Indo Pak War
Riposte and its counter effectivity against Cold start
General Mirza Aslam Beg framed Pakistan army docrtrine through Zarb e Momin exercise named Riposte being counter offensive to any indian offence on the Pakistani soil. It comprises rapid movement of small amount of army as compared to slow movement of large number of army on the indian side. It basically revolves around deploying troops faster and gaining advantage to indian army by occupying almost 50 km of indian territory. Later on Sundarji Doctrine (1981—2004) was improvised because of its ineffectivity of troops mobilisation of almost 27 days to Cold start Doctrine.As per Cold Start promulgation, offensive operations could begin within 48 hours after orders had been issued. Such a limited response time would enable Indian forces to surprise their Pakistani counterparts. Operations would involve armoured spearheads, launched from forward positions in Punjab and Rajasthan.The plan emphasises speed and overwhelming firepower: armored formations and accompanying infantry would advance into eastern Pakistan, with limited goals in terms of distance and in terms of duration. The plan reportedly has a significant air support component. From the Indian perspective, the plan has the added virtue of accentuating Pakistani discomfiture and angst, which theoretically has some deterrent value.
General Mirza Aslam Beg framed Pakistan army docrtrine through Zarb e Momin exercise named Riposte being counter offensive to any indian offence on the Pakistani soil. It comprises rapid movement of small amount of army as compared to slow movement of large number of army on the indian side. It basically revolves around deploying troops faster and gaining advantage to indian army by occupying almost 50 km of indian territory. Later on Sundarji Doctrine (1981—2004) was improvised because of its ineffectivity of troops mobilisation of almost 27 days to Cold start Doctrine.As per Cold Start promulgation, offensive operations could begin within 48 hours after orders had been issued. Such a limited response time would enable Indian forces to surprise their Pakistani counterparts. Operations would involve armoured spearheads, launched from forward positions in Punjab and Rajasthan.The plan emphasises speed and overwhelming firepower: armored formations and accompanying infantry would advance into eastern Pakistan, with limited goals in terms of distance and in terms of duration. The plan reportedly has a significant air support component. From the Indian perspective, the plan has the added virtue of accentuating Pakistani discomfiture and angst, which theoretically has some deterrent value.
To counter Indian Doctrine of Cold Start Pakistani Army deployed short range miniatured tactical nuke called Nasr which is quoted as the most dangeous develpment in South Asia in case of tactical warfare.The ISPR described the system as "Multi-tube Ballistic Missile" because the launch vehicle carries multiple missiles. Its existence was revealed after a test in 2011 and it appears to have entered service after further testing in 2013.According to analysts, if used just inside Pakistani territory, it would counter cold start doctrine and maximize ionizing radiation exposure while minimizing blast effects which would be more dangerous for the Indian army than for local people as the blast yield is much lower than Strategic nuclear weapons.Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Qamar Javed Bajwa witnessed training launch of short-range surface-to-surface ballistic missile 'Nasr'.The COAS appreciated the standard of training and operational preparedness of Army Strategic Force and congratulated the scientists and engineers on achieving this significant milestone towards Pakistan's credible deterrence capability.He expressed his complete confidence in effective command, control, safety and security of all strategic assets and measures being taken to augment these. "You are our real heroes, the unseen, we owe you our gratitude," the COAS said.
"Nasr has put cold water on Cold Start ," the COAS said.
Both India and Pakistan consider the conflicts as the bargaining situations assuming the variable sum advantage to either stakeholder. Both counterparts will most probably use the bargain to ensure its throne on Indian occupied Kashmir and to have hold on the spillheads of the rivers originating from Kashmir Valley .
The two-day secretary-level talks between India and Pakistan , under the auspices of the World Bank, on the issues of Kishenganga and Ratle hydro-electric power plants within the framework of Indus Water Treaty, ended without producing any result. However, the World Bank, which is a signatory to the water sharing treaty between the two countries, has assured its continued assistance in resolving the issue peacefully.
Pakistan and India had been involved in intractable discussions to resolve the dispute regarding construction of two hydro electric power plants namely Kishenganga and Ralte being built by the latter in violation of the provisions of the Indus Water Treaty. This issue arose last year too, when Pakistan requested the World Bank to establish a court of Arbitration to resolve the differences between the two countries. India simultaneously requested the World Bank for the appointment of a neutral expert.India was actually trying to build pressure on Pakistan to back off from the position taken by her on the Kashmir issue, particularly in regards to current uprising in the valley. It was not a technical issue. India had been threatening to review the Indus Water Treaty in the backdrop of Uri attack which it blamed on Pakistan . In an atmosphere loaded with tensions between the two countries, expecting them to show goodwill in resolving the issue was hoping against hope. The World Bank had a role to play as per the Treaty and it failed that role this time.
"Nasr has put cold water on Cold Start ," the COAS said.
Both India and Pakistan consider the conflicts as the bargaining situations assuming the variable sum advantage to either stakeholder. Both counterparts will most probably use the bargain to ensure its throne on Indian occupied Kashmir and to have hold on the spillheads of the rivers originating from Kashmir Valley .
The two-day secretary-level talks between India and Pakistan , under the auspices of the World Bank, on the issues of Kishenganga and Ratle hydro-electric power plants within the framework of Indus Water Treaty, ended without producing any result. However, the World Bank, which is a signatory to the water sharing treaty between the two countries, has assured its continued assistance in resolving the issue peacefully.
Pakistan and India had been involved in intractable discussions to resolve the dispute regarding construction of two hydro electric power plants namely Kishenganga and Ralte being built by the latter in violation of the provisions of the Indus Water Treaty. This issue arose last year too, when Pakistan requested the World Bank to establish a court of Arbitration to resolve the differences between the two countries. India simultaneously requested the World Bank for the appointment of a neutral expert.India was actually trying to build pressure on Pakistan to back off from the position taken by her on the Kashmir issue, particularly in regards to current uprising in the valley. It was not a technical issue. India had been threatening to review the Indus Water Treaty in the backdrop of Uri attack which it blamed on Pakistan . In an atmosphere loaded with tensions between the two countries, expecting them to show goodwill in resolving the issue was hoping against hope. The World Bank had a role to play as per the Treaty and it failed that role this time.
Comments
Post a Comment