Indian army 'backed out' of Pakistan attack
By Siddharth Srivastava
NEW DELHI - Reluctance for battle by an ill-prepared army could have resulted
in India not launching an attack on Pakistan in the aftermath of the
Pakistan-linked terror attack in the Indian city of Mumbai on November 26 in
which nearly 200 people died.
High-level government sources have told Asia Times Online that army commanders
impressed on the political leadership in New Delhi that an inadequate and
obsolete arsenal at their disposal mitigated against an all-out war.
The navy and air force, however, had given the government the go-ahead about
their preparedness to carry out an attack and repulse
any retaliation from Pakistan.
Over the past few weeks, it has become increasingly apparent from top officials
in the know that the closed-door meetings of top military commanders and
political leaders discussed the poor state of the armory (both ammunition and
artillery), and that this tilted the balance in favor of not striking at
According to senior officials, following the attack on Mumbai by 10 militants
linked to Pakistan, India's top leadership looked at two options closely - war
and hot pursuit.
Largely for the reasons cited above, the notion of an all-out war was rejected.
Hot pursuit, however, remains very much on the table.
The government sources say that a framework for covert operations is being put
in place, although India will continue to deny such actions. Crack naval, air
and army forces backed by federal intelligence agencies will be involved. The
target areas will be Pakistan-administered Kashmir and areas along the Punjab,
such as Multan, where some of the Mumbai attackers are believed to have been
The coastal belt from the southern port city of Karachi to Gwadar in
Balochistan province will also be under active Indian surveillance.
Thumbs down to war
Following the Mumbai attack, New Delhi's inclination was to launch a quick
strike against Pakistan to impress domestic opinion, and then be prepared for a
short war, given the pressures that would be exercised by international powers
for a ceasefire to prevent nuclear war breaking out.
The expectation of New Delhi was that the war would go beyond the traditional
skirmishes involving artillery fire that take place at the Kashmir border,
essentially to check infiltration by militants, or the brief but bloody
exchanges at Kargil in 1999.
It was in this context that the army made it apparent that it was not equipped
to fight such a war, given the military's presence along the eastern Chinese
borders, and that India was at risk of ceding territory should an instant
ceasefire be brokered with Pakistan.
This would have been highly embarrassing, not to mention political suicide for
the Congress-led government in an election year. So instead, New Delhi
restricted itself to a strident diplomatic offensive that continues to date,
and the option of hot pursuit.
The air force, on the other hand, was confident that it was prepared to take on
the first retaliatory action by Pakistan, expected at forward air force bases
along India's borders in Rajasthan, Gujarat and Indian-administered Kashmir.
The role of the navy in the operations was not clearly defined, but it was to
cover from the Arabian Sea.
Not ready to fight
Various experts, former generals and independent reports have voiced concern
over the past few years about the state of preparedness of the Indian army.
For example, the Bofors gun scandal of the 1980s stymied the army's artillery
modernization plan, with no induction of powerful guns since the 1986 purchase
of 410 Bofors 155mm/39-caliber howitzers. The army has been trying to introduce
400 such guns from abroad and another 1,100 manufactured domestically, without
The latest report by the independent Comptroller and Auditor General said the
state's production of 23mm ammunition for Shilka anti-aircraft cannons and 30mm
guns mounted on infantry combat vehicles lacked quality. Further, supply was
nearly 35% short of requirements.
India's huge tank fleet is in bad shape due to a shortage of Russian spare
parts, while indigenous efforts, such as the main battle tank Arjun, have
Signs of trouble emerged during the Kargil war when it was revealed that
India's defense forces were dealing with acute shortages in every sphere.
In remarks that underscored the problems, the then-army chief, V P Malik, said
his forces would make do with whatever was in hand, given the fears of a
full-scale war that was eventually avoided due to pressure by America, then
under president Bill Clinton.
The Kargil review committee report noted, "The heavy involvement of the army in
counter-insurgency operations cannot but affect its preparedness for its
primary role, which is to defend the country against external aggression."
Although there have been attempts to hasten India's overall defense
modernization program, estimated at over US$50 billion over the next five
years, gaping holes need to be plugged, including corruption and massive delays
in the defense procurement processes.
India's defense expenditure has dipped below 2% of gross domestic product for
the first time in decades, despite experts pegging 3% as adequate.
Other defense arms are in dire need of enhancement. Fighter jet squadrons are
much below required strength, while the bidding process for medium fighter
planes has only just begun and may take a few years to complete.
Meanwhile, the prospects of an India-Pakistan conflict are not over. India's
army chief, General Deepak Kapoor, said last week that Pakistan had redeployed
troops from its Afghan border to the western frontier with India. "The Indian
army has factored this in its planning," Kapoor said.
Siddharth Srivastava is a New Delhi-based journalist. He can be reached