Relations between India and Pakistan - the two nuclear powers of South Asia - are straining due to unrest in the predominantly Muslim Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. Indian Interior Minister Rajnath Singh, speaking at a parliamentary hearing, accused Islamabad of trying to destabilize and support terrorism in the border state. The Indian security official's statement came after Pakistani UN Ambassador Maliha Lodhi called on the UN Security Council to put pressure on the Indian government to "stop repression." A new escalation of the "oldest conflict on the UN agenda", in which over the past two weeks 45 people were killed and more than three thousand injured, began after the Indian security forces liquidated an activist of the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen group, which is seeking the separation of Kashmir from India.

Hearings on the Kashmir issue, held in the Lok Sabha (the lower house of the Indian Parliament), were held after the Chief of Staff of the Indian Army Dalbir Singh Suhag visited Jammu and Kashmir last week in connection with the escalation of tension. Following the visit, he presented a report on the situation in the region to Defense Minister Manohar Parrikar.

The latest high-profile incident in Jammu and Kashmir occurred in the city of Kazigund. Indian soldiers opened fire on the crowd, who were throwing stones at them, killing three people. In general, the number of victims of a new escalation in Jammu and Kashmir - the largest in the past six years, despite the curfew introduced in a number of districts of the state, over the past two weeks amounted to 45 people (more than 3 thousand were injured of varying severity).

The riots erupted after security forces killed 22-year-old Burhan Wani, one of the leaders of the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen group, which is fighting to separate Jammu and Kashmir from India and is recognized as a terrorist group, during a special operation on July 8. Burhan Vani was killed in a shootout with Indian soldiers along with two other activists of the organization.

The Indian authorities are convinced that Islamabad is behind the aggravation of the situation in Kashmir. "Instead of solving its internal problems, Pakistan is trying to destabilize India," Indian Interior Minister Rajnath Singh warned at a parliamentary hearing, calling the neighboring state a "sponsor of terrorism." The Indian minister recalled that the Pakistani authorities called Burhan Wani a "martyr" and declared national mourning after his death.

The Indian Interior Minister's statement continued the war of words between the two nuclear-armed Asian powers and longtime antagonists, for whom a divided Kashmir has been a major bone of contention since their founding. This makes the Kashmir issue "the oldest conflict on the UN agenda."

Of the three Indo-Pakistani wars, Kashmir was the cause of two, in 1947 and 1965. The first war broke out immediately after the two countries gained independence as a result of the partition of British India into India and Pakistan. Then Pakistan managed to occupy a third of Kashmir. Another part - 38 thousand square meters. km of the Aksai-Chin mountainous region after the military invasion of 1962 was occupied by China. As a result, Kashmir was divided immediately between the three leading powers of Asia, and the Kashmir problem began to affect the interests of almost 3 billion people.

The Indian security official's statement at a parliamentary hearing came after Pakistani UN Ambassador Maliha Lodhi called on the UN Security Council to put pressure on the Indian government to "stop repression." And a few days earlier, Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif added fuel to the diplomatic conflict by calling Burhan Wani "a soldier who fought for independence." At the same time, he promised that Islamabad would continue to provide all possible support to the associates of Burhan Vani.

With the latest escalation in Kashmir, Islamabad has become increasingly bellicose, with Prime Minister Sharif's critics accusing him of not being tough enough. Recall that after the new prime minister Narendra Modi came to power in India in May 2014, good personal relations were established between the two leaders. Mr. Modi made an unexpected gesture, inviting the head of a neighboring state to his inauguration. After that, there was talk in both capitals about an Indo-Pakistani reset. However, recent events in Kashmir threaten to cross out the achievements recent years and return the two nuclear states of South Asia to the era of the previous confrontation.

"Having called the normalization of relations with Pakistan one of his priorities and relying on personal contacts with Nawaz Sharif, Prime Minister Modi clearly underestimated the conflict potential of the Kashmir problem, which can escalate from time to time against the will of the leaders of the two states. Apparently, this is what is happening today ", - Tatyana Shaumyan, director of the Center for Indian Studies, explained to Kommersant. According to the expert, the return of this problem to the list of regional conflicts threatens the Asian region with a new destabilization with the participation of three states: India, Pakistan and China, which have not divided Kashmir among themselves.

Pakistani-Indian armed conflicts of 1947-1949, 1965, 1971, clashes between Pakistani and Indian troops, due to the tension of Pakistani-Indian relations due to problems that arose during the division of the former British colony of India into two states - India and Pakistan. These relations were complicated by the subsequent intervention of the imperialist countries and the chauvinist policy of the reactionary circles of both states.

1) It arose in April because of the disputed territory - the northern part of the Kutch Rann Desert, where the border between India and Pakistan was not demarcated. Fighting broke out between Pakistani units. and ind. armies. On June 30, a ceasefire agreement was signed. Feb 19 1969 decision of the international. Tribunal under the auspices of the UN, the disputed territory was divided between India and Pakistan. July 4, 1969 India and Pakistan agreed to this decision;

2) On August 5, units of specially trained armed men invaded the Kashmir Valley from the Pakistani part of Kashmir. By mid-August, hostilities between Indian and Pakistani troops had unfolded virtually along the entire ceasefire line. With the assistance of the UN Security Council on September 23, the fire was ceased. At the initiative of the Soviet government, on January 4-10, 1966, a meeting was held in Tashkent between the President of Pakistan and the Prime Minister of India, at which an agreement was reached on the withdrawal of the armed forces of the parties to the positions occupied by them until August 5, 1965.

Conflict 1971 arose in connection with the unfolding struggle of the people of East Pakistan for independence. The crisis in Pakistan, the influx of several million refugees to India from East Pakistan led to an aggravation of Indo-Pakistani relations. On November 21, hostilities broke out between India and Pakistan in East Pakistan. On December 3, the Pakistani army opened hostilities on the western borders of India. In East Pakistan, Indian troops, with the assistance of local partisans - "muktibahini" - reached Dhaka by mid-December. On December 16, Pakistani troops operating in East Pakistan surrendered. The next day, hostilities on the western front were also stopped. Vost. Pakistan achieved independence.

Yu. V. Gankovsky

Used materials from the Soviet military encyclopedia in the 8th volume, vol. 6.

The book is dedicated to the main striking power of the ground forces - tank troops. The author reconstructed the main tank battles of World War II, spoke in detail about the background of the creation and post-war development of armored vehicles, gave a description of various types and types of tanks, paying great attention to armor protection and the parameters of tank guns, their maneuverability in specific landscapes. The publication is supplied with maps, diagrams and photographs.

Another blitzkrieg was the twenty-two-day conflict between India and Pakistan in 1965. In it, the combatants were militarily more or less equal.

When the British in 1947 divided their Indian (colonial. - Ed.) empire, Punjab (with a predominantly Sikh population. - Ed.) was divided between India and Pakistan, and the question of Kashmir was left open to be decided in a plebiscite. (Granting the long overdue independence of India, the British decided to create two states on its territory - one with a predominantly Hindu population (India), the other with a predominantly Muslim population (Pakistan). This resulted in mass migrations, accompanied by pogroms and murders. Sometimes local rulers, professing a religion different from the religion of most of their subjects, they annexed their lands to one of the states, which became another source of future troubles. Ed.) Old hatred, mostly of a religious nature, spilled over into the war over Kashmir in 1947-1948, and both countries later came to the brink of war twice. The 1965 conflict actually began in January in the Great Rann of Kutch, a desolate, salt marshes and apparently useless stretch of territory hundreds of kilometers southwest of Kashmir. This was followed by a better organized operation by Pakistan in Kashmir in April. The Indians counterattacked in May to establish defensive positions behind the 1947 ceasefire line to the north and northeast. The disputed territory is for the most part quite mountainous (including the highest mountains of the Karakorum, etc. - Ed.).

Hostilities began in earnest in August. Organized operations by Pakistani guerrillas, supplied by air through a 700 km demarcation line, began in the Kashmir mountains at four widely separated locations, with one group almost reaching the city of Srinagar. Pakistan's main goal was apparently to provoke an anti-Indian uprising, but this did not succeed. Another idea was to block the Indian military forces here, splitting them into five separate groups.

India had a larger army. Both sides were armed with various armored vehicles. Pakistan had about 1,100 tanks: light tanks M-24 and M-41, medium tanks M4A3, M4A1E8, M-47 and M-48 and self-propelled artillery M7V1 and M3V2. One armored division was available and another was in the process of formation. The Indian army had about 1450 tanks, light tanks AMX-13, M3A1 and PT76 (a Soviet-made amphibious tank); medium tanks M-4, M4A4, M-48, "Centurion" 5-7, T-54 and T-55 (the last two are also Soviet-made) and 106-mm recoilless rifles mounted on jeeps, as well as Unimog anti-tank vehicles . Some of the Indian Shermans (M-4, M4A4) were armed with Canadian-made 76mm cannons. In armored divisions, both sides had about 150 tanks, but infantry formations and units also had tanks and self-propelled artillery. Neither side had enough infantry in armored personnel carriers or even motorized infantry.

On August 14, an infantry battalion of Pakistani regular troops crossed the line to attack Bhimbar (75 km northwest of the city of Jammu). The next night, the Pakistanis bombarded the Indian position with artillery and tried to advance. The Indians, in turn, captured three positions in the mountains northeast of Kargil (near the demarcation line) to secure the most important mountain road between Srinagar and Leh (in Eastern Kashmir). On August 20, Pakistani artillery bombarded Indian troop concentrations near settlements Tithwal, Uri and Poonch. The Indians responded with two limited attacks deep into northern Kashmir. On August 24, the Indians attacked at Tithwal, capturing the peak of Dir Shuba. The Pakistanis blew up the Michpur Bridge. The Indians eventually entrenched themselves in positions dominating the key Srinagar-Leh road, blocking the main route of a possible invasion to Kargil (from the north along the Indus River Gorge).

Other Indian units crossed the demarcation line in the Uri area on August 25, taking several Pakistani positions in the mountains and finally capturing the Haji Pir Pass (leading to Poonch) from the rear. These troops, following from Uri, joined on September 10 with an Indian column advancing from Poonch. By the end of August, the main forces of the Pakistani partisans (saboteurs. - Ed.) were limited to penetrating into the interior of India by only 16 km. The plan of the Pakistani guerrillas would have been good if the expected uprising in India had taken place and if the plan had been better carried out.

Two Pakistani armored brigades, each of forty-five M-47 tanks, with two infantry support brigades from Bhimbar moved towards Akhnur on the Chenab River on 1 September to cut an important road and then take Jammu and the city. This created a danger of isolating all Indian troops from 100 thousand soldiers in mountainous Kashmir, since both vital roads were blocked (Jammu - the intersection of roads to Srinagar (and further to Leh and Tashigang) and Uri. - Ed.). The operation began at 4.00 am with a powerful artillery preparation. To mislead the enemy, the area north of Naushakhra was also bombarded with artillery. This was followed by three trial infantry attacks against one Indian infantry brigade and several tanks in defensive positions near Chhamba. There were two Indian infantry divisions in the area, and they pulled up to the scene of the fighting after the start of the Pakistani attacks. The Pakistanis had terrain suitable for tanks, while the Indians had to bring up reinforcements along a single road in difficult conditions. By the afternoon of September 2, the Indians knocked out sixteen Pakistani tanks, but Chhamb was taken by the Pakistanis with a wide coverage from the east.

Pakistani tank column, heading towards Akhnur, was trying to reach a strategic bridge over the 1.5 km wide Chenab River, vital for supplying the Indian forces in front of this river. The Indians attempted to delay the Pakistani advance with air attacks and claimed to have destroyed thirteen tanks. Pakistani aircraft were also called here, but further air activity on both sides was low.

INDO-PAKISTAN WAR

September 1965

The attacking Pakistanis reached Nariana on 5 September and were 8 km from Akhnur. However, they failed to capture the city due to their slow tactics and the flexibility of the active defense provided by the Indians. A significant part of the Pakistani troops were withdrawn from here when the Indians launched an attack much further south, in the Punjab, where the terrain is flat. India claimed to have inflicted heavy losses on Pakistani armored vehicles with its air raids during its withdrawal, which nevertheless was skilfully completed. The Indians had long recognized the area of ​​Chhamba and Akhnur as of little use for defense due to the nature of the terrain and decided that the best defense would be an Indian advance on Lahore. The Indian advance on Lahore began on 6 September, with a secondary advance on Sialkot the next day.

The Indian attack on Lahore on September 6 was carried out in three directions on a front of 50 km by three infantry divisions with armor attached to them and two infantry divisions in reserve. The northern group of Indians attacked along the axis of the main road. The southern group moved from the area east of Firozpur towards Khem-Karan. The central column, starting on the morning of September 7, advanced from Khalra in the direction of the Pakistani village of Burki.

The goal of the offensive in all three directions was to control the Ichkhogil irrigation canal. This channel was over 40 m wide and 4.5 m deep. Facing east, it served as a kind of tank trap, protecting Lahore. The channel, in turn, was protected by many long-term firing structures.

The Indian offensive ran into a very strong Pakistani defense along the canal. Apparently, for this reason, the Indians launched another attack with forces up to the brigade, 650 km south-west of Firozpur. But soon it became calm again in this sector - after September 18, when the Pakistanis repulsed the attack. On this retreat from the intended goal ended.

The Pakistani 10th Division had taken up defensive positions in front of Lahore only hours before the Indian attacks began, and there were no Pakistani armor east of the canal. The defenders were shocked by the pressure of the Indian attacks, because they treated the military abilities of the Indians with contempt (the costs of hundreds of years of domination of Muslims over Hindus in India; after all, the thousands of years of Aryan tradition and ancient culture overcame. - Ed.). As a precautionary measure, the Pakistanis blew up seventy bridges over the Ichkhogil Canal, making it a real anti-tank ditch.

The Indian central column captured two villages by nightfall on the first day, while the northern column reached the outskirts of the city at the canal but was driven back. The southern column advanced through Khem-Karan in the direction of Kasur. Opposition was so small that the Indian commander feared a trap and withdrew his troops to the left bank of the Sutlej River. On the night of September 6, a detachment of Pakistani paratroopers was dropped on the Indian forward air bases at Pathankot, Jalandhar and Ludhiana, but they mostly landed with a wide spread of targets and were surrounded by Indian troops by the end of the next day.

It seemed that neither side had a unified plan of action, and each operation was carried out as if they had no idea what the next step would be. As a result, both sides seemed to be driven by emotion, and their efforts were scattered over such a wide front that they did not have enough strength to make a decisive breakthrough anywhere. There was a deliberate escalation of the war on both sides (and both states apparently did not think about the consequences) - the result of a long period of distrust and hostility towards each other. And this escalation may also have been driven in part by the fact that, in their efforts to bring about a ceasefire, UN monitors kept both sides constantly aware of what each side was up to.

The Indians attacked Burki, a heavily fortified village with eleven long-term concrete emplacements made to look like dirty barracks. It was a night attack in which tanks used both sides. The second major battle was fought continuously over the village of Dogray, which was also heavily fortified, in addition to being defended by dug-in Shermans and recoilless rifles. The Indians reached the east bank of the canal and came under intense artillery fire, but no counterattacks were made by the Pakistanis. Part of the Indian infantry managed to cross the canal, but they were unable to gain a foothold, overtaking their armored vehicles, which were intercepted by Pakistani aircraft along the way. The village of Dogray changed hands several times before the Indians finally took it hours before the 22 September ceasefire. From the very beginning, the battle for Lahore went on continuously, but with varying success until the ceasefire.

Among the bridges blown up by the Pakistanis, one was north of Lahore. His absence prevented the Indians from advancing in that direction, but also prevented the Pakistanis from attacking the Indians from the flank. As a result of this, the Indian reserve tank regiment, located north of Amritsar, was transferred to the Khem-Karan region, which was attacked by the Pakistanis. The Indians captured Khem Karan with their 4th Infantry Division and an armored brigade and again moved west.

On the night of September 7, the Pakistanis launched a counterattack on the left Indian flank with large forces. The Pakistani 1st Armored Division with M-47 and M-48 medium tanks equipped with night vision devices and an additional regiment of M-24 light tanks concentrated in the Kasur area along with an infantry support division. After artillery preparation, a tank attack was carried out in two directions. Five separate attacks were made in the next day and a half, and the Indians were driven back to Khem Karan. During the first strike, Pakistani tanks were pulled up from Pakistan through a tunnel under the canal and thrown into battle without refueling. The Indians, on the other hand, believed that the Pakistani 1st Armored Division was in the Sialkot area. However, despite the fact that both the aforementioned Panzer Division and the Infantry Support Division were involved in these attacks, no breakthrough of the Indian defenses was made.

Meanwhile, the Indians prepared a U-shaped trap near the village of Assal-Uttar. There the infantry, artillery and tanks dug in between the drainage channels, which mostly flowed in a northeasterly direction. The northern flank of this position was protected by a barrier in the form of irrigation channels and water softened earth as a result of flooding due to the blocking of key channels. The southern flank was excluded given the minefield that stretched to the Beas River. The Indians slowly rolled back to this position in order to lure the Pakistanis into a trap.

On September 8, the Pakistanis conducted reconnaissance in combat - ten M-24 tanks and five M-47 tanks. They retreated under fire. A night attack followed, but it was repulsed by Indian artillery concentrated in the center of the position. On September 9, additional Indian armor was brought up and deployed on the flanks of the artillery concentrated here. tank brigade. On September 10, at 0830, the Pakistanis launched a powerful attack to the northeast with the forces of their 5th Tank Brigade and 2nd Infantry Division. The Pakistani 3rd Armored Brigade remained in reserve on the southern flank. The attack faltered. The Pakistani tanks turned into a field of high sugarcane, behind which the dug-in Indian infantry with Centurion tanks attached to them was hiding. As soon as the Pakistani armored vehicles revealed themselves with undulating movements of sugar cane about 3 meters high, the Centurions opened fire, supported by 106 mm recoilless rifles mounted on jeeps.

Then, without conducting reconnaissance, the 4th Tank Brigade launched a scattered attack along the front on the Indian northern flank. When she reached the flooded place, she turned south, and was hit in the flank by Indian Shermans (with 76-mm guns) firing from the trenches. The Pakistanis withdrew during the night, leaving behind 30 damaged tanks, as well as ten serviceable tanks that had run out of fuel. Personnel losses were heavy and included the division commander and his artillery officer. Pakistani troops were withdrawn to Khem Karan, where they dug in, holding three strips of Indian territory, 15 kilometers each, until a ceasefire.

The Pakistani attack involved moving in two columns. The southern column was supposed to take the bridge over the Beas River, which was a segment of the main highway, after hitting parallel to the river. The northern column was to take Amritsar. The central column also intended to reach the main thoroughfare. The movement plan took into account the nature of the terrain - with parallel rivers, numerous canals and many drainage channels that ran roughly parallel to the northeast from the border area. This would pose a threat to India and was a possible development that Indians have always feared. It was for this reason that an Indian armored division and other troops were stationed in the Jalandhar area.

In addition to the 1st Indian Armored Division, Jalandhar also had four infantry and mountain divisions. The bulk of the Pakistani army was located in the Punjab. On September 4, an Indian armored division boarded a train at Jalandhar. She arrived in Jammu on the morning of 8 September and disembarked. Then at night she advanced in the direction of Sialkot. The movement of three thousand different vehicles (including 150 civilian trucks involved) along a single road was fraught with the danger of an enemy devastating air strike, but the risk was justified. Together with the 1st Indian Corps, which was engaged in the area, a demonstrative diversionary attack was made towards Akhnur, but the real attack was made from Samba in three columns towards Phillora, where most of the Pakistani armor was located.

As previously mentioned, one day after the start of the Indian offensive on Lahore, I Indian Corps on the night of September 7 launched an attack near Sialkot against the Pakistani IV Corps, the 15th division and six regiments of medium and light tanks defending this city. The Pakistani 7th Infantry Division, which had advanced from Chhamb with the Paratrooper Brigade and the newly formed 6th Armored Division at the head, was ready to attack. The area was protected by a number of long-term emplacements, as well as a significant amount of Pakistani artillery. In an area of ​​about 12 km 2 of flat terrain began what was destined to become a fifteen-day battle - at close range and in all-consuming dust - between 400 and 60 tanks, now and then brought into battle. The Indians made at least fifteen major attacks with tanks and infantry.

An Indian armored column to the north and an infantry column with some armor to the south aimed at Sialkot. Heavy fighting involving tanks and infantry took place at Phillora and Chavinda. The Indians' immediate target was the Lahore-Sialkot railway. On September 8, by 0900, the Indians reached Phillora. Indian armor suffered heavy losses because it tended to move ahead of supporting infantry and expose its flanks to enemy fire. Many AMX-13 tanks were captured by the Pakistanis intact. The Pakistani counterattack on 8 September was followed by two days of regrouping and reconnaissance. In the Battle of Phillora between the Indian 1st Armored Division and the Pakistani 6th Armored Division, Pakistani tanks also suffered heavy losses due to being too close together.

There were no reserves left. Both sides threw everything they had into battle. Finally, ten massive attacks by Indian tanks and infantry, with tank attacks from different directions, led to the capture of Phillora, which fell under the blows of the southern group of Indians on September 12. Then followed a three-day lull for a new regrouping of forces. On September 14, the Indians attacked Chavinda, a key point of the Sialkot-Pasrur railway line, with Centurions and Shermans. On September 15, the Indians cut the railway at Chavinda and between Pasrur and Sialkot. The Pakistanis counterattacked but used their tanks too dispersed and lacked striking power. At Dera Nanak, Pakistani sappers blew up a strategic bridge over the Ravi River in order to block the third Indian offensive, thereby, however, eliminating the possibility of making a wide envelopment of the Indian left flank.

September 20 Pakistani attack on the Sialkot-Sughetgarh railway failed. The 3rd Indian Cavalry (Panzer) unit, equipped with Centurions, and the 2nd Armored Brigade, armed with Shermans, beat them up badly. After that, the front became calm until the ceasefire. Sialkot was only partially surrounded. railway the Indian troops reached, but the main railroad and highway running westward were unaffected. The capture of Sialkot would cut the supply line of the Pakistani troops at Chhamba and endanger the capital of Pakistan, Rawalpindi. At some point, in the midst of the battle, the Indian commander-in-chief broke loose and ordered a retreat, but the local commander refused to comply with the order.

The war went on for twenty-two days, ending quickly, without solving anything and exhausting both sides after many diplomatic efforts. By the time of the ceasefire, at 3:30 am on 23 September, India held the Uri-Poonch salient and territory in the Tithwal area of ​​Sialkot, as well as a strip of land in the Punjab between the Ichhogil Canal and the border. Pakistan held territory captured in the Chkhamb and Akhnur offensive and a narrow wedge in the Khem Karan area. The result was a fighting draw - in response to the call of the UN (special efforts were made. - Ed.) to the world. And although the truce was broken at times (by both sides), by the end of the year it was more or less respected.

The subjective opinions of the participants in the conflict and discrepancies in reports from both sides make it difficult to study, but it is clear that the losses in personnel among the Indians (who attacked a lot) were twice as high as among the Pakistanis. India admitted that the losses were 2,226 killed and 7,870 wounded and claimed that 5,800 Pakistanis were killed, but this was an exaggeration. Pakistan suffered heavy casualties in junior command and military equipment, in addition to armored vehicles.

70 Indian planes were shot down and Pakistan lost about 20 planes. Pakistan lost about 200 tanks with another 150 damaged but to be restored. This amounted to 32 percent of all his armored vehicles. The losses of the Indian side in armored vehicles were expressed in the approximate figure of 180 tanks with another two hundred vehicles damaged but subject to restoration, or about 27 percent of all available armored vehicles. It was later reported that 11 Pakistani generals and 32 colonels were retired. Several military trials were held in India and several officers were removed from command, but no further details were revealed.

The Pakistanis could claim superiority in their artillery, but neither side could claim superiority in their tanks, although the Indians seemed to have shown somewhat greater skill in weaponry and maneuvering. The Indians later claimed that Pakistani infantry were often transported in infantry fighting vehicles but rarely dismounted and showed too much dependence on their tanks; that the specifications of the American-made Pakistani tanks required more training from the Pakistani tankers than they received, and more than the Indians required for their AMX-13 and Centurion tanks; and that American tanks exploded more easily because of the way the ammunition was placed in them. And yet, some of this criticism of both sides, perhaps, can be ironed out. This follows from a statement made at Sialkot by Lieutenant General O.P. Dunn, commander of the 1st Indian Corps. In particular, the general acknowledged that the tanks used were too complex for simple peasant soldiers on both sides, adding that "this once again confirms the old truth that not behind the car, but behind the person who controls this car, is the last word.

A nuclear war can break out not only because of irreconcilable differences between the leading nuclear powers of the world, but also on the basis of the military-political confrontation of the countries of the so-called. third world. For example, India and Pakistan. In the latter case, the danger is the dispute between the two capitals over the status of Kashmir. According to the expert community, the world is a hostage to this conflict, which at any moment can escalate into a full-scale war using nuclear weapons.

Experts admit that the model of the Indo-Pakistani confrontation over Kashmir, which is based on a "gift" from the colonial past of these two countries, is an example of an insoluble political conflict with unpredictable consequences for all mankind. In this conflict, a whole bunch of problems are bizarrely intertwined, which can hardly be observed anywhere else in the world, even in our crazy age. First of all, it should be noted that the conflict immediately began with an armed clash between the two states, which at that time had barely managed to gain independence. That is, he was initially involved in blood.

Let's multiply this by the nuclear status of the two countries, the interests of, again, nuclear China, which is striving to turn Asia into a huge market for Chinese products, and the desire of the parties to gain control over fresh water resources.

The bouquet also includes the problem of human rights violations, the problem of the radicalization of society with bursts of riots, separatism, the spread of the ideas of radical Islamism and, of course, the so-called. "Islamic" terrorism. Let's add here the extremely tense situation in the immediate environment of the two warring states: this is the motley walking field of Afghanistan, China with its Tibetan problem and tension in the historical East Turkestan, and the growing power of Iran...

Background to the conflict

As noted above, the conflict over Kashmir is a legacy of the era of British colonial rule in the lands of present-day India and Pakistan. The two states split in 1947. Prior to this, what is now commonly called British India was administratively divided into British India proper and dependent Indian principalities, of which there were about six hundred (!).

Actually, the division into India and Pakistan was carried out by decision of the colonial administration. The principle of religious affiliation of the population was taken as the basis for the division. The Indian princes were given the right to make an independent choice in favor of the future of Pakistan or India. Not all princes decided at once. Some of them wished to maintain their much-desired independence from Britain.

One of these princes was the ruler of the province of Jammu and Kashmir - Maharaja Hari Singh (1895-1961). Maharaja was a Hindu, and the bulk of his subjects were Muslims. It should also be noted that Hari Singh had a sharply negative attitude towards the anti-colonial movement and opposed it both on an all-Indian scale and within his principality.

For example, he had a personal dislike for the main ideologist of the national liberation struggle Indians Jawaharlal Nehru (1889-1964), also of Kashmiri origin. The Maharaja was no better off than the other leaders of the Indian National Congress. However, the post-war history of the 20th century took its own course and moved colonial India in the direction of gaining independence. Therefore, during the partition of British India that began in 1947, Hari Singh found himself in a difficult situation.

Meanwhile, on August 14, 1947, the independence of Pakistan was proclaimed. A day later, the same thing was done in India. Independent India did not attract the Maharaja. But the prospect of absorption by Muslim Pakistan did not please him either. As a result, Hari Singh chose the third path and declared the independence of Kashmir. However, in the summer of 1947, inter-religious clashes began in the principality, and the ruler lost control of the situation.

The situation was aggravated by the fact that a wave of anti-monarchist speeches arose, calling for the expulsion of the Maharaja from Kashmir. The emergence of a Free Kashmir government was announced. This gave Pakistan an excuse to send troops into the territory of the principality, under the pretext of supporting the self-proclaimed government. In response, on October 26, 1947, Hari Singh was forced in a hurry to sign a document on the accession of his principality to India.

As a result of this decision, the first Indo-Pakistani massacre broke out, which ended more favorably for India. About two-thirds of the former principality went to her. These territories received the status of an Indian state with a special legal status. Pakistan was forced to be satisfied with the rest of the Maharaja's possessions and created a province under the loud name of Free Kashmir (Azad Kashmir) on the part of Kashmir that he had captured.

So, on the one hand, hitherto uncoordinated and therefore unsteady borders between the two countries were established, and on the other hand, on political map of the world, a constantly smoldering hot spot has been created that has kept the world in suspense for the past seventy years.

(to be continued)

Aidar Khairutdinov

Islamabad and Delhi are ready to arrange a nuclear massacre at any moment. We continue to analyze modern conflict situations in the world, capable of leading to large-scale wars. Today we will talk about more than 60 years of Indo-Pakistani confrontation, which in the 21st century was aggravated by the fact that both states have developed (or received from their patrons) nuclear weapons and are actively building up their military power.

A threat to everyone

The Indo-Pakistani military conflict occupies perhaps the most sinister place in the list of modern threats to humanity. According to Russian Foreign Ministry official Alexander Shilin, “ The confrontation between these two states became especially explosive when both India and Pakistan, having conducted a series of nuclear tests, demonstrated their ability to create nuclear weapons. Thus, the South Asian military confrontation became the second focus of nuclear deterrence in the entire world history (after cold war between the USSR and the USA)».

This is exacerbated by the fact that neither India nor Pakistan signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. and continue to refrain from joining it. They consider this treaty discriminatory, that is, it secures the right to possess nuclear weapons for a small group of “privileged” countries and cuts off all other states from the right to ensure their own security by all available means. Accurate data on the nuclear capabilities of the armed forces of India and Pakistan are not published in the open press.

According to some estimates, both states have set themselves the goal (and may have already achieved it) to increase the number of nuclear weapons from 80 to 200 on each side. If they are used, this is enough for an ecological catastrophe to call into question the survival of all mankind. The causes of the conflict and the bitterness with which it develops indicate that such a threat is quite real.

History of the conflict

As you know, India and Pakistan until 1947 were part of the British colony of India. Great Britain in the 17th century, by fire and sword, took "under its wing" the feudal principalities that existed here. They were inhabited by numerous nationalities, which could be roughly divided into the Hindus themselves - the indigenous inhabitants of the country and Muslims - the descendants of the Persians who conquered India in the XII-XIII centuries. All these peoples lived relatively peacefully with each other.

However, the Hindus were concentrated mainly in what is now India, and the Muslims in what is now Pakistan. In the lands that now belong to Bangladesh, the population was mixed. In large part it consisted of Bengals - Hindus who profess Islam.

Britain brought confusion to the relatively peaceful life of the tribes. Following the old and proven principle of "divide and rule", the British pursued a policy of separating the population along religious lines. Nevertheless, the national liberation struggle that is constantly going on here led after the Second World War to the formation of independent states. The northwestern Punjab, Sindh, the Northwestern province, and Balochistan were ceded to Pakistan. This was indisputable, since these lands were inhabited by Muslims.

Part of the previously divided Bengal became a separate area - East Bengal or East Pakistan. This enclave could communicate with the rest of Pakistan only through the territory of India or by sea, but for this it was necessary to travel more than three thousand miles. This division has already created a hotbed of tension between the two countries, but main problem is the situation with the principalities of Jammu and Kashmir.

In the Kashmir Valley, 9 people out of ten were Muslims. At the same time, historically, the entire ruling elite consisted of Hindus, who naturally wanted to incorporate the principality into India. Naturally, the Muslims did not agree with this prospect. In Kashmir, spontaneous militias began to be created, and groups of armed Pashtuns began to infiltrate from the territory of Pakistan. On October 25, they entered the capital of the principality of Srinagar. Two days later, Indian units took back Srinagar and pushed the rebels back from the city. The government of Pakistan also sent regular troops into the fight. At the same time, repressions against non-believers took place in both countries. Thus began the first Indo-Pakistani war.

Artillery was widely used in bloody battles, armored units and aviation participated. By the summer of 1948, the Pakistani army occupied the northern part of Kashmir. On August 13, the UN Security Council adopted a ceasefire resolution by both sides, but it was not until July 27, 1949 that Pakistan and India signed a truce. Kashmir was divided into two parts. For this, both sides paid a terrible price - more than a million dead and 17 million refugees.

On May 17, 1965, the 1949 armistice was broken., according to many historians, India: a battalion of Indian infantry crossed the ceasefire line in Kashmir and took several Pakistani border posts with battle. On September 1, the regular units of the Pakistani and Indian armies in Kashmir entered into combat contact. The Pakistani Air Force began to strike big cities and industrial centers of India. Both countries actively deployed airborne troops.

It is not known how all this would have ended if it were not for the strongest diplomatic pressure that forced Delhi to stop the war. Soviet Union- an old and traditional ally of India, was annoyed by this military adventure of Delhi. The Kremlin feared, not without reason, that China might enter the war on the side of its allied Pakistan. If this happened, the US would support India; then the USSR would have been relegated to the background, and its influence in the region would have been undermined.

By request Alexey Kosygin then Egyptian President Nasser personally flew to Delhi and criticized the Indian government for violating the ceasefire agreement. On September 17, the Soviet government invited both sides to meet in Tashkent and resolve the conflict peacefully. On January 4, 1966, Indo-Pakistani negotiations began in the Uzbek capital. After much debate, on January 10, it was decided to withdraw troops to the pre-war line and restore the status quo.

Neither India nor Pakistan were happy with the "pacification": each side considered their victory stolen. Indian generals stated that if the USSR had not intervened, they would have been sitting in Islamabad for a long time. And their Pakistani colleagues claimed that if they had another week, they would have blocked the Indians in southern Kashmir and made a tank attack on Delhi. Soon, both of them again had the opportunity to measure their strength.

It began with the fact that on November 12, 1970, a typhoon swept over Bengal, claiming about three hundred thousand lives. The colossal destruction further worsened the standard of living of the Bengalis. They blamed the Pakistani authorities for their plight and demanded autonomy. Islamabad sent troops there instead of help. It was not a war that began, but a massacre: the first Bengalis who came across were crushed by tanks, grabbed on the streets and taken to a lake in the vicinity of Chittagong, where tens of thousands of people were machine-gunned and their bodies drowned in the lake. Now this lake is called the Lake of the Risen. Mass emigration to India began, where about 10 million people ended up. India began to provide military assistance to the rebel detachments. This eventually led to a new India-Pakistan war.

Bengal became the main theater of hostilities, where the navies of both sides played a crucial role in conducting operations: after all, this Pakistani enclave could only be supplied by sea. Given the overwhelming power of the Indian Navy - an aircraft carrier, 2 cruisers, 17 destroyers and frigates, 4 submarines, while the Pakistani fleet had a cruiser, 7 destroyers and frigates and 4 submarines - the outcome of events was a foregone conclusion. The most important outcome of the war was the loss of Pakistan's enclave: East Pakistan became the independent state of Bangladesh.

The decades that have passed since this war have been rich in new conflicts. Particularly acute occurred in late 2008-early 2009, when the Indian city of Mumbai was attacked by terrorists. At the same time, Pakistan refused to extradite the persons suspected of involvement in this action to India.

Today, India and Pakistan continue to balance on the brink open war , with the Indian authorities saying that the fourth Indo-Pakistani war should be the last.

The silence before the explosion?

First Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems doctor of military sciences Konstantin Sivkov in an interview with a SP correspondent, he commented on the situation in modern relations between India and Pakistan:

In my opinion, in this moment the Indo-Pakistani military conflict is at the bottom of the conditional sinusoid. The leadership of Pakistan today is tackling the difficult task of resisting pressure from Islamic fundamentalists who find support in the depths of Pakistani society. In this regard, the conflict with India faded into the background.

But the confrontation between Islam and the Pakistani authorities is very typical for the current world alignment. The Pakistani government is pro-American to the core. And the Islamists who fight against the Americans in Afghanistan and strike at their henchmen in Pakistan represent the other side - objectively, so to speak, anti-imperialist.

As for India, it is not up to Pakistan now either. She sees where the world is heading and is seriously busy rearming her army. Including modern Russian military equipment, which, by the way, is almost never supplied to our troops.

Who is she arming herself against?

It is clear that sooner or later the US may inspire a war with Pakistan. The long-standing conflict is fertile ground for this. In addition, the current NATO war in Afghanistan may influence the provocation of the next round of the Indo-Pakistani military confrontation.

The fact is that during the time it has been going on, the United States has delivered to Afghanistan (and, therefore, indirectly to the Pakistani Taliban) a huge amount of ground weapons, the return of which back to the United States is an economically unprofitable operation. This weapon is destined to be used, and it will shoot. The Indian leadership understands this. And prepare for such a course of events. But the current rearmament of the Indian army has, in my opinion, a more global goal.

- What are you speaking about?

I have repeatedly drawn attention to the fact that the world with catastrophic acceleration rushed to the beginning of the "hot" period of the next world war. This is due to the fact that the global economic crisis has not ended, and it can be resolved only by building a new world order. And there has never been a case in history when a new world order was built without bloodshed. Events in North Africa and elsewhere are the prologue, the first sounds of the coming world war. The Americans are at the head of the new redistribution of the world.

Today we are witnessing an almost fully formed military coalition of US satellites (Europe plus Canada). But the coalition opposing it is still being formed. In my opinion, it has two components. The first one is the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, Republic of South Africa). The second component is the countries of the Arab world. They are just beginning to realize the need to create a single defense space. But the process is moving fast.

The Indian leadership is perhaps most adequately responding to the ominous changes in the world. It seems to me that it is soberly looking into a more or less distant future, when the formed anti-American coalition will still have to face the main enemy. In India, there is a real reform of the army, not like ours.

Disappointing calculations

A slightly different opinion an employee of one of the departments of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Alexander Shilov:

It is clear that India's nuclear deterrence is directed primarily against those states that it considers likely adversaries. First of all, it is Pakistan, which, like India, is taking steps to form strategic nuclear forces. But the potential threat from China has also been a major factor in India's military planning for many years.

Suffice it to recall that the Indian nuclear military program itself, the beginning of which dates back to the mid-60s, was mainly a response to the appearance of nuclear weapons by the PRC (1964), especially since China in 1962 inflicted a heavy defeat on India in the border war . A few dozen charges seem to be enough to deter Pakistan from India. In the opinion of Indian experts, in this case, the minimum would be the potential to ensure the survival of 25-30 carriers with ammunition after the first surprise nuclear strike from Pakistan.

Considering the size of India's territory and the possibility of a significant dispersal of nuclear attack weapons, it can be assumed that a strike from Pakistan, even the most massive one, will not be able to disable most of the Indian strategic nuclear forces. A retaliatory strike by the Indians using at least 15-20 nuclear warheads will undoubtedly lead to irreparable damage up to the complete collapse of the Pakistani economy, especially since the range of Indian aviation and ballistic missiles developed by Delhi allows hitting virtually any object in Pakistan.

Therefore, if we keep in mind only Pakistan, an arsenal of 70-80 ammunition may be more than enough. In fairness, it should be noted that the Indian economy will hardly be able to withstand a nuclear strike using at least 20-30 charges from the same Pakistan.

However, if we proceed simultaneously from the principle of inflicting unacceptable damage and not being the first to use nuclear weapons, then in the case of China, it will be necessary to have an arsenal at least comparable to that of China, and Beijing now has 410 charges, of which on intercontinental ballistic missiles no more than 40. It is clear that if we count on the first strike from China, then Beijing is able to disable a very significant part of India's nuclear attack weapons. Thus, their total number should be approximately comparable to the Chinese arsenal and reach several hundred in order to ensure the required percentage of survival.

As for Pakistan, the leadership of this country constantly makes it clear that the threshold possible application nuclear weapons in Islamabad can be quite low. At the same time (unlike India), Islamabad apparently intends to proceed from the possibility of using its nuclear weapons first.

Yes, according to Pakistani analyst Lieutenant General S. Lodi, « in the event of a dangerous situation where an Indian conventional offensive threatens to break through our defenses, or has already made a breakthrough that cannot be eliminated by the usual measures at our disposal, the government will have no choice but to use our nuclear weapons to stabilize provisions».

In addition, according to a number of statements by the Pakistanis, as a countermeasure in the event of a massive offensive by the Indian ground forces, nuclear land mines can be used to mine the border zone with India.

OUR REFERENCE

The regular armed forces of India number 1.303 million people (fourth largest in the world in terms of the number of armed forces). Reserve 535 thousand people.
Ground forces (980 thousand people) form the backbone of the armed forces. In service with the SV consists of:
- five launchers OTR "Prithvi";
- 3,414 battle tanks (T-55, T-72M1, Arjun, Vijayanta);
- 4,175 field artillery pieces (155-mm FH-77B Bofors howitzers, 152-mm howitzers, 130-mm M46 guns, 122-mm D-30 howitzers, 105-mm Abbot self-propelled howitzers, 105-mm howitzers IFG Mk I / II and M56, 75 mm RKU M48 guns);
- more than 1,200 mortars (160 mm Tampella M58, 120 mm Brandt AM50, 81 mm L16A1 and E1);
- about 100 122-mm MLRS BM-21 and ZRAR;
- ATGM "Milan", "Baby", "Bassoon", "Competition";
- 1,500 recoilless guns (106 mm M40A1, 57 mm M18);
- 1,350 BMP-1/-2; 157 armored personnel carriers OT62/64; over 100 BRDM-2;
- SAM "Kvadrat", "OSA-AKM" and "Strela-1"; ZRPK "Tunguska", as well as MANPADS "Igla", "Strela-2". In addition, there are 2,400 anti-aircraft artillery installations 40-mm L40 / 60, L40 / 70, 30-mm 2S6, 23-mm ZU-23-2, ZSU-23-4 "Shil-ka", 20-mm guns " Oerlikon";
- 160 multi-purpose helicopters "Chitak".

Air Force(150 thousand people) are armed with 774 combat and 295 auxiliary aircraft. Fighter-bomber aviation includes 367 aircraft, consolidated into 18 Ibae (one Su-30K, three MiG-23s, four Jaguars, six MiG-27s, four MiG-21s). As part of fighter aviation- 368 aircraft brought together in 20 IAE (14 MiG-21s, one MiG-23MF and UM, three MiG-29s, two Mirage-2000s), as well as eight Su-30MK aircraft. AT reconnaissance aviation there is one squadron of Canberra aircraft (eight machines) and one MiG-25R (six), as well as two MiG-25U, Boeing 707 and Boeing 737 aircraft. EW aviation includes four Canberra aircraft and four HS 748 helicopters .
Transport aviation is armed with 212 aircraft, consolidated into 13 squadrons (six An-32s, but two Vo-228s, BAe-748 and Il-76), as well as two Boeing 737-200 aircraft and seven BAe-748 aircraft. In addition, the aviation units are armed with 28 VAe-748, 120 Kiran-1, 56 Kiran-2, 38 Hunter (20 R-56, 18 T-66), 14 Jaguars, nine MiGs -29UB, 44 TS-11 "Iskra" and 88 training NRT-32. Helicopter aviation includes 36 attack helicopters, consolidated into three squadrons of Mi-25 and Mi-35, as well as 159 transport and combat transport helicopters Mi-8, Mi-17, Mi-26 and Chitak, consolidated into 11 squadrons. The air defense forces are organized into 38 squadrons. In service are: 280 PU S-75 "Dvina", S-125 "Pechora". In addition, to increase the combat capabilities of air defense, the command plans to purchase S-300PMU and Buk-M1 anti-aircraft missile systems from Russia.

Naval forces (55 thousand people, including 5 thousand - naval aviation, 1.2 thousand - marines) include 18 submarines, aircraft carrier "Viraat", destroyers of the "Delhi" type, project 61ME, frigates of the "Godavari", "Linder" type, corvettes of the "Khukri" type (pr. ).
The Navy has 23 strike aircraft in service. Sea Harrier (two squadrons); 70 anti-submarine helicopters (six squadrons): 24 Chitak, seven Ka-25s, 14 Ka-28s, 25 Sea Kings; three base patrol aviation squadrons (five Il-38s, eight Tu-142Ms, 19 Do-228s, 18 BN-2 Defenders), a communications squadron (ten Do-228s and three Chetaks), a rescue helicopter squadron (six Sea King helicopters), two training squadrons (six HJT-16s, eight HRT-32s, two Chitak helicopters and four Hughes 300s).

Pakistan Armed Forces

The number of military personnel is 587,000, mobilization resources are 33.5 million people.
Ground forces - 520,000 people. Armament:
- 18 OTR "Hagf", "Shahinya";
- more than 2320 tanks (M47. M48A5, T-55, T-59, 300 T-80UD);
- 850 armored personnel carriers M113;
- 1590 field artillery pieces;
- 240 self-propelled guns;
- 800 ATGM launchers;
- 45 RZSO and 725 mortars;
- more than 2000 anti-aircraft artillery guns;
- 350 MANPADS ("Stinger", "Red Eye", RBS-70), 500 MANPADS "Anza";
- 175 aircraft and 134 AA helicopters (of which 20 are attack AH-1F).

Air Force - 45,000 people. Aircraft and helicopter fleet: 86 Mirage (ZER, 3DP, 3RP, 5RA. RA2, DPA, DPA2), 49 Q-5, 32 F-16 (A and B), 88 J-6, 30 JJ-5, 38 J-7, 40 MFI-17B, 6 MIG-15UTI, 10 T-ZZA, 44 T-37(ViS), 18K-8, 4 Atlangik, 3 R-ZS, 12 S-130 (B and E ), L-100, 2 Boeing 707, 3 Falcon-20, 2 F.27-200, 12 CJ-6A, 6 SA-319, 12 SA-316, 4 SA-321, 12 SA-315B.

Navy - 22,000 people. (including 1,200 in the MP and about 2,000 in the maritime security agency). Ship stock: 10 GSH (1 Agosta-90V, 2 Agosta, 4 Daphne, etc.), 3 SMPL MG 110, b FR URO Amazon, 2 FR Linder, 5 RCA (1 " Japalat", 4 "Danfeng"), 4 PKA (1 "Larkana", 2 "Shanghai-2", 1 "Town"), 3 MTC "Eridan", 1 GISU 6 TN. 3 Aviation of the Navy: Aircraft - 1 pae (3 R-ZS, 5 F-27, 4 "Aglantic-1"); helicopters - 2 aircraft PLV (2 Linu HAS.3.6 Sea King Mk45, 4 SA-319B).

/Sergei Turchenko, based on materials svpressa.ru and topwar.ru /