Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Kashmir: Adding/improving reference(s)
Expanding article Adding/improving reference(s)
Line 28: Line 28:


==Kashmir==
==Kashmir==
After the conclusion of the [[Soviet–Afghan War]], the fighters of the [[Islamic Unity of Afghanistan Mujahideen|Sunni Mujahideen]] and other Islamic militants had successfully removed the Soviet forces from Afghanistan. The military and civil government of Pakistan sought to utilize these militants in the [[Kashmir conflict]] against the Indian forces in accordance with the "thousand cuts" doctrine.<ref name="TribuneThousand"/> In the 1980s cross-border terrorism started in the Kashmir region as armed and well-trained groups of terrorists were infiltrated into India through the border. Pakistan officially maintained that the terrorism in Kashmir was "freedom struggle" of [[Kashmir]]is and Pakistan only provided moral support to them. But this turned out to be inaccurate as [[Director-General of Inter-Services Intelligence]] (ISI) stated in the [[National Assembly of Pakistan]] that the ISI was sponsoring this support in Kashmir.<ref name="Katoch"/>
After the conclusion of the [[Soviet–Afghan War]], the fighters of the [[Islamic Unity of Afghanistan Mujahideen|Sunni Mujahideen]] and other Islamic militants had successfully removed the Soviet forces from Afghanistan. The military and civil government of Pakistan sought to utilize these militants in the [[Kashmir conflict]] against the Indian forces in accordance with the "thousand cuts" doctrine.<ref name="TribuneThousand"/> In the 1980s cross-border terrorism started in the Kashmir region as armed and well-trained groups of terrorists were infiltrated into India through the border. Pakistan officially maintained that the terrorism in Kashmir was "freedom struggle" of [[Kashmir]]is and Pakistan only provided moral support to them. But this turned out to be inaccurate as [[Director-General of Inter-Services Intelligence]] (ISI) stated in the [[National Assembly of Pakistan]] that the ISI was sponsoring this support in Kashmir.<ref name="Katoch"/> Pakistan has used the jihadist militias to conduct asymmetrical warfare with India.<ref name="Racine">{{cite journal |last1=Racine |first1=Jean-Luc |title=Post-Post-Colonial India: From Regional Power to Global Player |journal=Politique étrangère |date=2008 |volume=Hors série |issue=5 |pages=65 |doi=https://doi.org/10.3917/pe.hs02.0065 |url=https://www.cairn.info/revue-politique-etrangere-2008-5-page-65.htm |accessdate=14 December 2018}}</ref>


According to a general involved with the "bleed India" strategy of infiltrating jihadists into Kashmir:
According to a general involved with the "bleed India" strategy of infiltrating jihadists into Kashmir:
{{quote|It kept 700,000 Indian troops and paramilitary forces in Kashmir at very low cost to Pakistan; at the same time, it ensured that the Indian Army could not threaten Pakistan, created enormous expenditures for India, and kept it bogged down in military and political terms.<ref>{{harvnb|Jaffrelot, The Pakistan Paradox|2015|p=453}}; {{harvnb|Rashid, Pakistan on the Brink|2012|p=62}}</ref>}}
{{quote|It kept 700,000 Indian troops and paramilitary forces in Kashmir at very low cost to Pakistan; at the same time, it ensured that the Indian Army could not threaten Pakistan, created enormous expenditures for India, and kept it bogged down in military and political terms.<ref>{{harvnb|Jaffrelot, The Pakistan Paradox|2015|p=453}}; {{harvnb|Rashid, Pakistan on the Brink|2012|p=62}}</ref>}}


In May 1998, India tested its nuclear weapons at [[Pokhran-II]] followed by Pakistani [[Chagai-I|nuclear tests]].<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/12/world/india-sets-3-nuclear-blasts-defying-a-worldwide-ban-tests-bring-a-sharp-outcry.html |title=India Sets 3 Nuclear Blasts, Defying a Worldwide Ban; Tests Bring a Sharp Outcry |last=Burns |first=John F. |date=1998-05-12 |work=The New York Times |access-date=2018-12-14 |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> The Infiltration of Pakistani soldiers disguised as Kashmiri militants into positions on the Indian side of the LOC, resulted in a geographically limited [[Kargil War]],<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/938003294 |title=Understanding Kashmir and Kashmiris |last=Christopher, |first=Snedden, |isbn=9781849046213 |location=London |oclc=938003294 |access-date=2018-12-14}}</ref> during which the [[Pakistani Foreign Secretary]] Shamshad Ahmed issued a veiled nuclear threat that, 'We will not hesitate to use any weapon in our arsenal to defend our territorial integrity.'<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/01/world/atmosphere-is-tense-as-india-and-pakistan-agree-to-talks.html |title=Atmosphere Is Tense as India and Pakistan Agree to Talks |last=Dugger |first=Celia W. |date=1999-06-01 |work=The New York Times |access-date=2018-12-14 |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>
In May 1998, India tested its nuclear weapons at [[Pokhran-II]] followed by Pakistani [[Chagai-I|nuclear tests]].<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/12/world/india-sets-3-nuclear-blasts-defying-a-worldwide-ban-tests-bring-a-sharp-outcry.html |title=India Sets 3 Nuclear Blasts, Defying a Worldwide Ban; Tests Bring a Sharp Outcry |last=Burns |first=John F. |date=1998-05-12 |work=The New York Times |access-date=2018-12-14 |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref name="Racine"/> The Infiltration of Pakistani soldiers disguised as Kashmiri militants into positions on the Indian side of the LOC, resulted in a geographically limited [[Kargil War]],<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/938003294 |title=Understanding Kashmir and Kashmiris |last=Christopher, |first=Snedden, |isbn=9781849046213 |location=London |oclc=938003294 |access-date=2018-12-14}}</ref> during which the [[Pakistani Foreign Secretary]] Shamshad Ahmed issued a veiled nuclear threat that, 'We will not hesitate to use any weapon in our arsenal to defend our territorial integrity.'<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/01/world/atmosphere-is-tense-as-india-and-pakistan-agree-to-talks.html |title=Atmosphere Is Tense as India and Pakistan Agree to Talks |last=Dugger |first=Celia W. |date=1999-06-01 |work=The New York Times |access-date=2018-12-14 |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>


After the [[Kargil War]] in 1999, the [[Kargil Review Committee]] came out with a report which took reference to the concept of Pakistan bleeding India. In Chapter 12, "Could Kargil Have Been Avoided?", the report said that if the "[[Siachen conflict|Siachenisation]]" of Kargil had happened prior to the war, that if troops had been stationed there all year round along a wider area, it would have resulted in huge costs "and enabled Pakistan to bleed India."<ref name=":12">{{Cite journal|last=Bedi|first=Rahul|date=22-28 April 2000|title=Kargil Report: More Questions Raised than Answered|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4409195|journal=Economic and Political Weekly|volume=Vol. 35, No. 17|pages=1429-1431|via=JSTOR}}</ref><ref>Kargil Review Committee (July 2000). ''[https://www.scribd.com/doc/152396717/Kargil-Review-Committee-Report-1999 From Surprise To Reckoning: The Kargil Review Committee Report]''. New Delhi. Sage Publications.{{ISBN|9780761994664}}</ref>
After the [[Kargil War]] in 1999, the [[Kargil Review Committee]] came out with a report which took reference to the concept of Pakistan bleeding India. In Chapter 12, "Could Kargil Have Been Avoided?", the report said that if the "[[Siachen conflict|Siachenisation]]" of Kargil had happened prior to the war, that if troops had been stationed there all year round along a wider area, it would have resulted in huge costs "and enabled Pakistan to bleed India."<ref name=":12">{{Cite journal|last=Bedi|first=Rahul|date=22-28 April 2000|title=Kargil Report: More Questions Raised than Answered|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4409195|journal=Economic and Political Weekly|volume=Vol. 35, No. 17|pages=1429-1431|via=JSTOR}}</ref><ref>Kargil Review Committee (July 2000). ''[https://www.scribd.com/doc/152396717/Kargil-Review-Committee-Report-1999 From Surprise To Reckoning: The Kargil Review Committee Report]''. New Delhi. Sage Publications.{{ISBN|9780761994664}}</ref>

Revision as of 23:37, 14 December 2018

Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts is a military doctrine followed by Pakistan against India.[1][2][3] It consists of waging covert war against India using insurgents at multiple locations.[4] According to scholar Aparna Pande, this view was put forward in various studies by the Pakistani military, particularly in its Staff College, Quetta.[5] Peter Chalk and Christine Fair cite the former director of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) explicating the strategy.[6]

In a 1975 speech to the UN Security Council, Pakistani Prime Minister ZA Bhutto declared a thousand year war against India.[7] Pakistani Army Chief General Zia-ul-Haq would give form to Bhutto's "thousand years war" with the 'Bleed India Through A Thousand Cuts' doctrine using covert and low intensity warfare with militancy and infiltration.[8] This doctrine was first attempted during the Punjab insurgency and then in Kashmir insurgency using India's western border with Pakistan.[9][8] India's borders with Nepal and Bangladesh have been used as points to insert trained militants into the country.[10]

Origins

See also: Operation Fair Play

The origins of the strategic doctrine are attributed to Pakistani Prime Minister ZA Bhutto, who declared a thousand year war against India during his speech to the United Nations Security Council in 1976.[7] He had stated that such a war would be carried out by "inflicting a thousand cuts" on India.[11] According to The Pioneer Bhutto declared that Pakistan's success in its 'national' goal of destruction of India would only be possible by "delivering a thousand cuts on its body politic" and not through a direct conventional war. One of the purposes of the declaration was to divert public attention from internal problems facing Pakistan.[11]

On 5 July 1977, Bhutto was deposed by his army chief General Zia-ul-Haq in a military coup before being controversially tried and executed.[12][13] Zia then assumed the office of President of Pakistan in 1978 and the thousand cut policy began taking shape . After the defeat of Pakistan in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, Pakistan was divided and Bangladesh was created. The war clarified that Kashmir could no longer be taken from India by a conventional war.[14] Zia implemented Bhutto's "thousand years war" with 'Bleed India Through A Thousand Cuts' doctrine using covert and low intensity warfare with militancy and infiltration.[8][9]

Punjab

Pakistan had been helping the Sikh secessionist movement in India since the 1970s.[15] Since the early 1980s Pakistan's intelligence agency ISI created a special Punjab cell in its headquarter to support the militant Sikh followers of Bhindranwale and supply them with arms and ammunitions. Terrorist training camps were set up in Pakistan at Lahore and Karachi to train the young Sikhs.[15] Hamid Gul (who had led ISI) had stated about Punjab insurgency that "Keeping Punjab destabilized is equivalent to the Pakistan Army having an extra division at no cost to the taxpayers."[4]

Kashmir

After the conclusion of the Soviet–Afghan War, the fighters of the Sunni Mujahideen and other Islamic militants had successfully removed the Soviet forces from Afghanistan. The military and civil government of Pakistan sought to utilize these militants in the Kashmir conflict against the Indian forces in accordance with the "thousand cuts" doctrine.[11] In the 1980s cross-border terrorism started in the Kashmir region as armed and well-trained groups of terrorists were infiltrated into India through the border. Pakistan officially maintained that the terrorism in Kashmir was "freedom struggle" of Kashmiris and Pakistan only provided moral support to them. But this turned out to be inaccurate as Director-General of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) stated in the National Assembly of Pakistan that the ISI was sponsoring this support in Kashmir.[14] Pakistan has used the jihadist militias to conduct asymmetrical warfare with India.[16]

According to a general involved with the "bleed India" strategy of infiltrating jihadists into Kashmir:

It kept 700,000 Indian troops and paramilitary forces in Kashmir at very low cost to Pakistan; at the same time, it ensured that the Indian Army could not threaten Pakistan, created enormous expenditures for India, and kept it bogged down in military and political terms.[17]

In May 1998, India tested its nuclear weapons at Pokhran-II followed by Pakistani nuclear tests.[18][16] The Infiltration of Pakistani soldiers disguised as Kashmiri militants into positions on the Indian side of the LOC, resulted in a geographically limited Kargil War,[19] during which the Pakistani Foreign Secretary Shamshad Ahmed issued a veiled nuclear threat that, 'We will not hesitate to use any weapon in our arsenal to defend our territorial integrity.'[20]

After the Kargil War in 1999, the Kargil Review Committee came out with a report which took reference to the concept of Pakistan bleeding India. In Chapter 12, "Could Kargil Have Been Avoided?", the report said that if the "Siachenisation" of Kargil had happened prior to the war, that if troops had been stationed there all year round along a wider area, it would have resulted in huge costs "and enabled Pakistan to bleed India."[21][22]

On 13 December 2001 a terrorist attack occurred on the Indian Parliament (during which twelve people, including the five terrorists who attacked the building, were killed) and the legislative Assembly on 1 October 2001.[23] India claimed that the attacks were carried out by two Pakistan-based terror groups fighting Indian administered Kashmir, the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad, both of whom India has said are backed by Pakistan's ISI –[24] a charge that Pakistan denied.[25][26][27] The military buildup was initiated by India in response to the twin attacks leading to the 2001–02 India–Pakistan standoff between India and Pakistan. Troops were amassed on either side of the border and along the Line of Control (LoC) in the region of Kashmir. International media reported the possibility of a nuclear war between the two countries and the implications of the potential conflict on the American-led "Global War on Terrorism" in nearby Afghanistan. Tensions de-escalated following international diplomatic mediation which resulted in the October 2002 withdrawal of Indian[28] and Pakistani troops[29] from the international border.

In spite of grave provocations, the lack of military retaliation by India was seen as evidence of successful deterrence of India by Pakistan’s nuclear capability.[30][31][1] According to David A. Robinson the nuclear deterrence has encouraged certain Pakistani elements to further provoke India. He adds that an "asymmetric nuclear escalation posture" of Pakistan has deterred conventional military power of India and in turn has enabled Pakistan's "aggressive strategy of bleeding India by a thousand cuts with little fear of significant retaliation."[31]

Present

Presently the Islamic fundamentalists in Bangladesh and Pakistan, controlled by the ISI, have joined forces to carry out terrorist attacks on India.[32] Nepal and Bangladesh have been used to launch the trained militants into India.[10]

Pakistan has decided to bleed India with thousand cuts. It's the policy of Pakistan. The creation of Bangladesh, which happened with the help of India, was a very humiliating defeat for them, and they feel that this is one way of avenging that defeat. They are avenging this defeat by causing casualties to our security forces and creating mayhem amongst the people.

— Chief of the Indian Army General Bipin Rawat in September 2018[33]

According to Pakistani commentator Pervez Hoodbhoy, "Pakistan's 'thousand cuts' policy is in shambles".[34] India was able to overcome its losses without weakening of its strength. The International community abhors Jihad. Pakistan's continuation of its covert war, called Jihad in Kashmir has caused loss of international support for Pakistan's Kashmir policy. This loss of support is evident even in the Muslim countries. Every Jihadist attack reduces Pakistan's moral high ground.[34]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Gates, Scott, Kaushik Roy (2016). Unconventional Warfare in South Asia: Shadow Warriors and Counterinsurgency. Routledge. ISBN 9781317005407.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. ^ Sitaraman, Srini (2012), "South Asia: Conflict, Hegemony, and Power Balancing", in Kristen P. Williams; Steven E. Lobell; Neal G. Jesse (eds.), Beyond Great Powers and Hegemons: Why Secondary States Support, Follow, or Challenge, Stanford University Press, p. 181, ISBN 978-0-8047-8110-7: 'manipulating ethnosectarian conflict and domestic challenges to power across the borders to weaken Indian security through a tactic described by several analysts as "bleed India through a thousand cuts"'
  3. ^ Ganguly, Deadly Impasse 2016, p. 27: 'The Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) led attack on Bombay (Mumbai) in November 2008 was emblematic of this new strategy designed to bleed India with a "war of a thousand cuts".'
  4. ^ a b Sirrs, Owen L. (2016). Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate: Covert Action and Internal Operations. Routledge. p. 167. ISBN 9781317196099. Retrieved 7 November 2018.
  5. ^ Pande, Explaining Pakistan’s Foreign Policy 2011, p. 200, footnote 103: Pande cites, as an example, Col. Javed Hassan, India: A Study in Profile, Quetta: Services Book Club. A Study conducted for the Faculty of Research and Doctrinal Studies, Command and Staff College (1990)
  6. ^ Chalk, Peter; Fair, C. Christine (December 2002), "Lashkar-e-Tayyiba leads the Kashmiri insurgency" (PDF), Jane's Intelligence Reivew, 14 (10): 'In the words of Hamid Gul, the former director general of the ISI: "We have gained a lot because of our offensive in Kashmir. This is a psychological and political offensive that is designed to make India bleed through a thousand cuts."'
  7. ^ a b "Speech delivered at the UN Security Council on September 22, 1965 on Kashmir Issue". Bhutto.org. Retrieved 14 November 2018.
  8. ^ a b c Maninder Dabas (3 October 2016). "Here Are Major Long Term War Doctrines Adopted By India And Pakistan Over The Years". Indiatimes. Retrieved 7 November 2018.
  9. ^ a b Dogra, Wg Cdr C Deepak (2015). Pakistan: Caught in the Whirlwind. Lancer Publishers LLC. ISBN 9781940988221. Retrieved 14 November 2018.
  10. ^ a b Prakash, Ved. Terrorism In India. Gyan Publishing House. p. 700. ISBN 9788178357478. Retrieved 7 November 2018.
  11. ^ a b c Balbir Punj (22 December 2014). "A thousand cuts bleed Pakistan to death". The Pioneer. Retrieved 13 November 2018.
  12. ^ Pakistan, Zia and after. Abhinav Publications. 1989. pp. 20–35. ISBN 978-81-7017-253-6.
  13. ^ Blood, Peter Blood (editor) (1994). "Pakistan – Zia-ul-Haq". Pakistan: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress. Retrieved 28 December 2007. ... hanging ... Bhutto for complicity in the murder of a political opponent... {{cite web}}: |author= has generic name (help)
  14. ^ a b Katoch, Dhruv C (2013). "Combatting Cross-Border Terrorism: Need for a Doctrinal Approach" (PDF). CLAWS Journal (Winter). Retrieved 14 November 2018.
  15. ^ a b Kiessling, Hein (2016). Faith, Unity, Discipline: The Inter-Service-Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9781849048637. Retrieved 2 October 2018.
  16. ^ a b Racine, Jean-Luc (2008). "Post-Post-Colonial India: From Regional Power to Global Player". Politique étrangère. Hors série (5): 65. doi:https://doi.org/10.3917/pe.hs02.0065. Retrieved 14 December 2018. {{cite journal}}: Check |doi= value (help); External link in |doi= (help)
  17. ^ Jaffrelot, The Pakistan Paradox 2015, p. 453; Rashid, Pakistan on the Brink 2012, p. 62
  18. ^ Burns, John F. (1998-05-12). "India Sets 3 Nuclear Blasts, Defying a Worldwide Ban; Tests Bring a Sharp Outcry". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2018-12-14.
  19. ^ Christopher,, Snedden,. Understanding Kashmir and Kashmiris. London. ISBN 9781849046213. OCLC 938003294. Retrieved 2018-12-14.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  20. ^ Dugger, Celia W. (1999-06-01). "Atmosphere Is Tense as India and Pakistan Agree to Talks". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2018-12-14.
  21. ^ Bedi, Rahul (22–28 April 2000). "Kargil Report: More Questions Raised than Answered". Economic and Political Weekly. Vol. 35, No. 17: 1429–1431 – via JSTOR. {{cite journal}}: |volume= has extra text (help)CS1 maint: date format (link)
  22. ^ Kargil Review Committee (July 2000). From Surprise To Reckoning: The Kargil Review Committee Report. New Delhi. Sage Publications.ISBN 9780761994664
  23. ^ Rajesh M. Basrur (14 December 2009). "The lessons of Kargil as learned by India". In Peter R. Lavoy (ed.). Asymmetric Warfare in South Asia: The Causes and Consequences of the Kargil Conflict (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 326. ISBN 978-0-521-76721-7. Retrieved 8 August 2013.
  24. ^ "Who will strike first" Archived 5 December 2008 at the Wayback Machine, The Economist, 20 December 2001.
  25. ^ Jamal Afridi (9 July 2009). "Kashmir Militant Extremists". Council Foreign Relations. Archived from the original on 2 March 2012. Retrieved 4 February 2012. Pakistan denies any ongoing collaboration between the ISI and militants, stressing a change of course after 11 September 2001. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |dead-url= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  26. ^ Perlez, Jane (29 November 2008). "Pakistan Denies Any Role in Mumbai Attacks". Mumbai (India);Pakistan: NYTimes.com. Archived from the original on 5 January 2018. Retrieved 31 January 2012. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |dead-url= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  27. ^ "Attack on Indian parliament heightens danger of Indo-Pakistan war". Wsws.org. 20 December 2001. Archived from the original on 15 December 2011. Retrieved 31 January 2012. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |dead-url= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  28. ^ "India to withdraw troops from Pak border" Archived 30 November 2003 at the Wayback Machine, Times of India, 16 October 2002.
  29. ^ "Pakistan to withdraw front-line troops" Archived 14 July 2018 at the Wayback Machine, BBC, 17 October 2002.
  30. ^ Aziz, Sartaj (2009). Between Dreams and Realities: Some Milestones in Pakistan’s History. Karachi, Pakistan: Oxford University Press. p. 408. ISBN 978-0-19-547718-4. Archived from the original on 19 September 2013. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  31. ^ a b Robinson, David A. (2011-07-14). "India's Rise as a Great Power, Part Two: The Pakistan-China-India Dynamic". Future Directions International.
  32. ^ Khullar, Darshan (2014). Pakistan Our Difficult Neighbour and India's Islamic Dimensions. Vij Books India Pvt Ltd. ISBN 9789382652823. Retrieved 13 November 2018.
  33. ^ "'Pakistan Wants To Bleed India With Thousand Cuts', Says Army Chief General Bipin Rawat". Outlook. 24 September 2018. Retrieved 8 November 2018.
  34. ^ a b Hoodbhoy, Pervez (14 October 2016). "'Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts' Policy Is in a Shambles". Open Magazine. Retrieved 7 November 2018.

Bibliography

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bleed_India_with_a_Thousand_Cuts&oldid=873769215"