Impact of technological advancements
Technological advancements throughout the wars played a huge impact of tactics, scope and outcome. Air, land and sea developments are all accounted for within the realm of technological developments. In an overarching picture, the effects of technology developing and therefore becoming more powerful, advanced and effective can be seen directly in the casualty ratings of the war. The first war (1947) lasted 2 months, 1 week and 3 days. The casualty toll (injured, captured or deceased) is around 25,000. The war of 1971 lasted a considerably less amount of time, only 13 days, yet there were approximately 124,000 military causalities and about 3,400,000 civilian casualties. The impact of technological developments can clearly be seen in these numbers, as a war significantly shorter than another has a considerably higher casualty rate (than the other). Tactics like naval reconnaissance submarine operations and air strikes required more people to operate, yet affected a larger mass of people. Each technological development had a positive and negative effect on the wars, as they became more effective yet deadlier, therefore increasing the scope and even length of the war. These changes also prompted the countries to focus more on devastating the other country through death and destruction rather than solidifying plans that would most benefit the cause. Therefore the technological developments, over the course of the three wars, affected the nature, practice and therefore outcomes of the conflicts.
To what extent did the war impact the "Home Front"?
The Indo-Pakistani wars impacted the “Home Front” to somewhat great extent as thousands of people were either misplaced or fled due to tensions and violence which as a result left India economically drained, yet society was so firmly rooted in their beliefs that the “Home Front” naturally diminished due to violence but never altered.
The “Home Front” betwixt Pakistan and India was blurred, as thousands fled Pakistan to escape violence, genocide or even return to respective religious majorities. Therefore, the “Home Front” of each country became less defined as the social climate continually changed and shifted.
India, who was already in a sore economic state, had an influx of refugees from Pakistan during the war of 1971 due to the genocide (particularly against Hindus) that engulfed Pakistan that further declined the economic stability. This lack of security made the quality of living on India’s “Home Front” worse and caused social anxiety to end the war and recalibrate the economic situation before another war catalyzed.
However, the religious aspects of culture and politics in the two countries may of not kept the people physically in place, but their beliefs were unwavering. As the war progressed, intentions grew to be more defined which helped keep some consistency to the home front despite the war that waged on in both countries.
In conclusion, the physical home front may have been altered and/or destroyed, but the mentality of what defines a “Home Front” was unwavering, perhaps a reason why three (and more outside of the principle) conflicts occurred.
The “Home Front” betwixt Pakistan and India was blurred, as thousands fled Pakistan to escape violence, genocide or even return to respective religious majorities. Therefore, the “Home Front” of each country became less defined as the social climate continually changed and shifted.
India, who was already in a sore economic state, had an influx of refugees from Pakistan during the war of 1971 due to the genocide (particularly against Hindus) that engulfed Pakistan that further declined the economic stability. This lack of security made the quality of living on India’s “Home Front” worse and caused social anxiety to end the war and recalibrate the economic situation before another war catalyzed.
However, the religious aspects of culture and politics in the two countries may of not kept the people physically in place, but their beliefs were unwavering. As the war progressed, intentions grew to be more defined which helped keep some consistency to the home front despite the war that waged on in both countries.
In conclusion, the physical home front may have been altered and/or destroyed, but the mentality of what defines a “Home Front” was unwavering, perhaps a reason why three (and more outside of the principle) conflicts occurred.