logo
India-Pakistan, 2002: When it was close to war

India-Pakistan, 2002: When it was close to war

India Today11-05-2025
(NOTE: This article was originally published in the India Today issue dated Dec 23, 2002)Last Christmas, fighter pilots of the Indian Air Force's No. 1 Tiger Squadron of Mirage-2000 H aircraft were not in celebratory mode. Moved a week earlier from home base Gwalior to the forward base Adampur near Jalandhar, the Tigers packed pistols, high-protein Swiss chocolates and a quarter-inch map of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK). These would come in handy in case any of them was shot down behind enemy lines.advertisementTheir comrades in arms, the Indian Army's para-commandos, looked like the US marines with war paint, MP-5 sub-machine guns, infrared night-vision devices, Kevlar bulletproof jackets and hi-tech frequency-hopping radio sets. For the past week, the two elite forces had been secretly conducting mock raids in the hills of Jammu and Kashmir. This was not a routine exercise. It was preparation for war. Just how close India actually came to war, not once but twice, is emerging only now, and INDIA TODAY was able to piece together key details.It all began on December 13, 2001, when Pakistan-based terrorists of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) and the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) attacked the Indian Parliament, killing nine people. As the real intent of the strike sunk in and evidence of Pakistan's involvement mounted, Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee made it clear that India's patience had worn thin.advertisement
At a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) and the three service chiefs on December 15, Vajpayee asked the service chiefs, "Can we do something quickly?" All three responded in the affirmative. The CCS—comprising Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani, the then external affairs minister Jaswant Singh, finance minister Yashwant Sinha, Defence Minister George Fernandes, Planning Commission Chairman K.C. Pant and National Security Adviser Brajesh Mishra—agreed on a strike against PoK-based terrorists.JANUARY 14, 2002: FIRST CHANCEOrders were immediately issued to mobilise troops—more than those in the run-up to the 1971 war. Considering that it would take three to four weeks for deployment on the western borders, the armed forces planned action for the second week of January 2002. After much debate, the service chiefs opted for a limited offensive against the terrorists' training camps in PoK.It would essentially entail air force strikes to pulverise zones with a high concentration of camps—that's where the Tiger Squadron came in. A limited ground offensive by special forces of the army would further neutralise the camps and help occupy dominant positions on the LoC. D-day was tentatively fixed for January 14.In Delhi's war calculus, limited action in PoK made sense as it would not only convey the Indian resolve to Pakistan but also keep international retribution to manageable levels. India, after all, was only taking a leaf out of the ongoing US action against Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaida terrorists in Afghanistan. The daunting prospect of Pakistan launching an all-out offensive in response to the Indian action weighed heavily on the CCS.advertisementBut the intelligence assessment that the Pakistani Army was not well prepared loaded the dice in India's favour. This meant that the chances of Pakistan launching a full-scale war were minimal. The Indian plans were also backed by a sound economy that was bolstered by low inflation, high forex and petroleum reserves. Sinha went on record saying the economy was prepared for war even though it was the last option.A limited strike was a clever tactical option. The build-up indicated to the world, especially the US, that India was serious. If Pakistan wasn't reined in, India would have no option. Delhi also stepped up the diplomatic offensive, recalling its high commissioner and banning civilian flights from Pakistan. Picking up the war signals, Pakistan went into hypermode: it began mobilising forces and exchanged frantic calls with the US, getting President George W. Bush into the act.advertisementSecretary of State Colin Powell called India and Pakistan to cool down temperatures. British Prime Minister Tony Blair even flew to India in the first week of January to say that they were leaning on Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf. As proof, the US declared LeT and JeM as terrorist groups. Advani, meanwhile, flew to the US on January 8, where he was briefed on the contents of Musharraf 's impending landmark speech. The speech finally came on January 12, when Musharraf declared that terrorism in the name of Kashmir was unjustified. Practically giving in to Indian demands, he also announced plans to regulate madarsas and ban known terrorist groups operating out of Pakistan.Besides Musharraf's speech, there was another factor that shot down the CCS plans of an immediate war when it met on moved out most terrorist training camps from PoK in January, implying that the Indian forces would have to cross the international borders to achieve militarily significant results. This was risky as it would show India as an aggressor and could invite global intervention on Kashmir. So the CCS decided to give Musharraf another chance but keep the armed forces fully mobilised for war. And in a symbolic gesture on January 14, the Tiger Squadron destroyed an "enemy" bunker at Pokhran in Rajasthan with a laser-guided bomb.advertisementJUNE 10, 2002: SECOND SHOTThe readiness strategy paid off when Pakistan's terrorist groups struck again on May 14. Storming into the army residential quarters at Kaluchak cantonment in Jammu, they killed 22 women and children. Even before the killings, India had accused Pakistan of failing to keep its promise on ending cross-border terrorism. A day after the massacre, a visibly tense Vajpayee told Parliament, "Hamein pratikar karna hoga (We will have to counter it)."On May 18, Vajpayee, along with Fernandes, was briefed on military preparedness by Director-General Military Operations Lt-General S.S. Chahal and Military Intelligence Chief Lt-General O.S. Lochab. Later, after a two-hour meeting, the CCS favoured military action against terrorists in Pakistan.The political leadership apparently wanted limited action similar to the one in January. But after evaluating various military options, it was decided that action in PoK was not viable as Pakistan had beefed up its forces across the LoC. Any action limited to forays across the LoC would translate into minimum military gains and would risk attrition in the Indian forces. The military, however, favoured an all-out offensive that would stretch Pakistani troops across the international borders and give India an opening in PoK.advertisementSo the armed forces came up with a daring plan: destroy Pakistan's war-waging potential and pulverise the terror factories in PoK. The June canvas was bigger than the January one, since Pakistan had packed areas north of Chenab with forces and military logic dictated the battle should not be confined to the LoC. But there were serious limitations to the plans that worried the political bosses. With the monsoons imminent, the armed forces warned that the window for attack was extremely narrow. Any miscalculation could see the offensive bogged down with disastrous consequences.Even as the debate raged, the military made its plans. The launch of the offensive was entrusted to Strike Corps I led by Lt-General J.J. Singh, who had directed military operations in Kargil war. The IAF, along with Strike Corps I, would initiate action in the Shakargarh bulge and engage Pakistan's Army Reserve North (ARN) spread from Muzaffarabad in PoK to the Shekhopura-Lahore area. The idea was to lock Pakistan's key strike corp in battle that was essentially a boxer's feint. The real offensive would be in PoK by strike formations moved in from the east and tasked to capture strategic points used by Pakistan to push in terrorists.The period considered for limited strikes was between May 23 and June 10. On May 22, at Kupwara brigade headquarters near the LoC Vajpayee declared that "it was time for a decisive battle". A day later, the CCS met to assess the readiness of the country's key sectors in the event of a war. An economic review was also undertaken: Sinha said India's economy was a hundred times stronger than Pakistan's to bear hostilities, and RBI Governor Bimal Jalan pointed to a low inflation rate of 1.56 per cent and all-time high forex reserves of $55 billion (Rs 2,64,000 crore) to tide over the crisis. The crude oil and petroleum stock reserves, which should sustain the country for more than a month in a war, were also sufficient.With the CCS endorsing a strike, Vajpayee wrote to Bush, Blair, Russian President Vladimir Putin and French President Jacques Chirac, saying Musharraf had failed to deliver on his January 12 speech and that India's patience was running out. Hectic diplomacy followed as Bush, Putin, Blair and even Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi called and pleaded with Vajpayee not to take the extreme step. The global community conveyed to Delhi that it would impress on Musharraf to clarify his promise on stopping cross-border infiltration.That June was an option considered seriously by the Vajpayee Government is borne out by the Defence Ministry's SOS for defence supplies to Israel during the month. But the global community urged restraint as it was worried Pakistan would use the nuclear card to address its conventional asymmetry against the Indian armed forces. Musharraf had already played the nuclear brinkmanship—hinting he would use nukes against India—in an interview to German magazine Der Spiegel in April. Pakistan had even tested three missiles—Ghauri (N-capable), Ghaznavi and Abdali—between May 25 and 28 as a deterrent to India's posture.This belligerence forced India to review its N-capability to strike back—Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman Anil Kakodkar and Defence Research and Development Organisation Secretary V.K. Aatre reportedly participated in a CCS meeting in late May. In the absence of any formalised strategic force command, the nuclear strategy was handled on a need-to-know basis by Mishra, who reportedly attended an AEC meeting on May 24 in Chennai and later flew to Manali to brief Vajpayee.Pakistan's nuclear theatrics also led to Powell calling Musharraf five times in the last week of May and reading the riot act to him. Bush sent Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage to Pakistan on June 5. He apparently asked Musharraf three times whether he would "permanently" end cross-border infiltration and help dismantle the terrorist infrastructure. He conveyed Musharraf's commitment to Powell while flying to Delhi on June 6, and to India, on arriving.On June 10, Powell disclosed Musharraf's promise to the world, by which time India had already called off its strike plans. The political logic was understandable as a full-frontal attack would translate into war. It was better to give Musharraf another chance. Or perhaps, the build-up was a shrewd ploy by India, not only in June but also in January, to force Pakistan as well as the world community into action.Last week, Fernandes denied (to INDIA TODAY) that India had been on the brink of war, claiming that at no point had the CCS given directions to the armed forces to take action against Pakistan. He, however, did not put it beyond the army generals to prepare for contingency plans. Mishra, on the other hand, reiterated that India had indeed been "close to war" in January and May. While refusing to disclose dates, he pointed out that on June 23, Vajpayee had said in an interview to the Washington Post that it was a "touch and go affair".The Tiger Squadron, on its part, did have its share of action. On August 2, four Mirage fighters evicted Pakistani intruders 800 m across the LoC in Machhil sector of Kashmir. In Washington, it was dubbed Kargil II. The Tigers know that given the murky Indo-Pak relations, all it will take is another carnage for them to be back in air, in action.Subscribe to India Today Magazine
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Dy CM book to release on Atal anniv
Dy CM book to release on Atal anniv

Time of India

timean hour ago

  • Time of India

Dy CM book to release on Atal anniv

Lucknow: A book focusing on the life, thoughts, and legacy of Atal Bihari Vajpayee , authored by Dy CM Brajesh Pathak, will be released at an event to mark the death anniversary of former Prime Minister on Saturday. Titled, 'Atulniya Atalji (Vyaktitva, Vichar aur Virasat)', the work includes three of Vajpayee's articles written in the 1960s on nationalism, Indian identity, and the promotion of Indian languages. It also compiles three of his notable speeches, including his first address in Hindi at the United Nations as External Affairs Minister, his first speech from the Red Fort as Prime Minister, and his inaugural address as president of the Jan Sangh. Additionally, the book features select poems by Vajpayee, often quoted by him during significant occasions. Pathak stated that the aim of the book is to acquaint the younger generation with Vajpayee's ideas and legacy, highlighting his roles as a poet, writer, thinker, mass leader, and freedom fighter. He noted that Vajpayee's life story reflects the journey of contemporary Indian politics, public struggles, and nation-building, and is valuable reading for those connected to politics, literature, and journalism. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Happy Independence Day wishes , messages , and quotes !

Govt inks MoU with global apparel giants to drive textile growth
Govt inks MoU with global apparel giants to drive textile growth

Time of India

time2 hours ago

  • Time of India

Govt inks MoU with global apparel giants to drive textile growth

Bhopal: CM Mohan Yadav on Thursday held a roundtable with international sourcing heads of leading apparel brands, sealing an MoU with the Brand & Sourcing Leaders' Association (BSL) to boost investment in the state's textile sector. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Addressing the gathering at CM House here, he said the state had put PM Narendra Modi's Five 'F' Vision - Farm to Fibre, Fibre to Factory, Factory to Fashion, and Fashion to Foreign - into practice, and was on course to become a global hub for apparel and textiles. The upcoming 'PM Mitra Park' in Dhar district will take the state's textile sector to new heights. The state's strong base in organic cotton, modern textile/garment capacities, abundant green energy, stable policy environment, and swift administrative decision-making culture provide the confidence that attracts global brands to invest in the state. The CM said 'Made in MP - Wear Across the World' was not just a slogan but an industrial mission of the state, aimed at ensuring competitive access for MP's products in global markets. "The textile and garment sector is empowering farmers, women, youth, and the underprivileged," Yadav said. The CM, referring to the first meeting with the group held in Delhi on July 31 as the beginning of the 'journey from resolution to success', said Thursday's meeting in Bhopal was an opportunity to translate that resolution into concrete results. He said the PM Mitra Park was being established on 2,177 acres in Dhar, and a groundbreaking ceremony for the park will soon be performed by Modi. Even before the groundbreaking, letters of intent for investments worth over Rs 16,000 crore have been received. "So far, the state has attracted investments of more than Rs 3,513 crore in the textile sector," he said.

How to make adolescent sex safer?
How to make adolescent sex safer?

India Today

time2 hours ago

  • India Today

How to make adolescent sex safer?

(NOTE: This article was originally published in the India Today issue dated August 18, 2025)The age of consent, or the age at which a person's consent to sexual activity is valid in law, has a long, eventful history in India. Over 165 years, it moved from the age of 10 to 12 to 16, where it remained for about 73 years. Then, in 2012, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act (POCSO) was passed. Baked into the law was the definition of a child as anyone below 18, and any sexual activity under this age was deemed a crime. The law thus raised the age of consent, without discussion or explanation, from 16 to 18. At best, it was a hardline expression of concern for children's safety. At worst, a moral stance that aligned age of consent with age at marriage, signposting the invalidity of premarital the past decade, evidence has shown that the impact of this move has predominantly been the criminalisation of consensual sex between adolescents, used by their families to punish rebellious teens who fall in love and transgress caste, class, religious or social norms. A public interest litigation, led by senior advocate Indira Jaising, recently brought these submissions before the Supreme Court, asking it to read down the statutory age of consent from 18 to comes as a long-due and welcome move. The raised age of consent has not only criminalised boys as 'rapists' in consensual relations, it has resulted in brutal natal family violence, denied young people access to sexual health services and compounded the culture of silence and fear around sexuality. Taking a stand that the age of consent should be brought down to 16 does not diminish the commitment to protect children from abuse. Instead, it would acknowledge the fact that sexual activity exists amongst adolescents and create a less fearful space to build systems responsive to these needs. National Family Health Survey (2019-21) data shows that young people across urban and rural areas are involved in sexual activity from the age of 15 onwards. The age of consent varies across countries, with many at 16 or below. It is currently 18 in Nepal and 16 in Sri Lanka. The sexualisation of culture as well as the influence of the internet and social media have changed sexual mores and increased permissiveness, albeit unevenly. What we need is the implementation of sex-positive sex education in private and government schools, and easy availability of contraception and information to youth. Reducing the age of consent could reduce or manage teen pregnancies due to safer access to contraception and would also force us to look beyond sex at questions of consent and adolescence. How can we support young people to understand and articulate consent, something that is so difficult given the social stigma and taboos around premarital sex, especially the shaming that society accords to girls who say yes to sex? Shame unfortunately cannot be banned, but a reduced age of consent could lighten the cloud of confusion and shame surrounding in fact, is a red herring. It becomes the thing around which anxieties converge, blurring the focus on other important elements. Rather than the exceptionalism of sex, it is more useful to look at the exceptionalism of adolescents. Adolescence, increasingly an area of study, especially the 16-18 age group, is a period that needs attention differently from children requiring protection at younger ages. Reducing the age of consent could compel us to apply an adolescent-friendly lens to important institutions, be it education, health or justice. In practice, adolescent girls who approach the police station or hospitals for sexual concerns encounter judgement and blame. We don't need hardline, stone-jawed laws designed to discipline young people to express our protective impulse for them. We need to do the hard work of creating systems that listen to—and believe— writer is a sociologist and author of Intimate City (Zubaan, 2021)Subscribe to India Today Magazine- EndsTrending Reel

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store