Modi's India: A Paper Elephant?
"Desh ka bahut nuksaan hua hai", acknowledged Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi after his military's recent failures against Pakistan in Balakot and Kashmir. This marked a major shift in Modi's belligerent tone that has been characterized by his boasts of "chhappan inch ki chhati" (56 inch chest) and talk of "munh tor jawab" (jaw-breaking response) and "boli nahin goli" (bullets, not talks) to intimidate Pakistan in the last few years. The recent events are forcing India's western backers to reassess their strategy of boosting India as a counterweight to China.
Balakot and Kashmir:
Indian government and media have made a series of false claims about Balakot "militant casualties" and "shooting down Pakistani F16". These claims have been scrutinized and debunked by independent journalists, experts and fact checkers. There is no dispute about the fact that Squadron Leader Hasan Siddiqui of Pakistan Air Force (PAF), flying a Pakistan-made JF-17 fighter, shot down Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman of Indian Air Force (IAF) flying a Russia made MiG 21. Abhinandan was captured by Pakistan and then released to India.
After the India-Pakistan aerial combat over Kashmir, New York Times published a story from its South Asia correspondent headlined: "After India Loses Dogfight to Pakistan, Questions Arise About Its Military". Here are some excerpts of the report:
"Its (India's) loss of a plane last week to a country (Pakistan) whose military is about half the size and receives a quarter (a sixth according to SIPRI) of the funding is telling. ...India’s armed forces are in alarming shape....It was an inauspicious moment for a military the United States is banking on to help keep an expanding China in check".
Ineffective Indian Military:
Academics who have studied Indian military have found that it is ineffective by design. In "Army and Nation: The Military and Indian Democracy Since Independence", the author Steven I. Wilkinson, Nilekani Professor of India and South Asian Studies and Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at Yale, has argued that the civil-military constraints that have helped prevent a coup have hurt Indian military effectiveness and preparedness in at least three important ways:
(1) the weakening of the army before the 1962 China war;
(2) the problems caused for defense coordination and preparation by unwieldy defense bureaucracy, duplication of functions among different branches and lack of sharing of information across branches and
(3) the general downgrading of pay and perks since independence which has left the army with huge shortage of officers that affected the force's discipline capabilities.
Summary:
India's international perception as a "great power rising" has suffered a serious setback as a result of its recent military failures against Pakistan which spends only a sixth of India's military budget and ranks 17th in the world, far below India ranking 4th by globalfirepower.com. "Desh ka bahut nuksaan hua hai", acknowledged Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi after his military's recent failures in Balakot and Kashmir. This marked a major shift in Modi's belligerent tone that has been characterized by his boasts of "chhappan inch ki chhati" (56 inch chest) and talk of "munh tor jawab" (jaw-breaking response) and "boli nahin goli" (bullets, not talks) to intimidate Pakistan in the last few years. The recent events are forcing India's western backers to reassess their strategy of boosting India as a counterweight to China.
Here's a discussion on the subject:
https://youtu.be/tEWf-6cT0PM
Here's Indian Prime Minister Modi making excuses for his military's failures:
https://youtu.be/QIt0EAAr3PU
Balakot and Kashmir:
Indian government and media have made a series of false claims about Balakot "militant casualties" and "shooting down Pakistani F16". These claims have been scrutinized and debunked by independent journalists, experts and fact checkers. There is no dispute about the fact that Squadron Leader Hasan Siddiqui of Pakistan Air Force (PAF), flying a Pakistan-made JF-17 fighter, shot down Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman of Indian Air Force (IAF) flying a Russia made MiG 21. Abhinandan was captured by Pakistan and then released to India.
Beautiful Balakot, Kaghan Valley, Pakistan |
Western Narrative:
The widely accepted western narrative about India and Pakistan goes like this: "India is rapidly rising while Pakistan is collapsing". In a 2015 report from South Asia, Roger Cohen of New York Times summed it up as follows: "India is a democracy and a great power rising. Pakistan is a Muslim homeland that lost half its territory in 1971, bounced back and forth between military and nominally democratic rule, never quite clear of annihilation angst despite its nuclear weapons".
India: A Paper Elephant?
In an article titled "Paper Elephant", the Economist magazine talked about how India has ramped up its military spending and emerged as the world's largest arms importer. "Its military doctrine envisages fighting simultaneous land wars against Pakistan and China while retaining dominance in the Indian Ocean", the article said. It summed up the situation as follows: "India spends a fortune on defense and gets poor value for money".
India-Pakistan Military Spending: Infographic Courtesy The Economist |
India: A Paper Elephant?
In an article titled "Paper Elephant", the Economist magazine talked about how India has ramped up its military spending and emerged as the world's largest arms importer. "Its military doctrine envisages fighting simultaneous land wars against Pakistan and China while retaining dominance in the Indian Ocean", the article said. It summed up the situation as follows: "India spends a fortune on defense and gets poor value for money".
Pakistan Defense Spending. Source: Jane's Defense |
After the India-Pakistan aerial combat over Kashmir, New York Times published a story from its South Asia correspondent headlined: "After India Loses Dogfight to Pakistan, Questions Arise About Its Military". Here are some excerpts of the report:
"Its (India's) loss of a plane last week to a country (Pakistan) whose military is about half the size and receives a quarter (a sixth according to SIPRI) of the funding is telling. ...India’s armed forces are in alarming shape....It was an inauspicious moment for a military the United States is banking on to help keep an expanding China in check".
India-Pakistan Ratios of Tanks and Soldiers |
Ineffective Indian Military:
Academics who have studied Indian military have found that it is ineffective by design. In "Army and Nation: The Military and Indian Democracy Since Independence", the author Steven I. Wilkinson, Nilekani Professor of India and South Asian Studies and Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at Yale, has argued that the civil-military constraints that have helped prevent a coup have hurt Indian military effectiveness and preparedness in at least three important ways:
(1) the weakening of the army before the 1962 China war;
(2) the problems caused for defense coordination and preparation by unwieldy defense bureaucracy, duplication of functions among different branches and lack of sharing of information across branches and
(3) the general downgrading of pay and perks since independence which has left the army with huge shortage of officers that affected the force's discipline capabilities.
Summary:
India's international perception as a "great power rising" has suffered a serious setback as a result of its recent military failures against Pakistan which spends only a sixth of India's military budget and ranks 17th in the world, far below India ranking 4th by globalfirepower.com. "Desh ka bahut nuksaan hua hai", acknowledged Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi after his military's recent failures in Balakot and Kashmir. This marked a major shift in Modi's belligerent tone that has been characterized by his boasts of "chhappan inch ki chhati" (56 inch chest) and talk of "munh tor jawab" (jaw-breaking response) and "boli nahin goli" (bullets, not talks) to intimidate Pakistan in the last few years. The recent events are forcing India's western backers to reassess their strategy of boosting India as a counterweight to China.
Here's a discussion on the subject:
https://youtu.be/tEWf-6cT0PM
Here's Indian Prime Minister Modi making excuses for his military's failures:
https://youtu.be/QIt0EAAr3PU
Related Links:
Haq's Musings
South Asia Investor Review
China-Pakistan Defense Production Collaboration Irks West
Balakot and Kashmir: Fact Checkers Expose Indian Lies
Is Pakistan Ready for War with India?
Pakistan-Made Airplanes Lead Nation's Defense Exports
Modi's Blunders and Delusions
India's Israel Envy: What If Modi Attacks Pakistan?
Project Azm: Pakistan to Develop 5th Generation Fighter Jet
Pakistan Navy Modernization
Pakistan's Sea-Based Second Strike Capability
Who Won the 1965 War? India or Pakistan?
Haq's Musings
South Asia Investor Review
China-Pakistan Defense Production Collaboration Irks West
Balakot and Kashmir: Fact Checkers Expose Indian Lies
Is Pakistan Ready for War with India?
Pakistan-Made Airplanes Lead Nation's Defense Exports
Modi's Blunders and Delusions
India's Israel Envy: What If Modi Attacks Pakistan?
Project Azm: Pakistan to Develop 5th Generation Fighter Jet
Pakistan Navy Modernization
Pakistan's Sea-Based Second Strike Capability
Who Won the 1965 War? India or Pakistan?
Comments
The current focus on North Korea’s growing arsenal obscures the fact that the most likely trigger for a nuclear exchange could be the conflict between India and Pakistan.
Long among the world’s most antagonistic neighbors, the two nations clashed again last week before, fortunately, finding the good sense to de-escalate. The latest confrontation, the most serious between the two nations in more than a decade, gave way to more normal pursuits like trade at a border crossing and sporadic cross-border shelling.
But this relative calm is not a solution. As long as India and Pakistan refuse to deal with their core dispute — the future of Kashmir, India’s only Muslim-majority state — they face unpredictable, possibly terrifying, consequences.
The current crisis dates to Feb. 14, when a Kashmiri suicide bomber killed at least 40 Indian paramilitary officers in the deadliest attack in three decades in Kashmir, a region that Pakistan has claimed since partition in 1947. The militant group Jaish-e-Muhammad, which seeks independence for Kashmir or its merger with Pakistan, took responsibility. While it is on America’s list of terrorist organizations and is formally banned in Pakistan, the group has been protected and armed by the Pakistani intelligence service.
Last week, India sent warplanes into Pakistan for the first time in five decades. Indian officials said they had struck the group’s “biggest training camp” and killed a “very large number” of militants, although those claims have been called into doubt. Pakistan counterattacked, leading to a dogfight in which at least one Indian jet was shot down and a pilot was captured by the Pakistanis.
The situation could have easily escalated, given that the two countries have fought three wars over 70 years, maintain a near constant state of military readiness along their border and have little formal government-to-government dialogue.
Adding to the volatility, India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, is waging a tough re-election campaign in which he has used anti-Pakistan talk to fuel Hindu nationalism.
With Pakistan’s army most likely shaken by the Indian raid and unwilling to slide into protracted conflict, Prime Minister Imran Khan returned the pilot to India, in what was seen as a good-will gesture, called for talks and promised an investigation into the bombing. Mr. Modi took the opportunity to back off further escalation.
The next confrontation might not end so calmly.
https://www.thekashmirmonitor.net/little-cause-to-cheer-the-balakot-airstrike-and-its-aftermath/
The Modi government might still win the war of perception within India, but India’s conventional deterrence has been compromised. Its war-fighting capabilities – pivoted on air power – have been blunted without a fight. This will have implications for the on-going proxy war by Pakistan. Meanwhile, Pakistan maintained credibility of both its first combined civil-military government and its air power.
" It was evident that the operation was meant for publicity. A case in point, unsubstantiated media reports claimed that 300 to 350 Jaish terrorists in Balakot were eliminated by IAF strikes, a claim that has since been questioned by the international media, which was allowed by Pakistan to visit the target site. Subsequently, other media reports have emerged claiming that the IAF fighters did not actually cross the Line of Control. Instead, Balakot was attacked using stand-off weapons. Hence, deliberate confusion continues."
"Since the war was neither on, nor imminent, it would have taken any professional air force (PAF is no exception) minimum 10 minutes from detection to reaction and interception. Moreover, the PAF did not have its airborne early warning aircraft in the air (AWACS cannot stay more than 24 hours in air), and the time was such that observers manning the Ground Based Air Defence System (GBADS) could not have been vigilant (it is not possible to remain on high alert 24×7 in peacetime)."
" Pakistan was faced with the dilemma of how to avenge India’s unprecedented action: to use or not to use the PAF. It was decided that the PAF too would breach Indian airspace while calling it a non-military strike. Unlike the IAF, the PAF strike would be done with menacing force in broad daylight ensuring that Indian military installations close to the Line of Control were not damaged enough to compel India to raise the ante."
https://youtu.be/YX4qXrR34PI
Guns have slipped back into holsters and diplomats behind their desks; the Samjhauta or “Concord” Express has resumed its reassuring bi-weekly chug connecting Lahore Junction and Old Delhi Station. Relations between India and Pakistan are returning to the normal huffy disdain after a week of military brinkmanship. For the divided and disputed border region of Kashmir, there is relief. Yet in the Kashmir Valley, a fertile and densely populated part of the Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir, this comes tempered with weariness. For its 7m inhabitants, most of them Muslim, a return to normal means a large and growing pile of frustrations. Some, such as bad government services and a deepening shortage of jobs, are familiar to all Indians. Others are unique to the valley.
Pakistan views the valley’s Muslims as sundered citizens; its constitution prescribes what should happen not if, but “when”, Kashmiris vote to join Pakistan. And since independence in 1947, Pakistan has never ceased trying to hasten this moment by sending guerrillas over the border to stir up jihad—although this week it claimed to rounding up such militants. India, for its part, says that Kashmir was lucky to fall to a secular, democratic country at partition and not to its violent, narrow-minded neighbour. But Indian governments turn deaf the moment people in the valley speak of greater autonomy, let alone azadi (independence). Their efforts at counter-insurgency have been disturbingly bloody. The conflict has claimed 50,000 lives since the 1980s.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-03-07/are-india-s-think-tanks-promoting-conflict-with-pakistan
Peace appears to have been given a chance in South Asia. Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, striving to play the statesman, has not only released a captured Indian pilot but also detained several alleged Pakistani militants. Still, there’s good reason to worry that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi might once again ratchet up tensions against a nuclear-armed neighbor as he approaches the most crucial election of his political life.
Modi’s militant nationalism, loudly amplified by Indian television anchors, isn’t the only flammable element in a volatile situation. India’s burgeoning military-intellectual complex also deserves the world’s close and skeptical scrutiny.
One wing of this community consists of superannuated and clearly bored generals, titillating hyper-patriotic television anchors and themselves with visions of do-or-die wars and glorious victories. Their jingoism far exceeds the capacity of the Indian military, which, an internal report recently revealed, is encumbered with “vintage” equipment.
Perhaps more worrying, though, are the credentialed members of what a recent report by Brookings India identified as India’s “strategic community.” Though much more sober than the fire-breathing talking heads on cable TV, they seem equally attracted to the “temptation,” as U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower put it in his classic warning against the military-industrial complex, of “some spectacular and costly” military action.
Perched in privately funded think tanks, many of these connoisseurs of “surgical strikes” did not seem in the least shocked or disturbed that an Indian leader who has, as the Economist put it last week, “made a career of playing with fire” was now playing with Armageddon by launching airstrikes into Pakistan. Rather, they echoed the Hindu nationalist consensus that India was now finally dictating the terms of engagement with its rival — a triumphalism shattered the very next day when Pakistan raised its own threshold for conflict with India by striking within Indian territory and bringing down an Indian warplane.
Eisenhower’s fear in 1961 of vested interests acquiring “unwarranted influence” is freshly pertinent in today’s New Delhi. With hopes rising that India would soon be a superpower closely allied to the U.S., as well as a strategic counterweight to China, much Indian and foreign money has gone into creating a luxurious ecosystem for strategic experts and foreign-policy analysts.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-03-07/are-india-s-think-tanks-promoting-conflict-with-pakistan
---------------
There’s ample reason to fear that such an often murkily funded and influential security establishment outside government won’t serve the cause of democracy and peace in the Indian subcontinent. In the U.S., a series of reports by the New York Times in 2016 alleged that on all kinds of issues, including military sales to foreign countries, think tanks were “pushing agendas important to corporate donors, at times blurring the line between researchers and lobbyists.” If intellectual dishonesty mars analysis in Washington, it can be expected to be more pervasive in New Delhi, where the line between paid service for corporate donors and research work is even fuzzier.
It may seem melodramatic to fear that a few well-connected intellectual racketeers might endanger democracy and social stability. But America under President Donald Trump confirms that Eisenhower was right to worry that an axis of government, corporations and intellectuals-on-hire might skew national priorities, or that, pathologically obsessed with an enemy, his country might degenerate into “a community of dreadful fear and hate.”
Already by 1984, George F. Kennan, arguably America’s finest diplomat, was lamenting that the “habit” of constantly preparing for “an imagined war” with the Soviet Union had “risen to the status of a vast addiction of American society.” This habit, Kennan presciently warned, “would be difficult to eradicate in the future,” long after the U.S.S.R. had disappeared.
In India, Hindu nationalist politicians and their sympathizers in the media have similarly turned an imagined punitive war on Pakistan into another vast addiction, and the military-intellectual complex increasingly aggravates this national habit. Focused on Islamabad’s backing for the militant insurgency in Kashmir, they’ve successfully externalized a problem that is primarily domestic: the Modi government’s resolve to suppress, rather than address, Kashmiri demands for democracy and civil liberties.
Ajai Shukla was one of the very few mainstream Indian writers on security issues to point out that “the wider story in a crisis with such potential devastation is that the Modi government has launched a nationwide anti-Muslim agenda that regards Muslims as unpatriotic, Pakistan as a cunning and implacable foe and Kashmiri separatists as its willing tools.” Thus, Shukla argues, Kashmiris protesting against Indian brutality have come to be widely seen as “Muslim traitors, rather than the manifestation of a political problem that has to be discussed and resolved, not militarily crushed.”
Zealously pushing a military solution to a political problem, India’s political, media and security establishment suffered a debacle last month. They ought to “learn,” as Eisenhower exhorted, “how to compose differences not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose” — above all in Kashmir, which is the key, now more than ever, to the health of civil society in both India and Pakistan.
The way in which tensions suddenly worsened and threatened to trigger a war between the nuclear-armed nations shows how the Kashmir region, which both claim and is at the core of their enmity, remains one of the world’s most dangerous flashpoints.
The exchanges did not get beyond threats, and there was no suggestion that the missiles involved were anything more than conventional weapons, but they created consternation in official circles in Washington, Beijing and London.
Reuters has pieced together the events that led to the most serious military crisis in South Asia since 2008, as well as the concerted diplomatic efforts to get both sides to back down.
The simmering dispute erupted into conflict late last month when Indian and Pakistani warplanes engaged in a dogfight over Kashmir on Feb 27, a day after a raid by Indian jet fighters on what it said was a militant camp in Pakistan. Islamabad denied any militant camp exists in the area and said the Indian bombs exploded on an empty hillside.
In their first such clash since the last war between the two nations in 1971, Pakistan downed an Indian plane and captured its pilot after he ejected in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir.
Hours later, videos of the bloodied Indian pilot, handcuffed and blindfolded, appeared on social media, identifying himself to Pakistani interrogators, deepening anger in New Delhi.
With Prime Minister Narendra Modi facing a general election in April-May, the government was under pressure to respond.
That evening, Indian National Security Adviser Ajit Doval spoke over a secure line to the head of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), Asim Munir, to tell him India was not going to back off its new campaign of “counter terrorism” even after the pilot’s capture, an Indian government source and a Western diplomat with knowledge of the conversations told Reuters in New Delhi.
Doval told Munir that India’s fight was with the militant groups that freely operated from Pakistani soil and it was prepared to escalate, said the government source.
A Pakistani government minister and a Western diplomat in Islamabad separately confirmed a specific Indian threat to use six missiles on targets inside Pakistan. They did not specify who delivered the threat or who received it, but the minister said Indian and Pakistani intelligence agencies “were communicating with each other during the fight, and even now they are communicating with each other”.
Pakistan said it would counter any Indian missile attacks with many more launches of its own, the minister told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.
“We said if you will fire one missile, we will fire three. Whatever India will do, we will respond three times to that,” the Pakistani minister said.
Doval’s office did not respond to a request for comment. India was not aware of any missile threat issued to Pakistan, a government official said in reply to a Reuters request for comment.
Pakistan’s military declined to comment and Munir could not be reached for comment. Pakistan’s foreign ministry did not respond to a Reuters request for comment.
---
U.S. security advisor Bolton was on the phone with Doval on the night of Feb 27 itself, and into the early hours of Feb 28, the second day of the Trump-Kim talks, in an attempt to defuse the situation, the Western diplomat in New Delhi and the Indian official said.
Later, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who was also in Hanoi, also called both sides to seek a way out of the crisis.
“Secretary Pompeo led diplomatic engagement directly, and that played an essential role in de-escalating the tensions between the two sides,” State Department deputy spokesperson Robert Palladino said in a briefing in Washington on March 5.
Any belief in India that its military adventurism has ‘worked’ could erode the stability of mutual deterrence which Pakistan’s military response of Feb 27 re-established. If New Delhi is convinced that Pakistan can be cowed by a combination of military and diplomatic pressure, it may feel emboldened in the next crisis to conduct military strikes at a ‘higher’ level.
Pakistan must, therefore, take steps to expose India’s falsehoods before, during, and after the military exchanges of Feb 26-28. It should advertise that India’s bombs destroyed trees and killed a crow. It must reveal to the world, including the people of India, how Pakistan could have destroyed Indian military targets but chose not to do so. It should point out that India’s captured pilot could have been humiliated and India could have had its nose rubbed in the dirt by requiring a minister or its air chief to come and retrieve him. Finally, it should be made clear that Pakistan’s actions against militant organisations are designed to implement its own National Action Plan, not in response to Indian or other external pressure.
Islamabad should not anticipate that Modi’s hostility towards Pakistan will abate after the Indian national elections. Apart from their ideological animus, if Modi and the Hindu alliance succeed in the forthcoming elections, it will reinforce their conviction that aggression against Pakistan and the Kashmiris is a winning formula.
Unfortunately, India’s aggressive posture is being actively encouraged by the US which is now firmly aligned with New Delhi in its global rivalry with China. Pakistan enjoys some leverage in the context of Afghanistan; but this does not seem to have prevented Washington’s one-sided pressure on Pakistan during and after India’s military incursion.
Yet, this does not imply that the Kashmir issue will fade away. Despite all odds — massive Indian oppression, over 100,000 killed, Pakistan’s frequent indifference — the Kashmiris have persisted in their struggle for freedom from Indian rule for over 70 years.
The current uprising in occupied Kashmir is led by the third generation of Kashmiris. It is entirely indigenous. It has continued for four years without external support and is likely to be sustained. Like Afghanistan, Kashmir is mountainous, and India is a large and fractured country where active insurgencies are under way in 119 districts (according to former prime minister Manmohan Singh) and can find succour from various internal sources.
The BJP’s plan to ‘resolve’ the Kashmir ‘problem’ is to colonise it and transform it into a Hindu-majority state. A first step in this plan would be to eliminate Jammu & Kashmir’s ‘special’ and autonomous status under the Indian constitution. If Modi and the BJP proceed with this plan, the Kashmiri resistance will obviously intensify. The Hindu fundamentalists may then be tempted to resort to the outright genocide of the Kashmiri Muslims.
As the blood flows, the Kashmiri diaspora, and sympathetic Pakistanis, will seek to join the freedom struggle, including from Pakistan’s territory. The Pakistan government will then face a binary choice: facilitate the freedom fighters or fight them as ‘terrorists’.
Pakistan says it has conducted initial investigations into a dossier provided by neighbouring India on the Pulwama suicide attack in Kashmir, concluding that so far no links can be drawn between Pakistan and the bombing, the foreign office said.
At least 54 individuals had been arrested, 22 locations investigated and a number of phone numbers tracked as part of the investigation, said a Pakistani foreign office statement released on Thursday.
Pakistan said it had shared its findings with India a day earlier, while also briefing top diplomats in the capital Islamabad.
Tensions between the nuclear-armed neighbours spiked last month after a suicide bombing in the Indian-administered Kashmir town of Pulwama killed at least 40 Indian security forces personnel.
India blamed Pakistan for "controlling" the attack and launched punitive air raids on what it termed "a training camp" on Pakistani soil shortly thereafter.
Pakistan said the air attacks hit an uninhabited forest, and launched its own air attacks adjacent to Indian military targets, causing no casualties.
Both sides deployed fighter jets and in an aerial dogfight, an Indian aircraft was shot down, resulting in the capture of its pilot.
With his return two days later, tensions began to subside, although both countries' militaries remain on high alert.
On Wednesday, Pakistan fully reopened its airspace for flights originating or departing from the country for the first time in a month. Transit flights over Pakistani airspace remain suspended.
Shortly after the attack, a video emerged of alleged suicide bomber Adil Dar, a native of Indian-administered Kashmir, claiming responsibility for the attack and swearing allegiance to Pakistan-based armed group Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM).
Mr Modi swept to power in New Delhi in 2014, pledging to bring acche din, or good times, for India, with accelerated economic growth and millions of new jobs. But his record of delivery on these promises is highly contentious.
The prime minister insists India’s economy has grown faster under his leadership than ever before, with an average annual GDP growth of 7.3 per cent, compared with an annual average of 6.7 per cent under the previous Congress-led government. But many economists have questioned the credibility of official data, amid perceptions of unprecedented political interference. Even by New Delhi’s own numbers, India’s GDP growth slowed to 6.6 per cent in the three months ending December 31, its slowest pace in five quarters.
New Delhi has also suppressed a major report which apparently indicated rising joblessness among youth. In a Pew Research Center survey of 2,521 Indians last summer, 76 per cent cited lack of employment opportunities as a major concern. “The gap between the hype and the promises was clearly wide and clearly visible,” Mr Varshney says.
Farmers have been squeezed hard as part of the effort to curb once rampant inflation, their anger displayed in a series of large-scale protests. “We are very unhappy”, says Lakshman Ram, a 61-year-old farmer at the Jodhpur spice market, where he was selling a mound of fragrant cumin seeds to traders. “He has killed us farmers. He has finished us. I’m just waiting for Congress — they think about us.”
---------------
The Zomato and Swiggy delivery boys, however, brim with enthusiasm for Mr Modi, especially his recent authorisation of a missile strike on an alleged terrorist training camp in neighbouring Pakistan. Their excitement is mirrored by Akshay Bhati, 25, whose father supplies milk to the shop.
“The power of the nation has gone up,” the younger Mr Bhati says. “Before, any enemy country would come and attack India and just get away with it — India would not do anything. Now, we will enter your house and kill you.”
The divergent views among the evening crowd at Pokar’s reflects the deep faultlines among India’s 900m eligible voters, as they gear up for what has become an unusually personality-driven general election contest. The voting will serve as a national assessment of how well the charismatic populist Mr Modi has lived up to the high expectations he raised of a “New India”, when he took power in 2014 after 10 years of disappointing rule by the Congress party.
----
The premier’s Bharatiya Janata party, with its deep pockets and sophisticated political machinery, is urging India’s voters to give Mr Modi another five years in power to continue his efforts to remake India.
Fragmented opposition parties — including the BJP’s arch-rival Congress, led by Rahul Gandhi, and a diverse array of smaller regional parties — are trying to counter by accusing Mr Modi of failing to live up to expectations, and inflicting unnecessary misery on the population, while simultaneously taking potshots at one another. Results will be known only on May 23, as voting is spread over six weeks.
“It is undoubtedly a referendum on Mr Modi,” says Ashutosh Varshney, director of the Center for Contemporary South Asia at Brown University, of the contest. “It’s a very presidential style election.”
The issue, thus, is about tactics and operational level of war. The Pakistan military, learning from the Soviet Union, has always given importance to the operational level. This is why in the 1965 and 1971 wars, despite being more in bean-counting of assets, India never won in the western sector. Proof of this are the ceasefire line and the Line of Control, which otherwise would have been converted into international borders.
The situation, regrettably, remains the same today. Separate doctrines of the Army and the Air Force, and with each service doing its own training is evidence that no amount of modernisation would help if the focus of service chiefs remains on tactics. For example, after the Balakot operation, a senior Air Force officer told me that the PAF would not last more than six days. He believed in tactical linear success. What about the other kinetic and non-kinetic forces which impact at the operational level?
This is not all. Retired senior Air Force officers started chest-thumping about the Balakot airstrike having set the new normal. Some argued that air power need not be escalatory, while others made the case for the use of air power in counter-terror operations like the Army. Clearly, they all were talking tactics, not war. Had India retaliated to the PAF’s counter-strike, what it called an act of war, an escalation was assured. It is another matter that PM Narendra Modi had only bargained for the use of the IAF for electoral gains.
Talking of tactics, Air Chief Marshal Dhanoa spoke about relative technological superiority. Perhaps, Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman would not have strayed into Pakistani airspace if his MiG-21 Bison had Software Defined Radio (SDR) and Operational Data Link (ODL). The SDR operates in the VHF, UHF, Ku and L bandwidths and is meant to remove voice clutter. The ODL provides the pilot with data or text, in this case from the ground controller. The officer, separated from his wing-man, and without necessary voice and data instructions, unwittingly breached the airspace and was captured by the Pakistan army. There are known critical shortages of force multipliers in addition to force levels in the IAF. Surely, the IAF Chief can’t do much except keep asking the government to fill the operational voids. But, he could avoid making exaggerated claims since his words would only feed the ultra-nationalists, and support the Modi government’s spurious argument of having paid special attention to national security.
The same is the case with Rafale and S-400. These would certainly help, but would not tilt the operational level balance in India’s favour. For example, the IAF intends to use S-400 in the ‘offensive air defence’ role rather than its designed role of protecting high-value targets like Delhi, for which it was originally proposed. For the protection of high-value targets, the Air Headquarters has made a strong case to purchase the United States’ National Advanced Surface to Air Missile System (NASAMS). This is ironic, because while S-400 can destroy hostile ballistic missiles, NASAMS can’t do so. It can only kill cruise missiles and other aerial platforms. The thinking at the Air Headquarters is that since there is no understanding on the use of ballistic missiles — especially with Pakistan — both sides are likely to avoid the use of ballistic missiles with conventional warheads lest they are misread and lead to a nuclear accident. So, NASAMS may probably never be called upon to take on ballistic missiles.
Given the direction of the relationship between the India and Pakistan, this assumption may not be the best to make when procuring prohibitively expensive high-value assets.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi today issued a stern warning to Pakistan and said that India no longer fears Pakistan's nuclear threats. PM Modi further said that India's nuclear arsenal are not saved for Diwali. The BJP leader's comment came during a rally at Rajasthan's Barmer. PM Narendra Modi said, "India has stopped the policy of getting scared of Pakistan's threats ... Every other day, they would say 'we have nuclear button'. Our media used to write that Pakistan too has nuclear weapons ... What do we have then? Have we kept ours (nuclear arsenal) for Diwali?"
https://scroll.in/latest/920944/pakistans-nuclear-bombs-are-not-kept-for-eid-either-mehbooba-mufti-hits-back-at-pm-modi
The former Jammu and Kashmir chief minister’s statement came after the prime minister had bragged about India’s nuclear capability.
Peoples Democratic Party chief and former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti on Monday hit out at Prime Minister Narendra Modi for bragging about India’s nuclear capability. She accused Modi of “stooping low” and lowering the country’s political discourse.
On Sunday, Modi had said that his government had refused to be intimidated by Pakistan’s nuclear threats and that with the Balakot air strike, India had given Pakistan a “fitting reply”. “What do we have then? Have we kept our nuclear bomb for Diwali?” Modi had said at a rally in Barmer district of Rajasthan. Modi had said that his government had made the terrorists afraid from across the border and the results of it were visible as there were no blasts anywhere in the country in the last five years.
On Monday, Mufti said, “If India hasn’t kept nuclear bomb for Diwali, it’s obvious Pakistan’s not kept theirs for Eid either. Don’t know why PM Modi must stoop so low & reduce political discourse to this.”
Addressing reporters in Kulgam, Mufti once again criticised Modi for his remark. “What Pakistan [nuclear bombs] possesses would not be saved for Eid either. We are evenly placed in this matter,” she said.
As time moves forward, Hindu Rashtra will take its rightful place as a well-researched attempt to explain the unfolding of the Modi years. Review by Mani Shankar Aiyar
Ashutosh takes the reader by the hand, as it were, through the beginnings of Hindutva: the invention of this hitherto unknown word by V.D. Savarkar, its elaboration by M.S. Golwalkar, and its being put into political practice by the current icon of “masculine and martial nationalism”, Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
“Hindutva,” the author observes, “has an infinite appetite to quarrel with the past”. The past is seen, in Savarkar’s words, as “millions of Muslim invaders from all over Asia (falling) over India century after century with all the ferocity at their command to destroy the Hindu religion, the lifeblood of the nation”. Savarkar held that in this the Muslim invaders succeeded only because the Hindus had become “weak and cowardly” by upholding the “perverted virtues” of “compassion, tolerance, non-violence and truth”. The answer lay in recasting the Hindu as “masculine and martial”, the very qualities that Mr Modi seeks to embody. Ashutosh continues: “Modi epitomises Hindutva nationalism, which is founded on an adversarial attitude towards Muslims and believes that India’s history is one of Hindus being tortured in their own homeland for thousands of years because of the ruthlessness of Muslim rulers”.
But why continue this quarrel with the past even unto the 21st century, well after India, albeit a partitioned India, gained her Independence? M.K. Gandhi laid down the fundamental parameter of our contemporary nationhood in the following terms: “The assumption that India has now become the land of the Hindus is erroneous. India belongs to all who live here”.
Golwalkar held in direct contrast that the coming into being of Pakistan “is a clear case of continued Muslim aggression”. This led Nathuram Godse to justify assassinating Gandhi as, “Gandhiji was himself the greatest supporter and advocate of Pakistan… In these circumstances, the only effective remedy to relieve the Hindus from the Muslim atrocities was, to my mind, to remove Gandhiji from this world.”
This meshes seamlessly, as cited by Ashutosh, with Vinay Katiyar, several times BJP MP from Faizabad, asserting in an NDTV interview on February 7, 2018: “Muslims should not stay in this country. They have partitioned the country. So why are they here? They should go to Bangladesh or Pakistan. They have no business being here in India”. And that explains the conflation of “Kashmir, Pakistan and Islam” which Hindutva enjoins as “the duty of every Indian to fight”.
It is from such beliefs, argues Ashutosh, that have arisen the horrors of lynching and murder in the name of gau raksha and “love jihad”, assault and assassination of “anti-nationals”, the undermining of the institutions of democracy, and the nurturing of a new breed of “right-wing television channels that have become platforms for the propagation of Hindutva ideology: muscular nationalism; warmongering; militarism; bashing of Islam, Kashmir and Pakistan; and ridiculing and condemning liberal and secular values”.
The writer goes into each of these, and more, linking them to the ideology that inspires such hate and prejudice. The basic dream of Hindutvavadis, he shows, is “to make Hindus ruthless and masculine as they assume Islam did to its followers” by “effectively us(ing) state power to spread religion”.
Pakistan continues to restrict its airspace after an air strike in late February by the Indian military in northern Pakistan. The disruption is forcing international airlines to take costly and time-consuming detours to the north and south, adding flight time for passengers and fuel costs for airlines.
Hundreds of commercial and cargo flights are affected each day. Reuters counted 311 such flights between four airports in Europe and four in Southeast Asia.
Pakistan lies in the middle of a vital aviation corridor. In the week before the air space was closed, almost all the flights analysed passed directly over Pakistan, some coming extremely close the Kashmir region - the epicentre of tensions with India - including aircraft operated by Singapore Airlines, British Airways, Lufthansa and Thai Airways, according to flight tracking service FlightRadar24. Routes that run through Pakistan on a north-south axis are not affected.
OPSGROUP, which monitors international flight operations, used International Civil Aviation Organization data to calculate that the closed airspace was affecting as many as 350 flights daily. Most rerouted as far south as Oman’s airspace, the group said.
Flight information regions (FIR) are how airspace is divided up for control. Pakistan has two: Karachi and Lahore. They, and the Kabul FIR, have seen a notable drop in air traffic since the conflict. Muscat, however, has seen an increase.
Flights between Europe and Southeast Asia are still suffering from the disruption. The group of 311 flights that Reuters analysed has taken different routes to avoid Pakistan, according to FlightRadar24.
OPSGROUP calculates that routing south to Oman, passing through the Muscat flight information region, adds about 280 miles (451 kilometres) to a flight from London to Singapore and 410 miles from Paris to Bangkok.
Lengthy delays
Reuters analysed flight time data from FlightRadar24 for several routes from Europe to Southeast Asia. For each individual route, 14 flights prior to Feb. 27, the day air space was closed, were compared to 14 recent flights prior to April 9.
Some flights are consistently delayed. KLM, Lufthansa and Thai Airways flights are taking up to two hours longer than before the conflict
Airstrikes against ‘terrorist’ targets in Pakistan and subsequent aerial battles with Islamabad’s warplanes would have been more successful if India had better technology, a service report cited by local media admits.
The Indian Air Force’s ‘lessons learnt’ assessment primarily covered February’s retaliatory airstrike on a suspected jihadist training camp in Balakot, Pakistan, resulting in a military flare-up with its neighbor. It found that IAF warplanes would have been able to do serious damage to their Pakistani adversaries – if they had access to weapons capable of doing so in the first place.
The wording of the report was somewhat careful about admitting this fact openly, suggesting that they would have been able to compete with their opponents more effectively if they had possessed “technological asymmetry.”
A litany of technical issues was found to have hampered the IAF’s combat prowess. On top of problems integrating new weapons with the available hardware, one of the fighter jet’s missiles apparently failed to deploy from the aircraft altogether due to issues with its navigation system. The same issue had featured in an earlier embarrassing report which suggested that India had likely shot down its own helicopter with a malfunctioning missile while attempting to target encroaching enemy craft.
The latest review also noted that since 1999’s Kargil War, Pakistan “has been consistently enhancing its air defense and offensive capabilities,” demonstrated in the recent clashes by their use of F-16 fighter jets, giving Islamabad an edge. India’s hardware, meanwhile, has become increasingly outdated.
“We felt we could not punish the adversaries appropriately. So we need to bolster technological asymmetry so that the enemy does not even dare to come close to the border,” one source told India’s Economic Times. While things didn’t go exactly as expected, the report reminds readers that “no battle plan ever survives the first contact with the enemy.”
India also maintained that it carried out the assault into Pakistani airspace in order to strike a training facility used by the terrorist group Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), which had carried out an attack in Pulwama, killing 40 Indian troops. However, Pakistan has consistently denied the existence of such camps, and said that the raid had merely destroyed some trees.
In 2018 India increased its military spending by 3.1 per cent to $66.5 billion. Military expenditure by Pakistan grew by 11 per cent (the same level of growth as in 2017), to reach $11.4 billion in 2018. South Korean military expenditure was $43.1 billion in 2018—an increase of 5.1 per cent compared with 2017 and the highest annual increase since 2005.
‘The tensions between countries in Asia as well as between China and the USA are major drivers for the continuing growth of military spending in the region,’ says Siemon Wezeman, a senior researcher with the SIPRI AMEX programme.
https://sipri.org/media/press-release/2019/world-military-expenditure-grows-18-trillion-2018
https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/Data%20for%20all%20countries%20from%201988%E2%80%932018%20in%20constant%20%282017%29%20USD%20%28pdf%29.pdf
https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/Data%20for%20all%20countries%20from%201988%E2%80%932018%20as%20a%20share%20of%20GDP%20%28pdf%29.pdf
When the Bharatiya Janata Party (bjp) won a landslide victory in India’s general election in 2014, its leader, Narendra Modi, was something of a mystery. Would his government initiate an economic lift-off, as businessfolk hoped, or spark a sectarian conflagration, as secularists feared? In his five years as prime minister, Mr Modi has been neither as good for India as his cheerleaders foretold, nor as bad as his critics, including this newspaper, imagined. But today the risks still outweigh the rewards. Indians, who are in the midst of voting in a fresh election (see article), would be better off with a different leader.
Mr Modi is campaigning as a strongman with the character to stand up to Pakistan for having abetted terrorism. In fact, sending warplanes to bomb India’s nuclear neighbour earlier this year was not so much an act of strength as recklessness that could have ended in disaster. Mr Modi’s tough-guy approach has indeed been a disaster in the disputed state of Jammu & Kashmir, where he has inflamed a separatist insurgency rather than quelling it, while at the same time alienating moderate Kashmiris by brutally repressing protests.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/india-did-major-damage-new-3-billion-submarine-leaving-hatch-open-52292
The modern submarine is not a simple machine. A loss of propulsion, unexpected flooding, or trouble with reactors or weapons can doom a sub crew to a watery grave.
Also, it’s a good idea to, like, close the hatches before you dive.
Call it a lesson learned for the Indian navy, which managed to put the country’s first nuclear-missile submarine, the $2.9 billion INS Arihant, out of commission in the most boneheaded way possible.
The Hindu reported yesterday that the Arihant has been out of commission since suffering “major damage” some 10 months ago, due to what a navy source characterized as a “human error” — to wit: allowing water to flood to sub’s propulsion compartment after failing to secure one of the vessel’s external hatches.
Water “rushed in as a hatch on the rear side was left open by mistake while [the Arihant] was at harbor” in February 2017, shortly after the submarine’s launch, The Hindu reports. Since then, the sub “has been undergoing repairs and clean up,” according to the paper: “Besides other repair work, many pipes had to be cut open and replaced.”
It’s hard to articulate how major a foul-up this is, but Kyle Mizokami does a good job at Popular Mechanics: Indian authorities ordered the pipe replacement because they “likely felt that pipes exposed to corrosive seawater couldn't be trusted again, particularly pipes that carry pressurized water coolant to and from the ship’s 83 megawatt nuclear reactor.” For context, a submarine assigned to Britain’s Royal Navy narrowly avoided a complete reactor meltdown in 2012 after the power sources for its coolant system failed.
The incident is also quite an embarrassment — and strategic concern — for the Indian Armed Forces. A Russian Akula-class attack sub modified to accommodate a variety of ballistic missiles, the Arihant represented a major advance in India’s nuclear triad after its completion in October 2016. (India in 1974 became the 6th country to conduct a successful nuclear test.) Indeed, the Arihant’s ability to deliver K-15 short-range and K-4 intermediate-range nuclear missiles was envisioned as a powerful deterrent against India’s uneasy nuclear state neighbor, Pakistan.
“Arihant is the most important platform within India’s nuclear triad covering land-air-sea modes,” the Hindu reports. Well, it’s important if it works — and it probably helps to make your submarine watertight.
This is just some sloppy, dangerous seamanship, and the Indian Navy better get its act together fast. Either that, or perhaps follow the Royal Navy’s lead and install the 2001-era Windows XP as an operating system on all your most vital vessels. That way, you can blame the blue screen of death instead of “human error” for the next critical foul-up. Although even outdated software probably knows enough to dog down on all the hatches.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/india%E2%80%99s-only-aircraft-carrier-caught-fire-and-china-thinks-it-knows-why%C2%A0-56272
ndia’s only aircraft carrier suffered a fire that left one sailor dead.
And China, which is India’s rival, says this is because Indians aren’t competent enough to operate advanced military equipment.
The fire broke out in the engine room of the carrier Vikramaditya as it entered the Indian naval base at Karwar on April 26.
The blaze was extinguished, but not before an Indian Navy lieutenant commander, who led the firefighting effort, was overcome by fumes and later died in hospital, according to Indian media. He had gotten married just a month earlier.
The Indian Navy reported that the fire had not seriously damaged the combat capabilities of the vessel, which is India’s only operational carrier. The 45,000-ton Vikramaditya – the ex-Soviet carrier Admiral Gorshkov -- had just completed a deployment in the Arabian Sea, and was preparing to begin joint exercises with the French Navy’s only aircraft carrier, the Charles de Gaulle, off the Indian coast.
The cause of the fire has not yet been disclosed. But Chinese media quickly ran a story that suggested the fire was the result of Indian incompetence. Li Jie, a Chinese naval expert, told the state-owned Global Times newspaper “that the fire was more likely to be out of human error rather than mechanical problems. The fire and the extinguishing process suggested that they are unprofessional and unprepared to address such an emergency, he said.”
“India has been actively developing its military in recent years, but ‘its military culture is lax and it has loose regulations,’ which cannot effectively train soldiers to operate advanced military equipment, Li said.”
That criticism comes despite that fact that India has far more experience than China in operating aircraft carriers. India’s first carrier, the Vikrant, a former World War II British carrier, was commissioned in 1961. It performed combat duty in the 1971 India-Pakistan War. China’s first carrier, the Liaoning – the ex-Soviet carrier Varyag – wasn’t commissioned until 2012. It has yet to see action.
Ironically, both India and China are in the midst of ramping up their carrier fleets. India is completing a new Vikrant, which will be the nation’s first domestically-produced carrier. It has also announced plans to build a 65,000-ton carrier, which might even be based on the Royal Navy’s Queen Elizabeth-class vessels.
"A Mirage is good at high speeds and poor at slow speed combat. The Mirage leader made his high speed pass at me and as I forced him to overshoot he pulled up high above me. His wingman followed in the attack and I did the same with him; followed by a violent reversal and making the aircraft stand on its tail. The speed dropped to zero. The wingman should have followed his leader.
To my surprise he didn’t, and reversed getting into scissors with me at low speeds. That was suicidal and a Mirage should never do that against a Mig-21. But then, the game plan probably was for the wingman to keep me engaged while the leader turned around to sandwich and then shoot me. It was a good plan, but not easy to execute. The only difficulty in this plan was that the second Mirage had to keep me engaged long enough without becoming vulnerable himself. This is where things began to go wrong for the wingman because his leader took about 10 seconds longer than what was required."
https://tribune.com.pk/story/855837/50-years-on-memories-of-the-1973-arab-israeli-conflict/
The suspensions targeting the so-called “open-source intelligence,” or OSINT, community raises serious questions about Twitter’s commitment to fairness, facts and intellectual freedom. Equally troubling is the Indian government’s apparent influence on a social-media platform with millions of users all over the world.
The accounts Twitter targeted all had one thing in common. They questioned the Indian government’s claims in the aftermath of the brief but intensive aerial clash between Indian and Pakistani warplanes over Kashmir in February 2019.
The battle began when Indian planes on Feb. 26, 2019 attempted to bomb an alleged Pakistani training camp outside Balakot, near the border with Kashmir. Both India and Pakistan claim the mountainous region. Military skirmishes and militant violence are frequent in Kashmir.
At least one Indian warplane, a MiG-21, was destroyed. Pakistani troops briefly held the pilot before repatriating him. New Delhi claimed its own forces shot down a Pakistani F-16 fighter, but provided no evidence.
OSINT accounts closely followed the fighting and challenged claims from Indian and Pakistani sources. Open-source intelligence practitioners usually rely on a mix of news reports, social media, commercial satellite imagery and public ship- and flight-tracking software to keep tabs on military operations.
The OSINT analyst with the Twitter handle @ELINTNews the day of the initial Indian air raid questioned India’s claim that its jets shot down an F-16. “No evidence so far to corroborate India’s claim of it downing a Pakistani plane,” ELINTNews noted. By contrast, images quickly appeared on-line confirming Pakistan’s destruction of an Indian MiG.
A count of Pakistani F-16s later confirmed that none were missing.
Months later, India retaliated against the Twitter OSINT community. Reporter Snehesh Alex Philip summarized the situation in a June 18, 2019 story in The Print. “The social media giant has told handles like the popular @ELINTNews, that they’ve been suspended for ‘violating Indian laws.’”
“Seems they're knocking off the big OSINT accounts due to Indian complaints that they're terrorists, or something,” Steffan Watkins, a prominent Canadian OSINT analyst, told The National Interest.
“The move has led to speculation that the Indian Air Force is behind it,” Philip explained. “However, sources in the IAF remained tight-lipped about this development, with some also expressing ignorance.”
A notice Twitter sent to @ELINTNews confirmed that the social-media company had received “official correspondence” that prompted the ban.
Great Game India, a journal based in Hyderabad, celebrated Twitter’s attack on OSINT. “Very welcome step,” the journal tweeted. The journal in May 2019 conducted what one reporter described as an “independent social media tracking operation” and accused OSINT analysts of being fronts for the Pakistani government.
https://www.reddit.com/r/LessCredibleDefence/comments/9uwqzk/iama_us_naval_officer_who_spent_5_days_onboard/
I see a lot of disappointments/shock in your comments. Were there any positives? Did they have good food?
Actually, their food was excellent. They also made really good tea, too. I drank nothing but hot milk tea my entire 5 days there because I was afraid of drinking the water (I saw their reverse osmosis units, dear god).
How bad was it?
15+ years old and they looked like nobody had done any maintenance in the last 5+ years. Their ROs were in such poor shape that despite having a greater fresh water production capacity than my ship by several thousand gallons, they were still on water hours.
How do they runs things differently then the USN?
Their engineering practices were abysmal. No undershirts, no steel-toed boots - they wore sandals - no hearing protection in their engineering spaces. No lagging (sound dampening material) in any space. No electrical safety whatsoever. No operational risk management. No concept of safety of navigation. Absolutely did not adhere to rules of the road. They more or less did not have any hard-copy written procedures for any exercise or event, at all. They had no concept of the coded fleet tactical system that US coalition forces and allies utilize (they literally made it up as they went along, and when I tried to interject and explain to them how it worked, they ignored me). When I arrived onboard they thought I was a midshipman and treated me as such. I had to be frank and explain that I was a commissioned officer and that yes, I stood officer on the deck onboard my ship and was a qualified surface warfare officer. They don't entrust their people with any responsibility until they are very senior Lieutenants (O-3s) and junior Lieutenant Commanders (O-4s). At this point in the US Navy there are literally guys commanding ships, and these guys couldn't even be trusted to handle a radio circuit.
How knowledgeable did you find the officers to be?
Well, their captain was driving the ship when it came within 50ft of the stern of a USNS replenishment ship and at any given time there were multiple officers on the bridge screaming at each other. They were generally clueless and had almost zero seamanship skills. I found their enlisted guys to be far more competent than their officers on the bridge.
Why do you think they're so incompetent and have such crappy operations?
Well, coming within 50ft of another ship at sea is never a good sign. But, afterwards, the general consensus/excuse that they came up with during their mini-debrief was "oh well, rough seas, better luck next time" not "holy ******* ****, we parted a tensioned wire cable made of braided steel under hundreds of thousands of pounds of tension". And wearing sandals during replenishment/helo ops/boat ops/in engineering spaces pretty much says it all. They legitimately didn't understand why I was wearing steel-toed flight deck boots. Things like these aren't cultural differences, they are golden exhibitions of their sheer lack of common sense and seamanship.
1. Are you breaking any US Navy rules by telling us all this?
2. How did they do in the exercise? Did they get "sunk" five times or what?
3. Were there equivalent Indian Navy personnel on a US Navy ship and do you happen to know their assessment? Were they disappointed by the lack of slaves?
4. Let's say * * * * hits the fan. India and Pakistan (or any other country. Take your pick) are at war and the ship you were on is sent into action. Would they be an effective fighting force or are they on the bottom of the ocean before the first day of shooting? Great AMA btw!
What does the evidence suggest?
by Robert Beckhusen
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/could-pakistan-sink-indian-aircraft-carrier-war-76086
Essentially, this makes Indian carriers’ self-defeating, with the flattops existing primarily to defend themselves from attack rather than taking the fight to their enemy. Carriers are also expensive symbols of national prestige, and it is unlikely the Indian Navy will want to risk losing one, two or all three. Under the circumstances, India’s investment in carriers makes more sense symbolically, and primarily as a way of keeping shipyards busy and shipyard workers employed.
The Indian Navy has put out a proposal for its third aircraft carrier, tentatively titled the Vishal due to enter service in the latter 2020s. The 65,000-ton Vishal will be significantly larger than India’s sole current carrier, the Vikramaditya known formerly as the ex-Soviet Admiral Gorshkov, and the incoming second one, the domestically-built Vikrantwhich is expected to enter service later in 2018.
To see why Vishal is a big deal for the Indian Navy, one needs only to look at her proposed air wing — some 57 fighters, more than Vikramaditya — 24 MiG-29Ks — and Vikrant‘s wing of around 30 MiG-29Ks. While below the 75+ aircraft aboard a U.S. Navy Gerald R. Ford-class supercarrier, Vishal will be a proper full-size carrier and India’s first, as the preceding two are really small-deck carriers and limited in several significant ways.
The Indian Navy is also looking at an electromagnetic launch system for its third carrier, similar to the one aboard the Ford class. India’s first two carriers have STOBAR configurations, in which aircraft launch with the assistance of a ski-jump, which limits the maximum weight a plane can lift into the air. Typically this means that fighters must sacrifice weapons, or fuel thus limiting range, or a combination of both.
Most likely, India would attempt to enforce a blockade of Pakistan and use its carriers to strike land-based targets. But Pakistan has several means to attack Indian carriers — with near-undetectable submarines and anti-ship missiles — which must also operate relatively far from India itself in the western and northern Arabian Sea. China does not have a similar disadvantage, as the PLAN would likely keep its carriers close and within the “first island chain” including Taiwan, closer to shore where supporting aircraft and ground-based missile launchers can help out.
Thus, Indian carriers would be relatively vulnerable and only one of them will have aircraft capable of launching with standard ordnance and fuel. And that is after Vishal sets sail in the next decade.
To directly threaten Pakistan, the small-deck carriers will have to maneuver nearer to shore — and thereby closer to “anti-access / area denial” weapons which could sink them. And even with a third carrier, the threat of land-based Pakistani aircraft will force the Indian Navy to dedicate a large proportion of its own air wings to defense — perhaps half of its available fighters, according to 2017 paper by Ben Wan Beng Ho for the Naval War College Review.
“Therefore, it is doubtful that any attack force launched from an Indian carrier would pack a significant punch,” Ho writes. “With aircraft available for strike duties barely numbering into the double digits, the Indian carrier simply cannot deliver a substantial ‘pulse’ of combat power against its adversary.”
India has an economic policy disease. While needing enormous productivity increases to become rich, it conducts policy as if it is already rich. What’s needed for a boom has been clear for a long time — land and labor reform. Instead, the discussion is of interest rate cuts and central government borrowing. Until that changes, the “India rising” story should be shelved.
There has been an overdone fuss over a quick drop in Indian gross domestic product (GDP) growth, from 8 percent a year ago to 5 percent in the most recent quarter. Most likely GDP decelerated before this year’s election but was manipulated to avoid showing this. The sharpness of the decline is probably due to official data catching up to reality.
India’s obsession with GDP is a more durable problem. GDP is merely correlated with vital outcomes such as employment and wealth; it should not be the performance benchmark. Five percent GDP growth would be adequate if household incomes outpace it, and if it is labor-intensive. We can’t tell because joblessness has never been properly measured. No one in Delhi has wanted to know.
This has become a crippling failure; the principal reason to expect a decade or more of fast growth is the surge of India’s working-age population. The primary goal of policy should thus be gainful and productive opportunities for potential labor market entrants. However, decision makers don’t even see the true state of the labor market, much less make policy on this basis.
It follows immediately that core reforms have little to do with more spending. First, measure joblessness. Second, liberalize labor markets. The vast majority of Indian firms, and all firms with 300 or more employees, cannot fire workers freely. The obvious impact is that they also don’t hire freely. They miss growth opportunities, which means the economy misses growth opportunities.
The same phenomenon put another way: India can only become richer if it becomes more productive. Productivity is hamstrung when basic hiring and firing decisions are warped by the state. Officials talk incessantly about demographic expansion, but labor policy devastatingly discriminates against making new workers productive. Against that failure, government spending pales.
Land reflects labor. The foundation of all development is escaping subsistence farming. Indian policymakers actually fear this because labor restrictions mean the economy can’t absorb the workers created if farming moves beyond subsistence. Rather than trying to boost agricultural productivity, they pass truly abysmal land laws and offer subsidies that do nothing to bring farmers prosperity.
The standard response is that such labor and land liberalization is politically impossible. India can indeed boom for 20 years, with near double-digit annual income growth, to become the third-largest national economy. But if Prime Minister Narendra Modi can’t even start to make it happen after a second, sweeping election victory, we should stop clinging to that potential and start to face reality.
Bidanda Chengappa | Updated on March 01, 2019 Published on March 01, 2019
https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/how-the-iaf-compares-with-the-paf/article26411688.ece
The IAF has maintained a numerical edge in terms of fighter aircraft over the PAF of almost 3:1. With depletion of numbers in the IAF’s combat squadrons, this edge is currently down to around 1.4:1. The strength of the combat squadrons will soon drop below 30 squadrons. Once the IAF gets back to its sanctioned strength of 42 squadrons, the edge should evolve to 2:1.
An IAF fighter squadron has 18 operationally deployed aircraft with three in reserve. This totals to 900 fighter aircraft of which around two squadrons or 40 aircraft may cease to be fully operational every year as they reach the end of their life. But the IAF is unlikely to get the 42 squadrons till 2035.
-----------------------
The PAF currently has 22 fighter aircraft squadrons that translate into about 410 aircraft. These include around 70 JF-17s, 45 F-16s, 69 Mirage IIIs, 90 Mirage Vs and 136 F-7s. The JF-17, a China-designed aircraft, is claimed to be a fourth-generation, multi-role aircraft. It is reported that another 100 are on order.
The PAF plans to acquire 250 aircraft to replace its Mirage IIIs and F-7s. Some of these would be Block 2 version with 4.5 generation features while some more would be Block 3 and are expected to have fifth-generation characteristics. The PAF is also said to have placed an order for 36 Chinese J-10s a 4.5 generation aircraft. The J-10 is expected to be inducted as the FC-20, an advanced PAF-specific variant.
The PAF’s fighter aircraft currently are of four types, which are planned to be reduced to three multi-role types, namely the F-16, JF-17 and FC-20 by 2025. Russia and Pakistan have also been talking about the possible purchase of the Sukhoi-35 air-superiority multi-role fighter. The PAF plans to procure 30-40 Chinese FC-31 stealth fighter aircraft to replace the F-16 fighter jets. The FC-31 is designed to fly close air support, air interdiction and other missions. However, the PAF is more likely to employ conventional tactical aircraft rather than stealth aircraft in actual missions to support Pakistani ground forces.
Seventh largest
The PAF with a smaller fighter aircraft inventory is the seventh largest air force in the world and the largest in the Islamic world. PAF pilots are well-trained, with battle experience and high morale. The PAF is also an inherently air-defence oriented force. As earlier, in an exclusive Indo-Pak war scenario, the PAF will be kept head-down by the IAF and is likely to be defeated. In the shadow of nuclear stand-off, a full-fledged war is less likely.
In a limited war as a follow-up to a trigger incident or a surgical strike, the IAF will be much better placed on account of its larger weapon inventory and superior platforms. There is a considerable scope for conventional offensive action short of the nuclear threshold.
Lately, the induction of Airborne Early Warning (AEW) aircraft into the subcontinent has altered the regional strategic environment. It enables the two sides to keep an eye on each other, and in India’s case, Pakistan’s ally China. These AEW aircraft provide low altitude coverage for both sides, looking into mountain valleys and across the horizon over the sea.
Pakistan’s diverse terrain, which includes sea, desert, glaciers and mountains, means monitoring these areas was ‘patchy’ because ground based air defence radars cannot cover the sea, and not always the land. While the PAF has two AEW aircraft, the IAF has two AWACS and three AEW aircraft, which will make air warfare that much more challenging in the subcontinent.
The writer is a Professor of International Relations and Strategic Studies at Christ Deemed to be University, Bengaluru
As I browse my Twitter timeline, surfing through replies by people clearly identifying themselves as staunch Hindus and, more importantly, as Narendra Modi’s supporters, a common theme emerges: among other religious and political iconography, they use as their display pictures the image of an angry Hanuman’s face, bathed in half saffron and half black. You can find similar imagery, like a Shiva with six-pack abs or a face sketch that’s half Modi and half lion, but the angry Hanuman seems to be the most popular icon by far. Sketched by Karan Acharya from Kerala, it has become one of the most popular icons for many young men who identify with the Bharatiya Janata Party, Modi, and, by extension, the Hindu nationalist idea of India.
In the unfolding story of India under Modi, one thing that’s constantly evoked is the overt masculinity of our “bachelor” leader, be it the 56-inch chest, the manliness of the Balakot air strike, the ‘main bhi chowkidar’ slogan. (A chowkidar, after all, is meant to protect you from external enemies and who better a watchman than one with the 56-inch chest.) Never mind that if you look at any picture of Modi, you can see he’s not as wide-chested as claimed. (Arnold Schwarzenegger, who stands at six feet two has a chest of 57 inches.) Yet, the myth persists.
On the other side are characters who are defined in clear non-masculine terms to hit home how aggressive, decisive and, therefore, a “proper leader” Modi is. Rahul Gandhi is the perennial baby who refuses to grow up and is, therefore, not man enough, never mind that he is a black belt in Aikido and from all visual samples is much fitter, if not healthier, than “56 inches”. Arvind Kejriwal is always coughing and wrapped in mufflers, thus weak and not the authority figure who should be the leader. Manmohan Singh was old, frail and, worst of all, managed by Sonia Gandhi, a woman, so he was meek and not a strong leader. In fact, the granddaddy of India’s opposition leadership in 2020 is a man who has been dead 56 years, Jawaharlal Nehru. To prove that Nehru was not an ideal leader, he is projected as this lascivious philanderer who gave up on national interests because he was busy satiating his carnal desires. (Being lascivious and philandering arguably doesn’t make one less manly, except in the angry Hanuman ecosystem.) In contrast, “Modi ji the bachelor” does not bother about such petty needs.
Problem of identity
Growing up as an upper caste Hindu man, it’s almost impossible to see caste. It’s so deeply embedded in daily life that even when you see caste discrimination – parents saying how having separate utensils is hygienic and not untouchability, so, of course, there are separate cups and plates for your house maid – you explain it away. On top of this, you’re constantly fed propaganda about how great your motherland and your religion are – propagated through school prayers, pledge of India, Bollywood films, and family lore – that you believe in a certain idea of greatness even if it’s not entirely true. The reason this propaganda is bought by the upper caste Hindu man more than any other person is that it mostly valorises people like him.
The first time many upper caste Hindus see caste up close is when they appear for engineering or medical school entrance exams. When caste, always lurking in the corner but invisible, suddenly appears here it seems almost unfair to this aspirant of unlimited ambitions. This, in a weird way, adds a positive to his established pride in his identity.
India under Mr. Modi’s rule has been marked by continuous explosions of violence in both virtual and real worlds. As pro-Modi television anchors hunted for “anti-nationals” and troll armies rampaged through social media, threatening women with rape, lynch mobs slaughtered Muslims and low-caste Hindus. Hindu supremacists have captured or infiltrated institutions from the military and the judiciary to the news media and universities, while dissenting scholars and journalists have found themselves exposed to the risk of assassination and arbitrary detention. Stridently advancing bogus claims that ancient Hindus invented genetic engineering and airplanes, Mr. Modi and his Hindu nationalist supporters seemed to plunge an entire country into a moronic inferno. Last month the Indian army’s official twitter account excitedly broadcast its discovery of the Yeti’s footprints.
Yet in the election that began last month, voters chose overwhelmingly to prolong this nightmare. The sources of Mr. Modi’s impregnable charisma seem more mysterious when you consider that he failed completely to realize his central promises of the 2014 election: jobs and national security. He presided over an enormous rise in unemployment and a spike in militancy in India-ruled Kashmir. His much-sensationalized punitive assault on Pakistan in February damaged nothing more than a few trees across the border, while killing seven Indian civilians in an instance of friendly fire.
Mr. Modi did indeed benefit electorally this time from his garishly advertised schemes to provide toilets, bank accounts, cheap loans, housing, electricity and cooking-gas cylinders to some of the poorest Indians. Lavish donations from India’s biggest companies allowed his party to outspend all others on its re-election campaign. A corporate-owned media fervently built up Mr. Modi as India’s savior, and opposition parties are right to suggest that the Election Commission, once one of India’s few unimpeachable bodies, was also shamelessly partisan.
None of these factors, however, can explain the spell Modi has cast on an overwhelmingly young Indian population. “Now and then,” Lionel Trilling once wrote, “it is possible to observe the moral life in process of revising itself.” Mr. Modi has created that process in India by drastically refashioning, with the help of technology, how many Indians see themselves and their world, and by infusing India’s public sphere with a riotously popular loathing of the country’s old urban elites.
Rived by caste as well as class divisions, and dominated in Bollywood as well as politics by dynasties, India is a grotesquely unequal society. Its constitution, and much political rhetoric, upholds the notion that all individuals are equal and possess the same right to education and job opportunities; but the everyday experience of most Indians testify to appalling violations of this principle. A great majority of Indians, forced to inhabit the vast gap between a glossy democratic ideal and a squalid undemocratic reality, have long stored up deep feelings of injury, weakness, inferiority, degradation, inadequacy and envy; these stem from defeats or humiliation suffered at the hands of those of higher status than themselves in a rigid hierarchy.
https://theprint.in/defence/indian-army-commanders-left-brigade-hq-minutes-before-paf-bomb-fell-in-compound-27-feb/241324/
When Pakistan Air Force fighter jets dropped a bomb near an Indian defence installation in Jammu and Kashmir on 27 February — a day after the Balakot strike by the Indian Air Force — Islamabad claimed that this was done to display its capability and not target the Indian military.
The H-4 Stand-Off Weapon, a precision-guided glide bomb, dropped by the PAF fell into the compound of the Indian Army Brigade Headquarters in the Rajouri sector, making it a close call.
This call, ThePrint has learnt, was much closer than known earlier as two top Indian Army commanders — Northern Army Commander Lt Gen. Ranbir Singh and 16 Corps Commander Lt Gen. Paramjit Singh — had stepped out of the Brigade Headquarters “minutes before” the bomb fell.
The two commanders, top sources in the defence and security establishment told ThePrint, had left for a nearby post when the PAF bomb fell into the compound of the Brigade Headquarters. This post was less than 700 metres from the spot where the bomb struck.
The Northern Command and the Indian Army headquarters did not respond to requests for comment from ThePrint for this report.
Speaking at the founding day of the National Cadet Corps Tuesday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said all India’s armed forces need to defeat Pakistan is seven to ten days.
Was he talking through his hat? Can the world’s fourth-largest military power defeat the fifth-largest in just about a week or so? Particularly when they are both nuclear-armed?
----------
The Soviets’ failure in Afghanistan ended their ideology and military bloc. Saudi Arabia, enormously richer and more powerful, has failed to defeat poor Yemen in almost five years. Iraq invaded Iran in 1980, hoping to take advantage of chaos in the wake of the revolution there. Eight years later, all the two countries had was corpses, cripples and prisoners of war, but no tangible gains.
This is by no means an exhaustive list. You might, for the sake of an argument, find an example here or there, such as Bosnia. But again, a regime change by a multinational force in such a small country wouldn’t really count for a victory in the sense of a nation defeating another.
Closer home, in 73 years marked with four large wars against two adversaries, China and Pakistan, two have ended decisively. It is easy to remember the one we won, in 1971 against Pakistan, and impossible to forget the one we lost, in 1962 to China.
he war India won, 1971, lasted all of 13 days. The defeat against China, in 1962, also came over about two fortnights of intense operations with a recess of sorts in between. This tells you something counter-intuitive to what our immediate reaction to Modi’s statement on NCC Day would be. So, don’t laugh at the idea that one strong country can defeat another in seven to ten days. Because our generation has seen exactly that at home, twice.
Which brings us to the nub of the issue. How do we define victory or defeat when modern nations fight? In 1971, the moment Dacca fell, Indira Gandhi offered Pakistan ceasefire in the more evenly-matched western sector. The moment Pakistan accepted, she could declare victory. Similarly, in 1962, China offered India a ceasefire unilaterally, even announced it was returning to its pre-war positions (except in some small parts of Ladakh). The moment India accepted it, vowing to fight another day, China could declare victory. The Chinese knew the risk of getting into an unwinnable war of attrition if they ventured into the plains, and Mrs Gandhi, sobered by Soviet allies, also understood the relative military parity in the western sector.
----
Apply this test to some other familiar situations. Kargil was a relatively tiny war and India won it only because Atal Bihari Vajpayee and his counsels defined victory narrowly and precisely as the mere withdrawal of Pakistan to the Line of Control. Pakistan had initiated that war with the objective of grabbing crucial territory and forcing India to negotiate Kashmir. Vajpayee set defeating that objective as his target, and declared victory the moment it was achieved.
Both Pakistan and India claim 1965 as a win. Here is the equation if we follow the parameters we’ve just set. Pakistan started that war, with the objective of grabbing Kashmir. It had the technological, tactical and diplomatic superiority, and the strategic space and cushion to do so.
----
India bombed Balakot, deep inside Pakistani mainland, to deliver a strategic and political message. That objective achieved, it had nothing more to do except brace for a Pakistani counter. Whatever the score in the air skirmish on the following morning, the Pakistanis were left with an IAF pilot and the wreckage of his plane. This enabled both sides to declare victory.
India’s Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has censured the Indian Army (IA) for enduring shortages of essential high-altitude clothing, equipment, and rations for soldiers posted in the disputed Himalayan region of Siachen, which borders Pakistan and China, an audit report tabled in parliament on 3 February revealed.
In the report the CAG stated that these “acute” deficiencies persisted for up to four years until 2018, pointing out that shortages of snow goggles ranged between 62% and 98%, while the lack of snow boots compelled soldiers on the Siachen Glacier to use ‘recycled’ footwear.
The audit further criticised the IA for purchasing 31,779 “substandard” sleeping bags at inflated rates, in addition to acquiring “inferior” backpacks that failed to meet the stipulated specifications.
Nuclear weapons are a persistent threat.
by Kyle Mizokami
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/india-pakistan-conflict-wont-be-won-having-largest-army-120206
If the two countries (India and Pakistan) went to war, a major clash between the two armies would be inevitable. Outnumbered and under-equipped, the Pakistani army believes it is in a position to launch small local offensives from the outset, before the Indian army can reach its jumping-off points, to occupy favorable terrain. Still, the disparity in forces means the Pakistanis cannot hope to launch a major, war-winning offensive and terminate a ground war on their own terms. As a result, the Pakistani army is increasingly relying on tactical nuclear weapons to aid their conventional forces.
For its part, the Indian army plans to immediately take the offensive under a doctrine called “Cold Start.” Cold Start envisions rapid mobilization followed by a major offensive into Pakistan before the country can respond with tactical nuclear weapons. Such an offensive—and Pakistan’s likely conventional defeat—could make the use of tactical nuclear weapons all the more likely.
--------------------
The Indian army is the primary land force of the Indian armed forces. The army numbers 1.2 million active duty personnel and 990,000 reservists, for a total force strength of 2.1 million. The army’s primary tasks are guarding the borders with Pakistan and China and domestic security—particularly in Kashmir and the Northeast. The army is also a frequent contributor to United Nations peacekeeping missions abroad.
The army is structured into fourteen army corps, which are further made up of forty infantry, armored, mountain and RAPID (mechanized infantry) divisions. There is approximately one separate artillery brigade per corps, five separate armored brigades, seven infantry brigades and five brigade-sized air defense formations.
--------------------
The Pakistani army numbers 650,000 active duty personnel and five hundred thousand reserves, for a total strength of 1.15 million. Although Pakistan resides in what most would consider a rough neighborhood, it is on relatively good terms with neighbors China and Iran. As a result, the army’s primary missions are domestic security operations against the Pakistani Taliban and facing off against the Indian army. Like India, Pakistan is a major contributor of forces to United Nations peacekeeping missions.
The Pakistani army consists of twenty-six combat divisions falling under the control of nine army corps. Most divisions are infantry divisions, with only two armored and two mechanized infantry divisions. Each corps also controls an average of one armored, one infantry and one artillery brigade each. Not only is the Pakistani army smaller than the Indian army, but it features fewer offensive forces capable of attacking India head-on. Special operations forces are concentrated under the control of the Special Services Group, which controls eight commando battalions.
First, Lindsey Graham, a close ally of US President Donald Trump, said this:
"When it comes to Kashmir, I don't know how it ends, but let's make sure that two democracies will end it differently. And if you can prove that concept here, then I think it's probably the best way to sell democracy."
Pat came the reply from S Jaishankar.
"Don't worry, Senator. One democracy will settle it. And you know which one."
#India’s Jaishankar’s main audience is one person: #Modi with his “56 inch chest” and “boli naheen, goli” pronouncements on #Pakistan and #Kashmir. It’s similar to #Pompeo’s main audience being #Trump. https://www.riazhaq.com/2019/03/modis-india-paper-elephant.html?showComment=1581871283614#c6964470296631396399
New Delhi (Sputnik): On Friday, Indian Air Force (IAF) Chief RKS Bhadauria said the 36 Rafale jets were not the whole solution to the IAF's needs. India signed a $7.8 billion contract with French Dassault Aviation to buy the aircraft in 2019.
Sitting beside Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, Air Force Chief Rakesh Kumar Bhadauria issued a strong warning to the political leadership of India, claiming that the Rafale fighter jet is insufficient to meet the country's defence needs.
IAF veteran Vijainder K Thakur told Sputnik that Rafale is definitely the best aircraft in the IAF's inventory now. However, a determined adversary like the Pakistan Air Force could turn the tables on the IAF by deploying longer-ranged Chinese PL-15 missiles on an updated version of the JF-17 jet.
“The technical advantage gained by the IAF through the acquisition of the Rafale would be transient because it would be based largely on the weapon systems and sensors of the Rafale,” Thakur said.
The IAF's excessive focus on platforms rather than sensors and weapon systems was evident during the Kargil conflict with Pakistan two decades ago. “The IAF fulfilled the expectations only after it made emergency purchases of Laser-Guided Bombs and targeting pods,” Thakur said.
Powered Up JF-17
The Pakistan Air Force’s single engine multirole fighter, the JF-17 manufactured by the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation, is due for a major upgrade, similar to the advanced technologies seen on the J-20 stealth fighter, the Chinese newspaper Global Times reported earlier this year.
It is confirmed by the Chinese outlet that the upgraded JF-17 fighter jet will have “an infrared search and track system and a radar cross section reducing ‘pseudo-stealthy’ airframe”.
The JF-17 fighter jet has been also equipping with PL-15 Beyond Visual Range air-to-air missile that has posed serious concern among the US Air Force due to the long range of its missiles.
Herbert J. Carlisle, the then head of the US Air Force’s combat command, was quoted by Flight Global as saying that outmatching the Chinese PL-15 air-to-air missile in particular is an “exceedingly high priority”.
“The PL-15 and the range of that missile, we’ve got to be able to out-stick that missile,” US Air Force’s Command chief had said in 2015.
Lessons From Balakot Strike and Options for India
On February 27 2019, a day after the IAF struck an alleged terror training camp at Balakot, the PAF surprised the IAF with its longer range AMRAAM and better supporting sensor capability.
“IAF allowed itself to be outgunned by focusing on platform acquisitions, rather than weapon system and sensor upgrades. With sufficient military foresight, the IAF could have armed its Su-30MKI with longer range air-to-air missiles acquired from Russia rather than continuing to rely on the lesser ranged missile ordered years ago from Ukraine,” IAF veteran Thakur asserted.
The Indian Air Force ordered a large batch of Russian air-to-air missiles such as R-27, R-73 very shortly after Balakot strike.
Emphasising the importance of indigenous Astra air-to-air missile, Indian Air Force Chief Bhadauria said at a seminar in New Delhi on Friday that when the missile goes on to the Su-30 and MiG-29, that the power of parity and better performance will spread across the air force.
The Indian Air Force will start taking delivery of the Rafale jets in May 2020.
1. Indian pilots are prone to fratricide – killing friendly aircraft
2. #IAF require 1 min between takeoffs vs 30 secs for other air forces
3. IAF not keen on 1 on 1 dogfights
https://youtu.be/35nBQF5-qhc via @YouTube
From: http://www.chuckyeager.org/news/charles-yeager-and-pakistan-air-force-daily-pakistan-global/
Charles Yeager, a retired brigadier general in the United States Air Force and record-setting test pilot, was posted to Pakistan as the US Defense Representative from 1971 to 1973, during the Indo-Pak war on East Bangladesh. Yeager provided the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) with a great opportunity to learn from someone who was at that time the most experienced and perhaps the best fighter pilot in the world.In 1947, he became the first pilot confirmed to have traveled faster than sound.z5The PAF and its fighter pilots learnt as much as they could in that short period.
During the war, he was constantly at hand to advise and organise the PAF’s defences. After the war ended, Chuck Yeager, who had experienced it first had, briefed at length the PAF on what it had done right and on what it had done wrong.Many of Chuck Yeager’s training and combat advice to the PAF was incorporated into PAF training and combat tactics manuals. Chuck Yeager’s affiliation with the PAF was an honour to it. The PAF remains the only foreign air force in the world to have received Chuck Yeager’s admiration – a recommendation which the PAF is proud of.
Here is how he admired the Pakistan Air Force, in his own autobiography:
“When we arrived in Pakistan in 1971, the political situation between the Pakistanis and Indians was really tense over Bangladesh, or East Pakistan, as it was known in those days, and Russia was backing India with tremendous amounts of new airplanes and tanks. The US and China were backing the Pakistanis.
My job was military adviser to the Pakistani air force, headed by Air Marshal Rahim Khan, who had been trained in Britain by the Royal Air Force, and was the first Pakistani pilot to exceed the speed of sound. He took me around to their different fighter groups and I met their pilots, who knew me and were really pleased that I was there.
They had about five hundred airplanes, more than half of them Sabres and 104 Starfighters, a few B-57 bombers, and about a hundred Chinese MiG-19s. They were really good, aggressive dogfighters and proficient in gunnery and air combat tactics. I was damned impressed. Those guys just lived and breathed flying.”
z7One of Yeager’s first jobs there was to help them put US Sidewinders on their Chinese MiGs, which were 1.6 Mach twin-engine airplanes that carried three thirty-millimeter canons. The US government had furnished them with the rails for Sidewinders. Pakistan bought the missiles and all the checkout equipment that went with PAF, and Yeager had an interesting experience watching PAF electricians wiring up American missiles on a Chinese MiG.
He writes: “I worked with their squadrons and helped them develop combat tactics. The Chinese MiG was one hundred percent Chinese-built and was made for only one hundred hours of flying before it had to be scrapped – a disposable fighter good for one hundred strikes. In fairness, it was an older airplane in their inventory, and I guess they were just getting rid of them. They delivered spare parts, but it was a tough airplane to work on; the Pakistanis kept it flying for about 130 hours.
“The PAF surprised the IAF by launching air-to-air missiles from inside Pakistan-occupied Kashmir,” said Sameer Joshi, a former Indian Air Force fighter pilot. “The AMRAAM effectively outranged the IAF air-to-air missiles which did not get a command to launch.”
India is now looking to Israel, from whom it has purchased numerous weapons, such as the Heron drone and the Derby, a radar-guided, beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile with a range of 50 kilometers (31 miles). To counter AMRAAM-armed Pakistani F-16s, the IAF is looking at the improved I-Derby, which features a more radar seeker and – most importantly – a 100-kilometer (62 mile) range.
-------------
“In two years from now, the Indian Air Force's frontline Sukhoi-30 fighters may be re-armed with Israeli Derby air-to-air missiles after the jet's Russian-made R-77 missiles were found wanting in air combat operations over the Line of Control on February 27,” NDTV said.
During air battles along the Kashmir border on February 26 and 27 of last year, an Indian Air Force (IAF) MiG-21 was shot down, apparently by a U.S.-made AIM-120 AMRAAM (Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile) fired by one of Pakistan Air Force’s (PAF) American-built F-16 fighters. India claims to have downed a Pakistani fighter – which Pakistan denies – but India was still embarrassed by the capture of its MiG-21 pilot, who was shown on Pakistani television and later returned.
What troubles the Indian Air Force was that Pakistan was able to destroy an Indian jet from long range. “Among the Indian Air Force's fighters which were targeted were two Sukhoi-30s which managed to evade the AMRAAMs which were fired at close to their maximum range of 100 kilometers [62 miles],” according to NDTV. “Fully defensive and desperate to escape the incoming AMRAAMs, the IAF Sukhoi-30s escaped being shot down but were unable to retaliate the F-16s because they were out of position and their own missiles, the Russian R-77s, did not have the range to realistically engage the Pakistani fighters. IAF sources told NDTV that the Russian missiles do not match its advertised range and cannot engage targets which are more than 80 kilometers [50 miles] away.”
The early-model AIM-120A/B has a range of up to 75 kilometers (46 miles). But in 2010, Pakistan received a batch of the AIM-120C-5, with a range of 100 kilometers (62 miles). The most advanced AIM-120D has an estimated range of up to 160 kilometers (100 miles).
Let's hope it never happens.
by Kyle Mizokami
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/these-are-horrific-weapons-india-would-use-fight-pakistan-138692
It’s distinctly possible that any future war between India and Pakistan would involve limited action on the ground and full-scale fighting at sea and in the air. India has the upper hand in both, particularly at sea where it would have the ability to blockade Pakistani ports. Pakistan imports 83% of its gasoline consumption, and without sizable reserves the economy would feel the effects of war very quickly. An economic victory, not a purely military one might be the best way to decisively end a war without the use of nuclear weapons.
-------------
Vikramaditya is 282 meters long and displaces 44,000 tons, making it less than half the displacement of American supercarriers. Nevertheless Vikramaditya’s powerful air wing is capable of executing air superiority, anti-surface, anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare. The carrier air wing is expected to consist of 24 MiG-29K or Tejas multi-role fighters and 10 anti-submarine warfare helicopters. India has ordered 45 MiG-29Ks, with the first squadron, 303 “Black Panthers” Squadron, stood up in May 2013.
While INS Vikramaditya would be the visible symbol of a naval blockade, perhaps the real enforcers would be India’s force of 14 attack submarines. The most powerful of India’s submarines is INS Chakra, an Akula-II nuclear-powered attack submarine.
INS Chakra would be able to fulfill a variety of wartime tasks. It would be a real threat to Pakistan’s Navy, particularly her 11 frigates and eight submarines, only three of which are reasonably modern. Chakra is also capable of covertly laying mines in Pakistani waters and conduct surveillance in support of a blockade.
--------
INS Chakra is armed with not only four standard diameter 533 torpedo tubes but also another four 650mm torpedo tubes. Armament includes the VA-111 Shkval supercavitating torpedo, a high speed torpedo capable of traveling at 220 knots to ranges of up 15 kilometers. Missile armament is in the form of 3M54 Klub anti-ship missiles. Chakra can carry up to 40 torpedo tube launched weapons, including mines. (Five merchant ships were struck by mines during the 1971 India-Pakistan War.) For defensive purposes, Chakra has six external tubes, each carrying two torpedo decoys.
According to the terms of the lease with Russia, Chakra cannot be equipped with nuclear weapons.
India’s recent agreement to purchase the AH-64D Apache helicopter represents a quantum leap in land firepower for the Indian Army. The Apache’s versatility means that it will be able to do everything from engage armored formations in a conventional war scenario to hunt guerrillas and infiltrators in a counterinsurgency campaign.
---------------
The helicopter has four external hard points, each of which can mount four Hellfire missiles. A 30mm cannon capable of engaging light armor, soft targets or personnel is mounted underneath the helicopter chin and slaved to an optical sight worn by the pilot and gunner.
------------
The Su-30MKI is an evolution of the 1980s-era Su-27 Flanker. Thrust vectoring control and canards make the plane highly maneuverable, while the Zhuk active electronically scanned array radar makes it capable of engaging several targets at once. Complementing the Zhuk will be the Novator long-range air to air missile, capable of engaging targets at up to 300 to 400 kilometers.
The Su-30MKI has an impressive twelve hardpoints for mounting weapons, sensors and fuel tanks. The Su-30MKI is arguably superior to any fighter in the Pakistani Air Force, with the possible exception of the F-16 Block 50/52, of which Pakistan has only 18.
A portion of the Su-30MKI force has been modified for the strategic reconnaissance role. Israeli-made sensor pods reportedly give the Indian Air Force the ability to look up to 300 kilometers into Pakistan (or China) simply by flying along the border.
https://youtu.be/mSS8BTrGBFI via @YouTube
Three Days Standoff: Pakistan - India | 26 Feb 2020 (ISPR Official Video)
"I am proud of the armed forces that responded to Indian aggression across the Line of Control (LoC) in Balakot with maturity which will be remembered by India.
: PM Imran Khan
national geographic documentary on abhinandan varthaman
The senior MoD official told Defense News that due to the shortage of funds, at least a dozen pending defense contracts will experience delays. “The current $18.52 billion capital allocation is only [a] marginal increase from [the] previous year [capital] allocation of $18.02 billion [and] does not even adequately cover inflation costs.”
The Indian Air Force is to receive $6.76 billion from the 2020-2021 budget, a drop from the previous year’s $7.01 billion. The money is expected to go toward payments for orders of Rafale fighters from France and an S-400 missile system from Russia.
The Indian Navy is to receive $4.56 billion, which is expected to help cover the cost of leasing a nuclear submarine and stealth frigates from Russia, as well as pay for warships from Indian companies. A Navy official said it is unlikely the service will be able to sign a contract for 24 MH-60R multirole helicopters for more than $2 billion from the U.S. next year.
The Indian Army is to receive $5.06 billion to pay cover previous orders of wheeled and ultralight artillery guns, T-90 tanks, and ammunition.
India’s state-owned defense companies continue to receive 60 percent of defense-related business, with 30 percent going to overseas defense companies and 10 percent to domestic private defense firms.
Another MoD official said the armed forces plan to focus on industry-funded defense projects under the government’s “Make-II” category, which allows private companies to participate in the prototype development of weapons and platforms with a focus on import substitution, for which no government funding will be provided.
Pakistan’s actions have always been in Kashmir, which it believes is an occupation, and legitimate theater for action.
India twice attacked Pakistan across the International Border in 1965 and 1971.
No country other than #India recognizes #Kashmir to be part of India. The international community rejects India's claim on Kashmir.
Listen to this #JNU Professor Nevidita Menon explain why Kashmir is not and has never been part of India.
https://youtu.be/KWp1E8xrY5E
A former sarpanch, aligned to the BJP, from Shopian in South Kashmir has been arrested by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in a case registered in January, after a J&K police officer Davinder Singh was caught travelling in a car with a Hizbul Mujahideen militant.
Arrested J&K DSP Davinder Singh’s police medal for gallantry ‘forfeited’: Government order
The suspect, Tariq Ahmad Mir, 36, was arrested by the NIA on Wednesday. An official said his name cropped up during the interrogation of Naveed Mushtaq Shah, the Hizbul Mujahideen militant. Shah reportedly told interrogators that Mir was involved in providing weapons to other terrorist groups.
Gram panchayat elections are not fought on party symbols but candidates do get support from political parties. Mir was elected in 2011. An official said the NIA had raided multiple locations in February and Mir’s house was one of them, but he was not arrested then.
Panchayat elections could not be held in the district in 2018 due to prevailing law and order situation. Around 20,000 panchayat seats are vacant mostly in South Kashmir.
NIA shifts Davinder Singh, three militants to Jammu
“Mir is an arms conduit, he was arrested and produced in court which granted six day custody. Further interrogation is on,” a senior NIA official said.
Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Singh was arrested with Naveed, Rafi Ahmed Rather, another Hizbul militant and Irfan Shafi, a lawyer, on January 11 in South Kashmir’s Kulgam. The accused were enroute to the residence of Naveed’s younger brother Syed Irfan Ahmad in Jammu. A PhD scholar, Irfan was arrested on January 24 by the J&K police. The case was subsequently transferred to the NIA.
Another official said though Mir was not directly involved in Davinder Singh’s case, he played an important role in providing weapons to several terrorist groups active in Kashmir Valley including the Hizbul.
Singh’s arrest created a sensation as he was found in the company of Naveed Shah, a former police constable and one of the ‘most wanted terrorists’ in J&K. Police say that Shah was behind the killing of 11 truck drivers, non-local labourers and apple traders in south Kashmir after the August 5 clampdown in the former State after Parliament abrogated Article 370.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/southasia/2016/09/05/india-must-remember-that-balochistan-is-not-bangladesh/
https://twitter.com/ashoswai/status/772678975265107968?s=20
Following Prime Minister Modi’s comments about Balochistan in his independence day speech, Ashok Swain warns that open support for Baloch separatists will not solve the Kashmir conflict. What is more, he writes that by threatening its neighbour’s territorial integrity India risks alienating key allies, and in the worst case scenario intervention could result in a nuclear conflict which would threaten the lives and livelihoods of millions.
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his Independence Day Speech on 15 August 2016 raised the issue of Pakistan’s human rights violations in Balochistan. This has brought a new excitement in New Delhi, particularly among the right wing commentators as if India has finally found a solution to the Kashmir issue.
Since the death of a charismatic militant Burhan Wani in the hands of the security agencies on 8 July 2016, Kashmir is witnessing unprecedented violent protest. Modi and his advisors hope that Kashmir unrest will come to an end if India starts spreading the fire in Balochistan. If Modi and his advisors really believe that the Balochistan threat will dissuade Pakistani agencies to stay out of Kashmir and the contested state will be peaceful forever, they are living in a cloud-cuckoo land. History shows that Pakistani military establishment does not succumb to Indian threats. Instead, it uses this threat to accumulate more power for itself. India’s direct support to the East Pakistan liberation movement, which resulted in the creation of Bangladesh, did not succeed in changing the perception of Pakistani agencies. It only exacerbated their paranoia towards India further.
In the last decade, while Western attention has been mostly on the Taliban, the separatist struggle is turning quite violent in this scarcely populated but mineral-rich province in the south west of Pakistan. The Baloch have waged two major violent ‘freedom’ struggles against the state: an uprising from 1973 to 1977, which was crushed by the Pakistani Army using brute force. The second ongoing struggle started in 2005.
It is no secret that India has been supporting the separatists in Balochistan in their fight again Pakistani military without openly admitting it. Baloch activists have repeatedly admitted of receiving India’s ‘moral’ support and a representative of Balochistan Liberation Organization (BLO) has been living in New Delhi since 2009. Pakistan has been regularly accusing India for using its consulates in Jalalabad and Kandahar to fund, train and arm Baloch militants. A decade back, senior officials of Pakistan had even alleged that 600 Baloch tribals were being trained by India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) in Afghanistan to handle explosives, engineer bomb blasts, and use sophisticated weapons.
Pakistan has failed to provide much proof about Indian involvement, however, according to 2010 WikiLeaks cables, US and British intelligence cautiously agrees with the Pakistani accusations. Last year, Pakistan had handed over a dossier to the UN Secretary General containing ‘evidence’ of Indian support to violence in Balochistan. In March this year, Pakistan claimed to arrest an alleged RAW operative from Balochistan. India has been always denied these accusations, but has continued to remain engaged unofficially. However, by openly committing India to Balochistan’s cause in his speech, Modi is likely to expose India’s geo-strategic limitations without gaining any additional advantage, and there is a lot to lose.
It is important to keep in mind that the Balochistan issue is not a straightforward one for India to directly engage in, as was the case with East Pakistan. India does not share a common border with Balochistan and is therefore dependent upon Afghanistan to provide more support to Baloch separatists. This is not as easy as some hawks in India tend to believe, especially as India is struggling to get enough security cover even to protect its own assets in a fast-deteriorating environment in Afghanistan.
India’s expanded engagement in Balochistan might also bring Iran on Pakistan’s side because Baloch nationalists have not only pitched themselves against Pakistan but against Iran as well. Balochs form a majority in Iran’s Sistan and Baluchestan provinces and, like the Kurds, they are Sunni Muslims. It is not hard to imagine an Iran-Pakistan axis developing rapidly to prevent Baloch aspirations for independence. So getting bogged down in Balochistan risks turning Iran to an enemy of India.
When India went to war with Pakistan over Bangladesh in 1971 it had the blanket support of the Soviet Union, one of the two superpowers in the Cold War. If India picks a fight over Balochistan, Pakistan will receive support from China whose $46 billion USD CPEC investment in the region is at stake, and it is unlikely that any global or regional power will come out openly on India’s side. Both its old friend Russia, and new ally the USA have tried their best to stay out of the Balochistan imbroglio to date. There is no reason to expect that they will change their stance now.
Not only is Balochistan not East Pakistan, the Pakistani Military has moved on since the early 1970s. In 1971 their most prized possessions were the Patton tanks, but today it is their tactical nuclear weapons. After the country split, Pakistan did not just sulk and accept Indian domination, it decided to acquire a large nuclear arsenal by hook or crook. Unlike India, Pakistan has always been very clear about its purpose in acquiring nuclear weapons: to defend itself against Indian aggression. And unlike India, Pakistan also refuses to commit to a ‘no first use’ of their weapons.
Based on the amount of fissile material Pakistan has produced, it is estimated to have 110-130 nuclear warheads compared to India’s 100-120. Both now possess ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and sea-based nuclear delivery systems. Most importantly, Pakistan’s recent deployment of tactical nuclear weapons for its artillery arsenal has taken away any advantage India had previously in the case of a conventional war. This seriously limits India’s manoeuvrability to intervene militarily in Pakistani territory, whether to retaliate against any terror group or support any ‘separatist struggle’.
Provoking Pakistan to an armed conflict now is like playing with fire. If India threatens the territorial integrity of Pakistan as it did in 1971 there is a real possibility of that the Pakistani military will retaliate with its prized weapons. It has the capacity to launch a nuclear strike against India within 8 seconds and could strike Delhi in five minutes.
http://www.paluba.info/smf/index.php?topic=17897.0;wap2
How bad was it?
15+ years old and they looked like nobody had done any maintenance in the last 5+ years. Their ROs were in such poor shape that despite having a greater fresh water production capacity than my ship by several thousand gallons, they were still on water hours.
How do they runs things differently then the USN?
Their engineering practices were abysmal. No undershirts, no steel-toed boots - they wore sandals - no hearing protection in their engineering spaces. No lagging (sound dampening material) in any space. No electrical safety whatsoever. No operational risk management. No concept of safety of navigation. Absolutely did not adhere to rules of the road. They more or less did not have any hard-copy written procedures for any exercise or event, at all. They had no concept of the coded fleet tactical system that US coalition forces and allies utilize (they literally made it up as they went along, and when I tried to interject and explain to them how it worked, they ignored me). When I arrived onboard they thought I was a midshipman and treated me as such. I had to be frank and explain that I was a commissioned officer and that yes, I stood officer on the deck onboard my ship and was a qualified surface warfare officer. They don't entrust their people with any responsibility until they are very senior Lieutenants (O-3s) and junior Lieutenant Commanders (O-4s). At this point in the US Navy there are literally guys commanding ships, and these guys couldn't even be trusted to handle a radio circuit.
How knowledgeable did you find the officers to be?
Well, their captain was driving the ship when it came within 50ft of the stern of a USNS replenishment ship and at any given time there were multiple officers on the bridge screaming at each other. They were generally clueless and had almost zero seamanship skills. I found their enlisted guys to be far more competent than their officers on the bridge.
Why do you think they're so incompetent and have such crappy operations?
Well, coming within 50ft of another ship at sea is never a good sign. But, afterwards, the general consensus/excuse that they came up with during their mini-debrief was "oh well, rough seas, better luck next time" not "holy ******* ****, we parted a tensioned wire cable made of braided steel under hundreds of thousands of pounds of tension".
And wearing sandals during replenishment/helo ops/boat ops/in engineering spaces pretty much says it all. They legitimately didn't understand why I was wearing steel-toed flight deck boots.
Things like these aren't cultural differences, they are golden exhibitions of their sheer lack of common sense and seamanship.
The total contract is worth $485 million which includes multiple US allies. Work will be performed in Orlando, Florida, and various locations to be identified at the order level. The work is expected to be completed by May 2025.
Lockheed Martin Corp., Orlando, Florida, has been awarded a ceiling $485,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for Department of Defense and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Sniper, Infrared Search and Track (IRST); and Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night (LANTIRN) navigation pod (fixed wing) hardware production. This contract provides the necessary resources required for the management, fabrication, upgrade/retrofit, integration support and testing and shipping of its non-developmental item (NDI) Sniper Advanced Targeting Pods (ATP) System, NDI LANTIRN Fixed Image Navigation Set upgrades, and the NDI IRST system as it relates to the requirements document associated with each specific delivery order placed under this contract. Work will be performed in Orlando, Florida, and various locations to be identified at the order level. The work is expected to be completed by May 2025. This contract involves FMS to (this list is not all inclusive): Bahrain, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Egypt, Greece, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Republic of Korea, Kuwait, Morocco, Netherlands, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Taiwan, Thailand and Turkey. This award is the result of a sole-source acquisition. FMS funds in the amount of $34,900,000 are being obligated at the time of award under delivery order FA8540-20-F-0034 for the country of Morocco. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, is the contracting activity (FA8540‐20‐D‐0001).
https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2190758/
https://thediplomat.com/2020/05/is-the-chinese-jh-7-an-answer-to-the-pakistan-air-forces-deep-strike-needs/
The JH-7, while utilizing an old air frame, is a highly effective aircraft for deep strike operations. The jet first flew in 1988 and small numbers were delivered to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force during the 1990s. An improved version of the JH-7 fighter-bomber, also known by the NATO designation Flounder, began to be inducted in large numbers after 2004, after the Chinese aviation industry was able to indigenously manufacture a derivative of the Rolls Royce Spey engine. The Spey engine was designed specifically by the British for development of a low flying naval strike aircraft to counter the Soviet Navy in the Cold War.
Faced with cuts in defense expenditure and decreasing global influence after World War II, Britain could no longer afford to operate a sizable navy to deter the Soviet threat. Instead, the British opted for developing naval strike aircraft, such as the Blackburn Buccaneer, to extract a heavy toll on large Soviet Navy cruisers in a future conflict. The Spey engines were later utilized on the Royal Air Force’s fleet of F-4 Phantoms, giving the aircraft greater range and a shorter takeoff distance.
In addition to their low maintenance and impressive safety record, the Spey engine’s utility lies in the fact that it is designed specifically for sustained low altitude flight below the radar horizon of enemy naval vessels. Despite significant advances in jet engine development since the Cold War, the majority of engines today are designed for mid-to-high altitude flight. Flying at low altitude to avoid radar detection for longer periods thus decreases much of the engines’ range.
The JH-7 also complements the Pakistan Navy’s combat doctrine, which is based on the anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) blueprint. The PN’s three Khalid-class submarines form the linchpin of their A2/AD strategy, with the wartime objective of preventing an attempted blockade of the vital Karachi port by the Indian Navy. Acquisition of the JH -7 by Pakistan would provide Islamabad with lethal capability to considerably limit the maneuvering capacity of the Indian Navy in the proximity of Karachi port.
Also, the JH-7, with its longer combat range, heavy payload capacity, and ability to fly under enemy radar cover provides Islamabad with an offensive capacity targeted at India’s protracted western coastline. Hence, acquisition of the JH-7 by Pakistan serves both defensive and offensive purposes. The improved JH-7A variant currently in service with the PLA Air Force is capable to carry over seven tonnes of armament, including four KD-88/YJ-83 anti-ship missiles.
The capability to carry long range anti-ship missiles, which can be launched more than 100 miles away from their targets, means that the JH-7 is able to utilize an asymmetric “hit and run” strategy before enemy air defenses can effectively engage with it. This doctrine was perhaps most aptly demonstrated by the Argentine Air Force during the 1982 Falklands War, as French Super Etendard strike aircraft armed with Exocet missiles sank two British warships.
One alternative to the JH-7 for Pakistan is its existing arsenal of cruise missiles, but this option has its own pitfalls. First, cruise missiles follow a predictable trajectory and are vulnerable to interception by India’s air defense network and fighter aircraft such as the Sukhoi 30 MKI. Second, the use of cruise missiles, even in an all-out conflict, presents a significant leap in terms of escalation. As such, a cruise missile attack by either New Delhi or Islamabad can lead to an eventual nuclear exchange.
Indian media has claimed that Pakistan is behind the locust attack that has swept the country.
Arnab Goswami, an anchor at Indian news channel Republic TV, made the bizarre allegation on air alleging that the locusts were sent from across the border as a plot to “destroy the country’s agriculture and in-turn the economy”.
Goswami went on to claim tthat the locusts would target Pakistan soldiers.
Indian news outlet The Economic Times, also ran a story probing how the possibility.
The article went as far as to warn New Delhi not to let its “guard down just yet” citing declassified CIA files of its Cold War in which animals were used to photograph sensitive sites in the former USSR.
“As CIA also trained ravens and dolphins, Pakistani locusts should merit closer examination too,” the report states.
The short-horned grasshoppers invaded agriculture fields in both Pakistan and India decimating crops and risking famine in the region.
The locusts entered into the southwestern Balochistan province, from neighboring Iran.
These insects, mainly originating from deserts, eat anything from bark to seeds and flowers while traveling up to a speed of 93.2 miles (149 kilometers) a day.
After destroying crops in western Indian states of Rajasthan, Gujarat, and Maharashtra, the locusts’ swarms are heading towards national capital Delhi in large numbers.
Indian police also released a pigeon belonging to a Pakistani fisherman after a probe found that the bird, which had flown across the contentious border between the nuclear-armed nations, was not a spy.
“The pigeon was set free yesterday (May 28) after nothing suspicious was found,” said Shailendra Mishra, a senior police official in Indian occupied Kashmir.
It was unclear where the bird was released and whether it flew back to its owner.
The Pakistani owner of the pigeon had urged India to return his bird, which Indian villagers turned over to police after discovering it.
After a spat of unarmed clashes along his country's roughly 2,100-mile with China last month, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke Tuesday with President Donald Trump on "the situation on the India-China border," according to a readout. The U.S. leader had offered to mediate the feud, but both New Delhi and Beijing have rejected the offer and maintained the situation was under control.
"At present, the overall situation in the China-India border areas is stable and controllable," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian told reporters in Beijing on Wednesday.
"On border-related issues, there have been sound mechanisms and channels of communication between China and India, and the two sides are capable of properly resolving relevant issues through dialogue and consultation," he added. "There is no need for any third party to intervene."
But there was no indication that the situation had yet been resolved. After the Communist Party's official publication Global Times reported last week that border forces had been armed with new tanks, drones and helicopters, state television reported that the Chinese military had recently held high-altitude infiltration exercises at the Tanggula Mountains in Tibet, the far western province that borders India.
It was along this contested boundary between China-controlled Aksai Chin and India-administered Ladakh that patrols from both sides clashed several times at the sites of Pangong Lake, Galwan Valley, Demchok and Daulat Beg Oldie. The skirmishes were prompted by India's recent development near the sensitive Line of Actual Control dividing the two countries.
Indian media, which first reported on the conflict and the buildup of 5,000 Chinese troops at the border, reported Tuesday that New Delhi had moved in more personnel to the area. The next day, however, violence was reported elsewhere in the Himalayan region of Kashmir.
The Indian military reported Wednesday that Pakistan had violated their Line of Control ceasefire with small arms fire and heavy mortar shelling against the town of Nowshera in India-administered Kashmir. Days earlier, the Pakistani armed forces claimed the shootdown of two Indian drones.
While India and China fought a brief 1960s war and clashed occasionally along their borders, New Delhi and Islamabad have fought multiple deadly conflicts over Kashmir since the partition in 1947. India and Pakistan engaged in a dogfight and cross-border strikes last year in the first escalation of its kind in decades after India accused Pakistan of harboring insurgents responsible for a suicide attack on security personnel, a charge the country denies.
The situation intensified after Modi reshaped the Indian constitution in August to assert federal rule over India-administered Kashmir and Ladakh. Both Pakistan and China condemned the move as "unacceptable," with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan warning the security and human rights implications could bring the two nuclear-armed rivals to war.
“I thought that was it for the evening, but word soon came that Shanahan (Patrick Shanahan, then Acting Secretary of Defense) and Dunford (Joe Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) wanted to talk to (Mike) Pompeo (US Secretary of State) and me about a ballooning crisis between India and Pakistan,” Bolton writes.
“After hours of phone calls, the crisis passed, perhaps because, in substance, there never really had been one,” he stresses.
“But when two nuclear powers spin up their military capabilities, it is best not to ignore it. No one else cared at the time, but the point was clear to me: This was what happened when people didn’t take nuclear proliferation from the likes of Iran and North Korea seriously,” he says.
In his scathing memoir, Bolton, who was fired by Trump as the US NSA on 10 September 2019, also talks about how some US bureaucrats were in favour of extending India a “waiver”, so that it could import oil from Iran, on which the Trump administration had imposed stringent economic sanctions.
“(State Department) bureaucrats found endless reasons to extend the other waivers, as ‘clientitis’ took hold. ‘But India is so important’, or ‘Japan is so important’, said officials, arguing the interests of ‘their’ countries rather than the US interests at stake,” Bolton writes.
“One of the worst cases involved India, which, like the others, was buying Iranian oil at prices well below the global market because Iran was so desperate to make sales,” he says, adding that India “complained” about being disadvantaged not only because of having to find new suppliers, but also because the new sources would insist on prevailing market prices.
“India’s making this argument was understandable, but it was incomprehensible that US bureaucrats echoed it sympathetically,” he writes.
Bolton goes on to describe a phone call between Trump and Pompeo where they were discussing asking India to bring its oil imports from Iran down to zero.
“In a phone call with Pompeo, Trump had not been sympathetic to India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, saying, ‘He’ll be okay’,” the former US NSA writes.
India completely stopped importing oil from Iran in May last year under US pressure.
Bolton also adds in his memoir that Trump was concerned over news reports emanating from India that New Delhi was planning to buy S-400 air-defence systems from Russia over America’s Patriot defence systems.
The Multi-System Operators (MSO) have decided to stop the broadcast of Indian news channels in Nepal. The decision will come into effect, immediately, on Thursday.
According to the operators’ latest decision, viewers will not have access to any Indian news channels, except for the Indian state owned Doordarshan news.
While some cable operators implemented the ban immediately, the others are yet to follow suit.
The move comes in the wake of unfounded reports on Nepal carried by some of the Indian news channels, including their defamatory ‘shows’ on the Nepali Prime Minister along with the Chinese envoy.
Earlier today, the spokesperson of the ruling Nepal Communist Party, Narayan Kaji Shrestha had slammed the Indian media for their ‘nonsense’ reports on matters related to Nepal and the Nepali government.
These measures follow the events wherein an Indian news channel, Zee Hindustan, broadcasted an imaginative and defamatory programme linking PM Oli with Chinese ambassador to Nepal Hou Yanqi.
Looking to the J-20, the fighter has one of the highest altitude ceilings in the world and can comfortably exceed Mach 2 speeds, meaning it will be able to attack the Rafale from above and provide its missiles with much more kinetic and gravitational potential energy. Its range and endurance are among the longest in the world, with the aircraft designed for long distance missions over the Pacific. More important than its flight performance advantages however are its technological ones. As a fifth generation fighter, the J-20 makes use of an advanced radar cross section reducing airframe. Although the fighters in peacetime often deploy with luneburg reflectors or external fuel tanks, making them easy to detect even at long ranges, when in ‘stealth mode’ the fighters have a small fraction of the radar cross section of any fourth generation jet making them extremely difficult to lock onto. The J-20 further benefits from advanced stealth coatings, an asset the Rafale lacks, which absorb radar waves and augment the stealth advantage already provided by the design of its airframe.
In terms of situational awareness both the Rafale and J-20 deploy AESA radars, with France and China being the first two countries after Japan and the U.S. to integrate such radars onto fighter aircraft. It is important to consider that China’s research and development budget is several times higher, which combined with a much larger and generally more sophisticated military industrial base is expected to provide it with more advanced radar and electronic warfare systems. Not only this, but the J-20’s sheer size, more than twice as large as the Rafale, means it can carry a much heavier radar. The latter factor alone guarantees a significant advantage in situational awareness for the Chinese jet. The J-20’s situational awareness is further augmented by integration of state of the art distributed aperture systems, which are currently deployed only by the Chinese fighter and the American F-35 and will provide an important advantage over the Rafale particularly at closer ranges.
------
Finally, looking to weaponry, the J-20 deploys the PL-15 air to air missile with a 250-300km range. The missile makes use of thrust vector controls and has a very high manoeuvrability, although its most outstanding feature is its use of an AESA radar which not only makes it much more difficult to jam than passive radar guided missiles, but also allows it to lock on to its targets at greater distances and better engage stealth targets at range. The Rafale currently deploys the ageing MICA air to air missile, which is effectively obsolete for long range engagements with a range of 80km - respectable for its time but now far surpassed by new Chinese and American technologies. India’s Rafales will, however, soon deploy the Meteor missile which is thought to have a range anywhere between 200-280km, a potential challenge to the PL-15. it remains uncertain whether the Meteor integrates an AESA radar as the PL-15 does, although given the cost equipping missiles with such radars would incur in Europe it is likely that the platform, like the latest American missiles, still uses a passively scanned radar.
Mahbubani, Kishore. Has China Won? (pp. 239-241). PublicAffairs. Kindle Edition.
Rebecca Hersman
Increasingly capable and intrusive digital information technologies, advanced dual-use military capabilities, and diffused global power structures will reshape future crises and conflicts between nuclear-armed adversaries and challenge traditional ways of thinking about escalation and stability. This emerging security environment will require new concepts and tools to manage the risk of unintended escalation and reduce nuclear dangers.
https://tnsr.org/2020/07/wormhole-escalation-in-the-new-nuclear-age/
----------
The India-Pakistan crisis in February 2019, which culminated with widespread disinformation and highly escalatory rhetoric on both sides demonstrates the potential “out of control” nature of sub-conventional information warfare. In the immediate aftermath of the terror attack in India’s Jammu and Kashmir state that killed 40 Indian paramilitary members, an aggressive disinformation campaign was launched to link the incident to India’s upcoming parliamentary elections.27Notably, disinformation spread via WhatsApp that claimed that a leader of the Indian National Congress party, the opposition party, had offered a bribe to the suicide bomber’s family.28 Additional narratives were also disseminated, many of which portrayed the opposition party as “being soft on militancy”29 in Kashmir. Because Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party had 1.2 million volunteers operating the party’s social media campaign for the elections, misinformation and false narratives about the escalating crisis with Pakistan spread rampantly. In the days following the attack in Kashmir, Facebook removed hundreds of fake accounts linked to Indian political parties and Pakistan’s military. Yet, this disinformation campaign ultimately reached over 2.8 million Facebook users.30 What was once intended to influence domestic politics to bolster support for the Bharatiya Janata Party seemed to spiral out of control even as both countries came to the brink of a broader military conflict.
----------
These strategies of strategic competition in the sub-conventional domain may not be entirely new, but the tools that enable them have transformed the strategic significance of the unconventional battlespace and the coercive power of hybrid warfare. Fueled by technological innovation — particularly in digital media-based technology as well as cyber operations, artificial intelligence (AI), and machine learning — today’s competitive landscape is more complex and dynamic than before. The growing number of weapons in the sub-conventional arsenal include a range of kinetic and non-kinetic coercive tools, tactics, and strategies. The rise of the cyber domain; connectivity of global commerce, finance, and communications; speed and penetration of the internet; and prevalence and intimacy of social media that reaches nearly 40 percent of the world’s population have reshaped the competitive domain now commonly called the “gray zone”.3 Today’s proxies and surrogates look more like online trolls who wander freely inside one’s digital homeland, enabled by advanced cyber and disinformation tools and weaponized social media, rather than armed guerillas fighting internal wars with black-market weaponry in distant territories. Moreover, these new forms of influence and information warfare are not the exclusive domain of great powers. Rather, the accessibility of information technology suggests a leveling of the playing field for great powers, non-state actors, states, and non-government entities alike.
Adding to Pakistan’s rocket artillery inventory, the Fatah-1 joins the A-100, Nasr, and Yarmouk-series. Like the Fatah-1, Pakistan manufactures the A-100, Nasr, and Yarmouk domestically.
But in contrast to its other rockets, Pakistan is positioning the Fatah-1 as an offensively oriented weapon. The ISPR says the Fatah-1 gives Pakistan the ability to precisely engage targets “deep in enemy territory.”
Background on the Fatah-1
The Fatah-1 seems to be one of two MLRS the Pakistan Ministry of Defence Production (MoDP) referenced in its annual yearbook in 2015-2016. [1] These were a base MLRS and an “extended-range” MLRS.
In 2019, the ISPR revealed the A-100 (which has a range of over 100 km) as an “indigenous” rocket. If the A-100 is the base MLRS, the 140-km Fatah-1 could be the “extended-range” MLRS design.
There is no confirmed connection between the A-100 and Fatah-1. However, Pakistan apparently localized the A-100, so it would make sense for it to develop the Fatah-1 as a subvariant. If the Fatah-1 is a variant of the A-100, then it could share the same caliber (300 mm) and warhead weight (reportedly 235 kg).
However, this apparent link is only speculation. The Fatah-1 could also be distinct design and, as a result, be a larger rocket design. For reference, the Chinese Weishi or WS-series of rockets have spun out into a diverse line-up of missiles of varying calibres, ranges, and applications.
The ISPR’s mention of “precision target engagement” indicates that Pakistan configured the Fatah-1 with a guidance system. It could be a GPS/INS (or BeiDou/INS)-based suite. This enables Pakistan to feed Fatah-1 missiles with location data of predetermined targets.
Thus, Pakistan could use the Fatah-1 as a long-range strike weapon, and potentially deploy it combination with precision-guided bombs (PGB), land-attack cruise missiles (LACM), and glide-munitions.
How Pakistan May Deploy the Fatah-1
Past footage of Pakistan’s artillery deployments show that it is using the SLC-2 counter-battery radar with the A-100E (which it was using before announcing a locally built variant). However, the range potential of the Fatah-1 exceeds the reported detection range of the SLC-2…
The WhatsApp chats also reveal that Goswami allegedly had prior information about some sensitive events including the Balakot airstrikes, three days before it happened.
In a massive development in the ongoing TRP scam case, a 500-page document of alleged chats of Republic TV's Arnab Goswami was allegedly leaked on social media. The alleged chats reveal damning information related to Goswami's proximity with the Prime Minister's office and members of the ruling government, his efforts to manipulate TRPs in his favour and seek help from the BJP government and much more. The chats allegedly show Goswami and Dasgupta discussing politicians, journalists, news networks, and the TRP system. In one of the alleged chats of February 14, 2019, Goswami says "This attack we have won like crazy." The message was sent on the same day when 40 CRPF personnel had lost their lives after a convoy of vehicles carrying security personnel on the Jammu Srinagar National Highway was attacked by a vehicle-borne suicide bomber at Lethpora in the Pulwama district, Jammu and Kashmir.
The alleged chats also reveal that Goswami had prior information about some sensitive events and details including the Balakot airstrikes, three days before it happened
In the alleged chats, there are several pages of Goswami conversing with former BARC CEO Partho Dasgupta. Several portions of the alleged chat have been leaked on social media. The alleged chats primarily show how Goswami asked for help to push the TRPs of the channel ahead of other news channels. The alleged chats also reveal that Goswami and Dasgupta met regularly, joked about politicians, discussed crucial political developments, and gossiped about journalists such as Rajdeep Sardesai ("he is losing his job"), Sagarika Ghose ("she is rotting in Times"), Aroon Purie ("part of a Cong propaganda machine"), Ashok Malik ("such a hypocrite"), Rajat Sharma (an "utter fool" with a "substandard channel"), Rahul Shivshankar ("an ass"), and business journalists ("all bloody bootlickers"). Some alleged chats from 2019 shows Goswami and Dasgupta discussing Bollywood actor Kangana Ranaut and how she helps in generating TRPs. "Kangana is a massive rating earner", Goswami says. Goswami's alleged WhatsApp chat was leaked on social media on the same day when the Bombay High Court adjourned the hearing in the TRP Scam case till 29 January. The Mumbai Police also said that they will not arrest Goswami until the next hearing.
https://thelogicalindian.com/trending/goswami-balakot-air-strikes-26172
By Dr Mehmood-ul-Hassan Khan
CONSTANT Indian “warmongering” has now forced Pakistan to take “concrete” steps to further strengthen its “Deterrence” “Capabilities (DCs)” and upgrade its “Escalation Control System (ECS). Most recently, according to Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Director General Major General Babar Iftikhar, Pakistan successfully conducted a test flight of “indigenously” developed “Fatah-1”, Guided Multi Launch Rocket System (GMLRS). The DG ISPR highlighted that the new weapon system is capable of delivering a “Conventional Warhead (CW) up-to a range of 140 kilometres (87 miles). It has further enhanced its “operational” and “tactical” capabilities in which its wide range of Short Range Ballistic Missiles (SRBM), Medium Range Ballistic Missiles ((MRBM), Battlefield Ballistic Missiles (BBM), Surface to Surface Cruise Missiles (SSCM) and Rocket Artillery would play a “decisive” role in the “war theater”. The newly developed GMLRS weapon system will give Pak Army capability of “Precision Target Engagement (PTE). Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee and COAS have also congratulated the participating troops, technicians, engineers and scientists on successful conduct of flight test.
Prime Minister of Pakistan Imran Khan and the COAS General Qamar Bajwa have been projecting Indian “hegemonic” and “destructive” designs as “potential” threat to regional peace, stability and harmony. Pakistan’s political leadership and defence forces have been on “alert” because of imminent threat of aggression from India since last year. Last February, amid heightened tension with India, Islamabad carried out a successful test of its “Ra’ad-II” cruise missile. In March 2020, Pakistan tested the “Ghaznavi Ballistic Missile (GBM), which has a range of 290 kilometers (180 miles), just days after India tested its submarine-launched K-4 ballistic missile. It is bitter reality that bilateral relations between the two neighbors have worsened since New Delhi revoked Jammu and Kashmir’s semi-autonomous status and imposed a lockdown in August 2019. Unfortunately, Indian massive arms purchasing “madness” and Strategic Security Deals (SSDs) with USA and others also flared up tension and have started a fresh arms race in South Asia.
The 140 Kilometers range capable Fatah-I GMLRS has a significant “tactical” and “strategic” importance because the majority of “Indian Air Force (IAF)” bases situate within its “range”. In this connection, the Multi-Launch Rocket System (MLRS) is basically a type of Rocket Artillery System (RAS) that contains multiple rockets assembled and fired from the same platform. The rocket fired from MLRS is “self-propelled” and has different capabilities and a larger effective range than Conventional Artillery Shell (CAS). It helps to “devastate” hell on the enemy by “striking” different rockets in Multiple Rapid Successions (MRS). It has lots of significance in terms of “operationalization” and “channelization” for Pakistan and defence forces of Pakistan. It has probably either Beidou or GPS inertial navigation system.
Deep analysis of “modern” and “advance” warfare system and weaponry reveals that during the war it will provide “comparative advantage” and essential “strategic cushion” to defence forces of Pakistan because, according to defence experts, distance of Fort Abbas (Pakistan) to Bikaner Air Force Station (IAF) is 130 kilometers. Distance of Lahore to Adampur Air Force Station (IAF) is 125 kilometers. Distance of Berwala to Sirsa Air Force Station (IAF) is 140 Kilometers.
By Dr Mehmood-ul-Hassan Khan
Moreover, distances from Haveli Lakha to Bhatinda, Kausar to Halmara, Shakargarh to Pathankot and last but not the least, Murree to Srinagar (Air Force Station, IAF) is 100, 120, 45 and 130 kilometers. It conceptualizes that all important strategic air force bases of India are now in the “line of fire” and fall within the range of recently fired Fatah-I GMLRS. In case of any “misadventure” of India, Pak Army can easily thrash all strategic air force bases of IAF in a “matter of minutes”.
According to various prominent defence analysts, the GMLRS Fatah-I the new system is very “fast”, “accurate”, “survivable” and “difficult” to intercept. It is primarily developed to hit targets without leaving behind the unexploded ordnance. The extended range guided MLRS is a developed variant of the guided MLRS family usually with an extended range of up to 150km. The development of a conventional system by Pakistan seems to be a response to the Indian focus on the development of its conventional capabilities, besides improving response options to India’s Cold Start Doctrine. President Dr Arif Alvi and Prime Minister Imran Khan also congratulated the participating troops and scientists on the success of the test flight.
For the further strengthening of air defence of Pakistan its Air Force marked a major progress as it announced beginning the production of the state-of-the-art JF-17 Thunder Block-III war jets, while also acquiring 14 dual seats JF-17 aircrafts. The JF-17 Thunder Block-III of the PAF will be operational with a new radar, electronic warfare system and better engine set-up and will be better than the Rafale aircraft acquired by India. So far, 4 Rafael war jets have been handed over to Indian Air Force (IAF) and remaining 36 will be delivered till 2022. Whereas, according to PAF officials, more than new 50 JF-17 Thunder Block-III will be included into PAF till 2024, 12 in each year. Moreover, two new variants of JF-17 Thunder Block-III have been in the operation units of PAC.
If we compare JF-17 Thunder Block-III with Indian “borrowed” French Rafale fighter jet we will come to know that Pakistan’s “indigenously” developed JF-17 Thunder Block-III has certain “superiority” in terms of “manoeuvrability”, “multi-roll orientation”, “modern avionic”, “advance electronic war fare”, “price” and above all “upgradation facility” and “overhauling” mechanism because Pakistan manufactures itself in the country while India buys from other countries. Furthermore, it has Superior Missile System (SMS) in terms of “design”, “range”, “effectiveness” and “accuracy” than Rafael war jet. It has all the combination of air-to-air, air-to-earth, and air-to-sea missiles making it a perfect “killing machine” in any war theater. It has superior Target Lock Apparatus (TLA) which has already showcased at Balakot “dog-fight”.
Moreover, if we compare its price, JF-17 Thunder Block-III is much “cheaper” and affordable than Indian Rafael war jet enabling the Air Force of Pakistan for its “huge” manufacturing in the days to come. In a recently-held Corps Commanders meeting the top military brass of Pakistan Army discussed the current security situation and noted that defeat of the complete threat spectrum is only possible through a comprehensive national effort, where all segments of the society play their rightful role. “Forum specially discussed the ongoing security situation along the LoC and Working Boundary & Eastern Border”. Being a prominent regional expert, I term firing and induction of Fatah-I GMLRS and JF-Thunder Block-II & production of its third version a giant step for the protection of national security.
https://eurasiantimes.com/powerful-jets-with-one-weakness-pakistani-jf-17-pilot-recalls-clash-with-indian-su-30mkis/
According to warfare experts, real-world dogfights don’t ever happen at close ranges, so the battle usually tilts in the favor of the side with potent BVR missiles. The aerial fights are largely decided, or largely influenced, by the BVR stage of the engagement. And in that arena, the capabilities of the JF-17 are competitive to the F-16 and Mirage.
The JF-17’s main weakness is its limited BVR loadout as it has the ability to only carry four BVR missiles, unlike the Indian Su-30MKI which can carry eight or more.
To close this air-to-air capability gap, the IAF is inducting the indigenously built all-weather Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Astra missile. It is also considering integrating the Israeli I-Derby Extended Range missile on its Su-30MKI fighter, IAF’s frontline fighter aircraft.
These missiles are going to be the mainstay of the Indian air-to-air capability, along with the MICA medium-range BVR, and the long-range Meteor missiles.
-------------
Several of these jets managed to cross the Line of Control (LoC), the de facto India-Pakistan border, releasing precision-guided glide bombs on Indian military installations in the Rajouri sector in Jammu and Kashmir.
The Indian Air Force (IAF) scrambled eight fighter aircraft, including two Russian Sukhoi-30 MKI, to intercept the Pakistani aircraft when the launch of several AIM-120 C5 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) was detected in their direction. The AMRAAMs, launched when the PAF jets were well inside the Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, surprised the IAF while they outranged their air-to-air missiles.
The two Su-30MKIs were caught within the 100-km range of the Pakistani AMRAAMs and managed to dodge them. The IAF fighters were saved from being shot but were unable to retaliate against the adversary F-16s as the Russian R-77 missiles they were armed with did not have enough range.
The IAF later said the Russian missiles were unable to deliver the advertised range and cannot engage targets farther than 80 km.
The aerial duel between India and Pakistan had proved that the IAF had to work on its air-to-air missile inventory, which is where the Pakistanis had outpaced them. An Indian MiG-21 Bison was shot down and its pilot captured, while the Indian government claimed its fighter aircraft had downed one Pakistani F-16 during the dogfight.
Pakistan’s Home-Grown JF-17 Fighters
Pakistan’s indigenously-produced JF-17 had proved its mettle during the February 27 dogfight with India, and it was this jet that had managed to shoot down IAF’s MiG-21 Bison, according to the PAF.
The single-engine light fighter is a relatively new combat aircraft and has been competing with fighters like the F-16, Saab Gripen, and MiG-29 for export contracts.
According to the pilots who have flown the JF-17, the aircraft scores high on reliability, flight characteristics, and maintenance. And according to the JF-17 pilot who participated in the February 27 dogfight, the aircraft was getting a radar lock-on Su-30MKI at more than 100-km ranges.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/pakistan-increases-defence-budget-by-6-to-usd88-billion_18322
https://twitter.com/haqsmusings/status/1405181275753771008?s=20
The Pakistan government has announced a defence budget of PKR1.37 trillion (USD8.78 billion) for fiscal year (FY) 2021–22. The allocation is a 6.2% increase over the original 2020–21 defence expenditure of PKR1.29 trillion.
The new defence budget will represent about 16% of the government's total expenditure for 2021–22 and has been announced against the backdrop of Pakistan's improving economy. In 2020–21 the country's GDP is forecast to climb by nearly 4%, despite the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic.
The bulk of Pakistan's defence budget is allocated to Defence Services, with a small amount for Defence Administration. The largest expenditure in the former appropriation is employee-related expenses, which in 2021–22 receives PKR481.6 billion, a 1% year-on-year increase.
Defence Services also includes physical assets and operating expenses, which in 2021–22 receive PKR391.5 billion and PKR327.1 billion, increases of 9% and 8% respectively. Expenses for civil works is PKR169.7 billion, while Defence Administration receives PKR3.27 billion.
In terms of the armed services, the Pakistan Army will receive PKR651.5 billion in 2021–22 (or nearly 48% of the total), while the Pakistan Air Force and Pakistan Navy have been allocated PKR291.1 billion and PKR148.7 billion (or 21% and 11%) respectively. The majority of the remainder is allocated for defence-wide requirements.
In a separate appropriation, Pakistan's Defence Production Division, which supports the national defence industry, will receive PKR1.74 billion in 2021–22, an increase of nearly 11%.
1. United States of America – $717bn
2. China – $177bn
3. India – $60.9bn
4. Germany – $53bn
5. Saudi Arabia – $51bn
6. United Kingdom – $49bn
7. France – $48bn
8. Japan – $47bn
9. Russia – $46.4bn
10. South Korea – $42bn
---------
3. India – $60.9bn
https://www.army-technology.com/features/biggest-military-budgets-world/
The Indian defence budget witnessed a year-on-year increase of 8% in 2019, driven by anti-terrorism measures and territorial tensions with Pakistan and China.
The capital and revenue expenditure allocations account for 34% and 66% of the total defence budget, respectively. The Indian Army has a 56% share in the latest defence allocation, followed by the Air Force (23%), Navy (15%), and DRDO (6%).
The latest budget allocations will allow the Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) to procure fighter aircraft, maritime patrol aircraft, attack helicopters, missiles, warships, submarines, main battle tanks (MBTs), and UAVs.
A French judge has been tasked with investigating a controversial 2016 multi-billion-dollar sale of Rafale fighter jets to India on “corruption” suspicions, the national financial prosecutors’ office (PNF) said Friday.
The 7.8-billion-euro ($9.3-billion) deal for 36 planes between the Indian government and French aircraft manufacturer Dassault has long been mired in corruption allegations.
The PNF had initially refused to investigate the sale, prompting French investigative website Mediapart to accuse it and the French Anti-corruption Agency of “burying” suspicions surrounding the September 2016 deal.
In April, Mediapart claimed “millions of euros of hidden commissions” were given to a go-between who helped Dassault conclude the sale, of which “some... could have been given as bribes” to Indian officials.
Dassault retorted that no wrong-doing was flagged in the group’s audits.
After the reports, France’s Sherpa NGO, which specialises in financial crime, filed an official complaint for “corruption” and “influence peddling” among other accusations, prompting an investigating magistrate to be designated to probe the deal.
Sherpa had already asked for an investigation into the deal in 2018, but the PNF took no action.
In this first complaint, the NGO had denounced the fact that Dassault chose Reliance Group as its Indian partner, a conglomerate headed by billionaire Anil Ambani, who is close to Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Dassault had initially won a contract in 2012 to supply 126 jets to India and had been negotiating with Indian aerospace company Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL).
By March 2015, those talks had almost reached a conclusion, according to Dassault.
But in April of that year, after Modi paid an official visit to France, the talks suddenly broke down to general surprise.
Reliance Group, which has no experience in aeronautics, replaced HAL and finalised a new contract for 36 jets.
In January 2016, at the time of the negotiations, Reliance had financed a film co-produced by Julie Gayet, the partner of Francois Hollande, who was president at the time.
Sherpa believes this could constitute “influence peddling”.
Hollande said there was no conflict of interest, saying France had not had any say in who Dassault’s Indian partner was.
France’s Le Monde newspaper also revealed that France in 2015 cancelled a 143.7-million-euro tax adjustment targeting a French firm belonging to Reliance, at the time when the deal was being negotiated.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi while addressing the event of the launch of seven state-run defence companies on the occasion of Vijaydashmi, said that he wants to robust India's defence capabilities in an 'Aatmnirbhar' way.
On the occasion of Vijaydashmi, Prime Minister Narendra Modi launched seven state run defence companies.
The government passed an order on 16th June to convert Ordnance Factory Board from a Government Department into seven 100% Government owned corporate entities.
The Prime Minster said, "India is taking new resolutions to build new future. Today, there is more transparency & trust in defence sector than ever before."
Stressing on the need for aatmnirbhar bharat, he said, "Under the aatmnirbhar bharat scheme, our goal is to make country world's biggest military power on its own.
He said that major reforms have been rolled out in defence sector; instead of the conventional stagnant policies, the single window system has been arranged now.
"After Independence, there was a need to upgrade ordnance factories, adopt new-age technologies, but it didn't get much attention," the Prime Minister said.
The Prime Minsiter's office informed that the new strategy for defence production will focus on, 'Import substitution, diversification, newer opportunities and exports'.
Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and representatives from the defence industry associations were present in the event.
The Government of India has decided to convert Ordnance Factory Board from a Government Department into seven 100% Government owned corporate entities, as a measure to improve 'self-reliance in the defence preparedness of the country'. This move will bring about enhanced functional autonomy, efficiency and will unleash new growth potential and innovation, the Prime Minister's Office released a video informing about it.
Rs. 65,000 Crore have been moved from the Ordinance Factory Board and allotted to these 7 companies, the video added.
It involves offshore companies, dubious contracts and “false” invoices. Mediapart can reveal that detectives from India's federal police force, the Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI), and colleagues from the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which fights money laundering, have had proof since October 2018 that French aviation firm Dassault paid at least 7.5 million euros (equivalent to just under 650 million rupees) in secret commissions to middleman Sushen Gupta. This was in the context of the French firm's long and ultimately successful attempt to secure a 7.8 billion-euro-deal in 2016 to sell 36 of its Rafale fighters to India.
The news about Wing Commander Abhinandan making a time-grade promotion to Group Captain made me think about what brought him notoriety. He is perhaps the only fighter pilot in history to be awarded a gallantry award — Vir Chakra, for being shot down over enemy territory after a questionable, if not imaginary, kill by him of an enemy warplane. The IAF and the Indian government doubled down on the story that the combat aircraft Abhinandan shot out of the skies was a Pakistani F-16 even when it had too many holes in it. He was welcomed back, feted as a war hero with the then Air Chief, BS Dhanoa, even flying a celebratory sortie with him in a twin-seater MiG-21 Bison. Such are the small successes IAF is now reduced to.
Not to go into the details of this episode, but what really happened? In broad brush terms, Abhinandan was obviously hotdoggin’ it, picked up an adversary aircraft on his radar, went after it in hot pursuit, fired off a shortrange R-60 air-to-air missile. That missile hit something; he claimed it was an F-16. In the heat of the pursuit, he little realized he had intruded into Pakistani airspace and, too late to maneuver and scoot out of trouble, found himself and his MiG-21 shot down by a PAF plane that had him in its “cone”.
But it was not an F-16. The fact that no team from Lockheed Martin — producer of the F-16 aircraft, hightailed it to India or Pakistan to ascertain the details of that engagement is proof enough that no hardware of their’s was involved.
If it was not a PAF F-16, many IAF veterans speculate what Abhinandan had in his sights was an ex- Chinese-built JF-17. Two parachutes were observed floating down after that fighting incident, conforming to the fact of two pilots of two downed aircraft. So, why have Abhinandan and the IAF stuck to the F-16 story? Because, well, there is more glory in shooting down a frontline F-16 than a Chinese ripoff of a Russian MiG-21 — the JF-17.
By
EurAsian Times Desk
October 21, 2021
Pakistan Army’s air defense unit has recently inducted a variant of the Chinese-made HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system most likely to be deployed along the LOC. China had earlier deployed these missiles along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), its de facto border with India.
https://eurasiantimes.com/new-headache-for-india-chinas-most-powerful-missile-defense-system-likely-to-be-deployed-along-both-lac-loc/
The HQ-9/P (P for Pakistan) high-to-medium air defense system (HIMADS) was inducted into the Pakistan Army at a ceremony held at the Army Air Defence Centre, Karachi. Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Qamar Javed Bajwa was in attendance at the event.
------------------------
Powered By ‘On The Fly’ Algo, China Says Its AI-Controlled Hypersonic Missiles Can Hit Targets With 10 Times More Accuracy
The latest defense collaboration between the ‘iron brothers’, Pakistan and China, may be seen as a fresh threat to India, whose military has long been strategizing to tackle two-front war challenges.
The Hóng Qí-9 (HQ-9), literally the ‘Red Banner-9’, is a Chinese medium- to long-range, active radar homing SAM system. The weapon uses an HT-233 passive electronically scanned array (PESA) radar system, which has a detection range of 120 km with a tracking range of 90 km.
The system has four different types of radar — Type 120 low-altitude acquisition radar, Type 305A 3D acquisition radar, Type 305B 3D acquisition radar, and H-200 mobile engagement radar. In terms of capability, HQ-9 can be compared with the Russian S-300 and American Patriot air defense systems.
The EurAsian Times had earlier speculated that HQ-9 missile battery could feature one 200 kW Diesel generator truck, and eight transporter erector launchers (TELs) each with 4 missiles, totaling 32 rounds ready to fire.
A variety of equipment can be added to the system to make larger, more capable formations. Among the equipment that can be added is one TWS-312 command post, one site survey vehicle based on the Dongfeng EQ2050, additional transporter/ loader vehicles with each vehicle housing four missile TELs based on Tai’an TAS5380, etc.
Big Breakthroughs: After Landing Taikonauts On ‘Space Station’, China Tests World’s ‘Largest Solid-Fuel Rocket Engine’
Various units of these highly mobile systems have finished conducting long-distance maneuvers and drills.
China has developed multiple variants of this SAM system. The Hǎi Hóng Qí-9, literally the ‘Sea Red Banner-9’, is HQ-9’s naval variant. It seems to be quite identical to the land-based version.
China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has deployed the HHQ-9 in its Type 052C Lanzhou-class destroyer in Vertical Launch System or VLS tubes.
An anti-radiation variant of the missile system has also been designed and developed by China. The export designation for the air defense version is Fang Dun-2000 (FD-2000), literally meaning defensive shield. Its is developed by China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corporation (CPMIEC). It comes with anti-stealth capability.
Meanwhile, the HQ-9A version of the missile features advanced electronic equipment and software that provides it with increased accuracy and probability of kill. The HQ-9B has a longer range and is equipped with an extra seeker.
This new vertical launch, ground-to-air missile defense system has a target range of over 250 km and up to a height of 50km.
The naval variants of the missile are HHQ-9A and HHQ-9B. HQ-9C is currently under development. It is expected to be equipped with fully active radar homing.
Meet Pakistan’s Maritime Patrol Aircraft That Reportedly Detected Indian Navy Submarine Near Karachi
India in a statement said a technical malfunction led to the missile being fired into neighbouring Pakistan.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/11/india-says-it-accidentally-fired-missile-into-pakistan
“On 9 March 2022, in the course of a routine maintenance, a technical malfunction led to the accidental firing of a missile,” the Indian ministry of defence said in a statement on Friday.
“It is learnt that the missile landed in an area of Pakistan. While the incident is deeply regrettable, it is also a matter of relief that there has been no loss of life due to the accident.”
The ministry said the government had “taken a serious view and ordered a high-level Court of Enquiry” into the incident.
The statement came hours after Islamabad’s foreign ministry condemned what it called an “unprovoked violation of its airspace by an Indian origin ‘super-sonic flying object'”.
India’s charge d’affaires in Islamabad had been summoned to the foreign office for a “strong protest”, it added.
The “imprudent launch” had damaged property on the ground and put at risk civilian lives and aircraft in Pakistani airspace, it said, accusing India of “callousness towards regional peace and stability”.
Military experts have in the past warned of the risk of accidents or miscalculations by the neighbours, which have fought three wars and have engaged in numerous military clashes, most recently in 2019 which saw the air forces of the two engage in combat.
Both nations have nuclear weapons.
Pakistani military spokesman Major-General Babar Iftikhar said in a late evening news conference on Thursday that a “high-speed flying object” crashed near the eastern city of Mian Channu and originated from the northern Indian city of Sirsa, in Haryana state near New Delhi.
“The flight path of this object endangered many national and international passenger flights both in Indian and Pakistani airspace as well as human life and property of ground,” he said.
A Pakistan air force official said the object travelled at an altitude of 12,200 metres (40,000 feet), at Mach 3, and flew 124km (77 miles) in Pakistani airsp
@SushantSin
India's 'accidental firing' of Brahmos has raised serious questions which can't be dealt in the same manner, by obstruction and obfuscation of facts, as has been done with Balakot airstrike and Ladakh border crisis. The consequences are unimaginable. My piece in
@DeccanHerald
https://twitter.com/SushantSin/status/1502836352886337538?s=20&t=d2nnmzN4ox9KkyIswaiQbA
-------------
Christopher Clary
@clary_co
“Pakistan has claimed that the DGMO hotline wasn’t activated to inform it of the accidental firing of the missile and its trajectory. This has been neither disputed nor explained by the Indian side.”
https://twitter.com/clary_co/status/1502845103446147079?s=20&t=d2nnmzN4ox9KkyIswaiQbA
Read more at: https://www.deccanherald.com/national/a-broken-arrow-raises-serious-questions-1090769.html
By Sushant Singh, Senior Fellow, Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi
------
Pakistan has claimed that the DGMO-level hotline wasn’t activated to inform it of the accidental firing of the missile and its trajectory. This has been neither disputed nor explained by the Indian side.
India's 'accidental firing' of Brahmos has raised serious questions which can't be dealt in the same manner, by obstruction and obfuscation of facts, as has been done with Balakot airstrike and Ladakh border crisis. The consequences are unimaginable.
India and Pakistan, as subcontinental neighbours, do not have the luxury of time for considered decision-making when missiles are flying in either direction. Consider that the entire flight time of this accidently fired missile was about six minutes. That is about the time available for the decision-makers in either country to take a call. Essentially, 360 seconds are all that are available to Islamabad and New Delhi between doing nothing or going to war, accidental and unintended.
India, as the bigger country, has the cushion of geography, while Pakistan, driven by the insecurity of a small territory, has a nuclear security doctrine of ‘first use’. To avoid the destruction of its arsenal and delivery systems by a pre-emptive Indian strike, it deems it necessary to strike India first in the event of hostilities threatening to break out. This makes the situation more dangerous in the subcontinent.
An environment of relative calm between India and Pakistan, with a ceasefire on the LoC in Kashmir, definitely helped the Pakistani military keep its cool in the face of an Indian missile. Would it have reacted so maturely in the midst of military or political tensions? Or can Pakistan be blamed if they assume that certain rogue elements had taken control of the missile system in India and fired on it? Crucially, if the missile had a self-destruct feature, why wasn’t it activated? Should we expect every junior Pakistani military officer to display the same sagacity and courage as the Soviet naval officer Vasili Arkhipov, the Brigade Chief of Staff on submarine B-59, who refused to fire a nuclear missile and prevented a nuclear disaster in 1962? Or of the Soviet military duty officer Stanislav Petrov who, on seeing an early-warning system showing an incoming US strike, with about half-a-dozen missiles, in the early hours of September 26, 1983, made the call – in the face of incomplete information and doubt -- that it was a system malfunction, instead of reporting it to his superiors as enemy missile launches?
-----------------------
The lives of 1.6 billion people of India and Pakistan cannot be dependent on such lucky breaks. It is for these reasons – the destructive capacity of nuclear weapons, the minimal time available to take a decision, and Pakistan’s strategic mindset – accidents are unacceptable. Questions raised in western capitals about the safety and security of our nuclear weapon systems and processes were regularly dismissed by New Delhi by citing its impeccable track-record and supposedly fool-proof systems. It allowed India, despite the concerted efforts of certain American experts, to de-hyphenate itself from Pakistan’s poor track record of proliferation, its weak security systems always seen to be at risk of being infiltrated by religious religious extremists in uniform. On issues of nuclear safety, Pakistan has always attempted to bracket India with itself, but has often failed. But now, we have come out looking like either bumbling idiots or out of control, while the Pakistanis have come out as being both capable and mature. India can dismiss all Pakistani allegations but there will be renewed questions from the US non-proliferation lobby that are going to be tougher for New Delhi to respond to.
https://bharatkarnad.com/2022/03/14/even-if-authorised-missile-firing-makes-no-sense/
India on Friday said a missile that landed in Pakistan on March 9 was fired ‘accidentally’ due to a technical malfunction. The defence ministry ordered a court of inquiry into the incident a day after Pakistan said a high-speed projectile launched from India entered its airspace and fell near Mian Channu in Khanewal district.
Bharat Karnad, emeritus professor of national security studies at the Centre for Policy Research, the New Delhi think-tank, tells Rediff.com Senior Contributor Rashme Sehgal.
While the defence ministry has explained that the missile fired into Pakistan was due to a ‘technical malfunction’, former naval chief Admiral Arun Prakash has tweeted that these missiles can never be launched accidentally but only when authorised.What does that indicate?
The Admiral is right. This seems like an unauthorised firing. Further, even if authorised, the firing makes no sense, because there was no active warhead. So, what was the aim?
This missile was accidentally fired on March 9, one day before the counting of votes of the assembly elections. Could there be a co-relation between these two events?
No. The co-relation is only in the minds of the conspiracy inclined, and there is no dearth of those in the country.
The missile mishap occurred on March 9, but the government came up with a clarification on March 11. Why this delay?
Well, the government was first waiting for a formal Pakistani protest. And it took another day to craft a diplomatic apology.
What does this say about their safety mechanisms and the technical prowess in the way these dangerous weapons are being maintained in India?
That’s precisely the worry attending on this misfiring.
Indeed, the Pakistani government was quick to capitalise on this incident of the Brahmos missile going astray.
Prime Minister Imran Khan’s National Secrity Adviser Dr Moeed Yusuf publicly expressed concern and asked the international community to note the fairly casual manner in which missiles are operated.by the Indian armed forces.
He went on, understandably, to extend that concern to India’s handling of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems.
Such criticism is bound to have an effect on international opinion and hurt India’s self-confessed status as a ‘responsible State’.
The defence ministry seems to have landed with egg on its face.
A whole barnyard full of eggs, in fact. This is quite shocking and simply cannot be credibly explained away by referring to a ‘technical glitch’.
The triggering mechanism is a hardy piece of work including a firing sequence and a final authorisation.
How this process was obviated is a mystery.
Pakistan’s foreign office summoned India’s charge d’affaires in Islamabad to lodge a warning that this unprovoked violation of its airspace could have endangered passenger flights and civilian lives.
Well, yeah, anything could have happened, including the missile, even with a dummy warhead, kinetically taking out a passenger aircraft.
In your view, could this have been a BrahMos cruise missile possessing nuclear capability?
The Brahmos missile has interchangeable warheads and can carry both conventional and nuclear weapons.
But most forward-deployed Indian cruise missiles are conventionally armed.
If it was a nuclear missile — albeit unarmed — is there a possibility in the future that the command and control system could fail again in the future which could have dangerous consequences for both nations?
Unless the government clarifies the nature of the ‘technical glitch’ everything is in the realm of speculation. That could include a faulty command and control system.
By Sameer Lalwani
Why haven’t China’s increasing Indian Ocean capabilities raised more alarm bells in Washington, given the laser focus on China these days? One reason is that the U.S. has concentrated its efforts on East Asia, particularly the possibility of conflict in the Taiwan Strait. Another problem, however, is that the U.S. has long assumed India would be a counterweight to China in the Indian Ocean. Indeed, a deeper partnership with India — the world’s largest democracy, on an upward economic trajectory, seemingly perfectly positioned to counter China on land and at sea — has been something of a holy grail for at least four U.S. administrations.
Yet what former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton a decade ago called a “strategic bet” on India does not seem to be paying off. Indian naval and political power in the Indian Ocean region is faltering, giving way to influence by Beijing. Many of these problems are of India’s own making. But part of the problem is the way the U.S. has managed its relationship with New Delhi. The India relationship has become a case study of a partnership between two nations with naturally aligned geostrategic interests that is nonetheless faltering because of a lack of clear priorities, misaligned incentives, and a frequent inability to understand what the other side really wants.
Ultimately, it’s New Delhi that will need to make the most significant course corrections. But the U.S. can also help ensure this bet pays off, with clearer prioritization, incentives and expectations for what could be one of the most important security partnerships of the 21st century. To check China’s rising influence in the Indian Ocean, Washington needs a comprehensive strategy for the region and a revitalized approach to its partnership with India that prioritizes maritime security, bolsters India’s defense technologies and sets bold expectations for a country whose potential against the China challenge has yet to be realized.
--------
Part of the reason the Indian Ocean hasn’t received as much attention as it should is that many U.S. defense experts assume or hope they can rely on India to automatically be a “counterweight” to China in this region. For over two decades, Washington has been enamored with the idea that India, at one point exceeding 8 percent economic growth annually, would become a military powerhouse that could “frustrate China’s hegemonic ambitions.” The U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy released in February counts on India to be “a net security provider,” just as previous administrations officially banked on the Indian Navy taking a “leading role in maintaining Indian Ocean security.” Some former Trump administration officials even want to formalize a Japan-style alliance.
But India’s ability to play this role is in serious doubt. Indian officials had targeted a 200-ship navy by 2023, but today, the Indian Navy acknowledges it will be fortunate to reach 170 total ships sometime in the 2030s. Even if it does, analysts worry India may still be held back by a fleet that’s continuously underfunded and 60 percent obsolescent with serious deficiencies in equipment and manpower. As India’s navy slides in the opposite direction of China’s, it doesn’t help that India’s political influence in its neighborhood has also wobbled. Within a decade, India may not even be able to protect its own backyard against Chinese military coercion at sea just as on land.
True, India’s economy is undeniably large. According to the International Monetary Fund, India is the world’s third-largest economy in purchasing-power-parity terms, with a GDP of $10 trillion, behind China ($27 trillion) and the United States ($23 trillion). At market exchange rates, its GDP of $3 trillion makes it the sixth-largest economy, behind the US, China, Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom.
But India’s economic size has not translated into commensurate military strength. Part of the problem is simple geography. Bismarck supposedly said that the US is bordered on two sides by weak neighbors and on two sides by fish. India, however, does not enjoy such splendid isolation. Ever since independence, it has been confronted on its Western frontier by Pakistan, a highly armed, chronically hostile, and often military-ruled neighbor.
More recently, India’s northern neighbor, China, also has become aggressive, repudiating the territorial status quo, occupying contested land in the Himalayas, reclaiming territory in the east, and building up a large military presence along India’s borders. So, India may have fish for neighbors along its long peninsular coast, but on land it faces major security challenges on two fronts.
Despite these challenges and its sizable economy, India has struggled to generate adequate military resources. Defense expenditure is notoriously difficult to estimate, especially for China and Pakistan, which have opaque political systems. But annual combined defense spending by India’s two adversaries is likely to be three times the $70-75 billion that India spends. And the effective gap is probably even larger, because India’s politically driven emphasis on military manpower has crowded out spending on military technology. In short, India may have a large economy, but dangerous geography and domestic politics have left it militarily vulnerable.
Then there is the question of market size. As Pennsylvania State University’s Shoumitro Chatterjee and one of us (Subramanian) have shown, India’s middle-class market for consumption is much smaller than the $3 trillion headline GDP number suggests, because many people have limited purchasing power while a smaller number of well-off people tend to save a lot. In fact, the effective size of India’s consumer market is less than $1 trillion, far smaller than China’s and even smaller relative to the potential world export market of nearly $30 trillion.
---------------
India needs to accept, and act in line with, its current status as a middling power. Over time, rapid and sustained economic growth could make India the major power it aspires to be. Until then, it must look past the illusion of size and reconcile itself with strategic realities.
Beijing and Islamabad grow closer with eye on mutual rival
https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/China-ramps-up-arms-exports-to-Pakistan-aiming-to-squeeze-India
BEIJING/NEW DELHI -- From the sale of stealth fighters to submarines, China is accelerating its defense cooperation with Pakistan in a bid to exert pressure on India, a rival in border disputes with both.
China is believed to want to expand its influence in South Asia while the U.S. and Europe are focused on the war in Ukraine. Beijing "stands ready to provide assistance within its capacity for Pakistan to overcome difficulties and recover its economy," Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan in a Tuesday meeting, according to China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Khan expressed hopes for joint achievements and cooperation "in all fields," the ministry said. Ukraine was among the other topics discussed.
China this month delivered six J-10CE fighter jets to Pakistan, the Communist Party-affiliated Global Times has reported. An update to China's homegrown J-10s, they are a key part of the Chinese air force and often fly into Taiwan's air defense identification zone.
The J-10CE is a so-called 4.5-generation fighter, placing it somewhere between the F-15s used widely by Japan and the U.S. and F-35 stealth fighters in terms of capability. The delivered jets later took part in a military parade in Pakistan.
Pakistan this month is also adding 50 new JF-17 fighters, which were developed jointly with China. They do not match the performance of the J-10CE but do come with near-stealth capability.
India recently deployed the Russian S-400 missile defense system with an eye toward Pakistan. China looks to bolster its response to potential Indian air operations through greater cooperation with Pakistan.
China is actively contributing to improvements in Pakistan's navy as well, concerned that the Indian military could wield greater clout in key Indo-Pacific sea lanes. Pakistan in January inducted a Chinese-built Type 054 frigate, which is designed for anti-surface, anti-air and anti-submarine warfare.
"Pakistan is reportedly also planning to purchase from China eight submarines, which Pakistan is positioning as the 'backbone of the Navy,'" Japan's Ministry of Defense said in its 2021 white paper. "Four will be built in China, with the remainder to be built in Pakistan."
Sino-Indian relations have deteriorated since the deadly 2020 border clash in the Himalayas. India also announced a diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Olympics at the last minute after a Chinese soldier who had been involved in the fighting was chosen as a torchbearer.
Chinese President Xi Jinping invited Khan to the Olympics' opening ceremony. At a Feb. 6 summit, Xi told Khan that bilateral ties had gained greater strategic significance amid global turbulence and transformation. He expressed firm support for Pakistan's sovereignty -- a likely signal that China stands with Pakistan in the latter's own border dispute with India.
Khan expressed hopes for greater cooperation with China. No force can stop China's advance, he said.
AESA is a second-generation phased radar in which radio waves of multiple frequencies can be sent in different directions without moving the antenna. AESA radars allow aircraft and ships to send powerful signals while remaining stealthy and resistant to jamming.
According to details, Pakistan’s local AESA radar is being developed by the Air Weapon Complex (AWC), an R&D facility of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF), in collaboration with the National University of Science and Technology (NUST).
Although complete details of the radar are unavailable at the moment, sources have claimed that the indigenously developed AESA radar will use the latest gallium nitride (GaN) transmit and receive modules that are owned by only a few countries.
AWC reportedly designed two types of GaN transmit and receive modules- S-band and X-band- in late 2019 and early 2020 respectively.
Both modules have different functionalities. The S-band module is used in ground-based and airborne search radars for target search and detection. On the other hand, the X-band module is associated with fire control due to its superior resolution.
The indigenous AESA radar is expected to officially make its debut in the JF-17 Block 4 fighter jet or the fifth-generation stealth fighter jet being developed under Project Azm.
ARZAN TARAPORE
https://carnegieindia.org/2020/08/10/army-in-indian-military-strategy-rethink-doctrine-or-risk-irrelevance-pub-82426
India’s military strategy has been dominated by an orthodox offensive doctrine—a method of using force that favors large formations tasked with punitive incursions into enemy territory. This doctrine is orthodox in its preference for large combined-arms army formations, usually operating with minimal coordination with other services and relatively autonomously from its political masters. It is offensive in its military aims of imposing a punitive cost on the enemy––usually in the form of capturing territory for the purposes of gaining leverage in postwar negotiations––even if it is usually deployed in the service of a strategically defensive policy of maintaining the territorial status quo. And it is a doctrine in that it represents an enduring set of principles governing the Indian Army’s use of force, regardless of the scarcity of public doctrinal publications.
This paper argues that the stubborn dominance of the orthodox offensive doctrine, even in the face of drastic changes in India’s strategic environment, renders the military a less useful tool of national policy. In the two decades since India fought its last war in and around the district of Kargil in 1999, three major strategic trends have fundamentally changed India’s security environment: nuclear deterrence has made major conventional war unlikely; China’s military power and assertiveness now pose an unprecedented threat; and radical new technologies have redefined the military state of the art. India’s security policy has not kept pace. Given the balance of military power on India’s northern borders, India cannot decisively defeat either Pakistan or China on the battlefield. Without the ability to impose such unacceptable costs, India’s doctrine will not deter its rivals, which both have significant resolve to bear the costs of conflict. The continued pursuit of large, offensive military options also raises the risk that its enemies will rely on escalatory—even nuclear—responses. And because the doctrine demands a force structure of large ground-holding formations, it pulls scarce resources away from modernization and regional force projection—a problem made especially acute as the Indian government makes tough economic choices amid the coronavirus pandemic.
The remainder of this paper is divided into five parts. First, it surveys the history of India’s military strategy, showing its reliance on ground forces and the orthodox offensive doctrine. Second, it outlines the three major strategic changes that have upended India’s security environment in the twenty-first century. Third, it analyzes the reasons why India’s strategy and doctrine have failed to adapt. Fourth, the paper argues that India’s military is less useful in this new environment. Finally, the paper concludes with some recommendations for the Indian Army.
ARZAN TARAPORE
https://carnegieindia.org/2020/08/10/army-in-indian-military-strategy-rethink-doctrine-or-risk-irrelevance-pub-82426
Modern India’s military strategy has been dominated by ground forces managing threats on its northern continental periphery. Air power has traditionally been used only as a supporting adjunct to land power, rather than an independent strategic tool; and India has not projected significant maritime force despite a notable history of seafaring and influence across the Indian Ocean region. Historically, there were sound reasons for this emphasis on ground forces. Wedged between two powerful and hostile neighbors, Pakistan and China, independent India fought five land wars along its northern land borders. Its most formative modern episodes were entirely or almost entirely ground-force actions. This includes its most searing defeat against China in 1962 and its most celebrated victory, in East Pakistan in 1971. India’s most immediate security threats today, from cross-border terrorism in the northern territories of Jammu and Kashmir to periodic incursions across its disputed boundary with China, are managed by the army and ground-force paramilitaries. To handle all this, the army attracts an ever-growing share of the military budget and resources. Despite its potential as a hybrid continental-maritime power, India’s security policy is dominated by ground forces.
-------
The orthodox offensive doctrine took center stage by the mid-1960s, propelled by two formative experiences that taught the Indian military the limits of the British Raj’s frontier defense doctrine.2 The first Kashmir war, in 1947–48, was a light-infantry conflict to gain control of the disputed territory.3 India quickly seized control of Srinagar and the Kashmir Valley, with most fighting thereafter occurring in the surrounding mountainous terrain. This reduced the scope for using combined arms, let alone other services. Air power did, however, play a vital—if not decisive—role in the war, when India used an air assault on Srinagar airport to launch its initial deployment into Kashmir. This allowed Indian forces to seize the initiative, establish and reinforce their military presence in the vital valley before Pakistan could, and resupply its lead forces. Without that initial use of air power, India would not have been able to make its timely intervention or sustain its operations in Kashmir. The bulk of the subsequent inconclusive fighting was done by India’s newly inherited ground forces. They secured ground lines of communication through Jammu to sustain the fight in the following months and pressed out of the valley to fight for control in the mountains until a ceasefire suspended hostilities.
-----
In response to the Cold Start doctrine, Pakistan has made tactical nuclear weapons an integral part of its military strategy and consistently warns that it will not hesitate to escalate a crisis past the nuclear threshold. Perhaps to preclude the possibility of a Pakistani nuclear attack, Indian strategists and planners may be developing a counterforce option to preemptively defang Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.63 A counterforce element of a cost imposition strategy—a contentious but plausible supposition—would multiply the risks already inherent in its orthodox offensive doctrine, especially while India’s counterforce capabilities are still under development and unproven. In response to India’s growing military presence near the Line of Actual Control, China has reinforced its border deployments and periodically seeks to revise the territorial status quo with provocative incursions, as it did most recently from April 2020.64
https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2022/06/10/pakistan-boosts-defense-budget-by-nearly-6/
Though mainly covering salary increases, some of the extra money is earmarked for infrastructure such as the continued development of Jinnah Naval Base in Ormara, the Navy’s main operational base, and a naval air base in Turbat.
Official figures state the 83 billion rupee (U.S. $412 million) increase pushes the defense budget up to nearly 1.45 trillion rupees (U.S. $7.19 billion). That implies the 2021 defense budget was about $7.49 billion.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, a Sweden-based think think, found that Pakistan’s military-related expenditures for 2021 came to $11.3 billion. However, the difference could come down to how the procurement budget is created.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, a Sweden-based think think, found that Pakistan’s military-related expenditures for 2021 came to $11.3 billion (including pensions). However, the difference could come down to how the procurement budget is created.
Amid the ongoing threat of domestic terrorism and the need to maintain a credible deterrent against India, the fate of Pakistan’s economy does not bode well, according to Pakistan expert Claude Rakisits, who teaches at the Australian National University.
“Pakistan’s economic situation is in dire straits. This makes it difficult for the government to buy new hardware or even plan ahead for new acquisitions,” he said.
Brian Cloughley, an analyst and former Australian defense attache to Islamabad, has tracked developments in Pakistan for decades, and he doubts the government’s fiscal approach will be different from previous ones that failed to address underlying issues, including the country’s elite effectively ruling for their own benefit, leading to Pakistan’s cycle of economic woes.
“It is likely, however, that there will be announcement of deferment of expenditure plans for at least some acquisitions, if only to try to convince the [World Bank and International Monetary Fund] that their present, fairly benevolent policy on Pakistan should be maintained,” he said.
But he also believes Pakistan can likely rely on its allies and other friendly nations to carry the load. “The Chinese and the Saudis will probably continue to support Pakistan’s military posture and plans, and the current — most serious — economic crisis will have little effect on the military overall.”
Rakisits agreed that Pakistan might rely on China, although Beijing will likely step in for its own benefit.
“China has a vital interest in ensuring that not only does Pakistan’s economic situation not get worse, which could threaten the overall stability of the country and the viability of its CPEC project, but that it is in a position to maintain its defense capability,” Rakisits said, referring to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which is meant to improve infrastructure to strengthen trade between the two countries.
“Accordingly, It’s almost certain that Beijing will assist Pakistan financially in one way or another, especially in light of the West’s increased interest in selling military hardware to India,” he added.
@Aadil_Jillani
Military Pension should be the part of Defense Budget, Effectively, its 2nd biggest Expense (Rs1918 bln) after Interest payments in Current Expenditure, Eats up 27.37% of Tax Revenues needs to "Rationalize" for creating Fiscal Space at the Centre!
https://twitter.com/Aadil_Jillani/status/1535614986608836609?s=20&t=y-XpZaW5OkxRDpBFIf2xnQ
---------------
@Sabbandkardo
military pension is almost 3 times civilian pension for fed govt
https://twitter.com/Sabbandkardo/status/1535307827971072002?s=20&t=y-XpZaW5OkxRDpBFIf2xnQ
Sushant Singh
@SushantSin
The motivations for bringing in the short-term contractual recruitment of (Indian) soldiers are financial but its consequences will be borne by the military and the society. Agnipath scheme belies any understanding of soldiering as a profession of honour. My piece in today's
@the_hindu
https://twitter.com/SushantSin/status/1538000288061067264?s=20&t=6pCpevB_ZI6AC0tolj3KqA
The OROP demand became tricky to fulfil but it was officially instituted in November 2015 for more than 25 lakh defence pensioners.
It came with an immediate annual financial implication of ₹7,123.38 crore and the actual arrears from July 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015 were ₹10,392.35 crore.
The financial burden increased cumulatively over time and has substantially increased the budgetary expenditure on defence pensions.
In the current financial year, ₹1,19,696 crore has been budgeted for pensions, along with another ₹1,63,453 crore for salaries —that is 54% of the allocation for the Defence Ministry.
It has been argued that the savings in the pensions bill — which will show up on the books only after a couple of decades — would be directed towards the modernisation of defence forces.
The armed forces do not have that kind of time available to them to postpone their already long-delayed modernization.
The Indian Air Force is already down to 30 squadrons of fighter jets against the 42 squadrons it needs, and the Indian Navy is at 130 ships when its vision was to be a 200 ship navy; the Indian Army is already short of 1,00,000 soldiers.
The announcement of the Agniveer scheme is an implicit acknowledgement that the Indian the economy is incapable of supporting the armed forces that India needs.
It faces an active military threat from two adversaries, China and Pakistan, and the internal security challenges in Kashmir and the northeastern States.
Hence we must not resort to shrinking the military and rather must expand the economy to support the military and its needs.
Damaging consequences
Delayed consequences might be seen at operational levels of the Military especially the Navy and the Air Force which requires specialization in various areas.
The training infrastructure, administrative working, etc. might be insufficient currently to the handle retention, release and recruitment of huge number of young soldiers.
In the Agnipath pral, the class-based recruitment has been replaced with an all-India all-class recruitment. The reasons for this will strike at the core of the organizational management, leadership structures and operating philosophy of the Indian Army.
Replacing the social identity of the soldiers with a purely professional identity would bring its own challenges in a tradition-bound army.
There will be major problems in training, integrating and deploying soldiers with different levels of experience and motivations.
The criterion of identifying the 25% short-term contracted soldiers to be retained could result in unhealthy competition.
An organisation that depends on trust, camaraderie and esprit de corps could end up grappling with rivalries and jealousies amongst winners and losers, especially in their final year of the contract.
just like the OROP issue, this could become a politically attractive demand for longer tenures and pensions to be picked up by the Opposition parties. Over time, this will lead to the salary and pension budget creeping back up again.
Political, and social implications
The Agnipath scheme also does away with the idea of a State-wise quota for recruitment into the Army, based on the Recruitable Male Population of that State which was implemented from 1966. This prevented an imbalanced army, which was dominated by any one State, linguistic community or ethnicity.
Academic research shows that the high level of ethnic imbalance has been associated with severe problems of democracy and an increased likelihood of civil war.
Coupled with this is the lack of hope in India’s economy, where over 45 crore Indians have stopped looking for jobs, there are
high levels of unemployment and underemployment.
It is to this mix that these few thousand young men who have been trained in inflicting organized violence will be thrown up every year.
From erstwhile Yugoslavia to Rwanda — and closer home, during Partition — there are numerous examples of demobilised soldiers leading to increased violence against minorities.
Way Forward
In India, the Indian Army has so far provided salary, uniform and prestige, an inheritance of the British who took care of the living conditions, facilities for the soldiers’ families, and postretirement benefits and rewards, such as grants of land. A short-term contractual soldier, without earning pension, will be seen as doing jobs after his military service that are not seen to be commensurate in status and prestige with the profession of honour. It will reduce the motivation of those joining on short-term contracts while diminishing the “honour” of a profession which places extraordinary demands on young men. The Government’s yearning for financial savings runs the risk of reducing the honour of a profession, the stability of a society and the safety of a country.
Source – The Hindu
Fidato
@tequieremos
..Bihar, Bengal and Gujarat provided just 14% of the recruitment albiet their total number is 30% of India's population. After the Agnipath Scheme, this imbalance will further expand. The annual intake into Army is about 65 thousand soldiers per year. It will increase to..
https://twitter.com/tequieremos/status/1539589175003185152?s=20&t=qrOiXQ9qhCVQoA2XRAzV5Q
Fidato
@tequieremos
..about 1-1.5 lakhs per year as per this model. Resultantly, the Indian Army will be Northern States heavy since the vacancies from North East, Gujrat, and Goa get undersubscribed and while Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Punjab get oversubscribed.
Fidato
@tequieremos
2. Another important issue is training. For example, there are two Artillery Centres in India with a maximum capacity of 4000 soldiers in each. The new scheme will double the number of trainees. Gunners normally go through six months of basic military training and six months...
Fidato
@tequieremos
..as a Gunner. Agniveers would be deployed in field after six months of training. In such a time constraint environment, the training centres would yield a highly incompetent lot.
Also, why would an Agniveer give his life when he has to retire after 4 years with no pension?
Fidato
@tequieremos
3. These Agniveers will be thrown in a society where over 45 crore Indians have stopped looking for jobs. Muslims are facing an impending genocide. Three years into Modi’s first term, a research report found that 97% of all cow-related violence in India came after he was electe
Fidato
@tequieremos
We already know that the RSS, which is the largest Neo Nazi group have a strong belief that Muslims and other minorities are an ‘Internal threat’ to India. RSS has an estimated 1.5 – 2 million regular participants in its nearly 57,000 shakhas across 36,293 locations nationwide...
Fidato
@tequieremos
..along with an armed dedicated militia of 600,000 Now it's militia will have well trained Agniveer soldiers to wreck havoc against the minorities.
@MahendraForBJP
has already made his party's intentions clear. He's asking Agniveers to defend India against Adharmis.
New Pakistani radars, including one being installed now, close to Balakot
Pakistan is strengthening its radar system. A TPS-77 multi role radar, that can spot not just fighters, but drones, and ballistic missiles is being installed at Cherat, about 200 from Balakot, in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Pakistan has decided to place a dozen radars, in strategically significant locations, mostly in Punjab and also, in Sindh.
Srinjoy Chowdhury
https://www.timesnownews.com/india/new-pakistani-radars-including-one-being-installed-now-close-to-balakot-article-90744616
Three years after Balakot, the attack by the Indian Air Force on a Jaish-e-Mohammed terror camp, Pakistan is strengthening its radar system. In February 2019, Indian fighters entered Pakistan airspace, flew all the way to Balakot, dropped its bombs on the terror camp and returned with the PAF nowhere in sight.
A TPS-77 multi role radar, that can spot not just fighters, but drones, and ballistic missiles is being installed at Cherat, about 200 from Balakot, in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, where the strikes happened. Installing the Lockheed Martin radar at Cherat is part of a plan to fit these radars all over the country. Pakistan has decided to place a dozen other radars, in strategically significant locations, mostly in Punjab and also, in Sindh. some are already functional.
* Kamra, known for its Pakistan Air Force base in Punjab.
* Arifwala in Pakpattan, also in Punjab
* Malir, near Karachi, Pakistan's largest city in Sindh.
* Dera Nawab Khan in Punjab.
* Deosai near Skardu, in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, specifically in the Gilgit Baltistan area. Skardu, of course, is an important air base.
* Mangla, where an army corps HQ is located in the Jhelum district.
* Pasrur in the Sialkot district of Punjab. Sialkot, is also a big city.
* Chunian, near Kasur in Punjab.
* Bholari, where there is a Pakistan Air Force base. It is in Sindh, not far from Karachi.
* Pano Aqil in Sukkur, Punjab, where a cantonment is located.
* Badin, in Sindh and,
* Bhawalpur, where the Army's 31 Corps HQ is located.
Of the 13, eight have already been delivered and five more are due.
by Shekhar Gupta
https://youtu.be/3GbgmJM4Ygw
Key points:
1. Indian aircraft carrier is powered by American General Electric turbines
2. Russian MIG 29s require a lot of maintenance. These will be replaced with French Rafales or US F-18s in future.
3. Chinese aircraft carriers are totally indigenous (including engines, weapons, and aircraft) are much bigger
4. China has developed "aircraft carrier buster missiles" to deal with hostile nations' Navies.
5. Indian Navy hid its aircraft carriers from Pakistani submarines during 1965 and 1971 wars.
6. Indian-American analyst Ashley Tellis questions the utility of Indian aircraft carriers in the absence of India's geopolitical aims and its Naval Doctrine.
----------
Ashley Tellis on submarines vs aircraft carriers
https://youtu.be/6BficVBrqls
------------------
The Unusual Carrier Killer Capability Of The Chinese Navy’s Strategic Bomber - Naval News
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/10/the-unusual-carrier-killer-capability-of-the-chinese-navys-strategic-bomber/
China’s recent test of a hypersonic ‘Orbital Bombardment System’ has been characterized as a ‘Sputnik moment’. The world is only just waking up to Chinese advances in strategic weapons technologies. Among a raft of new weapons, which increasingly do not have direct equivalents in the West, are anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs). One of these, an air-launched version, appears to include a hypersonic maneuvering missile.
https://eurasiantimes.com/upgraded-f-16-fighters-for-pakistan-is-indian-air-force-worried/
According to IAF Veteran Squadron Leader (retd) Vijainder Thakur, “It is likely that the maintenance support package provided by the US will include upgrades that allow PAF F-16s to carry more advanced weapons and sensors. While I do not believe that the package would significantly alter the balance of power, it will most certainly allow the PAF to maintain its deterrence capability against the IAF.”
There has also been an overarching debate regarding F-16s vs. Rafales in the region. The acquisition of Rafales was seen in Pakistan as an attempt to challenge the F-16’s might and deter the PAF.
General Kizer Tufar, a Pakistani veteran, had said, “IAF aircraft cannot be compared with the combination used by the Pakistani Air Force: F-16 and AIM-120 missiles. The Indian Air Force is aware of these restrictions, so they decided to place an order to buy the Rafale from France.”
Indian Air Force Rafale Fighter Jet
Rafale fighter jet is a twin-engine, 4.5th generation fighter aircraft that can operate from ground bases and aircraft carriers. On the other hand, the US-based Lockheed Martin developed F-16, a fourth-generation, single-engine supersonic multirole fighter aircraft. The two aircraft are almost similar regarding the dimension of length.
Given that they can carry more armaments than the F-16s, the Rafales would have an advantage in an encounter between the two. However, the F-16s have a slight advantage over the Rafales regarding striking power. Rafales only have a range of 3700 kilometers compared to the F-16s’ 4220 kilometers.
“The US has always relied on Pakistan due to its strategic location as it is the gateway to Afghanistan or the Middle East and Central Asian republics. Its importance as a launch pad can’t be reduced – which Pakistan also is equally aware of. And, in the US, a strong pro-Pakistan lobby benefits due to various deals and aid to Pakistan – they get paid – by corrupt Pakistani officials and Generals.
The present F-16 deal is also to be looked at from that angle. Overall it will not have much impact on IAF except for irritant value. Numerically and qualitatively, IAF is much better placed,” Air Vice Marshal Pranay Sinha (retd) told EurAsian Times.
The US decision comes when arms sales worldwide are booming owing to newer threat perceptions. Western officials have debated how to wean India off its dependence on Russian armament. However, India has refused to join the West in isolating Russia.
Some experts contend that the US decision is based on a business requirement. According to Group Captain Johnson Chacko, KC (retd), “Arms transactions worldwide are business oriented. Money matters. The US has supplied F-16s to Pakistan, so it is honor bound to maintain them.
In addition, the arms industry gets money while Pakistan holds the debt. We cannot reduce it to the F16 vs. Rafale debate, as the men behind the machines matter.
We demonstrated that against USAF in the first COPE India exercise held at Gwalior, where USAF F-15s were overwhelmed by what they felt was inferior Russian aircraft flown by IAF.”
It is pertinent to mention that the Indian Air Force has been undertaking a rapid modernization drive. It is dominated by Russian heavy-duty fighters like the Su-30MKI and MiG-29s, combat-hardened Mirage 2000s and Jaguars, and Light Aircraft like the Tejas, besides the cutting-edge Rafale fighters.
J-10C
A Chinese J-10C. (via Twitter)
The Pakistan Air Force, on the other hand, is dominated by the F-16s, the brand-new J-10Cs, the JF-17, and Mirages, among others.
Before the J-10C fighters were transferred to Pakistan by China earlier this year, military analysts asserted that the purchase underlined the need to counter India’s Rafale aircraft and provide a strong deterrent against the Indian Air Force.
@suhasinih
India, Pakistan both partners of U.S. with different points of emphasis: Biden administration
"We look to both as partners, because we do have in many cases shared values...shared interests." Said State dept spokesperson
https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/india-pakistan-both-partners-of-us-with-different-points-of-emphasis-biden-administration/article65940554.ece
https://twitter.com/suhasinih/status/1574601690581389313?s=20&t=rC5naFys3GZIi6ol7sNwVQ
-----------
India and Pakistan are both partners of the U.S. with different points of emphasis, the Biden administration said on September 26, a day after visiting External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar questioned the rationale behind the latest American F-16 security assistance to Islamabad.
Referring to the argument made by the U.S. that F-16 sustenance package is to fight terrorism, Mr. Jaishankar had said everybody knows where and against whom F-16 fighter jets are used. "You're not fooling anybody by saying these things," he said in response to a question during an interaction with Indian-Americans.
"We don't view our relationship with Pakistan, and on the other hand, we don't view our relationship with India as in relation to one another. These are both partners of ours with different points of emphasis in each," State Department Spokesperson Ned Price told reporters at his daily news conference.
"We look to both as partners, because we do have in many cases shared values. We do have in many cases shared interests. And the relationship we have with India stands on its own. The relationship we have with Pakistan stands on its own," he said.
Early this month, the Biden administration approved a $450 million F-16 fighter jet fleet sustainment programme to Pakistan, reversing the decision of the previous Trump administration to suspend military aid to Islamabad for providing safe havens for the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani network.
"We also want to do everything we can to see to it that these neighbours have relations with one another that are as constructive as can be possible. So that's another point of emphasis," Mr. Price said in response to a question.
Responding to another question, Mr. Price said it is "not in Pakistan's interest to see instability and violence in Afghanistan".
"The support for the people of Afghanistan is something we discuss regularly with our Pakistani partners; our efforts to improve the lives and livelihoods and humanitarian conditions of the Afghan people, and to see to it that the Taliban live up to the commitments that they have made," he added.
Pakistan is implicated in many of these same commitments: the counterterrorism commitments, commitments to safe passage, commitments to the citizens of Afghanistan, Mr. Price said. "The unwillingness or the inability on the part of the Taliban to live up to these commitments would have significant implications for Pakistan as well".
"So, for that reason, we do share a number of interests with Pakistan regarding its neighbour," Mr. Price said.
The United States, he noted, has been intently focused on the devastation that has resulted in the loss of life resulting from the torrential floods that have devastated large areas of Pakistan.
"We have provided tens of millions of dollars in relief for these floods. The Secretary today will have additional details on further US assistance for the Pakistani people, in light of this humanitarian emergency that Pakistanis are facing," he added.
@hass_akbr
Shocking coming from a country that has been on the receiving end of US generosity what with the CAATSA waiver. Can’t believe India thinks it can dictate US foreign policy while selling Washington baloony about is own independence when it comes to Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/hass_akbr/status/1574369893797220353?s=20&t=rC5naFys3GZIi6ol7sNwVQ
"You're Not Fooling Anybody...": S Jaishankar On US' F-16 Deal With Pak
"It's a relationship that has neither ended up serving Pakistan well nor serving the American interests," S Jaishankar said at an event in Washington
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/youre-not-fooling-anybody-jaishankar-responds-to-us-f-16-package-for-pakistan-101664183691205.html
@frank11285
“Modi laid the foundation stone for the Deesa airfield in Gujarat which will be a forward Air Force base.”
https://twitter.com/frank11285/status/1583224834896515073?s=20&t=vJZdCxMsdx3c4vDdPyGlHw
----------
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/new-airbase-coming-up-in-gujarat-near-indo-pak-border-to-emerge-as-effective-centre-for-countrys-security-pm-modi/article66029973.ece
PM launches ‘Mission DefSpace’, an ambitious effort to develop innovative solutions for the three Services in the space domain through Indian industry and start-ups
In an ambitious effort to develop innovative solutions for the three Services in the space domain through the Indian industry and start-ups, Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Wednesday launched the ‘Mission DefSpace’ at the ongoing DefExpo. He also released the fourth defence indigenisation list which bars import of 101 items after certain timelines.
“Space technology is an example of what security will mean for any strong nation in the future. Various challenges in this area have been reviewed and identified by the three Services. We have to work fast to solve them,” Mr. Modi said. Under Mission Def-Space, 75 challenges are being opened to get innovative solutions, based on the defence requirements in the space domain, the Defence Ministry said.
Stating that space technology is shaping new definitions of India’s generous space diplomacy, giving rise to new possibilities, the Prime Minister stated, “Many African countries and many other small countries are benefiting from this.”
Real-time access to data
There are more than 60 developing countries with whom India is sharing its space science. “The South Asia satellite is an effective example of this. By next year, 10 Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries will also get real-time access to India’s satellite data. Even developed countries like Europe and America are using our satellite data,“ he stated.
Explaining the significance, Lt. Gen. A.K. Bhatt (retd.), Director General of the Indian Space Association (ISpA), said this was the first time an opportunity was being given to the private industry in the defence space sector. “Defence space challenges, which have been worked with the Services, Ministry of Defence (MoD), along with private industry and the ISpA, are primarily aimed at making a range of defence applications to enhance the capability of the three Services,” he stated.
One senior official explained that the effort is not meant to develop offensive capabilities in space but to build technology enablers for the Services.
As part of efforts to boost the domestic defence industry and promote defence exports, the Defence Ministry had earlier promulgated first, second and third Positive Indigenisation Lists, comprising 310 items on August 21, 2020, May 31, 2021 and April 7, 2022 respectively. The items on the lists cannot be imported by the Services and should be sourced from within the country.
The fourth list has been prepared by the MoD after several rounds of consultations with all stakeholders, including the industry, the Ministry said in a statement. “It lays special focus on equipment/systems, which are being developed and likely to translate into firm orders in the next five to 10 years,”
Like the first three lists, import substitution of ammunition which is a recurring requirement has been given special focus, the Ministry stated.
The items listed in the fourth list will provide ample visibility and opportunity to the domestic defence industry for understanding the trend and futuristic needs of the armed forces and create requisite research and development and manufacturing capacity within the country. the Ministry added.
https://eurasiantimes.com/pakistan-displays-indias-mig-21-bisons-tail-shot-down-by-paf-f-16/
By
Ashish Dangwal
November 17, 2022
The tail section of a MiG-21 of the Indian Air Force is on display at IDEAS-22 that was shot down on February 27, 2019, during Operation Swift Retort, by a Pakistani F-16. New Delhi and Islamabad made different statements about the event’s occurrence at the time.
-----
Meanwhile, the J-17C’s informative photos, one of which also shows the cockpit, are being presented at the event. A video module of the aircraft is also showcased at PAF Pavilion during IDEAS 2022.
Pakistan’s JF-17C, also known as Block 3, is the latest version of the J-17 aircraft. The Chengdu Aircraft Corporation (CAC) of China and the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) collaborated to develop the medium-sized multi-role JF-17 ‘Thunder’ fighter aircraft for the Pakistan Air Force.
The service has received more than 100 Thunder jets since 2007.
The JF-17 C model is thought to have taken to the skies for the first time in December 2019. The PL-10E, which China describes as its most advanced air-to-air missile, was also spotted being carried by the JF-17 Block 3 in 2021.
The JF-17C has notable upgraded capabilities, such as Missile Approach Warning Systems (MAWS), Wide Angle Smart HUD, more Chin Hardpoints, and an integrated EW suite.
Another photograph that has gained popularity on the internet is thought to be the finest image of a PAF JF-17C – dubbed Block 3 – so far.
The DEPO organizes IDEAS every two years. Since its beginning in 2000, IDEAS has established itself as a worldwide staging ground for defense manufacturers, business owners, R&D professionals, finance experts, and top-level officials.
However, in terms of space, reservations, exhibitors, and delegates from domestic and international countries, this year’s event has reportedly eclipsed all records.
The defense expo was inaugurated by Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari at the city’s expo center in Karachi. IDEAS 2022 officially started on November 15 and will last through November 18.
In his remarks at the occasion, FM Bhutto-Zardari discussed the current coalition government’s difficulties while noting that it succeeded despite the economic downturn. About 300 exhibitors are showing off their latest products from 32 nations.
This exhibition is attended by about 500 national and international delegates, including high-level delegations from friendly nations.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif tweeted that the nation’s defense industry is meeting the demands of the technological era, and he emphasized that IDEAS had grown into a significant platform in the global defense market.
He stated that this year’s event’s ‘Arms for Peace’ theme represented Pakistan’s commitment to peace and stability. Sharif added that IDEAS had developed into a platform that showcased Pakistan’s expanding impact in the global defense market.
“Good to see that our defense sector is catering to demands of the tech era,” he added.
Meanwhile, the Pakistan Air Force is presenting its aerospace, avionics, cyberspace, and other related technologies at its pavilion. The National Aerospace Science and Technology Park (NASTP) is the PAF pavilion’s biggest attraction.
It is a Pakistan Air Force project to promote industry-academia linkage to provide an ecosystem of critical elements required to nurture design, research, development, and innovation in the aviation, space, and cyber sectors.
---
Speaking at the event, the Air Chief stated that the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) is dedicated to creating advanced technologies in the nation to deliver the most cutting-edge, efficient, and impenetrable aerial defense.
@clary_co
A bit of a tour d'horizon of India-Israel Aerospece Industries cooperation in the Indian Express the other day. "The reporter was in Israel at the invitation of the Embassy of Israel in New Delhi." A few highlights. /1
https://twitter.com/clary_co/status/1595067490694045697?s=20&t=eh-ePoRuzHrlqM1h0gCXlg
------------------
From UAVs to refuellers: How Israel is helping India keep an eye on LAC
These days, Avi Bleser, vice-president of marketing for India at Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), says he is working closely with the Indian Army and Indian Air Force to tailor solutions for their defence needs.
https://indianexpress.com/article/india/from-uavs-to-refuellers-how-israel-is-helping-india-keep-an-eye-on-lac-8272676/
-----------------
Christopher Clary
@clary_co
IAI is working closely with India on "the induction of Heron MK II, a state-of-the-art UAV that can fly at a height of 35,000 feet, cover a radius of 1000 km, see through dense clouds, work in bad weather & fly for 45 hours. It’s learnt that MK IIs are being deployed in Leh." /2
https://twitter.com/clary_co/status/1595067492157849600?s=20&t=eh-ePoRuzHrlqM1h0gCXlg
-------------------
Christopher Clary
@clary_co
"Last year, the Indian Army had also taken on lease Heron TPs, a Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) for all-weather missions, from IAI. Heron TP drones are one of the two drones made in Israel that can be armed, if needed." /3
---------
Christopher Clary
@clary_co
"The IAI and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) have signed a joint venture whereby IAI will not only offer UAVs to India, but also help HAL in manufacturing them in India." /4
-----------------
Christopher Clary
@clary_co
"Earlier this year, HAL signed [an MoU] with IAI to convert civil passenger aircraft into a multi-mission tanker transport for air refuelling with cargo & transport capabilities. The MoU also covers conversion of passenger planes into freighter aircraft." /end
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/01/opinion/india-china-himalayas.html
By Ajai Shukla
Mr. Shukla is a strategic affairs analyst and former Indian Army officer.
Soldiers from China and India, nuclear-armed Asian neighbors, have been clashing on their disputed border with an alarming frequency owing to the rise of aggressive nationalisms in President Xi Jinping’s China and Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s India. Insecurity is also growing in New Delhi and Beijing over intensified construction of border infrastructure by both countries. And mutual suspicion is deepening as China contemplates the increasing strategic cooperation between the United States and India as competition and conflict between Washington and Beijing intensifies.
---------------
Throughout the 1960s and the ’70s, India’s military, traumatized by China’s comprehensive victory and fearful of setting off another conflagration, deployed well to the rear of the border, which was covered only by long-range patrols. In the early 1980s, the Indian military leadership came to be dominated by a new generation of bolder commanders and New Delhi greenlighted a move forward, much closer to the Line of Actual Control.
----------
Between 1989 and 2005, the Indian and Chinese sides had 15 meetings and no blood was shed for 30 years. After the Gandhi-Deng meeting, the two sides signed an agreement in 1993 for restraint and joint action on the disputed border whenever Indian and Chinese patrols differed on the alignment of the LAC. It was followed by four more pacts, aimed at keeping the peace on the border.
Minor Chinese intrusions in Ladakh in 2008, 2013 and 2014 were resolved through dialogue. A major escalation followed in June 2017 in the Doklam Plateau in the Himalayas, where India, China and Bhutan meet. The Chinese military was building a road into the area, which is claimed by both China and Bhutan.
-------------
The plateau is close to “Chicken’s Neck,” a narrow corridor of Indian territory that connects mainland India to its northeastern states, an area the size of Oregon, where 45 million people live. India saw the Chinese incursion and construction as a dangerous move toward control over the Doklam Plateau, and it reawakened New Delhi’s fear of China cutting off northeastern India in a war by taking over Chicken’s Neck.
------------
For New Delhi, China’s new aggressiveness presents a clear dilemma: Should India continue to build strategic and military relations with the United States and the partnership of America, Australia, Japan and India — known as the Quad — even though Beijing has made it clear it sees the Quad as an anti-China grouping? While the Quad, and its more overtly militaristic version, the AUKUS (Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States) alliance, constitute a viable deterrent to China in the maritime Indo-Pacific theater, India is the only partner that confronts China on its land border.
From New Delhi’s perspective, the Chinese military aggression on the disputed border is the price India is paying for joining hands with the Western alliance. New Delhi takes pains to portray its independence, even turning down an American offer of assistance against China at the time of the 2020 intrusions in Ladakh. New Delhi has restricted Indo-U.S. cooperation to the realm of intelligence and privately asked Washington to lower the rhetoric over China. This is unlikely to change.
Within India, Mr. Modi’s strongman image has taken a dent from the confrontation with China. His insistence that India has not lost territory to China provides ammunition to his supporters, but the numbers of his blind supporters have dwindled. The Chinese military’s most recent aggression shows that Beijing continues to fuel the confrontation, and relations between India and China face a negative spiral without a predictable end. The political cost to Mr. Modi, it seems, will eventually be decided in Beijing as much as in New Delhi.
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-pakistan-came-close-to-a-nuclear-war-claims-former-us-secretary-of-state-in-new-book/article66429650.ece
Former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has claimed that he was “awakened” to speak to his then Indian counterpart Sushma Swaraj who told him that Pakistan was preparing for a nuclear attack after the Balakot surgical strike in February 2019 and India is preparing its own escalatory response.
In his latest book Never Give an Inch: Fighting for the America I Love that hit the stores on Tuesday, Mr. Pompeo says the incident took place when he was in Hanoi for the U.S.-North Korea Summit on February 27-28 and his team worked overnight with both New Delhi and Islamabad to avert this crisis.
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/mike-pompeos-book-never-give-an-inch-5-quotes-claiming-us-stopped-india-pak-nuclear-war-3722522
Mike Pompeo's "Never Give an Inch," his memoir of his time as Donald Trump's top diplomat and earlier CIA chief, was published on Tuesday.
Former US President Donald Trump's top diplomat Mike Pompeo, in his just-published memoir, has claimed that India and Pakistan came close to nuclear war in 2019 and that US intervention prevented escalation.
Here are the top five points Mike Pompeo made his new book:
Mr Pompeo claimed he was awakened some time in 2019 to speak to his then Indian counterpart Sushma Swaraj who told him that Pakistan was preparing for a nuclear attack in the wake of the Balakot surgical strike and India is preparing its own response.
"I do not think the world properly knows just how close the India-Pakistan rivalry came to spilling over into a nuclear conflagration in February 2019. The truth is, I don't know precisely the answer either; I just know it was too close," Mr Pompeo wrote.
The former US official said he spoke to Ms Swaraj who "believed the Pakistanis had begun to prepare their nuclear weapons for a strike. India, he (sic) informed me, was contemplating its own escalation". "I asked him to do nothing and give us a minute to sort things out... No other nation could have done what we did that night to avoid a horrible outcome," he wrote.
Mr Pompeo said Pakistan "probably enabled" the attack on security forces in Pulwama, which triggered the Balakot strike, said he spoke to "the actual leader of Pakistan," then army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa, in an allusion to the weakness of civilian governments.
In comments critical of Sushma Swaraj, Mr Pompeo wrote, "On the Indian side, my original counterpart was not an important player on the Indian foreign policy team. Instead, I worked much more closely with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, a close and trusted confidante of Prime Minister Narendra Modi".
@thewire_in
After S. Jaishankar said that India cannot pick a fight with China because the latter has a bigger economy, military veterans have accused the Narendra Modi government of having a "defeatist attitude" and "bowing down to a bully".
https://thewire.in/security/veterans-criticise-jaishankar-china
New Delhi: After external affairs minister S. Jaishankar said that India cannot pick a fight with China because the latter has a bigger economy, military veterans have accused the Narendra Modi government of having a “defeatist attitude” and “bowing down to a bully”.
In a podcast with ANI editor-in-chief Smita Prakash on Wednesday, Jaishankar said: “Look, they (China) are the bigger economy. What am I going to do? As a smaller economy, I am going to pick up a fight with the bigger economy? It is not a question of being reactionary, it’s a question of common sense….”
He added that India and China have an agreement not to bring large number of troops to the border, and asked if India should violate that agreement.
Former Navy chief Arun Prakash, a veteran of the 1971 war, tweeted: “If relative size of economies is seen as arbiter of int’l relations, how come nations like Cuba, N Korea & Iran thumb their noses at the USA or Vietnam at China? India, as a democracy, nuclear weapon state & significant economic & mil power must stand firm against hegemony.”
Major General Shail Jha (retired) tweeted: “Mr Jaishankar should know that its not India but China which is picking the fight.”
The veteran added: “Economy or no economy, if we bow down to a bully, we are abandoning our self-respect. Is it acceptable? What a shame. And the guy is being hailed as the greatest FM. It’s cowardice.”
Speaking to The Telegraph, a former lieutenant general said Jaishankar’s statement was “shocking” and was reminiscent of “unconditional surrender”.
“What happened to the so-called muscular nationalism that this government projects in election speeches? Modi’s self-declared muscular nationalism has now capitulated to Chinese aggression and bullying,” the veteran said.
Speaking about Chinese intrusions across the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the veteran told the newspaper that instead of “asking the Chinese troops to retreat”, the “New India under Modiji agreed to create buffer zones within Indian territories in eastern Ladakh as part of the disengagement agreement, thus ceding further territory to China
A retired colonel said Jaishankar’s “defeatist statement” spoke volumes about Modi’s China policy. “Where is Mr 56-inch Modi’s muscular nationalism when it comes to China?” the former colonel asked.
Pakistan will respond with "Operation Swift Retort" if Modi and his fellow Islamophobes are foolish enough to attack Pakistan again.
Listen to your Indian Professor Ashok Swain who tweeted this today:
Ashok Swain
@ashoswai
Never let a regime fool you in the name of nationalism - If you do it once, you have to keep doing it. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-kashmir-pakistan-airstrike-insi-idUSKCN1QN00V
https://twitter.com/ashoswai/status/1630209788075286528?s=20
--------------
Satellite images show buildings still standing at Indian bombing site
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-kashmir-pakistan-airstrike-insi-idUSKCN1QN00V
Jeffrey Lewis, director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Project at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, who has 15 years’ experience in analyzing satellite images of weapons sites and systems, confirmed that the high-resolution satellite picture showed the structures in question.
“The high-resolution images don’t show any evidence of bomb damage,” he said. Lewis viewed three other high-resolution Planet Labs pictures of the site taken within hours of the image provided to Reuters.
The Indian government has not publicly disclosed what weapons were used in the strike.
Government sources told Reuters last week that 12 Mirage 2000 jets carrying 1,000 kg (2,200 lbs) bombs carried out the attack. On Tuesday, a defense official said the aircraft used the 2,000-lb Israeli-made SPICE 2000 glide bomb in the strike.
A warhead of that size is meant to destroy hardened targets such as concrete shelters.
Lewis and Dave Schmerler, a senior research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation studies who also analyses satellite images, said weapons that large would have caused obvious damage to the structures visible in the picture.
@clary_co
"The IAF... informed the parliamentary panel that the Russia-Ukraine war affected its supplies so much that it slashed its projected capital expenditure... for the financial year ending March 31, 2024, by nearly a 3rd compared to the previous fiscal year."
https://twitter.com/clary_co/status/1638909910179037186?s=20
-----------------
NEW DELHI, March 23 (Reuters) - Russia is unable to deliver vital defence supplies it had committed to India's military because of the war in Ukraine, the Indian Air Force (IAF) says.
https://www.reuters.com/world/india/russia-cannot-meet-arms-delivery-commitments-because-war-indian-air-force-says-2023-03-23/
New Delhi has been worried that Moscow's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 could affect military supplies from India's largest source of defence equipment. The IAF statement is the first official confirmation of such shortfalls.
The IAF statement was made to a parliamentiary committee, which published it on its website on Tuesday. An IAF representative told the panel Russia had planned a "major delivery" this year that will not take place.
A spokesperson for the Russian Embassy in New Delhi said: "We don’t have information which may confirm the stated."
There was no immediate response from Rosoboronexport, which is the Russian government's weapons export arm.
The report does not mention specifics of the delivery.
The biggest ongoing delivery is the S-400 Triumf air defence system units India bought in 2018 for $5.4 billion. Three of these systems have been delivered and two more are awaited.
IAF also depends on Russia for spares for its Su-30MKI and MiG-29 fighter jets, the mainstay of the service branch.
Russia, and the Soviet Union before it, has been India’s main source of arms and defence equipment for decades.
Russia accounted for $8.5 billion of the $18.3 billion India has spent on arms imports since 2017, according to the latest data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
Over the past two decades, New Delhi has sought to reduce its dependence on Moscow and looked westward towards France, the United States and Israel.
It is also pushing Indian companies to produce more at home in collaboration with global players.
The IAF also informed the parliamentary panel that the Russia-Ukraine war affected its supplies so much that it slashed its projected capital expenditure on modernisation for the financial year ending March 31, 2024, by nearly a third compared to the previous fiscal year.
The air force had projected a capital expenditure of 853 billion rupees ($10.38 billion) for fiscal 2022-23 and cut it to 588 billion rupees ($7.15 billion) in the national budget presented in February.
https://www.deccanherald.com/national/national-politics/india-needs-educated-pm-arvind-kejriwal-targets-narendra-modi-in-assam-1205990.html
Continuing his criticism of Prime Minister Narendra Modi over his educational qualifications, Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal on Sunday said an educated PM would not have gone for "dangerous" decisions like the demonetisation and three "anti-farmer" laws.
"I listened to Narendra Modi's speech where he said he went to a village school only and could not do further studies. But I want to ask you today, shouldn't the Prime Minister of a great nation like India be educated?" Kejriwal asked the crowd during his maiden rally in Assam capital Guwahati on Sunday afternoon. The rally was organised by the Assam unit of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) as part of its organisational expansion programme in the state, where BJP has been in power since 2016.
"India is a poor nation and someone not going to school due to poverty is not a crime. But our Prime Minister should be educated. The Prime Minister did demonetisation which took our economy 10 years backward. Someone fooled our PM and told him to ban the notes to end corruption. Did demonetisation end corruption? Someone told our PM that demonetisation will end terrorism. Did demonetisation end terrorism?" Kejriwal asked.
"It's the 21st Century and youths of the 21st Century are aspirational. They believe in science and technology. They want employment and prosperity of India and only an educated PM can bring that prosperity. A less educated or illiterate person can not bring prosperity. A private company asks for an MBA, MA and BA degree for a manager's job. But shouldn't there be educational qualifications for the country's topmost manager as the Prime Minister?" he asked.
Punjab CM Bhagwant Singh Mann addressed the rally before Kejriwal in which he also slammed BJP.
Both Kejriwal and Mann slammed their Assam counterpart Himanta Biswa Sarma saying the latter was only doing "dirty politics" and failed to provide jobs, hold examinations in a fair manner and could not improve amenities such as schools, hospitals and other infrastructure. "Today he is threatening me on TV to put me behind bars. Am I a terrorism, why will you catch me?" Kejriwal asked while referring to Sarma's warning on Friday about filing defamation cases in case the former made corruption allegations. "Today I want to invite him to come to my home for tea when he visits Delhi next. I will take him around in my car and the finest schools and hospitals we have provided to the people of Delhi," he said. Both Mann and Kejriwal asked why Sarma's wife was running a private school in Guwahati. "If a CM's wife runs a private school, will the government improve the government schools?" he asked. Both promised that AAP will provide Delhi and Punjab-like facilities if people voted them to power in the Assembly elections in 2026.
https://thewire.in/politics/satya-pal-malik-full-interview-pulwama-modi
The Foreign Office (FO) said on Sunday that the latest revelations made by Satya Pal Malik — the “so-called” former governor of Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) — regarding the Pulwama attack in 2019 had “once again vindicated Pakistan’s stance”.
In February 2019, an attack took place on Indian paramilitary troops in IIOJK killing more than 40 soldiers. India accused Pakistan of being behind the attack from the get-go — a charge Islamabad has vehemently denied.
On Friday, in an interview with Indian publication The Wire, Malik — who was governor during the Pulwama attack and the scrapping of Article 370 in August that year — said that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi hid key facts from the public about the incident.
He told the publication that he immediately realised that Modi wanted to use the attack to blame Pakistan for the benefit of his government and the BJP.
Malik said the Indian prime minister was “ill-informed” and “ignorant” about IIOJK, and that he had told Malik not to speak about the home ministry’s lapses, which led to the devastating incident.
He revealed that the attack on the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) convoy in Pulwama was a result of “incompetence” and “carelessness” by the Indian system, specifically the CRPF and the home ministry.
Malik also gave details of how the CRPF had asked for aircraft to transport its personnel but was refused by the home ministry.
More importantly, he said all of these lapses were raised by him directly when Modi called him from outside Corbett Park, shortly after the Pulwama attack. He said the prime minister told him to keep quiet about this and not tell anyone.
Malik also said that National Security Adviser Ajit Doval also told him to keep quiet and not talk about it. Malik said he immediately realised that the intention was to put the blame on Pakistan and derive electoral benefit for the government and BJP.
In a statement issued on Sunday, the FO said that Malik’s disclosures demonstrated how the “Indian leadership has habitually used the bogey of terrorism from Pakistan to advance its sham victimhood narrative and the Hindutva agenda, clearly for domestic political gains”.
“We hope that the international community would take cognisance of the latest revelations and see through India’s propaganda campaign against Pakistan driven by selfish political considerations and based on lies and deceit,” it said.
The FO stressed that India must answer the questions raised in the latest revelations. “It is time India be held accountable for the actions that imperiled regional peace in the aftermath of the Pulwama attack”.
The statement added that Pakistan would continue to counter India’s “false narrative” and act firmly and responsibly in the face of different provocations.
Pulwama attack and Operation Swift Retort
The attack in Pulwama on Feb 14, 2019, surpassing one in 2016 when 19 soldiers died, saw explosives packed inside a van rip through buses in a convoy of 78 vehicles carrying some 2,500 members of the paramilitary CRPF.
Two blue buses carrying around 35 people each bore the brunt of the explosion around 20 kilometres from the main city of Srinagar on the main highway towards Jammu.
The next day, Modi said his country would give a “strong response” to the Pulwama attack. The “blood of the people is boiling” and forces behind the act of terrorism will be definitely be punished, he was quoted as saying by Hindustan Times.
Modi didn’t name Pakistan but went on to say: “If our neighbour, which is totally isolated in the world and thinks it can destabilise India through its tactics and conspiracies, then it is making a huge mistake”.
https://thewire.in/politics/satya-pal-malik-full-interview-pulwama-modi
SM: I told him that it was our fault.
KT: And he asked you to keep quiet on the subject?
SM: I had also said it to someone, a channel or so, and then he told me to not say these things and let him talk.
KT: This is again very important. When you had told the Prime Minister that this has happened because of us, that they had asked for the aircraft and Home Ministry did not give them, and the Prime Minister asked you to keep quiet. He said don’t let people know we made a mistake.
SM: Doval also said this to me.
KT: Who?
SM: Doval, Ajit Doval.
KT: He also told you to keep quiet?
KT: So what you’re saying, is both the Prime Minister—
SM: I can share with you, that I realised that this entire onus is going to be put on Pakistan so it’s better to be quiet on the subject now.
KT: So this was in some way, a clever policy of the government that blame Pakistan—
SM: Exactly.
KT: And we will get credit, and that will help our election.
SM: Exactly.
KT: But you said two very important things that the prime minister knew that you had told him it was our fault?
SM: I distinctly remember. He was in Corbett National Park, getting his shooting done. There isn’t a phone there, so after getting out of there, he called me from a dhaba, Satyapal, what happened? I told him sir I am very unhappy that this happened solely due to our fault if we had given them an aircraft it wouldn’t have happened. He told me to keep quiet about it then.
KT: And Mr Doval said the same?
SM: Yes.
KT: In an interview to a YouTube channel [given to Prashant Tandon of DB Live], you said that the route was not sanitised, security was not—
SM: Of course it was not sanitised. The route has 8-10 link roads specifically in that area, not one of them was manned by someone to restrict access to people. Nothing was done.
KT: All link roads were unmanned?
SM: Unmanned.
KT: How many link roads?
SM: Around 8-10.
KT: 8-10 link roads were unmanned? This is a huge security lax.
SM: This also I told them. This was our lax. We were not in the loop, CRPF was planning everything.
KT: In you YouTube interview, you said that there was incompetence and carelessness. Whose?
SM: The Home Ministry’s and the CRPF.
KT: Both? And Home Ministry came under Rajnath Singh.
SM: Now whosoever was there, I don’t know.
KT: He was Rajnath Singh and that means the buck stops with Rajnath Singh who was home minister. He was the one to blame.
By Chietigj Bajpaee
https://thediplomat.com/2023/10/the-israel-palestine-conflagration-is-a-cautionary-tale-for-indias-global-ambitions/
the most recent developments in the Middle East show how unresolved disputes have a tendency to flare up. In this context, tensions with Pakistan (and to a lesser extent China) remain a constant thorn in India’s global ambitions.
--------------
Claims of a “new Middle East” have been quashed as the “old Middle East” has returned with a vengeance: The devastating October 7 Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel have been followed by unprecedented Israeli attacks on Gaza and the resumption of prolonged Israel-Palestine hostilities. This has also called into question the future of diplomatic initiatives such as the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states, the Saudi-Iran resumption of diplomatic relations earlier this year, and efforts to facilitate a rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Israel.
What does this mean for India? Beyond the Modi government’s unequivocal support for Israel (which is arguably more equivocal at the level of public opinion, given India’s longstanding support for the Palestinian cause) the latest hostilities in the Middle East hold lessons for India’s global ambitions.
Recent years have seen India raise its voice on the world stage. India’s G-20 presidency strengthened the country’s credentials as the voice of the Global South. New Delhi is offering Indian solutions to global problems, ranging from climate change and sustainability to digital public infrastructure and global health. India has spearheaded new connectivity initiatives, from its rebranded “Act East” Policy in the East to the India-Middle East-Economic Corridor and I2U2 (India-Israel-UAE-U.S.) grouping in the West.
Despite the growing polarization of the international system following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, India has been courted by all major poles of influence. It is a member of both Western-led initiatives such as the Quad and non-Western initiatives such as the BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
Undergirding these developments are India’s impressive achievements, ranging from its space program marking a global first to surpassing the United Kingdom in GDP and surpassing China in population. Projections China in population. Projections hold that India will be the world’s fastest growing major economy in 2023; it is on course to surpass Germany and Japan to emerge as the world’s third-largest economy by the end of this decade. Meanwhile, the Indian government has just announced that it will submit a bid to host the 2036 Olympic games.
But the most recent developments in the Middle East show how unresolved disputes have a tendency to flare up. In this context, tensions with Pakistan (and to a lesser extent China) remain a constant thorn in India’s global ambitions.
All it would take is another high-profile terrorist attack on India, followed by the mobilization of both countries’ militaries, to erode investor confidence. This would undermine India’s ambitions to emerge as an engine of global growth, a global manufacturing hub and a beneficiary of the push to de-risk or decouple supply chains away from China. It would also challenge the government’s credentials as the “chowkidar” or watchman/protector of India’s interests, just as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “Mr. Security” reputation has been tarnished by the recent Hamas attacks. As such, despite India’s success in de-hyphenating its relationship with Pakistan, the unresolved Kashmir dispute and relations with Pakistan remain a key challenge to India’s global ambitions.
https://thewire.in/diplomacy/watch-we-have-narratives-but-no-proof-of-balakots-success-former-high-commissioner-to-pakistan
In an interview to mark the launch of his recently published book Anger Management: The Troubled Diplomatic Relationship between India and Pakistan, which contains a critical chapter on the Pulwama terrorist attack and India’s retaliatory strike on Balakot, India’s High Commissioner to Pakistan at the time, Ajay Bisaria, has accepted that we only have narratives but no proof of the success of the Balakot strike. He added, “You’ll perhaps never know for sure” of how successful the strike was.
In a 35-minute interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire, Bisaria, while discussing his views, said that the terrorists behind the Pulwama attack of February 2019, the fifth anniversary of which will fall next month, “lucked out in getting an unprotected target in a convoy of vehicles” and thus “met with unexpected success”.
Bisaria was asked if he was echoing what Satya Pal Malik, who was the governor of Jammu and Kashmir at the time, told The Wire in an interview last year, when he claimed the terror attack was a result of “incompetence” and “laparwahi” by the Indian system.
The former envoy was also asked what proof exists to corroborate the statement made by the foreign secretary of the time, which Bisaria quotes in his book. The statement is that at Balakot, “a very large number of JeM terrorists, trainers, senior commanders, and groups of jihadis, who were being trained for fidayeen action, were eliminated.” It was during this part of the discussion that he accepted that we have narratives but not proof of Balakot’s success.
Towards the end of the interview, there is a substantial discussion about Pakistan’s response to Balakot, the shooting down of Wing Commander Abhinandan Varathaman’s MiG-21, and why Pakistan chose to hand him back within a couple of days.
This part of the interview involves a key question about Biswaria’s view that Pakistan “panicked” as well as the facts and developments he cites in his book which suggest that there was a fair amount of panic on the Indian side, too, including a phone call made by then foreign minister Sushma Swaraj to the then US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, in the middle of the night (when she woke him up) because she was worried that Pakistan was preparing to use nuclear weapons against India.