What is India trying to prove with its Cold Start?

It is a war scheme for India to perform holding attacks before international intervention or retaliation from Pakistan

Recently, despite countless refutes, the curtain over the Indian Cold Start doctrine has finally been raised. In an interview on January 4^th, soon after his appointment, the Indian Army Commander-in-Chief General Bipin Rawat raised a new conflagration in the strategic community of India and around the world by officially acknowledging India’s conventional military operations targeted towards Pakistan.

For those of you who are unaware, the Cold Start is a military doctrine developed by the Indian Army for use in a possible war with Pakistan. It is intended to allow India’s conventional forces to perform holding attacks in order to prevent a nuclear retaliation from Pakistan in case of a conflict.

Rawat is the first senior Indian official to do so, as all former personnel of his stature  avoided using the term ‘Cold Start’ and preferred calling it ‘proactive strategy’.

For years, India consistently denied having a rigid stance towards Pakistan; however, in 2011, former Army Chief General Vijay Kumar Singh admitted that there was a ‘proactive strategy’ in place if ever need be. According to Singh,

“There is nothing like Cold Start. But we have a ‘proactive strategy’ which takes steps in a proactive manner so that we can achieve what our doctrines and strategies.”

Furthermore, former Indian defence minister Jaswant Singh also denied the existence of the doctrine, stating,

“There is no Cold Start doctrine. No such thing. It was an off-the-cuff remark from a former chief of staff. I have been defense minister of the country. I should know.”

It is worth mentioning here that India’s Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar passed a statement regarding India’s ‘no first use of nuclear weapons’.  Therefore, it is justified for the Foreign Office spokesperson, Nafees Zakaria, to call bluff on it and say that the declaration “amounted to nothing”. According to Zakaria,

“Pakistan believes the ambiguous no first use declaration is not verifiable and amounts to nothing. The declaration can’t be a substitute for verifiable arms control and restraint measures proposed by Pakistan’s standing offer of Strategic Restraint Regime.”

Officially and proudly acknowledging the doctrine threatens Pakistan’s conventional and asymmetric pre-eminence relationship with India. Islamabad must be prepared for Delhi opting to use its nuclear weapon first and ever more so with hardliners like Parrikar, Ajit Davol and Sushma Sawraj at the helm.

Inversely, Pakistan has developed its own tactical nuclear weapons. Pakistani Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry outlining the conditions and options for tactical nuclear weapons usage once said,

“Pakistan’s low-yield weapons were meant to lower the threshold for nuclear escalation to counter the perceived logic of Cold Start.”

India, Aizaz said, resorted to forward deployments under its Cold Start doctrine and Pakistan has every right to develop weapons to defend its sovereignty.

“Our nuclear programme is not meant for war but prevention of war,” he added.

On the other hand, commenting on the on-going tension along the Line of Control and the working boundary, former chief of army staff, General Raheel Sharif said,

“If the enemy ever resorts to any misadventure, it will have to pay an unbearable cost regardless of its size and scale. I can say with a lot of conviction that today our country is much stronger, and the Pakistani nation is more resolute than ever before. Pakistan is capable of dealing with all kinds of internal and external threats, be it conventional or sub-conventional, cold start or hot start. We are ready!”

It would be pertinent to mention here that Pakistan has not ruled out the option of using their tactical nuclear weapons if India were to launch any cross-border attack inside Pakistan’s territory, whether through ground or air strikes. Tactical weapons are usually delivered by short-range ballistic missiles, which Pakistan does possess, and could effectively counter a Cold Start strike. Moreover, Pakistan can relocate its defensive formations along the Indian borders where the Indian army is deploying more than 460 main battle tanks (MBTs), substantially increasing its existing sizable tank force. The deployment of these MBTs would be their key strategy as they play a crucial part in carrying out rapid attacks in Pakistani territory.

Although India has always maintained an extensive amount of tank force along the border, recently, however, certain Indian senior defence officials confirmed to IHS Jane 360 that the Indian army is planning to deploy nearly 500 newly ordered T-90MS main battle tanks along India’s western and northern borders with Pakistan. The tanks have been specifically designed by Russia, at a cost of INR134.80 billion/ $2 billion. These new tanks will replace the already deployed 850-900 Bhishma tanks in the Indian states of Rajasthan and Punjab —both bordering with the Pakistan borders.

Calling a spade a spade, the Cold Start doctrine is a war scheme that calls on India’s conventional forces to perform holding attacks before international intervention or before nuclear retaliation from Pakistan. Hitherto, it is believed that this doctrine is a step that would eliminate reconciliations between both nations consequently. Furthermore, it could have serious consequences, for not only the neighbouring countries but globally, including the potential use of nuclear weapons.

On a global level, India’s constant aggressive moves send an appalling signal to the international community that South Asia is in a permanent state of regional conflicts. Recently, at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, the outgoing US Vice President Joe Biden expressed his concerns in a speech over the rise of nuclear weapons in Europe, East and especially south Asia.



If this alarming increase of artillery near the border is not a clear indication of India’s motives and preparations to methodically activate and implement the Cold Start doctrine, then we might as well turn into the three wise monkeys.

In conclusion, I would like to say that putting our patriotism and love for our country aside, war will do no country any good. Both armies need a reason to show off their military might, but it is up to the citizens to understand and dissuade any such jingoistic behaviour on either side of the border. War is and never will be the correct answer, no matter what artillery each country possess and what each army tries to convince us, the citizens.