Some western militaries constantly use fire power from other arms to support their infantry for every mission. Infantry goes in, finds a target, requests fire support from Armor, Artillery, Aviation (Gunships/UAV), Air Force (CAS Fighter/Fighter-Bomber/Strategic Bomber etc) or in some cases Navy (Naval sir support/Frigate/Destroyer etc) to take out the target. In Pakistan Army, Infantry, is considered to go in and complete the job even if the fire support is not available. 1948, 1965, 1971 wars have been fought with infantry having little or no supporting firepower from other arms.
This was also seen in 1999 kargil war, when only fire support was artillery. Gunships were not used. Armor and Navy couldn't operate in the mountains. PAF was not keep in the loop at the start of Ops and later conducted AD CAPs.
This time around for COIN war, PA has used Armor, Artillery, Aviation Gunships and PAF fighter-bombers to assist the infantry in clearing insurgent strongholds. On top of that PA has also raised specialized infantry formations to conduct warfare in urban theater of war- LCB (Light Commando Battalion) with secondary skill set as Air Assault qualified.
Opinion for Strategy in Planning
Coming to conventional war, should Pakistan Infantry assault an enemy position if it:
1. Always has support from Armor, Artillery, Aviation and Air Force? (all support assets ready to deploy)
2. Just has support from Armor or Artillery ? (either Tanks or Howitzers)
3. Just has support from UAV/UCAV/ Aviation Gunships ? (if other support assets cannot reach or do not have the range)
4. is led by SSG or LCB, after that the regular infantry regiments can assault ?
5. is on its own, since it has the necessary light weapons to accomplish the task ?
ISSUES
Issues without heavy firepower from supporting arms are:
1. Causality Rate increases . Un-necessary loss of life. Pakistan has lost thousands of soldiers in the recent COIN war as well as conventional wars in the past
2. Delay in time for capturing a position. Critical delays can cause failures in consolidating a position.
3. Pakistan is pre-dominantly an Infantry Army including para military. Armor-Infantry ratio is miserable. Aviation has very gunships as well as UAV/UCAV to support half million troops. Some trainer aircraft in PAA can be fitted with weaponry but their survival will be questionable in presence of enemy AD and AF. Pakistan Artillery is the only firepower which is considered reliable.
4. Training doctrine allows infantry to conduct assault with or without supporting fire power. So it is expected that infantry will assault with or without fire support.
5. PAF has a history of not providing CAS until recently now in COIN war.
6. Navy is restricted to coastline only and doesn't operate assets for providing firepower in Punjab/KPK/AJK.
WARFARE PSYCHOLOGY
The use of T-59/AZ MBTs and AH-1 Gunships supporting infantry on front lines in COIN created psychological havoc on insurgents. The insurgents didnt fear LMG/RPG and took cover in dug outs and tunnels and caves during Artillery fire. In the face of heavy insurgent fire power, when the MBTs when rolled on the ground with infantry forcing the insurgents to retreat and who were then picked out by AH-1 and targeted to be be stopped in their tracks. Similarly, PAF jets gave no reaction time to insurgents to flee and take cover.
In conventional war with the enemy, the morale and motivation of Infantry rises up to the sky, when the MBT tracks are heard as their main guns look for targets as well as rotors of Gunships are seen hovering above them, loaded with different kinds of weaponry. Friendly Air force in the horizon is also a mark of victory since Infantry knows that bombs will be dropped on enemy positions to soften up enemy defences and command is hell bent for this Operation to succeed.
QUESTION for FUTURE
Should the MO (Military Ops) Directorate in its future planning, only sends infantry, if, the necessary support elements with their firepower are available and will take part to conduct an operation successfully ?
This was also seen in 1999 kargil war, when only fire support was artillery. Gunships were not used. Armor and Navy couldn't operate in the mountains. PAF was not keep in the loop at the start of Ops and later conducted AD CAPs.
This time around for COIN war, PA has used Armor, Artillery, Aviation Gunships and PAF fighter-bombers to assist the infantry in clearing insurgent strongholds. On top of that PA has also raised specialized infantry formations to conduct warfare in urban theater of war- LCB (Light Commando Battalion) with secondary skill set as Air Assault qualified.
Opinion for Strategy in Planning
Coming to conventional war, should Pakistan Infantry assault an enemy position if it:
1. Always has support from Armor, Artillery, Aviation and Air Force? (all support assets ready to deploy)
2. Just has support from Armor or Artillery ? (either Tanks or Howitzers)
3. Just has support from UAV/UCAV/ Aviation Gunships ? (if other support assets cannot reach or do not have the range)
4. is led by SSG or LCB, after that the regular infantry regiments can assault ?
5. is on its own, since it has the necessary light weapons to accomplish the task ?
ISSUES
Issues without heavy firepower from supporting arms are:
1. Causality Rate increases . Un-necessary loss of life. Pakistan has lost thousands of soldiers in the recent COIN war as well as conventional wars in the past
2. Delay in time for capturing a position. Critical delays can cause failures in consolidating a position.
3. Pakistan is pre-dominantly an Infantry Army including para military. Armor-Infantry ratio is miserable. Aviation has very gunships as well as UAV/UCAV to support half million troops. Some trainer aircraft in PAA can be fitted with weaponry but their survival will be questionable in presence of enemy AD and AF. Pakistan Artillery is the only firepower which is considered reliable.
4. Training doctrine allows infantry to conduct assault with or without supporting fire power. So it is expected that infantry will assault with or without fire support.
5. PAF has a history of not providing CAS until recently now in COIN war.
6. Navy is restricted to coastline only and doesn't operate assets for providing firepower in Punjab/KPK/AJK.
WARFARE PSYCHOLOGY
The use of T-59/AZ MBTs and AH-1 Gunships supporting infantry on front lines in COIN created psychological havoc on insurgents. The insurgents didnt fear LMG/RPG and took cover in dug outs and tunnels and caves during Artillery fire. In the face of heavy insurgent fire power, when the MBTs when rolled on the ground with infantry forcing the insurgents to retreat and who were then picked out by AH-1 and targeted to be be stopped in their tracks. Similarly, PAF jets gave no reaction time to insurgents to flee and take cover.
In conventional war with the enemy, the morale and motivation of Infantry rises up to the sky, when the MBT tracks are heard as their main guns look for targets as well as rotors of Gunships are seen hovering above them, loaded with different kinds of weaponry. Friendly Air force in the horizon is also a mark of victory since Infantry knows that bombs will be dropped on enemy positions to soften up enemy defences and command is hell bent for this Operation to succeed.
QUESTION for FUTURE
Should the MO (Military Ops) Directorate in its future planning, only sends infantry, if, the necessary support elements with their firepower are available and will take part to conduct an operation successfully ?
