Kargil Facts & Figures - 2!

[EagleEyes]

Old thread is located here.

http://www.pakistaniforces.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1146

Continue the discussion and keep it civilized, and mature.

Thanks!

 

[EagleEyes]

Is it possible that Kargil War occured because Pakistan wanted to check up on Indian Military power, tactic and their response to it. If India have not engaged (though Pakistan Military knew they would) it would have been a win. We won tactically, as Musharraf claims.

 

[Contrarian]

how did Pakistan win 'tactically'?

i mean, it was a 'tactical' surprise , thats all.

Pakistan didnt even claim the dead!, we won international praise, we got back the land that was ours. it would have been a tactical success if Pakistan would have been able to retain Kargil. The world commented us, it was a PR super victory. The WORLD condemned Pakistan for the Kargil misadventure as it is known now!

Plus Pakistan got to know that we wont look kindly to any such aggression. A message, that we are willing to fight for the last inch in India. Pakistan also got to know that any future action wont be tolerated and a small measure of India's might.

It also lost another crucial thing, this flaw in Indian preparedness in the begining could have been exploited hell of a lot better in case of a war. Now India will adequately prepare for such things in the future and this loophole will be plugged.

So how was it in any ways a win for Pakistan? the only thing Pakistan got was a surprise. Nothing else...and dont go by Musharraf's word, after all he still has to run a country, and he cant say that Kargil was a disaster for Pakistan.

 

[TexasJohn]

Malay,

The Indian establishment ( Armed Forces, humit etc.) was caught with it's pants down. All Pakistan did was exploit the holes.. hopefully this would teach them a lesson in vigilance!!

As far as it having been a tactical victory, you would really have to explain to me why you think so.. it was a cluster in my opinion!

 

[MIG_ACE]

Malay,

The Indian establishment ( Armed Forces, humit etc.) was caught with it's pants down. All Pakistan did was exploit the holes.. hopefully this would teach them a lesson in vigilance!!

I agree with you.It was one hell of an intelligence failure.I have even read that the IA was first alerted to the presence of intruders by a couple of kashmiri farmers who were grazing their cattle and got a nasty surprise on the mountain slopes.
I think there were two reasons for this.
1) Sheer negligence.After the Lahore summit there was a sort of hunky-dory atmosphere btwn the two countries and the indian govt. as well as the IA got a bit carried away.The times of india had even reported that recce flights over Azad Kashmir by IAF Mig-25R jets had been suspended bcoz they werent felt necessary when the relations b/w India and PAK were "supposedly" improving.
2)The snow melted earlier that year and while Pakistan took full advantage of that the IA was soundly sleeping.

But the IA did a good job in kargil despite being unprepared.The standard response in this scenario wud have been to cross the LOC and cut off their supply lines.But this was strictly forbidden by the govt.(much to the dismay of the IA commanders) and this led to the IA suffering from heavy casualties.But they still did their job against all odds.
The indian armed forces also learnt a lot of lessons from kargil.Some essential equipment like hand-held thermal imagers,bullet-proof vests,weapon-locating radars etc. was procured after kargil on a high priority basis.
The IAF got some valuable experience in using Laser guided weappons to destroy bunkers on mountain tops.
And the most important lesson: NEVER TRUST PAKISTAN. No matter how good the realtions b/w the two countries get in the future India should always be on its guard.U can never say when pakistan will try another kargil style operation.

 

[vnomad]

India would have suffered atleast three times more casualties was it not for the stellar performance of the artillery. All advantage the intruders had through being at a superior elevation was offset by brilliant arty support the IA had.
Why exactly did Pakistan attack India? An attack otherwise could have been justified but why the Lahore pact then?

 

[MIG_ACE]

The Lahore pact was a distraction.It was attempt to make India think that pakistan was serious about peace.And the distraction succeeded to the extent that the PA was able to achieve complete surprise.I've already elaborated the other aspects above.

 

[vnomad]

The Lahore pact was a distraction.It was attempt to make India think that pakistan was serious about peace.And the distraction succeeded to the extent that the PA was able to achieve complete surprise.I've already elaborated the other aspects above.

I read that but I'd like to hear the version of our Pakistani friends here.

 

[Goodperson]

Kargil did one good thing, It made India trigered new arms acquitision, development and common command setup for defence forces.

 

[Janbaz]

Kargil operation was drived by stealth. Pakistani troops and militants entered Kashmir as early as Oct 1998 but only discovered in May of 1999. Laugh at massive Indian intellegence in the region when two shepard boys saw them in a ledge.

 

[niaz]

Is it possible that Kargil War occured because Pakistan wanted to check up on Indian Military power, tactic and their response to it. If India have not engaged (though Pakistan Military knew they would) it would have been a win. We won tactically, as Musharraf claims.

According to 'Von Clauswitz'; War is a political tool to impose your will on the enemy. It must have clearly defined objectives else it runs out of control with unforseen consequences.

Whatever Musharraf claims let us examine the events with cold logic.

1. Pakistan was single out internationally as a war monger.
No one believed that those people were only Freedom Fighters. At least in the UK media and thanks to " I am innocent " attitude of Nawaz Sharif. PA was labelled as a rogue army. A clear defeat in the propaganda war.

2. It was Pakistan not India which went begging to US to bail them out.

3. Lets not guess as to "what would have, could have or should have happened". What is important is what actually happened. Pakistan agreed to unilateral withdrawl without any conditions and only a very vague promise that Clinton would use his personal influence to solve Kashmir issue. As if we didn't know that Clinton, along with JFK; was one of the most pro Indian US Presidents ever.

Based on the above and much to my dismay as a Pakistani, I have to admit that in whatever which way we examined the facts, it was a defeat for Pakistan militarily and a very comprehensive one at that. Not only we failed to impose our will on the enemy, our Prime Minister was appologetic to the extreme. Tactical victory? Certainly not. All the loss of life was for nothing.

4. It resulted in an increase in the annual Indian Defence Budget equal to total Pak Defence Budget. Thus making India more powerful and even tougher to beat in any future conflict.

The whole episode reminds me of an anecdote during the WW1;when generals were sending thousands of men to death in the trench war with little or no gain; it is an army of lions led by the donkeys.

 

[dabong1]

According to 'Von Clauswitz'; War is a political tool to impose your will on the enemy. It must have clearly defined objectives else it runs out of control with unforseen consequences.

Whatever Musharraf claims let us examine the events with cold logic.

1. Pakistan was single out internationally as a war monger.
No one believed that those people were only Freedom Fighters. At least in the UK media and thanks to " I am innocent " attitude of Nawaz Sharif. PA was labelled as a rogue army. A clear defeat in the propaganda war.

2. It was Pakistan not India which went begging to US to bail them out.

3. Lets not guess as to "what would have, could have or should have happened". What is important is what actually happened. Pakistan agreed to unilateral withdrawl without any conditions and only a very vague promise that Clinton would use his personal influence to solve Kashmir issue. As if we didn't know that Clinton, along with JFK; was one of the most pro Indian US Presidents ever.

Based on the above and much to my dismay as a Pakistani, I have to admit that in whatever which way we examined the facts, it was a defeat for Pakistan militarily and a very comprehensive one at that. Not only we failed to impose our will on the enemy, our Prime Minister was appologetic to the extreme. Tactical victory? Certainly not. All the loss of life was for nothing.

4. It resulted in an increase in the annual Indian Defence Budget equal to total Pak Defence Budget. Thus making India more powerful and even tougher to beat in any future conflict.

The whole episode reminds me of an anecdote during the WW1;when generals were sending thousands of men to death in the trench war with little or no gain; it is an army of lions led by the donkeys.

1-It was one of the most brilliant tactical high altitudes operations of all times.Even Indian own post war inquiry admitted that 'after all our war planning we were totally surprised'.

2-Pakistan Army captured nearly 134 posts and according to neutral observers till the time Clinton intervened, Indians had taken back about 10 of these posts.

3-Most importantly the posts that Indians recaptured were the frontal ones meaning where artillery could have direct hits and have an impact, where as remaining 110+ plus were at the rear where this decisive Indian strength was useless.

4-The role of President Clinton has not really been correctly highlightened in the kargil war.The real fact is that it was HIS personal intervention that in the end turned the tables.It seems that other geo political considerations such as Pak. support of Taliban etc. played a decisive role in ensuring U.S mega pressure on Nawaz Sharif.

5-In short, from pure military point of view it was a super move by Pakistan Army.I have checked from number of global sources and and just a fraction of NLI was hit.Their bravery at those heights was unbelievable as was the professionalism of SSG commandoes, perhaps the best high altitude fighters in the world.

6-However, the limitations were equally glaring regarding poor understanding of U.S response and other players intervention.

 

[Contrarian]

dabong1,
Dont confuse yourself, in Kargil, the NLI was being blasted off by the end. The IA suffered, but only in the begining when the opposition was under estimated, by the end, they were winning with a very decisive edge.

It was merely a tactical surprise, Pakistan failed to gauge the Indian response. They thought that India would not react the way it did on such a scale. It was a strategic and military loss.

It was indeed a super move by Pakistan in the context of it being a total surprise, nothing more and nothing less. Unfortunately they counted on a weak response by the IA, and no condemnation by the world. Dont think for even one second that Pakistan withdrew from Kargil under US pressure. They were getting beaten up badly there, and needed face saving, and thus saying that US made them retreat. If you retreat, you atleast take your dead with you.

 

[TomCat111]

Dont confuse yourself, in Kargil, the NLI was being blasted off by the end. The IA suffered, but only in the begining when the opposition was under estimated, by the end, they were winning with a very decisive edge.

1. Of course, India wins decisively against Pakistan in every single conflict, but only in bollywood movies. Snap out please, we are not debating bollywood scenarios.
2. I guess that’s why India was threatening to open up other fronts. It’s a common strategy among the decisive winners to open up other fronts to relive pressure, right?
3. Decisive winners also finish their jobs completely and not half-assed. Enjoy::read:

'Key peak still in Pakistani occupation'
[ 7 Jun, 2004 2128hrs ISTIANS ]

CHANDIGARH: A former Indian Army officer has claimed a few strategic peaks in the Kargil sector of Jammu and Kashmir, including the crucial Point 5353, were still under occupation by Pakistani forces.

Brig. Surinder Singh, who was dismissed from service in June 2001, also claimed the Indian defence establishment had misled the country by claiming it had gained control on the peaks in Kargil, where India and Pakistan fought a brief border conflict in 1999.

Singh was sacked after being embroiled in a controversy with his superiors about alleged lapses and intelligence failures that led to Pakistan-backed intruders occupying strategic features along a 140-km stretch of the Line of Control.

He asserted he had proof that Point 5353, a hill in the Drass sector of north Kashmir, was still under Pakistani occupation.

"I have evidence of this claim including satellite images," he told reporters.

Singh said the alleged inaction of the defence and political leadership during the Kargil conflict was only the tip of the iceberg.

"The defence establishment had misled the nation about getting every intruder out of the Kargil sector. I can give proof of this to whatever committee the new government at the centre sets up," Singh said, noting he had written about the matter to Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee.

Singh said he had asked Mukherjee to order a thorough probe into the Kargil conflict and issues that were deliberately hidden by the previous coalition government led by the Bharatiya Janata Party.

They were getting beaten up badly there, and needed face saving, and thus saying that US made them retreat.

:lol1:

If you retreat, you atleast take your dead with you.

Do you mean like the dead Indian soldiers whose bodies India plainly refused to take from the Pakistanis through the Red-Cross, right?:?:

 

[vnomad]

I have checked from number of global sources and and just a fraction of NLI was hit.

Links would be appreciated. Thanks.