India's Missile Defense Threatens Peace in South Asia
Last year's terror attacks in Mumbai triggered a wave of vociferous military threats against Pakistan in the Indian media by various Indian commentators and analysts. Sashi Tharoor, a former UN diplomat and current Indian minister, aptly described the post-Mumbai Indian reaction as India's "Israel Envy". Prior to the attacks, an Indian writer Pankaj Mishra described the urge by many in India's urban middle class to "do a Lebanon" in Pakistan.
India's Sabre Rattling:
After considerable saber rattling by Indian officials, including Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee who talked about "not ruling out military strikes in Pakistan", the Indian government backed off from its threats. The reason was captured well by New York Times' Somini Sengupta reporting in December, 2008 from New Delhi that "Indian officials have said privately in recent weeks that they are reluctant to strike Pakistan, and that even a limited attack on terrorist training camps would invite swift retaliation." Earlier, Pakistan's Army Chief had warned India of retaliation “within minutes” if India carried out any surgical strike inside the country.
Instead, Indian government is now pursuing the dual strategy of conducting covert operations inside Pakistan and developing a comprehensive missile shield to protect against future retaliatory strikes by Pakistan. Former Indian top spies B. Raman and Vikram Sood have argued for stepping up covert war inside Pakistan and using all available methods to discredit and destabilize Pakistani state and military.
Covert War Against Pakistan:
Former RAW chief B. Raman argues that India appoint a covert ops specialist as the new head of RAW. He says, “At this critical time in the nation’s history, RAW has no covert action specialists at the top of its pyramid. Get a suitable officer from the IB or the Army. If necessary, make him the head of the organization.”
Vikram Sood, another former top spy in India, has elaborated on India's covert warfare options to target Pakistan in the following words: "Covert action can be of various kinds. One is the paramilitary option, which is what the Pakistanis have been using against us. It is meant to hurt, destabilize or retaliate. The second is the psychological war option, which is a very potent and unseen force. It is an all weather option and constitutes essentially changing perceptions of friends and foes alike. The media is a favorite instrument, provided it is not left to the bureaucrats because then we will end up with some clumsy and implausible propaganda effort. More than the electronic and print media, it is now the internet and YouTube that can be the next-generation weapons of psychological war. Terrorists use these liberally and so should those required to counter terrorism."
Based on all the evidence of stepped up insurgencies and increasing bomb attacks in Pakistan, particularly Baluchistan, and the hostile, overactive, anti-Pakistan presence of Indians on various Internet sites, it appears that India is acting on the covert war proposals by Raman and Sood.
India's Missile Shield:
Indian defense officials said in December 2007 that the country will have a shield in place by 2010 to protect India from incoming missile that could be fired by Pakistan or China. One of India's top defense research scientists, V.K. Saraswat, revealed plans for a complete ballistic missile defense system to be deployed within three years.
Since this announcement, it has been learned that India's anti-missile missiles are to be based on Arrow technology from Israel, which is being funded by the United States. While there are many questions about the viability and effectiveness of such a missile shield, it is commonly accepted by experts that the missile shield can eventually be effective against an enemy with a small number of warheads. That's the basis for the US-Israeli joint effort, mostly funded by the US, to develop Arrow missiles as deterrent against "rogue states", currently defined as Iran and North Korea, with a small number of missiles. It appears that India's effort is primarily aimed at rendering Pakistan's small arsenal of about 100 ballistic missile useless against India, altering the current balance of terror between the two hostile neighbors.
Contrary to popular belief, the Obama administration has not abandoned the missile shield. Instead, it has essentially outsourced the project to Israel, but it is still funded by the Americans.
Pakistan's Response:
In the face of India's ambitious missile shield efforts, Pakistan's security concerns are genuine, given the several India-Pakistan wars and frequent threats by India. Since the potential success of India's missile shield represents a fundamental change in the current balance of terror that has prevented wars between the two nations in the recent history, it is important for Pakistan not to ignore it.
The downside for Pakistan of not doing anything in response to the Indian missile shield is to throw away its current nuclear or even conventional ballistic missile deterrent and invite Indian aggression after potential Mumbai-style terror attacks in the future by any group of terrorists with or without links in Pakistan.
Based on what is known today about Israel's ambitious Arrow program, there is a strong possibility that India's missile shield program will not meet any of its key objectives. However, it makes no sense to build Pakistan's national security strategy on hopes of India failing. The right Pakistani response, in my view, should be as follows:
1. Pakistan should gradually build up a larger arsenal of at least a thousand ballistic missiles with an appropriate mix of nuclear and conventional warheads to make India's missile shield much less effective.
2. Pakistani defense scientists and engineers should study all available information and data on Israel's Arrow technology to develop appropriate counter measures to confuse, frustrate and effectively penetrate any missile shields developed and deployed by India.
3. Pakistani defense scientists and engineers need to look into effective and affordable missile defense development in partnership with their Chinese counterparts to deal with the common Indian threat faced by both.
The history tell us that Indians and others have always underestimated Pakistanis' extraordinary creativity and determination to achieve balance of terror with India at a small fraction of the costs incurred by Indians. I am quite confident that, given the appropriate political and military leadership, Pakistanis have the capacity to preserve the current balance of terror in the interest of peace in South Asia.
Related Links:
India's Israel Envy
India's Missile Shield Plans
India-Pakistan Military Balance
Arrow Missile Technology
Can India do a Lebanon in Pakistan?
India's Quest For Anti-Ballistic Missiles
Swift Retaliation by Pakistan
India's Covert War in Pakistan
Israel Tests Arrow 2
India's Sabre Rattling:
After considerable saber rattling by Indian officials, including Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee who talked about "not ruling out military strikes in Pakistan", the Indian government backed off from its threats. The reason was captured well by New York Times' Somini Sengupta reporting in December, 2008 from New Delhi that "Indian officials have said privately in recent weeks that they are reluctant to strike Pakistan, and that even a limited attack on terrorist training camps would invite swift retaliation." Earlier, Pakistan's Army Chief had warned India of retaliation “within minutes” if India carried out any surgical strike inside the country.
Instead, Indian government is now pursuing the dual strategy of conducting covert operations inside Pakistan and developing a comprehensive missile shield to protect against future retaliatory strikes by Pakistan. Former Indian top spies B. Raman and Vikram Sood have argued for stepping up covert war inside Pakistan and using all available methods to discredit and destabilize Pakistani state and military.
Covert War Against Pakistan:
Former RAW chief B. Raman argues that India appoint a covert ops specialist as the new head of RAW. He says, “At this critical time in the nation’s history, RAW has no covert action specialists at the top of its pyramid. Get a suitable officer from the IB or the Army. If necessary, make him the head of the organization.”
Vikram Sood, another former top spy in India, has elaborated on India's covert warfare options to target Pakistan in the following words: "Covert action can be of various kinds. One is the paramilitary option, which is what the Pakistanis have been using against us. It is meant to hurt, destabilize or retaliate. The second is the psychological war option, which is a very potent and unseen force. It is an all weather option and constitutes essentially changing perceptions of friends and foes alike. The media is a favorite instrument, provided it is not left to the bureaucrats because then we will end up with some clumsy and implausible propaganda effort. More than the electronic and print media, it is now the internet and YouTube that can be the next-generation weapons of psychological war. Terrorists use these liberally and so should those required to counter terrorism."
Based on all the evidence of stepped up insurgencies and increasing bomb attacks in Pakistan, particularly Baluchistan, and the hostile, overactive, anti-Pakistan presence of Indians on various Internet sites, it appears that India is acting on the covert war proposals by Raman and Sood.
India's Missile Shield:
Indian defense officials said in December 2007 that the country will have a shield in place by 2010 to protect India from incoming missile that could be fired by Pakistan or China. One of India's top defense research scientists, V.K. Saraswat, revealed plans for a complete ballistic missile defense system to be deployed within three years.
Since this announcement, it has been learned that India's anti-missile missiles are to be based on Arrow technology from Israel, which is being funded by the United States. While there are many questions about the viability and effectiveness of such a missile shield, it is commonly accepted by experts that the missile shield can eventually be effective against an enemy with a small number of warheads. That's the basis for the US-Israeli joint effort, mostly funded by the US, to develop Arrow missiles as deterrent against "rogue states", currently defined as Iran and North Korea, with a small number of missiles. It appears that India's effort is primarily aimed at rendering Pakistan's small arsenal of about 100 ballistic missile useless against India, altering the current balance of terror between the two hostile neighbors.
Contrary to popular belief, the Obama administration has not abandoned the missile shield. Instead, it has essentially outsourced the project to Israel, but it is still funded by the Americans.
Pakistan's Response:
In the face of India's ambitious missile shield efforts, Pakistan's security concerns are genuine, given the several India-Pakistan wars and frequent threats by India. Since the potential success of India's missile shield represents a fundamental change in the current balance of terror that has prevented wars between the two nations in the recent history, it is important for Pakistan not to ignore it.
The downside for Pakistan of not doing anything in response to the Indian missile shield is to throw away its current nuclear or even conventional ballistic missile deterrent and invite Indian aggression after potential Mumbai-style terror attacks in the future by any group of terrorists with or without links in Pakistan.
Based on what is known today about Israel's ambitious Arrow program, there is a strong possibility that India's missile shield program will not meet any of its key objectives. However, it makes no sense to build Pakistan's national security strategy on hopes of India failing. The right Pakistani response, in my view, should be as follows:
1. Pakistan should gradually build up a larger arsenal of at least a thousand ballistic missiles with an appropriate mix of nuclear and conventional warheads to make India's missile shield much less effective.
2. Pakistani defense scientists and engineers should study all available information and data on Israel's Arrow technology to develop appropriate counter measures to confuse, frustrate and effectively penetrate any missile shields developed and deployed by India.
3. Pakistani defense scientists and engineers need to look into effective and affordable missile defense development in partnership with their Chinese counterparts to deal with the common Indian threat faced by both.
The history tell us that Indians and others have always underestimated Pakistanis' extraordinary creativity and determination to achieve balance of terror with India at a small fraction of the costs incurred by Indians. I am quite confident that, given the appropriate political and military leadership, Pakistanis have the capacity to preserve the current balance of terror in the interest of peace in South Asia.
Related Links:
India's Israel Envy
India's Missile Shield Plans
India-Pakistan Military Balance
Arrow Missile Technology
Can India do a Lebanon in Pakistan?
India's Quest For Anti-Ballistic Missiles
Swift Retaliation by Pakistan
India's Covert War in Pakistan
Israel Tests Arrow 2
Comments
Pakistan’s efforts to have a sea-based minimum credible nuclear deterrent vis-a-vis India took a significant step forward last month when the state-owned, Wuhan-based China State Shipbuilding Industrial Corp (CSIC) ferried the first Qing-class conventional attack submarine (SSK) to Shanghai to begin a year-long series of sea trials, which is likely to include the test-firing of three CJ-10K submarine-launched, 1,500km-range land attack cruise missiles (LACM) capable of being armed with unitary tactical nuclear warheads. Called the Qing-class SSK, it is a variant of the Type 041A Improved Yuan-class SSK, which is also due to begin its sea trials later this month.
It is now believed that the contract inked between CSIC and Pakistan early last April (see FORCE April 2011, pages 16-17) calls for the CSIC’s Wuhan-based Wuchang Shipyard to supply six Qing-class SSKs, all of which will be equipped with a Stirling-cycle AIP system and will be able to carry up to three nuclear warhead-carrying CJ-10K LACMs each. The double-hulled Qing-class SSK, with a submerged displacement close to 3,600 tonnes, bears a close resemblance to the Russian Type 636M SSK, and features hull-retractable foreplanes and hydrodynamically streamlined sail. The first such SSK was launched in Wuhan on September 9 last year, and a total of three such SSKs are on order from China’s PLA Navy as well. The AIP system for the Qing-class SSK was developed by the 711th Research Institute of CSIC. R&D work began in June 1996, with a 100-strong team of scientists and engineers led by Dr Jin Donghan being involved in developing the Stirling-cycle engine, while another team led Professor Ma Weiming of China’s Naval Engineering University began developing the all-electric AIP system. The two projects entered the production engineering stage in 2007, with the Shanghai Qiyao Propulsion Technology Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of the 711th Institute, becoming the principal industrial entity charged with producing the AIP system. Incidentally, the Qing-class SSK’s all-electric propulsion system is a derivative of a similar system that was developed about a decade ago for the PLA Navy’s six Type 093 Shang-class SSGNs and three Type 094 Jin-class SSBNs.
The submarine-launched CJ-10K LACM has been developed by the China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp’s (CASIC) Hubei-based Ninth Academy (also known as the Sanjiang Aerospace Group, or 066 Base) on cooperation with the Third Academy’s Beijing-based Xinghang Electromechanical Equipment Factory (159 Factory). Final assembly of the CJ-10K is undertaken by the Beijing-based Hangxing Machine Building Factory (239 Factory). The CJ-10K features an imaging infra-red optronic system for terminal homing, and it makes use of a ring laser gyro-based inertial navigation system combined with a GPS receiver to receive navigational updates from China’s ‘Beidou’ constellation of GPS navigation satellites.
In another development, during Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani’s four-day official visit to China beginning May 17, the decks were cleared for the Pakistan Navy to acquire for a 10-year lease period the two Jiangkai I-class Type 054 guided-missile frigates (FFG) Ma’anshan (FFG-525) and Wenzhou (FFG-526), which have been in service with the PLA Navy’s East Sea Fleet since 2005 (see FORCE December 2010, pages 44-46).
http://www.forceindia.net/Issue4.aspx
The best way to gauge the relatively restrained atmosphere of the India-China rivalry is to compare it to the rivalry between India and Pakistan. India and Pakistan abut one another. India's highly populated Ganges River Valley is within 480 kilometers (300 miles) of Pakistan's highly populated Indus River Valley. There is an intimacy to India-Pakistan tensions that simply does not apply to those between India and China. That intimacy is inflamed by a religious element: Pakistan is the modern incarnation of all of the Muslim invasions that have assaulted Hindu northern India throughout history. And then there is the tangled story of the partition of the Asian subcontinent itself to consider -- India and Pakistan were both born in blood together.
Partly because the India-China rivalry carries nothing like this degree of long-standing passion, it serves the interests of the elite policy community in New Delhi very well. A rivalry with China in and of itself raises the stature of India because China is a great power with which India can now be compared. Indian elites hate when India is hyphenated with Pakistan, a poor and semi-chaotic state; they much prefer to be hyphenated with China. Indian elites can be obsessed with China, even as Chinese elites think much less about India. This is normal. In an unequal rivalry, it is the lesser power that always demonstrates the greater degree of obsession. For instance, Greeks have always been more worried about Turks than Turks have been about Greeks.
China's inherent strength in relation to India is more than just a matter of its greater economic capacity, or its more efficient governmental authority. It is also a matter of its geography. True, ethnic-Han Chinese are virtually surrounded by non-Han minorities -- Inner Mongolians, Uighur Turks and Tibetans -- in China's drier uplands. Nevertheless, Beijing has incorporated these minorities into the Chinese state so that internal security is manageable, even as China has in recent years been resolving its frontier disputes with neighboring countries, few of which present a threat to China.
India, on the other hand, is bedeviled by long and insecure borders not only with troubled Pakistan, but also with Nepal and Bangladesh, both of which are weak states that create refugee problems for India. Then there is the Maoist Naxalite insurgency in eastern and central India. The result is that while the Indian navy can contemplate the projection of power in the Indian Ocean -- and thus hedge against China -- the Indian army is constrained with problems inside the subcontinent itself.
India and China do play a great game of sorts, competing for economic and military influence in Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar and Sri Lanka. But these places are generally within the Greater Indian subcontinent, so that China is taking the struggle to India's backyard.
Just as a crucial test for India remains the future of Afghanistan, a crucial test for China remains the fate of North Korea. Both Afghanistan and North Korea have the capacity to drain energy and resources away from India and China, though here India may have the upper hand because India has no land border with Afghanistan, whereas China has a land border with North Korea. Thus, a chaotic, post-American Afghanistan is less troublesome for India than an unraveling regime in North Korea would be for China, which faces the possibility of millions of refugees streaming into Chinese Manchuria.
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/india-china-rivalry
If you want to understand how far away India and Pakistan are from détente, take a look at how Indian newspapers are reacting to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s comments about the peace process at an event in New Delhi last night.
Mr. Kerry made the point that India and Pakistan, who have fought three wars since 1947, could use trade as the thin end of the wedge from which to improve overall relations. What’s more, he said, there were low-hanging economic benefits from increased trade.
“If India and Pakistan can confidently invest in each other, then the rest of the world will more confidently invest in you,” Mr. Kerry said.
This might seem anodyne to the casual observer. But this is not the kind of talk that goes down well in India, where efforts to put the two countries on a level are often frowned upon.
From the perspective of many in India, Pakistan’s continued sponsoring of Islamist militant groups means there should be no comparison.
The Times of India, the country’s most circulated English language newspaper, in a front-page story, said Mr. Kerry “may have ruffled a few feathers when he sought to draw parity between India and Pakistan.”
The headline of the story said the secretary “hyphenates India and Pakistan” – a dirty verb in India.
It was the Bush administration that pushed for the “dehyphenation” of India and Pakistan. This resulted in a U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement in 2008, a deal that was not extended to Pakistan.
The Hindu, another popular daily, said Sunday’s speech had “displeased” Indian diplomats because Mr. Kerry “has the perception of being soft on Pakistan unlike Ms. Clinton.”
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was popular in New Delhi in part because of her tough stance on Pakistan for failing to do more to stamp out militancy on its soil.
In 2008, after 10 Pakistani militants laid siege to Mumbai, India’s financial capital, killing more than 160 people, Ms. Clinton leaned on Pakistan to take steps to cut off militant groups.
On a visit to India in 2011, Ms. Clinton said Pakistan had an obligation to prosecute the perpetrators of the 2008 attacks “transparently, fully and urgently.”
“We have made it very clear that Pakistan needs to bring people to justice,” she said. “There is a limit to what both the U.S and India can do, but we intend to press as hard as possible.”
Indian officials blame Pakistan for failing to push ahead with the prosecutions of the seven suspects it has charged in connection with the Mumbai attacks. Islamabad says it does not have enough evidence from Indian authorities to move on with the trials.
The Hindu appeared to chide Mr. Kerry for commenting on recent floods in northern India, which have killed hundreds of people, rather than bringing up those who died in Mumbai.
In an article titled “Kerry’s soft line on Pakistan a sore subject,” the paper said: “Departing from his predecessor Hillary Clinton’s line of commiserating with the victims of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, he opted to sympathize with the victims of the Uttarakhand flash floods instead.”
On Sunday, Mr. Kerry acknowledged there were contentious issues between the two countries, but said he hoped the recent election of Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif could herald a “new era” between the nations.
http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2013/06/24/indian-media-rejects-hyphenation-with-pakistan/
There is also a blossoming military and commercial relationship between India and Israel. Israel is India's second largest arms supplier after Russia, and Israeli-Indian military cooperation extends to technology upgrades, joint research, intelligence cooperation, and even space (in 2008, India launched a 300-kilogram Israeli satellite into orbit). Israel has upgraded India's Soviet-era armor and aircraft and provided India with sea-to-sea missiles, radar, and other surveillance systems, border monitoring equipment, night vision devices, and other military support. Bilateral trade reached U.S. $6 billion last year and negotiations began this year for a free trade agreement.
Israeli-Indian cooperation in agriculture and water technology is growing both through government-sponsored initiatives and private business deals. Last year, Israeli and Indian government institutions jointly launched an online network that provides real-time communications between Indian farmers and Israeli agricultural technology experts, and Israel is in the process of setting up 28 agricultural training centers throughout India. Israeli Professor Yoram Oren has been studying the potential use of nano-filtration to filter out harmful textile dyes from India's polluted Noyyal River. Last June, a delegation of 16 high-ranking Indian officials from the water authorities of Rajasthan, Karnataka, Goa, and Haryana traveled to Israel to visit waste-water treatment plants and meet with some of Israel's leading environmentalists and agronomists to learn about the desert country's newest green technologies.
Tata Industries, the multi-billion-dollar Indian company, recently invested $5 million to kick-start the Technology Innovation Momentum Fund at Tel Aviv University's Ramot technology transfer company. Tata Industries hopes to capitalize on future Israeli innovation, like the algorithm for error correction in flash memory (which is one of the patents filed by Ramot and now inside billions of dollars worth of SanDisk products).
These are but a few examples of the remarkable cooperation between India and Israel. Such a synergistic relationship is unsurprising, given the historically harmonious relations between the peoples of Israel and India.
---
With the ongoing security threats posed by India's nuclear-armed rival, Pakistan, the Kashmir conflict (which recently claimed five Indian soldiers), and potential conflict with the other Asian heavyweight (China), India needs the kind of military edge that Israel can help it to obtain. Insofar as India provides an Asian counterweight to Chinese dominance, a powerful India bolstered by Israeli technological expertise is also in the interest of smaller Asian countries and the United States.
One area where India could deepen its alliance with both Israel and the U.S. is on the issue of Iranian nukes. India, the second largest importer of Iranian crude oil after China, won its third 180-day waiver from U.S. sanctions last June after reducing its oil purchases from Iran. But in 2012, Iran and India agreed to trade in rupees for shipments of oil, rice, sugar and soybeans, to circumvent U.S. financial sanctions on Iranian oil shipments. And Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals is now reportedly receiving a cargo of Iranian crude, after a 4-month hiatus, with Hindostan Petroleum also restarting imports soon. Iran may also become the top buyer of soybean meal from India for a second straight year, as Iran turns to Asia's biggest exporter to replace imports disrupted by Western sanctions....
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/08/india_israel_and_iran.html
...From the perspective of a metropolis of 17 million people, Israel looks like a small, distant country with peculiar, almost trivial problems. When reasonably decent drinking water for the masses and clean air to breathe are goals beyond reach, the right of return or Hezbollah’s arsenal of rockets seem to be almost theoretical issues. It’s also a question of one’s angle of observation: For the Indians there is no Middle East, only “western Asia.”
----
Since full diplomatic relations between Israel and India were established in 1992, the two have gradually but significantly moved closer together – primarily on the basis of growing economic trade, centering around sales by Israel’s defense industry to India.
-------------
India is now the No. 1 export target of Israel’s defense industries. The two countries. Both India and Israel avoid revealing details about the scale and nature of their security trade. However, in 2012 Israel’s Defense Ministry announced that the country’s total defense exports stood at $7 billion annually. India’s share of that is probably between $1 billion and $1.5 billion. And the potential for growth exists.
--------------
A partial list of the munitions that India has purchased from Israel in the past decade includes radar for the Arrow missile-intercept system, manufactured by Israel Aircraft Industries; sea-to-sea missiles manufactured by IAI and Rafael Advanced Weapons Systems; IAI warning planes, communications systems made by Elbit and ammunition manufactured by Israel Military Industries.
However, the potential of the transactions that have been discussed more recently is of a far greater scale. The projects include the upgrading of tanks and other combat vehicles, the supply of Barak-8 advanced missiles for protection of seagoing vessels and maritime facilities, and observation systems. India has expressed an interest in the technological progress embodied in the operational success of the Iron Dome system, manufactured by Rafael, in intercepting rockets fired from the Gaza Strip, though it’s doubtful that Iron Dome is appropriate for India’s needs.
-------------
In the face of the missile arsenal – and the nuclear capability – of Pakistan, India’s hostile neighbor, India must maintain commensurate strategic deterrence. The Indian authorities might thus be interested in systems, now under development, for interception of longer-range missiles.
----
At the moment, a huge deal is in the works. India wants to purchase advanced antitank missiles. The two suitors competing for the contract, which has an estimated worth of $1 billion, are Rafael’s Spike anti-tank guided missile and the Americans’ Javelin system.
-----------
In my short visit, I found a preponderance of pessimism and gloom, tempered somewhat by expectation of change. The fate of 1.2 billion people hangs in the balance. The change might come from the general election in May, in which, according to forecasts, the BJP, the Hindi nationalist party, will defeat the ruling National Congress Party.
Even on a lightning visit, Delhi is a surprising mix for someone encountering the city for the first time. Opposite the office building housing the research institute, people are scavenging in garbage cans. The impression made by the beauty of the grand monuments is erased within minutes by a depressing encounter with the girls who knock on the windows of the car and beg at every major intersection, with infants in tow who look groggy, as though they are under the influence of anesthetics...
------
On Sunday morning, a group of wild monkeys tranquilly crosses the road in the quarter where the foreign embassies are situated. The hotels look like fortified luxurious bastions from the period of the British Empire, and every foreigner is surrounded by a waiters and other staff members..
.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.575486
Though the exact location of the ceremony was not given, it is believed to have been held at PAF Base Masroor in Karachi as the prime minister was known to have been in the city that day.
Brian Cloughley, an analyst and former Australian defense attache to Islamabad, said AEW&C "is very good news for the PAF – and for Pakistan" because it "will dramatically improve early warning capabilities which up until now have been comparatively rudimentary."
The ZDK-03 Karakorum Eagle is a dish-based AEW&C system mounted on a Shaanxi Y-8F600 aircraft. Though never confirmed, it has been speculated that the dish houses an AESA antenna.
Four were ordered in 2008 with the first delivered in 2010.
Air Commodore Syed Muhammad Ali, a spokesman for the Air Force, confirmed all Karakorum Eagle aircraft on order have now been delivered, but could not say if more would be ordered from China.
The aircraft join No.4 Squadron, which was first established in 1959 with Bristol Freighter transports and Grumman HU-16 Albatross amphibians. The amphibians were used for maritime reconnaissance, search and rescue, and casualty evacuation alongside Sikorsky H-19D helicopters. The HU-16s were retired in 1968 and the H-19Ds in 1969.
The unit was then "number-plated" until officially re-equipped with the Karakorum Eagle.
The four Karakorum Eagle AEW&C aircraft join the surviving three Saab Erieye AEW&C aircraft ordered in 2005 and delivered from 2009. One of the four Erieye aircraft was destroyed in a terrorist attack on Kamra Air Base in August 2012.
That the Air Force operates two types of AEW&C aircraft for the same mission has been much commented on.
Analyst Usman Shabbir of the Pakistan Military Consortium think tank says the Karakorum Eagle's mission is "[b]asically the same job as Erieye but based in southern sector.
"To cover all the length of Pakistan we needed additional AEW&C aircraft and ZDK-03 was the answer due to political and financial considerations," he said.
Former Air Commodore Kaiser Tufail says the PAF was not keen on their purchase.
"The [Karakorum] Eagle was purchased rather reluctantly, under pressure of [then President] Gen. Musharraf, as a political expedient [Chinese appeasement], and not because of any reasons of technical superiority," he said. "It would have been more cost effective to manage a single type than these two vastly different ones."
Though he now believes attitudes have changed.
"Having said that, the performance of the Eagle has turned out to be surprisingly good, which takes some sting out of the initial criticism," he said.
Tufail says an absence of news of the fourth aircraft being delivered may mean it is undergoing installation of Link 16 datalink equipment to enable it to communicate with all of the PAF's aircraft, particularly its F-16s, and not just the JF-17 Thunders.
To date the Erieye AEW&C aircraft have been able to communicate with the Western aircraft in service such as the F-16, and the Karakorum Eagle with the Chinese aircraft such as the Sino-Pak JF-17, and perhaps the F-7PG.
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/air-force/2015/02/28/pakistan-re-equips-squadron-with-new-aewc-aircraft/24140709/
All masks are off and all veneers discarded- the Consulate General of Israel in Mumbai along with one Indo-Israel Friendship Association is organising a public discussion on Hindutva and Zionism on August 26th, at the The Convocation Hall of University of Mumbai. The poster of the event flaunts images of Theodor Herzl and VD Savarkar, and the event has Subramanian Swamy and a professor from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Gadi Taub as speakers. So far, Israel’s mission in India spoke the language of bringing technology and building cultural ties. Israel’s agencies, as part of its Brand Israel, have tried to whitewash its occupation, apartheid and settler-colonialism against Palestinians by hosting events, film festivals, etc, in an attempt to deflect attention from its crimes.
However, this time the ruling dispensation in India gives the Israeli embassy the confidence to drop all pretenses. All along, it is the connivance of these ideologies that has brought India and Israel closer in the last half a decade, at the cost of Indian solidarity to Palestine. In this context, we are sharing an excerpt from Sukumar Muralidharan’s essay “The ideological common ground between Hindutva and Zionism”, from the collection From India to Palestine: Essays in Solidarity edited by Githa Hariharan.
As Hindu nationalist ideology moves into its more extreme fringes, its inherent paradoxes stand out with similar starkness. Early pioneers of the ideology articulated these in the confident belief that minor doctrinal inconsistencies would be of no consequence in the mission of facing down a common enemy in Islam. As India under colonial rule lurched from the bitter aftermath of the collapse of the Khilafat agitation into an extended phase of communal estrangement, the notion of a country inhabited by two nations became widely accepted, crystallised especially in two political vehicles: the Hindu Mahasabha and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). A text published in 1939 by M.S. Golwalkar, a year before he took over the leadership of the RSS, remains one of the most authoritative statements on Hindu nationalism, offering rich insights through its comments on contemporary world events into the ideological pantheon it drew sustenance from.
Golwalkar’s statements lauding Nazi Germany for its virulent manifestation of “race pride”, which led to the expulsion of the Jews despite the world recoiling in horror at the enormity of the deed, are widely cited. These offer eloquent testimony in themselves, but only tell the full story when juxtaposed with the observations on Zionism that the same text offers. Golwalkar identifies India as one among the early nations that afforded sanctuary to the Jews after their country passed into Roman tyranny. This was obviously a bond in his rather twisted historical imagination, which persisted into that moment in history when the greater dispersal of the Jews took place, with the “engines of destruction . . . under the name of Islam” being let loose in the land. Palestine, in Golwalkar’s sense, suffered much like India did, losing its culture and traditions on account of the intrusions of Islam “Palestine became Arab, a large number of Hebrews changed faith and culture and language and the Hebrew nation in Palestine died a natural death.” But hope was not lost, since “the attempt at rehabilitating Palestine with its ancient population of the Jews is nothing more than an effort to reconstruct the broken edifice and revitalise the practically dead Hebrew National life.”
“Pakistan’s missile tests over the past several years appear to demonstrate enhanced accuracy and penetration capability in view of India’s growing investment in missile defenses. It has also introduced the [multiple independent reentry vehicle]-capable Ababeel ballistic missile system, designed to defeat any dedicated Indian anti-missile system,” he said. “While the S-400 remains a highly capable air defense system at best, its utility against missiles has yet to be proven in real-time conditions.”
Nevertheless, the S-400 does pose a considerable threat to Pakistan’s conventional deterrent.
“Suppression or destruction of enemy air defense (SEAD/DEAD) will likely have taken greater priority for the Pakistani Air Force in response to the S-400 acquisition,” Barrie said. “Options include acquiring more capable anti-radiation missiles, improved electronic countermeasures and aircraft self-protection.”
--------------
Overconfidence in its newly acquired S-400 air defense system may give India a false sense of invulnerability and increase the likelihood of a military miscalculation involving archrival Pakistan, analysts warn.
“Indian rhetoric appears to suggest a belief that the S-400 effectively makes its airspace impenetrable and its forces invulnerable,” Mansoor Ahmed, a senior fellow at the Pakistan-based think tank Center for International Strategic Studies who studies the country’s nuclear program and delivery systems, told Defense News.
Consequently, there are concerns “India may be emboldened to resort to military adventurism, believing its ‘Cold Start’ doctrine for punishing strikes and destabilizing incursions into Pakistan” is an assured success, he said.
Deliveries of India’s five S-400 regiments began in December 2021, with initial deployments along the Indo-Pakistan border.
On paper, the defensive — and potentially offensive — anti-access, area denial capabilities of the S-400 appear formidable. The system is reportedly effective against aircraft, UAVs, and ballistic and cruise missiles, with the latter capability potentially neutralizing Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent.
Its layered coverage is provided by a combination of the 40-kilometer-range 9M96E, 120-kilometer-range 9M96E2, 250-kilometer-range 48N6, and 400-kilometer-range 40N6E missiles, enabling it to protect large areas, high-value targets and itself from attack.
It is also highly mobile, can be made operational 5 minutes after arriving at a new location and therefore can be regularly relocated to avoid detection.
However, aerospace expert Douglas Barrie at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank, told Defense News the S-400 “should not be underestimated, neither should it be over-estimated.”
A notable claimed feature of the S-400 is its potential offensive capability that would restrict an adversary’s use of its own airspace. For Pakistan, due to its geography and the long border it shares with India, the weapon system would cover most of the country.
However, Barrie is unconvinced. “Its much-touted maximum engagement range is dependent on the variant of surface-to-air missile deployed, the acquisition ranges of the associated radars in the operational area, the capacity of the personnel to effectively exploit the system, and also the steps and countermeasures any opponent might take.”
India plans to integrate the S-400 into its existing air defense network, which consists of indigenous and Indo-Israeli systems.
Pakistan and China have come up with a new strategy in wake of India flexing its military muscle. Experts suggest that China is likely to equip Pakistan with its DF-17 hypersonic missile system in a bid to counter India's S-400 air defence system. Richard D. Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center in an interview has claimed that China is likely to sell the DF-17 or assist Pakistani HGV like it has supported North Korea’s new hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV) missile warhead. Hypersonic weapons, which travel at Mach 5 speeds (five times the speed of sound), are difficult to track and engage for air defence systems like S-400, that both India and China possess. Pakistan sees India's acquisition of the S-400 as a threat because of the system's versatility, which allows it to shoot down planes even in Pakistani airspace. A notable element of the S-400 is its potential offensive capabilities, which would limit an adversary's usage of its own airspace. The defensive system can cover a huge portion of Pakistan because of the country's terrain and lengthy border with India.
-----------
https://eurasiantimes.com/china-to-equip-pakistan-with-hypersonic-df-17-missiles-india/
Richard D. Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, testified before the US Congress about China’s military advances and has written extensively about the People’s Liberation Army.
“To the extent that China has supported North Korea’s new hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV) missile warhead, it has or will similarly assist a Pakistani HGV, or just sell the DF-17,” he told Defense News.
Given the air defense system’s superior sensors and the array of missiles, the Indian Media has referred to the S-400 as a “game-changer.” The S-400 employs four different types of surface-to-air missiles having a range from 40 to 400 kilometers.
https://thediplomat.com/2023/11/why-did-pakistan-test-its-mirv-capable-ababeel-missile/
As India’s ballistic missile defense system is further tested and development, Islamabad was compelled to illustrate its own response capabilities.
By Usman Haider and Abdul Moiz Khan
November 18, 2023
In late October 2023, Pakistani test-fired an Ababeel missile for the first time since 2017. Pakistan’s decision to develop and test multiple independent re-entry vehicle (MIRV) capable missiles like the Ababeel are within Pakistan’s policy of “full spectrum deterrence under the dictum of credible minimum deterrence.” The Ababeel, the Pakistani military explained back in 2017, was developed to ensure the “survivability of Pakistan’s ballistic missiles.”
The development of such MIRV capable missiles is a response to threat perceptions emerging from New Delhi, because of India’s efforts to develop and expand its ballistic missile defense (BMD) program. Islamabad fears that India’s operationalization of its BMD systems on land and at sea would significantly undermine Pakistan’s ability to retaliate to an Indian first strike. Pakistan is worried that the Indian BMD program, along with New Delhi’s enhanced missile capabilities, especially in terms of speed and precision, is part of an Indian strategy to launch counterforce strikes against Pakistan’s deterrent forces. Therefore, the goal of Ababeel’s development is to neutralize the threat that an operational Indian BMD system poses to Pakistan’s deterrent and ultimately to South Asia’s strategic stability.
India is presently developing a missile defense shield to protect its command-and-control centers, major population and industrial centers, and critical military infrastructure, including missile storage sites, airfields, and large cantonments. The Indian BMD program commenced in the 1990s, with the first interceptor tested on November 7, 2006, making the country the fourth to test the anti-ballistic missile apart from the United States, Israel, and Russia.
India has a two-tiered ballistic missile defense system, consisting of Prithvi Air Defense Vehicle (PAD)/Prithvi Defense Vehicle (PDV) and Ashwin Advanced Air Defense (AAD) interceptors. The former can intercept missiles at exo-atmospheric altitudes between 50-180 kilometers, while the latter can destroy missiles within atmospheric (endo-atmospheric) altitudes, ranging between 20-40 kilometers. Both interceptors have been tested successfully multiple times.
According to Indian media sources quoting Indian defense officials, the first phase of India’s BMD will be deployed soon and the system will initially protect two major cities: New Delhi, the capital, and Mumbai, a key business center.
Phase 2 trials of the BMD system began on November 2, 2022, when India successfully test-fired the AD-1 interceptor, capable of intercepting long-range ballistic missiles in low exo-atmospheric and endo-atmospheric conditions. The new interceptor will increase the range of interception up to 5,000 km, a significant enhancement from the Phase 1 range of 2,000 km, according to Janes, quoting Indian Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) officials.
To support the tracking and targeting of incoming projectiles, India is constructing a BMD radar site at Udaipur, likely to become operational by 2024, along with other sites in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. The sites are being developed to host long-range tracking radar (LRTR), the Swordfish, an advanced variant of Israel’s Green Pine radar.