DBWI: Why did the Indian Army fail spectacularly against Pakistan?

My question is why did Indians cold start war plan against Pakistan in 2009 fail so spectacularly.


So as everyone knows the Mumbai attacks on November 2008, led to the Indo-Pakistani war. Starting on the 2nd of January 2009 after diplomatic talks between both nations fell through.

Both nations had been gearing up for war in the event that diplomacy failed. And at 1 am on the second of January the Indians started operation Monsoon. Operation Monsoon was the implementation of the cold start doctrine by India, which aimed to defeat the Pakistan military on the field by surprise without pushing too deep into the nation in order to not push Pakistan towards the nuclear option.

But this failed spectacularly, as the Pakistani military was ready, and not only stopped India's invasion but counter attacked pushing into Indian lands. The Pakistani invasion was stopped in the north when the Indian Army regrouped and managed to grind them to a halt at the battles of Amritsar, Bikaner and Jodhpur. But Pakistan had greater success in the south occupying parts of Rajasthan and Gujarat west of the Sabarmati River and managed to surrounded the city of Ahmedabad and on February 23rd both nations signed a ceasefire much to the relieve of the world. Which led to the Paris peace talks mediated by the EU, the US, China and Russia.

Pakistani military occupation of Indian lands continued until the 11th of June, when India signed the Paris peace agreement where they relinquished all sovereignty to disputed lands of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh, handing them over to Pakistan.

This war had the world standing on edge as both nations had nuclear weapons, but decided not to use them. In Pakistan the war was seen as great victory and allowed Prime minister Gillani to consolidate his power of the nation and military. In India the war led to the collapse of the INC who were blamed for the loss, after the delayed 2009 election held during october rather than April and may due Pakistani occupation. The War also had a negative impact on the BJP who were pro war and whose leader Lal Krishna Advani led the breakdown in peace talks before the war.

Key:
Black - Pre war borders.
Red - Military front at the time of the ceasefire.

d31cbf6d2fbd5d4e333a348efc3eda2d.jpg
 
Th Indian armed forces were brave and tough, but were stabbed in the back by corrupt politicians and bureaucrats. The war laid bare the decades of systemic failures in the Indian military procurement system and general inadequacy in supplies.
 
Th Indian armed forces were brave and tough, but were stabbed in the back by corrupt politicians and bureaucrats. The war laid bare the decades of systemic failures in the Indian military procurement system and general inadequacy in supplies.

That and they had followed Soviet style tactics and the Pakistanis followed US/Western style tactics.
 

Khanzeer

Banned
I'm confused was there an actual shooting war in 2009 with large scale military operations between India and pakistan ?
 

Dolan

Banned
I'm confused was there an actual shooting war in 2009 with large scale military operations between India and pakistan ?
OOC: It's a DBWI

IC:
The subsequent Hindu Refugee Crisis from Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh due to forced expulsion kind of turning International opinions solidly against Pakistan though. Up to the point that President Obama and The Senate passed an unanimous economic sanctions and cancellations of further Pakistan purchase of American Military Equipments.

Pakistan did claim that the expulsions wasn't deliberately done, but nobody believe them nowadays, not with the new proof that Pakistani Intelligences has been infiltrating basically everywhere in South and West Asia.

It could be said that Pakistan won the war but only barely holding on the peace.
 
OOC: I am basing this off the actual 2002 rise in tensions. As the years have gone by declassified papers have shown it would have been a disaster for the Indians, the Pakistanis had accuratey guessed the axis of attack. The Indian movements and plans were slow and predictable.

IC:
The Indians telegraphed their punch. The armed forces were in no shape to move as quickly as the politicians wished. The Cold Start doctrine was new and untested and Pakistan had developed conunters, specifically adding mobile armoured reserves to their holding formations. This meant that they could release their regular armoured and mechanised Divisions to offensive roles.
Indian political aims were a confused mess. Which led to conflicting orders and was reflected in the operational plans. The thrusts were too narrow to have startegic impact, too deep to be seen as border area clashes, so the Pakistani response was much harder.

The breakthrough in the South was fortitious and unplanned. After the Indian attack has been blunted, the Area HQ had been order to merely hold the line. But at the same time reinforcements in the form of XII Corps came and the "probe" which followed the "holding" action revealed that the Indian forces in the region were in disorganised. Even then the decision to attack was made by the three Corps commanders on the ground, Islamabad's clearance came after the first defence line had been breached.
There is some speculation that the Indians had a spy in Pakistani GHQ, who told them no offensives were planned. It does explain the inexplicable positioning of the Indians.
 
OOC: A DBWI is where we discuss something that actual happened as if it had not happened.

i.e. DBWI: What if Donald Trump becomes the 45th president of the USA

I do not believe that the POD as written is a DBWI.....it's a WI surely? I like others went looking for an actual war that I was not aware had taken place!
 
Top