Retaliation against Pakistan is warranted
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
Issue Net Edition | Date : 27 Jul , 2015

The time window to retaliate against the Pakistani castration and beheading of three Indian soldiers earlier this year or killing of five brave soldiers in Poonch this week does not elapse if a month or year has passed.  In fact, the time, place, and method of retaliation are a matter of the victim’s own choosing.  Thus, retaliation could take place a year or two years from now: there are no statutes of limitations on this type of situation, and there is no absolute moral constraint from exercising retaliation; and there is no written international law on this matter.

Stupid Indian politicians fall for this diplomacy hook, line, and sinker, while Pakistani diplomacy returns chuckling that it made a fool of stupid Indians once again.

It is unfortunate that since the beheading incident, the Indian prime minister met with his Pakistani counterpart, hailing from the same district of Jhelum.  The Pakistani PM paid a pilgrimage to the sacred tomb of Moinuddin Chisti in Ajmer, and further met with India’s foreign minister.  These incidents served to diffuse the situation, and both Islamabad and New Delhi agreed to brush the incident under the carpet with the aim of forgetting it altogether.

But India has failed to understand or recognize this ploy by Pakistan.  After each major incident, Pakistan starts playing cards of goodwill, brings up old connections of Indians with West Punjab, raises the issue of sharing a common language and culture, opens the connection of religion with Indian Muslims, relates that Iqbal was an Indian poet laureate who wrote sare jahan se acha Hindustan hamara, and purports to act as a brother toward India.  Stupid Indian politicians fall for this diplomacy hook, line, and sinker, while Pakistani diplomacy returns chuckling that it made a fool of stupid Indians once again.

After 66 years with Pakistan, India has not learned.  To make it worse, we’ve had two prime ministers from Jhelum who have been immensely soft with Pakistan – Inder Gujral and Manmohan Singh.  Other prime ministers may have not been soft, but they have exhibited fear and restraint, which amounts to the same effect.  Thus, time and again, Pakistan gets away with excesses and atrocities against India.  And India in its arrogance thinks that love will conquer Pakistan.  Such thinking is far distant from the realpolitik, and tends to portray weakness and cowardice, instead.

And, Pakistan will violate the cease-fire and kill Indian soldiers again.

Military Retaliation Systems

There are various ways of retaliation that don’t have to simply be tit for tat.  These various ways are outlined below:

…to increase the level of disproportionate action to teach Pakistan a long lasting lesson.  This is to undertake action across the Line of Control with overwhelming firepower and attack a whole Brigade.

First, a tit for tat is legitimate in that India fires and kills three Pakistani soldiers for the beheading incident and five more for this week’s incident.  Castration and beheading is gruesome and against the Geneva Convention, so I can’t in good conscience recommend that strategy under any circumstance, even though Pakistan lives by it.[1]This action can be directed against the Baluch regimented that actually carried out gruesome acts against the Indian soldiers, or else against any other regiment along any part of the border.

The next is disproportionate retaliation, where instead of killing eight Pakistani soldiers, India kills eighty in an ambush action or night raid or other action.  Again, the place and time is of one’s own choosing and can be in Kashmir or Kutch.

The third is to increase the level of disproportionate action to teach Pakistan a long lasting lesson.  This is to undertake action across the Line of Control with overwhelming firepower and attack a whole Brigade.  Such a fight can go into two/three days of heavy fighting.

The fourth is to escalate the level of retaliation and use the air force for heavy bombing of a Pakistani division or vital facility, in either the most important or least important location – doesn’t matter.  The essence of this action might be to use one to two hundred warplanes in saturation bombing with an aim to destroy an entire Pakistani division.  This action can be restricted to a particular sector in limited action.  War is war – and holds need not be barred.

The fifth is to use asymmetric response.  That is, use the navy to retaliate for what the army has done, or use Special Forces for select action.  For instance, the navy could sink a Pakistani naval ship or two.  This would obviously take the Indian and Pakistani navy to high levels of alert for a prolonged part of a few years, but the weaker arm will tend to suffer more.  If Pakistan reacts with naval bombardment of its own, the Indian navy can simply repeat the exercise.  The purpose of retaliation is to simply teach Pakistan that it must not mess with India.  And if Pakistan doesn’t learn, the aim of India must be to degrade Pakistani assets to the point that they are ineffective.

The major problem to retaliate is not that India lacks the military muscle against a weaker Pakistan.  The problem is its politicians who may be controlled by foreign powers or be indebted to them.

Mind you, these forms of retaliation are still short of a full-scale war along the whole border, which is yet another viable and realistic option, even if it’s a last option.

The Problem to Retaliate: Political Fifth Columnists

The major problem to retaliate is not that India lacks the military muscle against a weaker Pakistan.  The problem is its politicians who may be controlled by foreign powers or be indebted to them.  For instance, “Juari Lal Neheru” was influenced by the British, and perhaps by Lady Mountbatten, at that, to call off its action in Kashmir even at a time when Indian forces were rolling northwards and westwards.  During 1962, the US ambassador to India, John Kenneth Galbraith, convinced Neheru that India should not use its air force against China.  This was to squarely (a) teach India a lesson for its meddling in Korea, (b) its initiation of the non-aligned movement that was a snub to Washington, and (c) very astutely make India dependant on the USA for international support and military armaments.  The long and short of it was that our prime minister wasn’t thinking for himself, but was allowing foreign powers to tell him what to do.  When India needed foreign assistance for engineering and technology in the 1950s and 60s, Neheru spurned it, but when India needed to rely on its own military advice, he sought foreign advice.

Whereas diminutive Lal Bahadur Shastri was considered a political giant and mental stalwart, he stumbled gravely at Tashkent and came under some uncertain foreign pressure at Tashkent to give away Haji Pir and other captured Pakistani territories that had strategic interest.  Once again, India’s PM was manipulated by a foreign power.

Though the Bangladesh victory has been touted as India’s finest hour, it ended with its darkest night in the return of 90,000 POWs and large swathes of Pakistani territory in West Pakistan, with Pakistan not returning Indian POWs.  Again, India’s Prime Minister “Indheera Ghandhi” had herself fooled by foreign minister Swaran Singh who leaned into Pakistani Punjabi niceties and falsehood to give Indheera the wrong advice to trust Zulfiqar Bhutto, a snake by any standard.  But not only that, the prime minister was firmly warned by USA and Russia to call it quits in the war.  Here was foreign interference at its height – a matter of utter shame for India – reflecting that” India did not have a spine that could hold up

“Morearjee Disaii” has been suspected at various times of being a CIA agent and mole.  The action that gave this away the most was his support of China in the Sino-Vietnamese war of 1979.  Why would he do such a thing like support China when the war wounds of 1962 had not been forgotten?  What did he have against Vietnam that he would condemn them?  The answer was obviously that he was told by his CIA masters to do what he did.  But what did India get in return?  Nothing that we can document.  So was Morearjee Dissai in the pay of the CIA?  Maybe an investigation would be in order.

Apparently, American interests in Pakistan were more important than Indian interests with Pakistan.  The toughest, biggest nation on Earth could turn the screws on the possibly corrupt leaders of a poor country at any time.

In 1997, “Indur Gujraal” appeased American interests when he dismantled RAW programs in Pakistan, and set back by a decade what RAW had striven hard to build.  He also blocked all military action across the LOC, thereby allowing Pakistan to freely wage a proxy war in Kashmir.  It has been spoken that Gujraal was also a CIA man, but again, an investigation may be required.

The next war, Kargil, again presented itself with control of India’s leaders by foreign powers.  The USA and Britain impressed upon India not to cross the LOC, leaving India with a formidable task to eject Pakistani soldiers from Kargil and other heights.  India earned some international goodwill by coming across as a peaceful nation that could restrain itself; some good can be seen in this action that India took.  But, Bill Clinton was exceptionally strong in his arm twisting of India after the sanctions of 1998.  India was unable to act with pride and honor to protect its strategic interests.  Once again, military decision making at time of war was dictated not in New Delhi by New Delhi, but by a foreign power from a foreign city.

India’s plan to retaliate with operation Parakram was thwarted by USA.  With Indian tanks having started to roll at night across the Thar Desert in the direction of Pakistan, “Bhajpayi” and “”George Furnandiz” received a midnight call on the hotline to call off the invasion, or else.  Apparently, American interests in Pakistan were more important than Indian interests with Pakistan.  The toughest, biggest nation on Earth could turn the screws on the possibly corrupt leaders of a poor country at any time.  Once again, Indian military action was determined by a foreign nation in a foreign city.  There was nothing of Indian independence in this thinking, revealing that India is not its own country.

Once again, when talk of retaliation arose earlier this year after the beheading incident, “Munmohan Singh” and “Sulmaan Khursheed” downplayed the incident.  And now, “Ant-one-e” gave a clean chit to Pakistan by stating that terrorists in Pak uniform attacked Indian soldiers.  Even so, the action came from Pakistani territory, and so Pakistan is culpable.  But with Pakistan engaged in funding the Atlantic Council and ill-conceived, non-formal Track II discussions, it begs the question as to how many traitors we have within our country and leadership.  Is it possible that some of our political leaders are given campaigning funds by Pakistan?  If yes, India is truly already in the hands of its enemies, and India is India by name only.

And, to state unequivocally, there is no time limit for retaliation.  Let Pakistan know this and boil in its own sweat.


Unless India can demonstrate independent military action that the vast Indian public lauds as morally correct, which further is seen as evidence of Indian honor and pride, the suspicion that India is in the hands of foreigners – that India has really not earned independence from foreign rule – will persist in the minds of millions of Indians.  One way to disprove the skeptics is to overtly and openly retaliate against Pakistan for its recent atrocity in one of the five ways outlined, not ruling out a full scale war, which is indicated and necessary in its own right.

And, to state unequivocally, there is no time limit for retaliation.  Let Pakistan know this and boil in its own sweat.

First Published on 08-August-2013

[1] Other uncivilized nations in former years, including Afghanistan, Persia, Bokhara, Khiva, and Khotan, not to forget Turkestan have simply lived by brutal treatment of soldiers and prisoners.

Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

Dr Amarjit Singh

is an independent security analyst.

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left

16 thoughts on “Retaliation against Pakistan is warranted

  1. So 70 years have gone and you are still waiting to teach pakus tan a lesson. 70 years and you Sikh still a servant if the lalas. Come nr. Singh and see what happens when a nuclear bomb wipes out your amrita.

  2. What do you mean by independent army action? Do not try to blame the civilian Govt. Our defense forces have no clear planning. They are interested only purchasing out dated weapons from foreign countries by paying exorbitant price. They still think of conventional war using foot soldiers, Mortars, different kinds of field guns to neutralize enemy power. Air force still think they can win a war by using better fighter planes. Navy do not know the strategic places. in the Indian ocean. Now also there is no improvement in the planing . A few days back I read a news that Militants planning to use Indus River for movement between provinces reported by Dawn news paper in the year 1914. Now the terrorist used Ravi river to attack Gurudasrpur .. The other day I read an article. that IAF was not familiar with Kargil area and taken long time to find out enemy concentration. Navy had purchased one more Air craft carriers in 1987 knowing well that the missile boats are performed far better than the Aircraft carrier in 1971 war. We should have manufactured so many fast missile boats to guard our coast line. What kind of retaliation. you mean? Pakistan is a nuclear power and they do not hesitate to use against India. India cannot beat Pakistan by using conventional weapons. I have no hesitation to tell that Pakistan has better war strategy than India. But I am hopeful that this will change within three years. We are a super power in missile technology and we have developed some of the best missiles in the world with the help of Russia and Israel . I will call trimurti’s developed the missiles. Russian engineering, Israelis avionic and India’s softer ware.

  3. We cannot allow Pakistan’s nuclear blackmail to cove us down anymore.
    We need to spell out in clear terms that any nuclear strike by them will be met with multiple nuclear strikes by us and that sixteen cities in Pakistan will be nuked in a retaliatory response within half an hour.

    It does not matter in the least if during the next war with Pakistan, we annihilate 170 million Pakistanis without batting an eyelid.

    What we need to focus on is the conventional punch which our armored divisions and airforces will be delivering in a short and explosive campaign focused on Punjab and Sindh which should last not more than 2 weeks.

    The End-Station is Islamabad-Rawalpindi. Our tank commanders should be issued tickets to the end station before the start of the campaign itself.

    The Indian Navy and the Desert based armored divisions should focus on investing and besieging the city of Karachi and subjecting it to relentless bombing and shelling round the clock which will hollow out the entire city.

    Overwhelming air, naval and armored superiority and ferocity should be demonstrated to besiege the city of Karachi and reduce it
    to a mass of twisted steel and concrete after continuous shelling by our artillery and missile forces.

    Lahore and Muridke should also not be spared and maximum trauma needs to be inflicted on all the people in Pakistan

    Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas should be overrun simultaneously along with Punjab which will be the Schwerpunkt of our rapid and ruthless campaign

    Thus at the conclusion of the Campaign, the surrender ceremony will be held in a railway carriage which will be hauled to Iqbal park in Lahore and the tri-color will flutter triumphantly on the Minar-e-Pakistan.

    Pakistan will cease to exist on the map of the world from then on.

    • Vishnu Sharma,
      Why are you still thinking about conventional war against Pakistan and China.? Please read my comment. I am sure that this Govt. has clear cut plan to tackle Pakistan. But it will take time. Pandavas waited more than 14 years . So we have to wait two to three years more.

  4. Great!
    The Author deserves appreciation for his commendable efforts in giving this fruitful analysis. But we will be doing injustice to ourselves, as well as to the nation, in case we mistake in trusting our so called fake and contracted rulers. In my opinion, though I may be mistaken, we should try to evolve some mechanism, for freeing our Armed Forces, from the clutches of these corrupt politicians, if not as a whole, then at least for such strategic and policy decisions, like war and other issues of external security concerns for the nation, where in their unwanted influence, which is continuously harming the national interest as a whole, will be set aside. For this, the decision could be taken by the real and most concerned personalities, i.e. the hon’ble three service chiefs, jointly/unanimously or by their majority vote, based on their matured experience or on the hand requirement of the situation, or else, in case some other personality has to step in for the said decision, let the hon’ble president (being the supreme commander of the Armed Forces) take a final call, based on the recommendations of the three chiefs.
    The retaliation, as required by the ground realities at the right hour, otherwise will only be a dream for us.
    The example of maturity/immaturity, we all have just seen, as the statement given by the Hon defense minister is just opposite to that by the hon’ble COAS, Gen Bikram Singh. There is always a risk of national security, in the absence of proper, timely and matured decisions.
    In the present day scenario, it is most unfortunate that the most crucial decisions even for the national security are biased and are taken, keeping in view of the foreign interest.

  5. The biggest problem is not Pakistan but the incompetent leadership in Delhi. They have no policy, no strategy and no action plan to respond when faced with Pakistani violence. This was true after the Parliament attack and true after the Mumbai massacre. Their only response is inaction with the hope that the Indian people will forget after mourning since they have bigger things on their mind, namely, putting food on the table. To stop Pakistan from repeating, the Indian planning, preparation and tactics need to be in place before the terrorism occurs. The punishing response from India has to be immediate as described by Dr. Amarjit Singh. Unfortunately, none of this is possible as long as the UPA corruption infested government is in power.

    • Very well said. A government that doesn’t get stirred by body bags of its brave losses all moral right to continue. What can be said about the people who created history by making India probably the only victorious nation n the world that did not ensure the safety of its POWs while returning 90000 enemy POWs for a song ? Even the holocaust pales in front of what our uniformed men of vintage ’65 and ’71 have had to and are still enduring. What’s more, many of these hapless men were distributed across the Arab world as bonded slaves (for the uninitiated google – Jaspal Singh, Masirah Prison, Oman). Now the same set of JOKERS are in power today. God alone knows what’s in store this time around!

  6. Agree in toto. Wonder if our politicians can come to their senses and see reason to retaliate immediately, at least, in their words; bigger actions can follow later at our choosing. It is a matter of shame that Mr Antony diluted the severity of the blow by his inept statement (though corrected subsequently) and Mr Salman Khurshid is attempting to show his hollow diplomacy by staing that we have come a long way in the peace process hinting that we should not make an issue out of such incidents. And about the PM, less said the better; he will go down in history, including the period which will follow, as the worst PM. Surely, there is a need to, immediately, call off the peace talks, which have led us nowhere. Unless we do it, Pakistan will continue fooling and bleeding us. As far as the Armed Forces are concerned, they are definitely capable of teaching a lesson to Pakistan but the democratic process adopted by the country, wherein they are kept away even from the security policy formulation, restrains them to step in on their own. Their patience, however, may not last indefinitely; after all, they know that it is only their “Dharma” which can save the country.
    Finally, salute to the author for a superb analysis. It will be good if the political masters also read it to know where they stand.

  7. jabardast analysis….maja aa gaya….bt bigger question is will Indian political class learn something…it has been repeated from mahabharat time that india was defeated due to bad military preparation and lack of political will…

  8. Sarcasm apart the Author hit the nail on the head. In the real sense we haven’t won a war against Pakistan. War is won at all levels, Tactical, Strategically and Politically at the International level. In real terms we never finished with our business except for some tactical victories. We lost the rest. What has been the final outcome of the 1971 war? NIL. That’s where we landed up. The main reason is that we arn’t strategy oriented. We don’t have a mechanism to brain storm events and advise the PM. The PM is briefed by run of the mill bureaucrats who have no understanding of military matters. The Army has hardly been consulted. No wonder we returned Hiji Pir Pass to the Pakistanis twice. They must have been laughing at us. In the International arena we have to be pushing. Why is India afraid? There are lesser nations that stand up to countries the US and others. We are militarily a very powerful nation but politically we are a dump. Its a wake up call for the Government to start acting. As far as retaliation is concerned we have to be prepared to face casualties then we can go ahead. We needn’t bomb out brigades and divisions because you cant find a brigade sitting in one place but we can conduct fire assaults on selective posts along the line of control. There will be retaliation form there side too but a sustained campaign along the LC cannot be held up by the Pakistanis for too long. It cannot be a one day affair. He who lasts longer will be the winner. On the lighter side the Author has talked about foreign powers and outsiders — well we have on sitting at the helm of our affairs in Delhi.

  9. Very well articulated land options but please do include drone attack on terrorist camps in POK. Actually that should be launched within 12h of anything like this taking place.

  10. Retaliation should be swift and not one-two years down the line. The families have made the sacrifice and the nations gratitude should be seen in 48h. The Indian Army is twice as large and has the capability to react fast.

  11. Sir, I totally agree with you. Our politicians have sold out our national interests. But I am more annoyed with our Armed Forces. Although so highly decorated personalities they have, but overdose of discipline and bureaucracy is killing their attitude. Why cant they nip such persons in bud? Why didn’t RAW dismantled IKG before he dismantled our decades of preparations? Why did big mouthed fools like MD allowed to info on Paki Nukes which in turn decimated our moles?
    Sir, apart from answerability to political masters, Defence Forces also have much higher answersablity and responsibility of keeping welfare of Common Indians in mind. At the times when we have Foreign Powers pressurizing Indian politicians why cant Indian Powers (defence & intelligence) can pressurize or decapacitate our erring rulers?

More Comments Loader Loading Comments