Saturday, June 29, 2013

Use of Air Force for tactical air support (from “War in the High Himalayas – by Maj Gen D K Palit, VrC)

COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE MY OWN


“At that time there were two schools of thought on the question of the use of tactical air support in case of hostilities on the northern border."

1.     "The General Staff was strongly in favour of it because we felt that it was the most effective way of restoring the imbalance of forces at the front, particularly in Ladakh. Furthermore, air force officers at squadron and wing level considered it an eminently feasible task. ( Gen Palit, here conveniently doesn’t mention the thoughts of officers in air force staff or higher headquarters and restricts himself to wing level.) I had discussed the possibility of air strikes in that area with the pilot (in a vampire fighter for an air reconnaissance of western kameng) and he had agreed that identification and destruction of ground targets woiuld be much easier on that high and open expanse than in the rugged, heavily forested and weather-driven terrain on our side of the border. (But wouldn’t the pilot have to fly the aircraft through the same weather driven terrain ? Wont that pose a problem?) Later in informal discussions with other officers of the squadron the consensus was that strikes on targets north of the border were a feasible task. In Kameng the frontier zone was close to the airfield at Tezpur, a factor that would allow our fighters enough time-over-target to be effective. In ladakh the circumstances would be moreadverse but the task coiuld still be worthwhile."

2.     "Counter-argument – India would be the loser should hostilities escalate to the use of air forces, because cities in north India were vulnerable to Chinese bombers based in Tibet, whereas Chinese cities were clearly beyond the range of our aircraft."

3.     "Counter Counter Point – There was little reason to fear strategic bombing by the Chinese. First, we had no positive intelligence of a bomber base anywhere in Tibet. (Well, we had no positive intelligence on the invasion in waiting and massing of Chinese troops as well. Intelligence was as such defunct and most of it was being fed by CIA to IB, Military Intelligence was as such non-existent). Second, if hostilities broke out over border claims, all indications till then were that fighting was unlikely to spread beyond the border regions. (The general impression in Delhi amongst the politicians, bureaucrats and the defense personnel was that the Chinese would never attack, forget fight in the border regions) Third, even if the Chinese action did escalate to air bombing of civilian targets, our air defense potential, although not sufficiently well equipped at that stage, could still meet the challenge. The most the enemy could hope to do would be to mount occasional raids over northern India which, while causing some damage, would have litter effect on the border war. (What about the lowering of morale of the citizens when the cities are bombed ?)"

The fact of the matter :-

"When the Chinese finally attacked, in October, a hasty decision was taken under a counsel of fears and with no homework done by the Air Force. It was decided that it would be best not to escalate the intensity of operations in case the Chinese retaliated in like measure. This was a grave misjudgment because, as Deputy Air Chief Arjun Singh admitted  to me a year later, the Chinese could not have launched bombers and fighters from Tibet at that time. Airfields located at heights of 4,000 meters or more require protracted and costly preparations, such as extended runways and other facilities. This was a gross failure of air intelligence. (Why only air intelligence, intelligence community at large had failed and so had the people in staff who could not appreciate this at an early stage)"

No comments: