India sets two-week deadline for Pakistan

The Times Of India ^ | 25th May 2002 | MANOJ JOSHI

[maquiladora]

Two weeks...the clock is ticking.

[bloggerjohn]

It's already gone off. By announcing a rigid deadline and a specific action they have made themselves a slave to anyone with a strap-on bomb. Funny politicians can't see that. Never tell people what cards you are dealing or when.

[maquiladora]

They will probably measure what Pakistan has done by looking at how many terror camps have been demolished and how many militants arrested before this 2 week period is up, rather that determine the situation on the basis of one of two acts of terror. India will be looking for huge measures to be taken by Musharraf within structure of the ISI also.
Thats the kind of things they'll be looking for.

Question is, will the ISI and the army carry out his orders?

[Tennessee_Bob]

The trigger has already been pulled - just how long now until the hammer falls...

[mhking]

Two weeks...the clock is ticking.

I called mid-June in the pool last week...

[RightWhale]

By announcing a rigid deadline and a specific action they have made themselves a slave to anyone with a strap-on bomb

This is one of the necessary steps to satisfy international legal requirements for war. This is the stage of pre-war known as the ultimatum. The ultimatum follows failure of negotiations and withdrawal of diplomatic relations, which are also recognized pre-war legal stages. The standard and ordinary ultimatum contains specific demands and a specific time limit and is usually something the enemy could accept without great loss. The ultimatum is usually rejected and the war itself begins, but sometimes the ultimatum is accepted.

[KissOfTheSith]

There are a lot of US military people in this area right now. If these two countries go nuclear, we will feel it.

-- Kiss of the Sith

[alloysteel]

The bunch of weenies that are in charge in India will simply continue to extend and extend the "deadline", much like so-called "liberals" everywhere. Like their American and European counterparts, they know neither how to negotiate equitable settlements nor wage a decisive war.

[maquiladora]

June is the month alright. The monsoon season is due to start in early July, so there's a tight window.
Also, India is under economic strain keeping over half a million troops on 6-hour alert in remote regions of Kashmir where supply is costly. They can't stay there indefinetly, but neither can they withdraw without reason. After all the retoric and bravado, for the Indian PM to withdraw for no reason would be political suicide and would also leave the opinion internally and externally that India is weak.
It's not an option this time. India will have to either go to war, or pull back in a few weeks after Musharraf takes sweeping anti-terror measures.

We've been here before. December, after the attack on the Parliment, the same situation. India threatened war, but the U.S. brought pressure on Musharraf to crackdown on the militants. In January he made a speech denouncing terror and later he ordered the arrest of 2000 militants.
India were forced to back down in the face of that. But then all those arrested terrorists were released again, and the ISI still supported and funded the militants and then only about a week and a half ago 34 people, the families of Indian troops, will killed in a terror attack. That has sparked this new crisis and once again the U.S. is pushing Musharraf to take serious action.

As Yogi Bear once said, it's like deja vu all over again.

So India is once biten, twice shy. India won't be fooled by promises again.
Musharraf will have to act real fast, and real strong.

Will he? Can he?
We'll know it about 2 weeks.

[luvbach1]

Jeez, Russia is still ridiculously big.

[Husker24]

Last I heard the deadline was two months, did those missile tests up the antie or what? It doesnt matter anyway when the two weeks expire the Indians will fire a mortar shell and start a new deadline.

[Fish out of Water]

*Index Bump

[maquiladora]

I think that two-month thing turned out to be incorrect. Anyway, that would be in the middle of the monsoon season.

If India takes action, it'll either be between now and late-June or else some time after September.

[lavrenti]

The monsoons do not effect J&K nearly as much as the rest of the region. Also, with three corps already in place at the border, India will be doing much of its fighting in Pak.

Another fact: India is a naval power, at least to the extent that they can create massive havoc with their carrier-based Harriers.

This war will be in the far north, in the air, and the wastelands of the Hindu Kush, which soon, after India crushes Pakistan will be renamed for our Musli "brothers".

[powderhorn]

The ultimatum is usually rejected and the war itself begins, but sometimes the ultimatum is accepted.

Pakistan, being the weaker of the two, will probably make a first strike (with nukes) before the time deadline. A nuclear first stike is Pakistan's only real hope of victory.

[KevinDavis]

If I was Musharraf, I would be keeping a close eye on the ISI. Personnaly I don't he is in control and I think it is the ISI who is in control of Pakistan.

[RightWhale]

Not all Pakistanis wish to see the country be obliterated forever. Some think the country has potential and could be developed. Musharraf apparently belongs with the latter group. If he prevails in the country, there will be no general war, although India may be allowed through to destroy the rebel camps.

[Ranger]

I have heard that September would more likely favor an Indian attack because the monsoons would be over and because they need more time to prepare. Also they have told their officers to take all leave before September. In other news posts last week the Indians has mentioned 2 months to see tangible dismantling of Pak terror camps and financial infrastructures so I was surprised in this posting that the message was now 2 weeks. Do you know when the previous Pak/Indian conflicts occurred (what month) as perhaps some indicator of the timing this go around?

[maquiladora]

Well, in a recent article on Rediff I came across this:

Is it any wonder that the terrorists [and their Pakistani masters] only feel bolder after watching the Indian forces apply the brakes? Surely they are justified in thinking that for all of India's shouting and posturing, it lacks the guts for the final move? Did the US mobilise its forces for the Gulf War in 1991 or the Afghan war last year, and then ask them to stop while it pondered its next act?

One only wishes that the current Indian Army chief had told the politicians to back off from using the army for political sabre-rattling and give the call for mobilisation only after the politicians had finally made up their minds. The analogy that comes to mind is the famous Indira Gandhi-Sam Maneckshaw tussle in 1971. The then army chief, General [later Field Marshal] Maneckshaw twice turned down the request of the then prime minister to attack East Pakistan.

The first was in March: Maneckshaw said he was not ready. The second was in August, when he pointed out that his tanks would get bogged down in East Pakistan because of the monsoon. Finally, in November, he said he was ready, and proved it with the Indian Army's quick success in liberating Bangladesh in just 14 days!

[powderhorn]

If he prevails in the country, there will be no general war, although India may be allowed through to destroy the rebel camps.

Yes, that is a reasonable, though highly risky outcome. For every crazy suicidal muslim fanatic on the boarder there are ten more inside Pakistan who are just waiting for a reason to rebel against Musharraf.