what more can we do? Are we falling into a trap? Given that we are dealing in tactical operations at the LoC, where our overall conventional advantage may not be deployed to its full strength. There are only as many troops we can deploy there, without starting a war. Which means, say we have a 100 and they have only 50 but both of us have deployed only 20, respectively, on each side. A simplistic example but one which illustrates how we may be nullifying our own advantage in this scenarios. Would like to read your views on the above. Also, please read what the experts had to say in the article. That too can be a topic of discussion.

 

[Dillinger]

We can not end this militarily.

But should that be our objective?

India is a nation state. We exist for our people, their well being and prosperity. That is the larger picture.

The occassional pain pakistan causes is not ideal, but it is also not the end of the world for us. We must be patient and defeat them where it matters most, making our people happier, healthier, wealthier. Isnt that why we exist?

Look at their world image. Look how their internal bloodshed makes their nation building even more difficult. Look at the way they are running away from that land drowning and getting shot on the way. Look at their economy and state of law and order, education and health and governance.

They are losing. We are winning. Why do something drastic? We must maintain the pressure is all.

Overall, yes. We should concentrate on our citizen's well being and prosperity. BUT! The occasional pain, as you put it, involves our soldiers dying. Is that a status quo we should continue to accept? Should we write it off as something we cannot alter, as we have been unable to decisively stop these Pakistani attacks so far, and accept as par of the course? Can we say that our Army must now defend even its residential bases from heavily armed terrorists... bases which are in the hinterland and not even at the front?

 

[nair]

This could be true, that they are willing to absorb the casualties

They are a bit different from other military's.... As their intentions are totally different.... As we know armed forces work to protect the nation, when it comes PA, their objective is to ensure their significance in the country, then comes the protecting the nation part...... Ex: Mushraff begged NS to go to US to save his rear..... and NS went and did for the nation, once he has back, the same mushraff said, that they were winning and the govt ensured the loss of PA in kargil......

Are we falling into a trap?

I have written the reply in another thread.....Are we in state of undeclared war? - Post 61

where our overall conventional advantage may not be deployed to its full strength.

Exactly my point in that post...

 

[nair]

The problem with us is we forget that we are dealing with a Cunning military, who is wounded and pained by India..... They do have a big score to settle, and will never forget the pain we caused to their mind and their psyche

 

[Notsuperstitious]

Overall, yes. We should concentrate on our citizen's well being and prosperity. BUT! The occasional pain, as you put it, involves our soldiers dying. Is that a status quo we should continue to accept? Should we write it off as something we cannot alter, as we have been unable to decisively stop these Pakistani attacks so far, and accept as par of the course? Can we say that our Army must now defend even its residential bases from heavily armed terrorists... bases which are in the hinterland and not even at the front?

At the risk of sounding heartless, the most successful nations, not of today alone, but from history too, have done many many times more military sacrifices than us. The price has to be paid, unfortunately.

Discussing strategy affecting the lives of nations, the analyses should be without emotion.

It boils my blood every time our soldiers die in a useless war that only benefits the real rulers of pakistan. But in my view those rulers can only be defeated by common pakistanis, when they finally realise how they were taken for a ride. This may or may not happen, but the best chance of that happening is when they see themselves losing where it matters most.

 

[Dillinger]

They are a bit different from other military's.... As their intentions are totally different.... As we know armed forces work to protect the nation, when it comes PA, their objective is to ensure their significance in the country, then comes the protecting the nation part...... Ex: Mushraff begged NS to go to US to save his rear..... and NS went and did for the nation, once he has back, the same mushraff said, that they were winning and the govt ensured the loss of PA in kargil......



I have written the reply in another thread.....Are we in state of undeclared war? - Post 61


Exactly my point in that post...

Yes, I saw your reply there, and continuing from that: we have not been able to make supporting terrorism costly enough for them for it to stop. Note, we have made such activities more costly... key is... not costly enough. That is exactly what this thread should ideally be about. Are the experts in the article on the right track? Are we on the right track, at least as far as the citizens see it?

 

[Dillinger]

At the risk of sounding heartless, the most successful nations, not of today alone, but from history too, have done many many times more military sacrifices than us. The price has to be paid, unfortunately.

Discussing strategy affecting the lives of nations, the analyses should be without emotion.

It boils my blood every time our soldiers die in a useless war that only benefits the real rulers of pakistan. But in my view those rulers can only be defeated by common pakistanis, when they finally realise how they were taken for a ride. This may or may not happen, but the best chance of that happening is when they see themselves losing where it matters most.

Yes, but a dispassionate analysis cannot ignore the fact that they have opened another front for us: deep enough into our territory that we may not be fully prepared for it but not so deep that it can get them hammered internationally -- Pathankot and Sunjuwan. Also, the fact that these are across the IB and not the LoC. Yes, in strategy, we may not see just the cost we pay in the lives of out soldiers. But, Sunjuwan isn't just about the unfortunate loss of lives, it's about dealing with a new security threat that imposes its own burden and costs on us and how do we respond to that.

 

[nair]

Yes, I saw your reply there, and continuing from that: we have not been able to make supporting terrorism costly enough for them for it to stop. Note, we have made such activities more costly... key is... not costly enough. That is exactly what this thread should ideally be about. Are the experts in the article on the right track? Are we on the right track, at least as far as the citizens see it?

Well.... Who decides what is costly or not??? We assume certian amount/degree/Nos..... But If the advisory is ready to pay that price and in their mind that cost is not significant, then the entire calculation has gone wrong.......

I feel we are paying for the the publicity we gave for "Surgical Strikes",

 

[nair]

I feel it has more to do with the diplomatic level, and the support china gives to Pakistan...... If you have a neighbor who supports you whole heartedly in a conflict in which the nighbor is also involved and has the same adversary, What else do you need?

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

Yes, I saw your reply there, and continuing from that: we have not been able to make supporting terrorism costly enough for them for it to stop. Note, we have made such activities more costly... key is... not costly enough. That is exactly what this thread should ideally be about. Are the experts in the article on the right track? Are we on the right track, at least as far as the citizens see it?

There are no Quick solutions to this problem

Had man Mohan singh not followed his appeasement policy we could have taken advantage of the Bad Internal situation in pakistan

Any way forget it

Now Both Afghanistan and US are getting tough against Pakistan so we should also ADD to their troubles by keeping the Border Hot Now and hotter in Summer

pakistan is a snake ; you cannot negotiate with snakes

With their increasing Internal and economic problems this is the Best time
to get revenge for all their crimes

The International opinion against pakistan has never been worse

The Iron is getting hot ; we have to use the hammer

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

I feel we are paying for the the publicity we gave for "Surgical Strikes",

This is WHY pakistanis Believe that they will WIN in their Civilisational war with India

Pakistanis believe that Because Indians are weak ;
they cannot take casualties so they will keep appeasing Pakistan

 

[nair]

Had man Mohan singh not followed his appeasement policy we could have taken advantage of the Bad Internal situation in pakistan

Stop looking thru the political lens..... When it comes to pakistan, no policy (no political leader in recent past) was successful.... Be it vajpeyee, Be it Man mohan sing, or be it Narendra Modi....... I do not blame 3 of them, as all three of them were sincere in their efforts, and all of them had got tight slaps on their face for the aman ki aasha.