Kargil War

Explaining Indian Military Strategy in the Kargil War​


What explains the consistent patterns – and exceptions – in Indian wartime strategy?

In most of its wars, the Indian military has used a similar military strategy – to gain limited advantage on the battlefield as a way of consolidating the strategic status quo. The key exception was the eastern theater in the 1971 war, in which it sought – and won – battlefield decision to effect a major territorial revision. Much of contemporary international relations scholarship elides questions of strategy altogether, treating combat as an abstract contest of material power or resolve. Scholarship that does deal with strategy often seeks to explain consistency through strategic culture, or evolutions in military doctrine; but cannot explain patterns and exceptions in wartime behavior. This paper offers an explanation of military strategy as a function of the state’s geopolitical risk assessment and its military’s organizational preferences.

Dr. Tarapore illustrates the argument with a detailed case study of the 1999 Kargil war, in which India was cautioned by the risk of nuclear retaliation, and the military pursued a tightly limited campaign. This research has implications not only for our understanding of Indian strategic behavior, but also theoretical debates on conventional deterrence and conflict processes.


View: https://youtu.be/3Phgbyw_BOQ
 
have any explanations come out since, as to what drove ABV to think that going to lahore was a good idea ?

May 98 nuclear tests happened, May 99 kargil happened. if there was no lahore visit in between, there would been a straight connection between nuclear tests and kargil, as far as historical reading goes.
 

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Donate via Bitcoin - bc1qpc3h2l430vlfflc8w02t7qlkvltagt2y4k9dc2

qrcode
Back
Top