Here's a Times of India story on Indian Navy's submarine plans:

While India is still years away from getting an AIP-equipped submarine, Pakistan already has one in the shape of PNS Hamza, one of the three French Agosta-90B submarines inducted by it over the last decade. Moreover, work is also underway to retrofit the French "Mesma" AIP in hulls of the other two submarines, PNS Khalid and PNS Saad.

The six new-generation submarines from China, the improved Yuan-class boats with "Stirling-cycle" AIP, will further add a punch to Pakistan's underwater warfare capabilities.

India, in sharp contrast, has so far refused to consider the Mesma AIP option in the ongoing Rs 23,562-crore project (P-75) to build six French Scorpene submarines at Mazagon Docks (MDL), already running three years' behind schedule with the boats now slated to roll out from 2015 to 2020.

"There has also been a huge cost escalation. To incorporate the steam-based Mesma AIP in the 5th and 6th Scorpenes would cost another $100 million or so," said a senior defence ministry official.

"Moreover, Navy is more keen on fuel-cell AIP. DRDO is developing one such system, which has been tested on shore. If it comes through, it can be considered for the 5th and 6th Scorpenes," he added.

To further compound matters, there is excruciatingly slow progress on P-75I, which envisages acquisition of six new stealth submarines, equipped with both tube-launched missiles for land-attack capabilities as well as AIP, for over Rs 50,000 crore.

The RFP (request for proposal) to be issued to foreign collaborators like Rosoboronexport ( Russia), DCNS (France), HDW (Germany) and Navantia (Spain) will be possible only towards end-2011 at the earliest.

"If one foreign shipyard can give AIP, it cannot provide land-attack missile capabilities, and vice-versa. So, P-75I is very complex...it will take at least two years to even finalize it, and another six-seven years after that for the first submarine to be ready," he said.

The plan till now is to directly import two submarines from a foreign collaborator, with three being built at MDL in Mumbai, and the sixth at Hindustan Shipyard in Visakhapatnam under transfer of technology.

Incidentally, Navy will have only five of its existing 10 Russian Kilo-class and four German HDW submarines by 2020. Consequently, even with the six Scorpenes, India will be far short of its operational requirement of at least 18 conventional submarines for the foreseeable future.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-04-11/india/294059...

ere's a PTI report on Pakistan Naval Strategic Command HQ: The Pakistan Navy on Saturday completed the establishment of a new Naval Strategic Force Command, described by the military as the custodian of the country's nuclear second strike capability.

Naval Strategic Force Command headquarters was inaugurated by naval Chief Admiral Mohammad Asif Sandila. The event was attended by Strategic Plans Division Chief Lt Gen (retired) Khalid Kidwai and senior naval and military officers.

Vice Admiral Tanveer Faiz, commander of the Naval Strategic Force Command, said the Naval Strategic Force Command, which is "the custodian of the nation's second strike capability", will strengthen Pakistan's policy of credible minimum deterrence and ensure regional stability.

The headquarters of the Naval Strategic Force Command will perform a "pivotal role in the development and employment of the naval strategic force", Faiz was quoted as saying in a statement issued by the military.

Admiral Sandila said the inauguration of the headquarters marked the "formal establishment of the Naval Strategic Force Command".

The statement did not give details of the weapon systems and delivery platforms that comprise Pakistan's second strike capability.

Unlike India, Pakistan does not have a "no first use" policy for its nuclear arsenal. India adopted the "no first use" policy shortly after its nuclear tests in 1998.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/pak-navy-inaugurates-strategic-force-hea...

Here's a DefenseNews article on Pakistan's sea-based nukes:

Pakistan has acknowledged the existence of a sea-based nuclear deterrent with the recent inauguration of the Headquarters of the Naval Strategic Force Command (NSFC) by the head of the Navy, Adm. Asif Sandhila.

A May 19 press release by the military’s Inter Services Public Relations stated the NSFC “will perform a pivotal role in development and employment of the Naval Strategic Force,” and was “the custodian of the nation’s 2nd strike capability.”

Mansoor Ahmed, lecturer at Quaid-e-Azam University’s Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, and who specializes in Pakistan’s nuclear and missile programs, said this is all but specific confirmation of the widely speculated submarine-launched variant of the Babur/HATF-VII (Vengeance-VII) cruise missile.

Analyst Usman Shabbir of the Pakistan Military Consortium think tank said Pakistan has been working on its sea-based deterrent for some time.

“When the Babur was first revealed in 2005, it was claimed that it is mainly designed to be deployed from submarines. There was at least that speculation,” he said.

The Navy “has pretty good experience in using similar systems, for example, both submarine-launched Harpoon and Exocet use a similar system, and [the Navy] has operated both for a long time.”

Shabbir speculates that the launch method may be similar to the UGM-84 Harpoon’s method of being fired from torpedo tubes.

However, other analysts are not so certain the Navy can afford to undertake the responsibility of the nation’s second-strike capability.

Former Australian defense attaché to Islamabad Brian Cloughley said the size of Pakistan’s submarine force is too small to carry out this task.

“Pakistan’s current submarine fleet is not adequate in numbers [although well-trained] to be able to undertake detection and effective interdiction of the Indian fleet, given its size — which is increasing, even if slowly,” he said.

Currently, Pakistan’s submarine flotilla comprises two refurbished 1970s-era Agosta-70s and three 1990s-era Agosta-90B submarines. The latter are equipped with air independent propulsion (AIP) or are in the process of being retrofitted with the AIP module, and incrementally entered service from 1999.

Cloughley said interdiction of India’s fleet “must remain [the Navy’s] first priority,” and considers “conversion of the present assets to take Babur not only costly but a most regrettable diversion of budget allocation.”

“I would go so far as to say that, in present circumstances, it would be a grave error if such a program were to go ahead,” he added.

The Navy, however, has a requirement for new submarines and wants to increase their number. The Agosta-90B design has been superseded twice, once by the DCNI Scorpene, and briefly by a paper design called the Marlin before it was absorbed into the Scorpene family.

There is a confirmed requirement for 12 to 14 submarines to meet Navy expansion plans. This would allow for a constant war patrol of at least one deterrent-tasked submarine, leaving other submarines to carry out more traditional tasks.

However, Cloughley is still certain that Pakistan does not require such a capability.

“[Pakistan] has plenty of nuclear-capable SSMs and strike aircraft, and does not need a Navy-oriented second-strike capability,” he said.

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120523/DEFREG03/305230004/Paki...|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

Here's Daily Telegraph on India-Pakistan nuclear arms race:

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Pakistan has expanded its short-range missile capability while India is developing weapons systems which can fire nuclear warheads from land, sea and air.

The escalation in nuclear capabilities has caused alarm because, despite recent improvements in relations between the two countries, the threat of a nuclear conflict remains.

There were fears of a military clash in 2008, shortly after Pakistan-based terrorists launched a multi-target attack on Mumbai, while in 2002 there were real concerns that rising tensions could lead to a nuclear attack.

Those concerns are based on Pakistan's development of "first-strike" tactical short-range warheads to counter India's superior conventional forces and weak mechanisms to avoid misunderstandings between the two countries in a military build-up.

According to the Stockholm-based think tank Pakistan has expanded its arsenal of short-range tactical missiles, which can be used to strike smaller targets like bridges, tank columns and other installations.
--------
India unveiled its first nuclear-powered submarine earlier this year and is expected to launch its first nuclear-armed submarine some time next year to complete its land, sea and air capability.

Pakistan is believed to have slightly more nuclear warheads than India – 90 to 110 compared with New Delhi's 80-100. But experts say the figures may not include Pakistan's growing number of short-range tactical weapons.

Dr Anupam Srivastava, leading nuclear security expert and director of the Centre for International Trade and Security at Georgia University, said the concern over Pakistan's build-up of tactical nuclear weapons is that it has a "first-use policy". "In a conflict between India and Pakistan, Pakistan's policy is that it can and will be the first to use nuclear weapons. Faced with India's conventional military superiority, they've tried to build an additional layer of security for themselves to deter a conventional strike," he said.

The danger is that the two countries have yet to develop the channels of dialogue between their military chiefs to ensure there are no catastrophic misunderstandings over troop movements and military exercises. "This doesn't exist for tactical weapons between India and Pakistan," he added.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/9312139/Ind...

Here's a Rediff report on Israeli help for India during Kargil:

In a startling revelation, the Israeli Ambassador in New Delhi, Mark Sofer, has said that his country had assisted India in 'turning around' the situation during the 1999 Kargil war with Pakistan.

In an interview with a weekly, the envoy disclosed how defence ties between the two countries got a boost after Kargil when Israel came to India's rescue at a critical time, helping turn around the situation on the ground.

'I think we proved to the Indian government that you can rely on us, that we have the wherewithal. A friend in need is a friend indeed,' he said.

He also disclosed that Indo-Israeli defence ties would go beyond mere selling-buying of arms.

'We do have a defence relationship with India, which is no secret. What is secret is what the defence relationship is? And with all due respect, the secret part will remain secret,' he said in the interview to Outlook weekly magazine.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/feb/08kargil.htm

Here's an Indian analyst Abhijit Singh of IDSA on Pak sea-based nuke plans:

Recent reports from Pakistan seem to suggest the Pakistan Navy (PN) may be on the cusp of developing a naval nuclear missile capability, even as its plans for acquiring a nuclear submarine capability gradually become clearer. The first indication of this came in May 2012 when Pakistan tested the Hatf VII (Babur)—an indigenously developed Cruise Missile with high precision and manoeuvrability. Reports suggested that the missile was launched from a state-of-the-art multi-tube Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV), which significantly enhances the targeting and employment options of the Babur Weapon System in both the conventional and nuclear modes. Importantly, this is the third test of the Babur in the recent past, of different capacities and loads.

Then, in another significant development, on May 19, the PN inaugurated the Headquarters of the Naval Strategic Force Command (NSFC). A statement from the Pakistan military’s Inter Services Public Relations said that the NSFC “will perform a pivotal role in development and employment of the Naval Strategic Force,” and was “the custodian of the nation’s 2nd strike capability” – presumably for use against India, in case the need ever arose. This is noteworthy because Pakistan is not known to have a sea-based second strike capability. Therefore, a public statement that the NSFC would be in-charge of such a capability is an open admission of sorts that Pakistan is in the process of developing a naval variant of a strategic nuclear missile.

For long, the Pakistan Navy has viewed the Indian Navy (IN) with suspicion. The IN’s sustained growth over the past few years has, in fact, become an excuse for the PN to push for its own development and expansion of assets. In an article written for a Pakistan daily in May 2012, Tauqir Naqvi, a retired Vice Admiral of the PN, suggested that the ‘hegemonic’ elements of the Indian Navy’s maritime strategy have been the main drivers of the resurgence of the Pakistan Navy. The article, when read closely, is a dead give-away of Pakistan’s real ambitions with regard to nuclear weapons and nuclear submarines.

Naqvi writes extensively about India’s strategic vision, characterising it as a “hegemonic” impulse that has led the IN to aim for control of the seas over an area extending from the Red Sea in the West to Fiji in the Pacific Ocean. While Pakistan, he contends, is a “peace-loving” nation, India has never been serious about developing friendly relations, fixated as it has been with the “idea of projecting power”. Surprisingly, he showers Indian scientists and the IN with some unexpected, even if ‘motivated’ praise, by mentioning the sterling efforts of the Indian scientific community and shipyard workers in operationalising a strategic maritime capability. The complimentary references are, in effect, a none-too-disguised message to Pakistan's political leadership and mandarins in the defence ministry about the ineluctable need for Pakistan to buttress its own strategic arsenal with naval nuclear missiles and a nuclear submarine, without which, the PN can forget about countering the “evil designs” of the Indian Navy.
-----------

Pakistan’s naval leadership will also be aware of the risks and financial costs of developing and operating a nuclear submarine—the need to constantly refine equipment and train personnel; of razor-sharp communications and command and control systems; and the requirement of mastering safety procedures. In the final analysis the SSBN is not an asset if it is not mastered well and operated optimally. Merely possessing one offers no strategic advantages.

http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/PakistanNavysNuclearAspirations_Abh...

Here's a Khaleej Times report on India-Pakistan Navy talks to avoid incidents on high seas:

Pakistan and India are discussing the establishment of a mechanism of direct contact between the navies of the two countries to avert military confrontations on high seas.

The mechanism could involve a communication system like hotline between senior officers of the two navies akin to the one between the armies.

“These are issues we are discussing and certainly with respect to Pakistan, it forms part of the discussion between the two foreign ministries which is the protocol to prevent incidents at sea,” Indian Navy Chief Admiral Nirmal Verma said.

The development comes in the backdrop of incidents involving Pakistan Naval ship Babur and Indian ship INS Godavari in the Gulf of Aden last year.

The Navy Chief was asked about the progress made by India in establishing such a protocol with China for avoiding conflicts on high seas. Admiral Verma said, “With China, this is something which would be in place when we have requirements to talk to each other.”

Indian and Chinese warships have also been reportedly involved in difficult situations as last year in South China Sea Indian ship INS Airavat was asked by the Chinese Navy to leave the maritime area.

Asked about the need for having Confidence Building Measures with the Chinese Navy as their aircraft carriers would also soon operate in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR), Verma said the two navies were cooperating in the Gulf of Aden and the issue was “out of place”.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/displayarticle.asp?xfile=data/internati...§ion=international&col=

Pakistan test fires nuclear-capable Babur Cruise Missile, reports Express Trib:

..The military described the Hatf-VII Babur missile as a “low-flying, terrain-hugging missile, which can strike targets both at land and sea with pin point accuracy” and has a range of 700 kilometres.

A statement issued by the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) said the missile is equipped with modern cruise missile technology of Terrain Contour Matching (TERCOM) and Digital Scene Matching and Area Co-relation (DSMAC), and is also capable of carrying both nuclear and conventional warheads.

The ISPR said Monday’s launch was carried out from a “Multi Tube Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV)”, which it said improved the Babur system’s targeting and deployment capabilities.

The test was witnessed by Director General Strategic Plans Division Lt Gen (retd) Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM) Chairperson Muhammad Irfan Burney and other senior officers from the armed forces and strategic organisations. The Strategic Command and Control Support System (SCCSS) was employed for the test, which allows real-time remote monitoring of the missile’s flight path.

Defence and missile expert Syed Muhammad Ali, while talking to The Express Tribune, highlighted the significance of the missile test.

“The Babur cruise missile is a far more advanced, miniaturised, accurate, stealthy and cost-effective nuclear delivery means available to Pakistan and after (its) induction, imposing a naval blockade on Pakistan will be impossible for any power in the future. In addition, the range limitation relevant to ballistic missiles deployment is not applicable in the case of cruise missiles because they can be launched from both land and sea-based mobile platforms,” Ali said.

He added that Pakistan now had the capability to exercise a complete and robust command and control over its cruise missiles throughout its flight trajectory and can be employed in both countervalue and counterforce targeting strategies.

Furthermore, Ali said that the Hatf-VII Babur missile was a cost-effective delivery system, adding that Pakistan could manufacture more than a dozen cruise missiles at the cost of a single ballistic missile.

“The upgraded capability of cruise missile Babar to hit mobile sea-based targets with both conventional and nuclear warheads has further augmented the value of our nuclear deterrence by proving to the world that Pakistan can protect not only its territory but also its maritime security from all powers at all times,” Ali added.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/438336/pakistan-test-fires-hatf-vii-bab...

Here are some excerpts of Bulletin of Atomic Scientists Nuclear Book on "non-strategic" nuclear weapons possessed by Pakistan:

In this Nuclear Notebook, the authors write about nonstrategic nuclear weapons—starting with the difficulty of finding a universal definition for them. Although the United States and Russia have reduced their nonstrategic stockpiles, significant inventories remain. And other nuclear weapons states appear to have nonstrategic nuclear weapons as well. Today, at least five of the world’s nine nuclear weapons states have, or are developing, what appears to meet the definition of a nonstrategic nuclear weapon: Russia, the United States, France, Pakistan, and China. The authors present information on the weapons at each of these arsenals.
-----------
Like France, Pakistan characterizes all its nuclear weapons as strategic. However, Pakistan is developing a new short-range rocket with nuclear capability that certainly would be characterized as a nonstrategic nuclear weapon if it belonged to Russia or the United States. Moreover, even the Pakistani statements about the weapon clearly place it in a different category.

The new weapon, the Nasr, is a 60-kilometer ballistic missile launched from a mobile twin-canister launcher. Following its first test launch in April 2011, the Pakistani military news organization, Inter Services Public Relations, described the Nasr as carrying a nuclear warhead “of appropriate yield with high accuracy,” with “shoot and scoot attributes” that was developed as a “quick response system” to “add deterrence value” to Pakistan’s strategic weapons development program “at shorter ranges” in order “to deter evolving threats” (Inter Services Public Relations, 2011).

This language, which has been repeated after subsequent Nasr tests, strongly indicates a weapon with a new mission that resembles nonstrategic nuclear weapons.

http://bos.sagepub.com/content/68/5/96.full

Here's Maleeha Lodhi's Op Ed on "Pakistan's Nuclear Compulsions" published in The News:

Much alarm has been raised in the West about Pakistan’s enhancement of its nuclear capability and the position it has taken at negotiations in Geneva on a treaty banning the production of bomb making fissile material. Western analysts have often depicted this as a mindless, irrational drive motivated by the unbridled ambitions of the nuclear scientific-military lobby.

This is far from true. To understand the strategic rationale for Pakistan’s fissile material needs – achieving credible nuclear deterrence at the lowest possible cost and level – the issue must be placed in a proper, broader perspective. It means taking into account the chain of rapid developments that have undermined the region’s strategic equilibrium and affected Pakistan’s nuclear threshold. They include the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal, exemption for India by the Nuclear Supplier’s Group, India’s conventional military and strategic build-up, enunciation of offensive doctrines involving ‘Proactive Operations’ and efforts to develop a missile defence capability.

Many of these developments were aided and abetted by the international community in pursuit of their strategic and commercial interests. Pakistan’s warnings were repeatedly ignored that discriminatory nuclear actions would be consequential for the region and oblige Islamabad to act to preserve the credibility of nuclear deterrence and ensure strategic stability.

The interplay between a changing strategic environment – Pakistan’s perception of increasing regional asymmetry in both nuclear and conventional capabilities – global non-proliferation efforts and technical compulsions help to explain why Pakistan has been building fissile stocks.

The historical context is important. The nuclear tests conducted by India and Pakistan in 1998 helped to establish strategic balance and provided Pakistan the reassurance of possessing a strategic equaliser to India’s conventional military preponderance.
----------
To hedge against this, Pakistan will likely multiply its missile numbers, including cruise missiles, and increase operational readiness to avert the destruction of its strategic assets in a pre-emptive strike. This too has a bearing on the amount of fissile material Pakistan would want to acquire.

These are the principal factors driving Pakistan’s fissile material requirements. The purpose is not to match the quantities or stockpiles that India has – which it can enhance if it wants to by diverting indigenous production for weapons use because of the nuclear fuel supply guaranteed by the US and similar agreements with other nations. Pakistan’s aim is not to engage in relentless production but to attain sufficiency for a spectrum of nuclear weapons, strategic, operational and tactical and to assure a second-strike capability.

As Pakistan’s diplomatic efforts to persuade India to establish a strategic restraint regime have yielded nothing, it has had to evolve a force development strategy at home and an effective negotiating position in Geneva to secure its national security interests.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-141314-Pakistan%E2%80%99s-n...

Here's a Defense Journal report on Pakistan Navy's land attack missile test:

ISLAMABAD — The Pakistan Navy has test-fired a new land attack missile in the North Arabian Sea off the coast of Pakistan this week.

According to a Navy news release, the test included “firings of a variety of modern missiles including the maiden Land Attack Missile (LAM)” and the tests “demonstrated lethality, precision and efficacy” of the Navy’s weapon systems as well as the “high state of readiness and professionalism” of the Navy.

The release also stated the test “reaffirms credibility of deterrence at sea.”

A Navy spokesman confirmed “multiple platforms were engaged” in firing missiles. The firings took place on Dec. 19 and 21.

Though the Navy has a variety of anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles, the Navy would not confirm the identity of the land-attack missile when asked.

Mansoor Ahmed from Quaid-e-Azam University’s Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, who specializes in Pakistan’s national deterrent and delivery program, believes the missile is one of two varieties: either a land attack variant of the Chinese C-802/CSS-N-8 Saccade anti-ship missile in service with a variety of naval platforms; or a variant of the HATF-VII/Vengeance-VII Babur cruise missile.

“Coupled with a miniaturized plutonium warhead, a naval version of the several hundred kilometer-range Babur [land attack cruise missile] or a 120-kilometer range C-802 missile can potentially provide Pakistan with a reliable if not an assured second strike capability and will complete the third leg of Pakistan’s eventual triad-based credible minimum deterrent — of which the naval leg was missing until now,” he said.

A land-attack variant of the C-802 would be able to be fired from existing launchers aboard Pakistani ships.

Ahmed however pointed out that M. Irfan Burney — chairman of the National Engineering and Scientific Commission (NESCOM), the research and development body that designed and manufactured the Babur cruise missile — witnessed the test firings. Ahmed believes that supports the notion that the missile was the Babur.

Burney was joined by Chief of Naval Staff Adm. Muhammad Asif Sandila, onboard the F-22P class frigate Zulfiquar.

The test comes seven months after Pakistan inaugurated the Naval Strategic Force Command. The Babur, once integrated with an operational naval command and control, “will help diversify the options available to counter India’s growing second strike capabilities at sea,” Ahmed said.

He said the Navy will be able to “strike critical counter-value and other strategic targets all along India’s coastline and maintain a semblance of strategic stability in the Arabian Sea.”

“Pakistan’s response in this field was necessary in the face of an exponential increase in Indian strategic capabilities, such as ballistic-missile defenses and the induction of SSBNs [ballistic-missile submarines] and planned $40 billion worth of naval weapons platform acquisitions over the next decade,” he added.

Ahmed said a “nuclear-tipped [land-attack cruise missile] is a readily available and affordable alternative for Pakistan instead of a dedicated SSBN.”

With an economy in chronically poor shape, the question of affordability and meeting the Navy’s expansion requirements in the face of a shortage of funds is a pressing concern.

However, after witnessing the test firings and voicing his appreciation of the operational preparedness of the fleet, Sandila also said the government was “cognizant of PN’s developmental needs and all out efforts are being made to address critical capability gaps.”

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20121221/DEFREG04/312210004/Paki...

Here are a few excerpts of an MIT doctoral thesis by Christopher Clary on future India-Pakistan conflict:

Conventional wisdom suggests that India has gained sufficient conventional superiority to fight and win a limited war, but the reality is that India is unlikely to be able to both achieve its political aims and prevent dangerous escalation.

------------
While India is developing limited options, my analysis suggests India's military advantage over Pakistan is much less substantial than is commonly believed.
------------
Most analyses do not account adequately for how difficult it would be for the navy to have a substantial impact in a short period of time. Establishing even a partial blockade takes time, and it takes even more time for that blockade to cause shortages on land that are noticeable. As the British strategist Julian Corbett noted in 1911, "it is almost impossible that a war can be decided by naval action alone. Unaided, naval pressure can only work by a process of exhaustion. Its effects must always be slow…."7 Meanwhile, over the last decade, Pakistan has increased its ability to resist a blockade. In addition to the main commercial port of Karachi, Pakistan has opened up new ports further west in Ormara and Gwadar and built road infrastructure to distribute goods from those ports to Pakistan's heartland. To close off these ports to neutral shipping could prove particularly difficult since Gwadar and the edge of Pakistani waters are very close to the Gulf of Oman, host to the international shipping lanes for vessels exiting the Persian Gulf. A loose blockade far from shore would minimize risks from Pakistan's land-based countermeasures but also increase risks of creating a political incident with neutral vessels.
-------------
The air balance between India and Pakistan is also thought to heavily favor the larger and more technologically sophisticated Indian Air Force. While India has a qualitative and quantitative advantage, the air capabilities gap narrowed rather than widened in the last decade. The Pakistan Air Force has undergone substantial modernization since 2001, when Pakistan exited from a decade of US-imposed sanctions. With purchases from US, European, and Chinese vendors, Pakistan has both dramatically increased the number of modern fighter aircraft with beyond-visual-range capability as well as new airborne early warning and control aircraft. Meanwhile, India's fighter modernization effort has been languid over the last decade. India's largest fighter procurement effort—the purchase of 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft—began in 2001 and has been slowed considerably by cumbersome defense procurement rules designed to avoid the appearance of corruption.
---------------
The ground forces balance has received the most attention from outside observers, in large part because the Indian Army has publicized its efforts at doctrinal innovation, most often referred to under the "Cold Start" moniker. However, India's ground superiority is unlikely to be sufficient to achieve a quick victory.
----------
The net result of this analysis is to conclude that India's limited military options against Pakistan are risky and uncertain. Pakistan has options to respond to limited Indian moves, making counter-escalation likely. At least in the near-term, Pakistan appears to have configured its forces in such a way as to deny India "victory on the cheap." Therefore, India might well have to fight a full-scale war that could destroy large segments of Pakistan's army to achieve its political aims, which would approach Pakistan's stated nuclear redlines. Such a conclusion should induce caution among Indian political elites who are considering military options to punish or coerce Pakistan in a future crisis. ...

web.mit.edu/cis/precis/2012spring/india_pakistan.html

Here's Global Times on US delivering P3C Orions to Pakistan:

Pakistan is expected to receive maritime surveillance P3C Orion aircraft from the United States this year, state media quoted the country's ambassador in Washington as saying.

Ms. Sherry Rehman, who has been meeting with top American officials as part of efforts to restore the full range of bilateral ties, has said both the civil and defense cooperation between the two sides are gaining momentum, radio Pakistan reported on Monday.

Pakistan's Vice Chief of the Naval Staff Vice Admiral Muhammad Shafique, currently on a visit to the US, discussed matters related to ongoing cooperation between Pakistani and American navies and expressed satisfaction over senior level exchanges.

He expressed the hope for early departure of P3C maritime aircraft from the United States.

Pakistan had signed an agreement with the American defense manufacturer Lockheed Martin seven years ago, for the delivery of seven Orion aircrafts.

The Navy received three of the aircrafts in 2010, while another two were delivered in 2011. In addition to the Orions, the Navy is also operating seven aging Fokker F27-200 Friendship naval surveillance aircrafts, which it had acquired during the 1980s.

The Orions are one of the most popular maritime surveillance aircrafts in the world, being used by the naval forces in a number of nations such as the US, Japan, New Zealand and Brazil.

The aircrafts were first inducted into the US Navy in 1962, and so far more than 750 units have been manufactured. The US Navy had recently decided to replace its Orion fleet with the Boeing P-8A Poseidons.

Pakistani ambassador said that Pak-US interactions are important to push forward Pakistan-US bilateral defense ties and said the Pakistan Navy's key role in securing sea lanes in North Arabian Sea as part of the anti-piracy international coalition has been widely appreciated in the United States.

State media said that as a result of some hectic diplomacy, Washington and Islamabad have come out of a difficult phase in bilateral ties since early 2011, following a series of high-level meetings and trust-building measures.

The US recently released long-delayed Coalition Support Fund reimbursements and both countries have resumed working on different levels of cooperation through regular forums of institutionalized dialogues and working groups

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/758602.shtml

Here's a report on world's largest exporters and importers of arms:

A new report says China has passed Britain to become the world’s fifth-largest arms exporter.

The report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute says Pakistan is the biggest buyer of Chinese arms, accounting for 55 percent of China’s exports.

The report says Chinese weapon exports between 2008 and 2012 rose 162 percent over the previous five-year period.

It said the United States remains the world's top arms exporter, accounting for 30 percent of the market, followed by Russia at 26 percent, Germany at seven percent, France at six percent, and China at five percent.

The world’s top five arms importers were all in Asia. The report said India was the biggest buyer, followed by China, Pakistan, South Korea and Singapore.

http://www.rferl.org/content/china-arms-pakistan/24931314.html

Here's an ET report on Pak-Turk air combat exercises:

International Air Exercise Indus Viper-II conducted between Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and Turkish Air Force (TuAF) concluded at an operational airbase of PAF, a statement said on Sunday.

Maj Gen Ares Mehmat, Chief of Operations at TuAF, was the chief guest at the culmination ceremony, it said. Air Marshal Waseemuddin, Deputy Chief of the Air Staff (Operations), PAF and M Babur Hizlan, the Ambassador of Turkey, were also present at the occasion.

The Turkish Air Force contingent comprising five F-16 Fighting Falcons, combat pilots and ground technical crew participated in the air exercise conducted from March 4 to16,.

According to the statement, PAF emphasises on the combat training of its air and ground crew and regularly undertakes air exercises with air forces of friendly nations. These exercises play a vital role in honing the combat skills of PAF air crew and enable them to learn the latest air power employment strategies.

Indus Viper II provided an opportunity to combat crew of both the air forces to acquaint themselves with applied tactics of air power in near real scenario.

PAF has been participating in a number of international air exercises with some of the best air forces of the world, including United States Air Force, Italian Air Force, Turkish Air Force (TuAF) and other allied countries.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/522514/indus-viper-ii-airmen-from-pakis...

Here's an AFP report on Pakistan arms imports:

China’s arms exports in 2008-2012 grew by 162% compared to the previous five years, with most of them — 55% — going to Pakistan.

“China’s rise has been driven primarily by large-scale arms acquisitions by Pakistan,” Paul Holtom, a research director at SIPRI said in a press release.

“A number of recent deals indicate that China is establishing itself as a significant arms supplier to a growing number of important recipient states.”

Pakistan has long been China’s key ally in South Asia. The report also named Myanmar, Bangladesh and Venezuela as importers of Chinese arms.

China has defended its rules on overseas weapons sales following the report. Foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said Monday that such sales follow domestic laws and UN guidelines.

Hong said weapons sales have to be justified by the legitimate needs of the recipient and must not harm peace, security or stability.

Islamabad confirms
The Inter Services Press Relations (ISPR) directorate, the public relations wing of the Pakistan military has confirmed that China is “one of Pakistan’s biggest partners” in terms of cooperation in the defence field.

In 2010, Pakistan signed agreements worth over $10 billion with China, many of which were linked to cooperation in the field of defence.

But the ISPR did not confirm whether China is the biggest partner and whether Pakistan’s imports most of its defense equipment from China.

“We have three major partners. These are the US, China and France.”

General (retd) Talat Masood, a defence analyst, said that his belief was that US continues to remain the main source of Pakistan’s defence hardware.

“I think given the ongoing military arrangements with the US, it is still Pakistan’s No 1 source for military hardware. This also includes money spent on military programs by the US government.”

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/China/Pakistan-buys-55-of-...

Here are some excerpts from Stratfor's analyst Robert Kaplan on India-China and India-Pakistan rivalry:

The best way to gauge the relatively restrained atmosphere of the India-China rivalry is to compare it to the rivalry between India and Pakistan. India and Pakistan abut one another. India's highly populated Ganges River Valley is within 480 kilometers (300 miles) of Pakistan's highly populated Indus River Valley. There is an intimacy to India-Pakistan tensions that simply does not apply to those between India and China. That intimacy is inflamed by a religious element: Pakistan is the modern incarnation of all of the Muslim invasions that have assaulted Hindu northern India throughout history. And then there is the tangled story of the partition of the Asian subcontinent itself to consider -- India and Pakistan were both born in blood together.

Partly because the India-China rivalry carries nothing like this degree of long-standing passion, it serves the interests of the elite policy community in New Delhi very well. A rivalry with China in and of itself raises the stature of India because China is a great power with which India can now be compared. Indian elites hate when India is hyphenated with Pakistan, a poor and semi-chaotic state; they much prefer to be hyphenated with China. Indian elites can be obsessed with China, even as Chinese elites think much less about India. This is normal. In an unequal rivalry, it is the lesser power that always demonstrates the greater degree of obsession. For instance, Greeks have always been more worried about Turks than Turks have been about Greeks.

China's inherent strength in relation to India is more than just a matter of its greater economic capacity, or its more efficient governmental authority. It is also a matter of its geography. True, ethnic-Han Chinese are virtually surrounded by non-Han minorities -- Inner Mongolians, Uighur Turks and Tibetans -- in China's drier uplands. Nevertheless, Beijing has incorporated these minorities into the Chinese state so that internal security is manageable, even as China has in recent years been resolving its frontier disputes with neighboring countries, few of which present a threat to China.

India, on the other hand, is bedeviled by long and insecure borders not only with troubled Pakistan, but also with Nepal and Bangladesh, both of which are weak states that create refugee problems for India. Then there is the Maoist Naxalite insurgency in eastern and central India. The result is that while the Indian navy can contemplate the projection of power in the Indian Ocean -- and thus hedge against China -- the Indian army is constrained with problems inside the subcontinent itself.

India and China do play a great game of sorts, competing for economic and military influence in Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar and Sri Lanka. But these places are generally within the Greater Indian subcontinent, so that China is taking the struggle to India's backyard.

Just as a crucial test for India remains the future of Afghanistan, a crucial test for China remains the fate of North Korea. Both Afghanistan and North Korea have the capacity to drain energy and resources away from India and China, though here India may have the upper hand because India has no land border with Afghanistan, whereas China has a land border with North Korea. Thus, a chaotic, post-American Afghanistan is less troublesome for India than an unraveling regime in North Korea would be for China, which faces the possibility of millions of refugees streaming into Chinese Manchuria.

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/india-china-rivalry

US issues arms sales waivers for Pakistan, reports PTI:

In an indication of the “positive trajectory” of the bilateral ties, the U.S. has issued a waiver, second in six months, for sale of major defence equipment to Pakistan citing national security interest.

The waiver issued quietly by the then Deputy Secretary of States Thomas Nides on February 15, and posted on the State Department website a week later on February 22, would pave the way for some major defence equipment sales to Pakistan.

“The Department issued the waiver because we have determined that security assistance is important to the national security interests of the United States and is a critical component of U.S. efforts to continue to build a strong, mutually beneficial relationship with Pakistan grounded in concrete action on areas of shared interest,” a State Department spokesperson told PTI.

The waiver, issued within a fortnight of Secretary of State John Kerry taking the reins U.S. diplomacy on February 1, allows for the execution of America’s Foreign Military Financing (FMF) programme, and for the sale or export of certain Major Defence Equipment (MDE).

“Major Defence Equipment,” means any U.S. manufactured defence article whose export is controlled by U.S. Munitions List which has a nonrecurring research and development cost of more than $50,000,000 or a total production cost of more than $200,000,000. These items require Congressional notification, the spokesman said.

“As a matter of policy we do not discuss proposed defence sales or transfers until they have been formally notified to Congress,” he said, refraining to give any figure to the expected sale of major defence items to Pakistan after this waiver.

According to a known South Asia expert, the two waivers issued by the then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in September were sweeping and so allowed the release of all forms of assistance for the fiscal 2012 including non-military.

It seems the main purpose of the February 15 waiver was to create a positive atmosphere for meetings in Washington DC with visiting senior military officials from Pakistan.

“These waivers don’t represent an improvement in U.S.-Pakistan relations so much as they represent attempts to improve such relations,” an expert explained said adding that from the U.S. perspective, some level of working relations with Pakistan is necessary for the U.S. drawdown from Afghanistan to go smoothly.

Observing that security assistance builds Pakistan’s capabilities in countering terrorism, the State Department official said that such assistance will continue to be implemented consistent with its policy goals of supporting Pakistan’s shared interest in regional stability and countering terrorism.

“Despite the past challenges in our bilateral relationship with Pakistan, we are encouraged by recent engagements which indicate the positive trajectory of the relationship, including productive working group meetings addressing the full range of the relationship and Pakistan’s participation in Core Group meetings with Afghanistan,” the spokesperson said.

“As we have said, our number one shared priority remains pursuing our counterterrorism objectives to secure the safety of American and Pakistani citizens. We face a common threat from a common enemy, and we must confront terrorism and extremism together,” the official asserted.....

http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/us-issues-fresh-wa...

Here's a report on China supplying 1000 MW Chashma 3 nuclear power plant:

China confirmed this week it will sell a new 1,000-megawatt nuclear reactor to Pakistan that the United States says would violate Beijing’s obligations under a nuclear supplier control group.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei was asked Monday about a report in the Free Beacon March 22 that first disclosed the secret agreement for the reactor reached last month in Beijing between the China National Nuclear Corp. and the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission.

“China has noted the relevant report,” Hong told reporters in Beijing.

Normally, Chinese government spokesmen deny such reports and label them “groundless” as a way to avoid comment. The spokesman’s use of the phrase “noted the relevant report” is unusual and a tacit admission the report is accurate.

U.S. intelligence and diplomatic officials privately said the agreement was reached in Beijing during a visit by a high-level Pakistani delegation of nuclear industry officials from Feb. 15 to 18.

The Chinese at the meeting urged Pakistan to keep the deal secret to avoid expected international opposition by states that say the sale violates China’s commitment to the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a 46-member association aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons.

China agreed in 2004 not to sell additional reactors to Pakistan’s Chashma nuclear facility beyond the two reactors that began operating in 2000 and 2011.

However, Hong denied the sale violates the voluntary NSG guidelines.

“The cooperation between China and Pakistan does not violate relevant principles of the Nuclear Suppliers Group,” he said. “In recent years, China and Pakistan do indeed carry out some joint projects related to civilian use of nuclear energy. These projects are for peaceful purpose only, in compliance with the international obligations shared by both countries, and they are subject to guarantee and monitor by international atomic energy organization.”

However, U.S. intelligence officials said the China National Nuclear Corp. (CNNC) is Beijing’s main nuclear weapons producer and is working to modernize Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal in addition to the civilian reactor construction at Chashma.

China also is working to develop Pakistan’s nuclear fuel reprocessing capabilities, the officials said....

http://freebeacon.com/concerns-proliferating/

Here's a WSJ report on Indian media's rejection of India-Pakistan hyphenation:

If you want to understand how far away India and Pakistan are from détente, take a look at how Indian newspapers are reacting to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s comments about the peace process at an event in New Delhi last night.

Mr. Kerry made the point that India and Pakistan, who have fought three wars since 1947, could use trade as the thin end of the wedge from which to improve overall relations. What’s more, he said, there were low-hanging economic benefits from increased trade.

“If India and Pakistan can confidently invest in each other, then the rest of the world will more confidently invest in you,” Mr. Kerry said.

This might seem anodyne to the casual observer. But this is not the kind of talk that goes down well in India, where efforts to put the two countries on a level are often frowned upon.

From the perspective of many in India, Pakistan’s continued sponsoring of Islamist militant groups means there should be no comparison.

The Times of India, the country’s most circulated English language newspaper, in a front-page story, said Mr. Kerry “may have ruffled a few feathers when he sought to draw parity between India and Pakistan.”

The headline of the story said the secretary “hyphenates India and Pakistan” – a dirty verb in India.

It was the Bush administration that pushed for the “dehyphenation” of India and Pakistan. This resulted in a U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement in 2008, a deal that was not extended to Pakistan.

The Hindu, another popular daily, said Sunday’s speech had “displeased” Indian diplomats because Mr. Kerry “has the perception of being soft on Pakistan unlike Ms. Clinton.”

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was popular in New Delhi in part because of her tough stance on Pakistan for failing to do more to stamp out militancy on its soil.

In 2008, after 10 Pakistani militants laid siege to Mumbai, India’s financial capital, killing more than 160 people, Ms. Clinton leaned on Pakistan to take steps to cut off militant groups.

On a visit to India in 2011, Ms. Clinton said Pakistan had an obligation to prosecute the perpetrators of the 2008 attacks “transparently, fully and urgently.”

“We have made it very clear that Pakistan needs to bring people to justice,” she said. “There is a limit to what both the U.S and India can do, but we intend to press as hard as possible.”

Indian officials blame Pakistan for failing to push ahead with the prosecutions of the seven suspects it has charged in connection with the Mumbai attacks. Islamabad says it does not have enough evidence from Indian authorities to move on with the trials.

The Hindu appeared to chide Mr. Kerry for commenting on recent floods in northern India, which have killed hundreds of people, rather than bringing up those who died in Mumbai.

In an article titled “Kerry’s soft line on Pakistan a sore subject,” the paper said: “Departing from his predecessor Hillary Clinton’s line of commiserating with the victims of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, he opted to sympathize with the victims of the Uttarakhand flash floods instead.”

On Sunday, Mr. Kerry acknowledged there were contentious issues between the two countries, but said he hoped the recent election of Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif could herald a “new era” between the nations.

http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2013/06/24/indian-media-rejects-...

Sharp fall in Indian currency against the US dollar and slower economic growth have caused India's GDP for Fiscal  Year 2012-13 to shrink in US $ terms to $1.84 trillion from $1.87 trillion a year earlier. The Indian rupee has plummeted from 47.80 in 2012 to 54.30 to a US dollar in 2013, according to Business Standard. Since this report was published in Business Standard newspaper, Indian rupee has declined further against the US dollar to Rs. 59.52 today. At this exchange rate, India's GDP is down to $1.68 trillion, about $200 billion less than it was in  Fiscal 2011-12.

Meanwhile,  Pakistan's economy continues to struggle with its annual GDP rising just 3.6% to $252 billion ($242 billion at Rs. 100 to a USD exchange rate)  in fiscal 2012-13, according to Economic Survey of Pakistan 2012-13 estimates based on 9 months data. The country is facing militancy and energy shortages impacting its economy.

Here's an Indian report on the state of Indian submarine force:

The recent disaster in the Indian submarine INS Sindhurakshak that perhaps killed all 18 Navy personnel on-board has raised a pertinent question on the Indian Navy's submarine conditions as well as its underwater combat edge. According to a TOI report, currently, India can only deploy 7-8 "aging conventional" submarines against enemy forces.

The stark reality is that the Indian Navy is left with only 13 aging diesel-electric submarines - 11 of them over 20 years old. Out of the 13 submarines - 9 Kilo-class of Russian origin and 4 HDW of German-origin - are undergoing reparation to 'extend' their operational lives. The only "face saver" of the Navy seems to be the INS Chakra, the only nuclear-powered submarine, taken on a 10-year lease from Russia last year. But due to international treaties, it is not armed with nuclear-tipped missiles. With its 300-km range Klub-S land-attack cruise missiles, other missiles and advanced torpedoes, the INS Chakra can serve as a deadly `hunter-killer' of enemy submarines and warships. Moreover, India has been indecisive to fit Air-Independent Propulsion (AIP) in the last two of the six French Scorpene submarines being constructed for over Rs 23,000 crore at Mazagon Docks under "Project-75". The first Scorpene will be delivered only by November 2016. On August 12, the Indian Navy launched its aircraft carrier INS Vikrant, placing India in the fifth rank, after US, Russia, Britain and France, who have the ability to design and build aircraft carriers of 40,000 tonnes and above. With a capacity to deploy over 30 aircraft and helicopters, it is considered to be the biggest aircraft carrier in India. Pakistan Navy Power: Whereas the neighbouring country Pakistan, which is continuously violating ceasefire bilateral agreement along the Line of Control (LoC) since last month, is far more more advanced and well prepared in terms of submarines. Presently, Pakistan is well equipped with five "new conventional" submarines and is considering to get six more 'advanced' vessels from its all-weather friend China. China already flexes its muscles with 47 diesel-electric submarines and eight nuclear-powered submarines. Incidentally, the Pakistan Navy is the first force in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) to have submarines equipped with air-independent propulsion (AIP) in the shape of three French Agosta-90B vessels. The difference: The conventional submarines have to surface every few days to get oxygen to recharge their batteries in contrast with the AIP equipped submarines that can stay submerged for much longer periods to significantly boost their stealth and combat capabilities.

http://news.oneindia.in/2013/08/20/india-far-behind-pakistans-power...

Here's a piece from American Thinker on close India-Israel tied:

There is also a blossoming military and commercial relationship between India and Israel. Israel is India's second largest arms supplier after Russia, and Israeli-Indian military cooperation extends to technology upgrades, joint research, intelligence cooperation, and even space (in 2008, India launched a 300-kilogram Israeli satellite into orbit). Israel has upgraded India's Soviet-era armor and aircraft and provided India with sea-to-sea missiles, radar, and other surveillance systems, border monitoring equipment, night vision devices, and other military support. Bilateral trade reached U.S. $6 billion last year and negotiations began this year for a free trade agreement.
Israeli-Indian cooperation in agriculture and water technology is growing both through government-sponsored initiatives and private business deals. Last year, Israeli and Indian government institutions jointly launched an online network that provides real-time communications between Indian farmers and Israeli agricultural technology experts, and Israel is in the process of setting up 28 agricultural training centers throughout India. Israeli Professor Yoram Oren has been studying the potential use of nano-filtration to filter out harmful textile dyes from India's polluted Noyyal River. Last June, a delegation of 16 high-ranking Indian officials from the water authorities of Rajasthan, Karnataka, Goa, and Haryana traveled to Israel to visit waste-water treatment plants and meet with some of Israel's leading environmentalists and agronomists to learn about the desert country's newest green technologies.

Tata Industries, the multi-billion-dollar Indian company, recently invested $5 million to kick-start the Technology Innovation Momentum Fund at Tel Aviv University's Ramot technology transfer company. Tata Industries hopes to capitalize on future Israeli innovation, like the algorithm for error correction in flash memory (which is one of the patents filed by Ramot and now inside billions of dollars worth of SanDisk products).
These are but a few examples of the remarkable cooperation between India and Israel. Such a synergistic relationship is unsurprising, given the historically harmonious relations between the peoples of Israel and India.
---
With the ongoing security threats posed by India's nuclear-armed rival, Pakistan, the Kashmir conflict (which recently claimed five Indian soldiers), and potential conflict with the other Asian heavyweight (China), India needs the kind of military edge that Israel can help it to obtain. Insofar as India provides an Asian counterweight to Chinese dominance, a powerful India bolstered by Israeli technological expertise is also in the interest of smaller Asian countries and the United States.
One area where India could deepen its alliance with both Israel and the U.S. is on the issue of Iranian nukes. India, the second largest importer of Iranian crude oil after China, won its third 180-day waiver from U.S. sanctions last June after reducing its oil purchases from Iran. But in 2012, Iran and India agreed to trade in rupees for shipments of oil, rice, sugar and soybeans, to circumvent U.S. financial sanctions on Iranian oil shipments. And Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals is now reportedly receiving a cargo of Iranian crude, after a 4-month hiatus, with Hindostan Petroleum also restarting imports soon. Iran may also become the top buyer of soybean meal from India for a second straight year, as Iran turns to Asia's biggest exporter to replace imports disrupted by Western sanctions....

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/08/india_israel_and_iran.html

Here's a news report on US security assistance for counter-insurgency in Pakistan:

The US-Pakistan Defense Consultative Group meeting tentatively would give a final shape to the five-year security assistance plan, developed during a meeting of defense officials of the two countries in February and is believed to zero in on the military hardware that the US would be providing to Pakistan.

Informed sources said after two meetings in the last one year -- Defense Consultative Group in December 2012 and Defense Resourcing Conference in February 2013 -- officials of US and Pakistan were able to develop a joint five-year plan for how security assistance would feed into defense cooperation on counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism issues and to help build Pakistan's capabilities in these areas.

Officials from Pakistan and the US during these two meetings identified seven broad areas of security assistance cooperation, which sources said initially covered 11 areas.

It is part of this decision that the Obama Administration this summer (July-August) informed the Congress of a number of appropriations related to security assistance to Pakistan.

This totalled about USD 1.4 billion in military assistance of which roughly USD 425 million was in Pakistan counter- insurgency and capabilities fund (PCCF) and the rest about USD 1 billion was in foreign military financing (FMF).

In addition, the notifications included roughly USD 260 million of civilian assistance, of which USD 230 million focused on energy programming for Pakistan and USD 30 million was the state department funding for civilian police programmes.

In September, the US also released to Pakistan USD 322 million as a reimbursement for military expenses made by Pakistan towards America's war against terrorism.

During these meetings, US and Pakistani officials agreed that the equipment security assistance would support seven core capabilities like night vision, precision strike, counter IED, survivability, border security, communications and maritime operations, maritime security.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/US-to-provide-security-...

Here's The Hindu newspaper piece on Pakistan Army doctrine:

“Army’s mother document” says growing Indian military power “disturbs strategic equilibrium of the region”

Pakistan’s official Army Doctrine calls on the country to “invoke disproportionate responses” in future wars with India, a copy of the document obtained by TheHindu has revealed. “The causes of conflict with the potential to escalate to the use of violence,” the classified internal document states, “emanate from the unresolved issue of Kashmir, the violation of treaty arrangements on sharing of natural resources, and the organised and deliberate support by external powers to militant organisations.”

The December, 2011, Doctrine does not name any country as a threat, but Pakistan has accused India of seeking to block its access to Indus waters, and backing terrorism. The Doctrine describes itself as the “army’s mother document” and “the fountainhead for all subordinate doctrines.”

Indian military sources told TheHindu the study was commissioned in the summer of 2008, soon after former chief of army staff General Pervez Kayani took office. It evolved through intensive discussions of the Kargil war of 1999 and the near-war that followed the December, 2001, terrorist attack on Parliament House

Georgetown University scholar Dr. C. Christine, author of a forthcoming book, Fighting to the End, says the Doctrine confirms what scholars have long known. “It tells us several interesting things,” she says, “among them that the Pakistan army sees Indian military modernisation as a threat, but that they also think nuclear weapons will insulate them from the consequences of pursuing high-risk strategies, like backing jihadist clients.”

Future wars, the Doctrine states, “will be characterised by high-intensity, high-tempo operations under a relatively transparent battle-space environment.” This, it states, is because of the “incremental increase in asymmetry of conventional forces and [the] nuclear overhang” — evident references to the programme of rapid modernisation India put into place after the 2001-2002 crisis, and both countries’ efforts to expand their nuclear weapons capabilities.

In the view of the Doctrine’s authors, de-facto parity between the two countries induced “through a combination of conventional and nuclear deterrence, has obviated the [likelihood of] conventional war.”

However, the Doctrine argues, “a disparity at the conventional plane continues to grow disproportionately, which too disturbs the strategic equilibrium of the region.” This, it states, “depletes peaceful diplomacy and dialogue, replacing it with coercion on the upper planes and violence across the lower-ends of the spectrum.”

“What worries Pakistan’s army,” says the former Indian Army vice-chief, Arvinder Lamba, “is their inability to organise offensive or defensive responses to our growing rapid mobilisation capacity. Their challenge is to deter us from striking by threatening nuclear weapons use in the face of the least provocation.

“India’s government and military must seek perceptual clarity on exactly what we intend to do in the face of such threats,” he said.

The Doctrine states that Pakistan will use nuclear weapons “only as a last resort, given its scale and scope of destruction.” Nuclear parity between India and Pakistan, it argues, “does not accrue any substantial military advantage to either side, other than maintaining the status quo.”

“In a nuclear deterrent environment,” it adds, “war is unlikely to create decisive military or political advantage.” However, it argues that “integration and synergy between conventional and nuclear forces, maintaining both at an appropriate level… [will avoid] an open-ended arms race.”

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/pakistan-army-warns-of-dispro...

From Dawn newspaper:

Even if limited in scope, a conflict with nuclear weapons would wreak havoc in the atmosphere and devastate crop yields, with the effects multiplied as global food markets went into turmoil, the report said.

The Nobel Peace Prize-winning International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War and Physicians for Social Responsibility released an initial peer-reviewed study in April 2012 that predicted a nuclear famine could kill more than a billion people.

In a second edition, the groups said they widely underestimated the impact in China and calculated that the world's most populous country would face severe food insecurity.

“A billion people dead in the developing world is obviously a catastrophe unparalleled in human history. But then if you add to that the possibility of another 1.3 billion people in China being at risk, we are entering something that is clearly the end of civilization,” said Ira Helfand, the report's author. http://www.dawn.com/news/1061711

Israeli Ambassador Mark Sofer in 08 said Israel helped India in turning around the situation in Kargil War by providing the much needed imagery of Pakistani army positions . ’We do have a defence relationship with India, which is no secret. What is secret is what the defence relationship is ? And with all due respeThis led to embassy level relations between India and Israel in 1992 . Everyone was startled when Israeli Ambassador Mark Sofer to an interview in 2008 said that Israel helped India in turning around the situation in Kargil War . Israel helped Indian Army by providing the much needed imagery of Pakistani army positions . ’We do have a defence relationship with India, which is no secret. What is secret is what the defence relationship is ? And with all due respect, the secret part will remain secret.” said Mark Sofer in an interview to Outlook Magazine.ct, the secret part will remain secret.” said Mark Sofer in an interview to Outlook Magazine.

Israel provided India with Laser Guidance Kits for dumb bombs (Mark 82, 83 etc.) as well as some Laser guided bombs. These kits were the reason that India could bomb Pakistan's major logistics base located on a very sharp ridge on the mountains. This attack with precision weapons significantly weekend Pakistan's military position Kargil. Later US followed with sale of similar equipment to India.

Here's a Defense News story on Pakistan's acquisition of surplus F-16s:

Of the fighters acquired from the Royal Jordanian Air Force, 12 of the aircraft are single seaters A models and one is a twin-seat F-16B. Jordan has recently acquired 15 similar aircraft – F-16A/B MLU from the Dutch Air Force, and expect these aircraft to be delivered in 2015. The aircraft Pakistan is receiving have also undergone MLU providing service and are cleared for 20 years operations or 3,000 flight hours on average. Pakistan has already received a number of F-16s

Pakistan has been contemplating to acquire more used planes for the PAF from other countries while the induction of new production JF-17 Thunder continues. The JF-17 is a co-production of Pakistan and China.

Through the upgrade process carried out at the US Air Force Ogden Air Logistics Centre, structural upgrades were performed to extend the aircraft life from the designed 4,000 to 8,000 hours flying time. Other modifications include changes to the engine bay, to receive the upgraded Pratt and Whitney F100-220E engine. Most of Pakistan’s F-16s are of early generation A/B models, acquired from US surplus and upgraded through MLU. Some were delivered free of charge by the US Government. The new acquisition will bring the Pakistani Air Force F-16 fleet to 76. Only 20 are of more modern make, namely F-16C and F-16C/D Block 52.

Through the years Pakistan has been a keen ‘collector’ of Dassault Mirage III/V fighter jets. Between 1967 and 1982 Islamabad bought 66 new Mirage III/V, but through the 1990s ‘collected’ over 130 of the fighters in the surplus market, from the French, Australian and Lebanese air forces. Many of these were modernized through the three phases ROSE program, improving avionics, weaponry and operational capabilities, associated with special missions, special weapons and night capabilities. The F-16, while adding many advanced capabilities, is not fulfilling many of these capabilities, therefore, it can replace the A-5C and F-7s in service, but not the Mirages.

Buying second hand fighters is one way for the Pakistani Air Force to manage the financial pressure that has limited its modernization since 2007. The acquisition of the JF-17 Thunder remains the single, highest priority, for which Islamabad secured a Chinese loan to keep production on track at an annual rate of 18 aircraft per year with 50 (Block I) jets in service. Defense News reported. Another significant investment was the acquisition of four Saab2000 Erieye early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft for US$1 billion, the last of those aircraft was delivered in 2010. (It is unclear how many of these are operational, one of the four was reportedly damaged or destroyed in August 2012 by a Taliban attack on the Kamra air base.)

Production of 50 Thunders of the second block began in December 2013. The Thunder Block II has improved avionics, weapons load and carriage capability, a data link and an electronic warfare suite, plus an in-flight refueling capability. With these enhancements the cost of the Thunder has increased from US$15 million to $25 million, according to Dawn. Pakistan’s requirement is for up to 250 planes to the F-7 and, eventually, Mirage III/5 fighter aircraft currently in service. The Thunder has already replaced the A-5C Fantan strike fighter with two squadrons.

While Pakistan is seeking relative parity with India, the PAF currently has no counterpart for India’s Su-30MKI, nor the future Rafale, (when and if the MMRCA is to be fielded). Pakistan has been considering buying Chinese FC-20 (J10) fighter planes they considered could be a fair match to the Rafale. However, it is now considered that Thunder Block III and more upgrades to their F-16s, bringing the Falcons to the Block52 level could satisfy the PAF requirements for the near term...
.

http://defense-update.com/20140219_pakistan-receive-13-f-16s-jordan...

Here's a Haaretz story on an Israeli's impressions of India:

...From the perspective of a metropolis of 17 million people, Israel looks like a small, distant country with peculiar, almost trivial problems. When reasonably decent drinking water for the masses and clean air to breathe are goals beyond reach, the right of return or Hezbollah’s arsenal of rockets seem to be almost theoretical issues. It’s also a question of one’s angle of observation: For the Indians there is no Middle East, only “western Asia.”

----

Since full diplomatic relations between Israel and India were established in 1992, the two have gradually but significantly moved closer together – primarily on the basis of growing economic trade, centering around sales by Israel’s defense industry to India.
-------------
India is now the No. 1 export target of Israel’s defense industries. The two countries. Both India and Israel avoid revealing details about the scale and nature of their security trade. However, in 2012 Israel’s Defense Ministry announced that the country’s total defense exports stood at $7 billion annually. India’s share of that is probably between $1 billion and $1.5 billion. And the potential for growth exists.
--------------
A partial list of the munitions that India has purchased from Israel in the past decade includes radar for the Arrow missile-intercept system, manufactured by Israel Aircraft Industries; sea-to-sea missiles manufactured by IAI and Rafael Advanced Weapons Systems; IAI warning planes, communications systems made by Elbit and ammunition manufactured by Israel Military Industries.

However, the potential of the transactions that have been discussed more recently is of a far greater scale. The projects include the upgrading of tanks and other combat vehicles, the supply of Barak-8 advanced missiles for protection of seagoing vessels and maritime facilities, and observation systems. India has expressed an interest in the technological progress embodied in the operational success of the Iron Dome system, manufactured by Rafael, in intercepting rockets fired from the Gaza Strip, though it’s doubtful that Iron Dome is appropriate for India’s needs.
-------------

In the face of the missile arsenal – and the nuclear capability – of Pakistan, India’s hostile neighbor, India must maintain commensurate strategic deterrence. The Indian authorities might thus be interested in systems, now under development, for interception of longer-range missiles.

----

At the moment, a huge deal is in the works. India wants to purchase advanced antitank missiles. The two suitors competing for the contract, which has an estimated worth of $1 billion, are Rafael’s Spike anti-tank guided missile and the Americans’ Javelin system.
-----------
In my short visit, I found a preponderance of pessimism and gloom, tempered somewhat by expectation of change. The fate of 1.2 billion people hangs in the balance. The change might come from the general election in May, in which, according to forecasts, the BJP, the Hindi nationalist party, will defeat the ruling National Congress Party.

Even on a lightning visit, Delhi is a surprising mix for someone encountering the city for the first time. Opposite the office building housing the research institute, people are scavenging in garbage cans. The impression made by the beauty of the grand monuments is erased within minutes by a depressing encounter with the girls who knock on the windows of the car and beg at every major intersection, with infants in tow who look groggy, as though they are under the influence of anesthetics...
------
On Sunday morning, a group of wild monkeys tranquilly crosses the road in the quarter where the foreign embassies are situated. The hotels look like fortified luxurious bastions from the period of the British Empire, and every foreigner is surrounded by a waiters and other staff members..
.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.575486

Here's news story about Pakistan's C-130 transport planes upgrade:

The U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress Tuesday of plans to sell the government of Pakistan a C-130 Fleet Upgrade Program package, plus associated equipment, parts, training, and logistical support valued at $100 million in total.

Specifically, the package includes upgrades to the avionics, engine management software and mechanical parts, cargo delivery system, and outer wing sets on six Pakistani C-130 transport planes. Also included in the sale will be spare parts, necessary support equipment, publications and technical documentation, and personnel training and training equipment, plus logistics support. The primary contractor on this sale has not yet been chosen, but the C-130s were originally built by Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT ) . A bidding process will be opened to choose the primary contractor.

Pakistan's air force includes a total of five C-130B and eleven C-130E aircraft. No mention of upgrades to the remaining 10 aircraft was made in the announcement, nor did DSCA clarify which specific models of C-130 would be getting the upgrades.

Explaining the sale to Congress, DSCA noted that Pakistan's planes are "facing airworthiness and obsolescence issues, and will require upgrades and repairs for continued operation and effectiveness. The proposed modernization of the C-130 fleet should ensure continued viability for an additional 10-15 years." DSCA added that this modernization is desirable to "improve the security of a Major Non-NATO ally which has been, and continues to be, an important force for regional stability and U.S. national security goals in the region."

According to DSCA, "there will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale." Nor will the sale "alter the basic military balance in the region."

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/03/11/congress-asked-to-...

The armed forces of Pakistan are the world’s largest recipient of $5 million funds the United States annually spends to impart technical education and training to foreign troops under its International Military Education and Training (IMET) programme.
Having reimbursed more than $11 billion as war expenditures to Pakistan over the past decade, Islamabad’s non-NATO allies in Washington have also extended over $ 4 billion in civilian aid under the Kerry-Lugar Bill (KLB) over last five years.
“The United States provides Pakistan’s military with training to promote regional stability, improve its counterterrorism and defense capabilities and enhance civilian-military relations,” said a fact sheet the US embassy shared on Monday with its local alumni on US Assistance to Pakistan.
The 10-page document details a range of areas in which the US has been cooperating with Pakistan to promote its partnership with the latter which, the embassy said, was vital to its shared interest in Pakistan’s economic growth and development, regional stability, and mutually determined measures to counterterrorism.
Since fiscal year 2009, the document said, the US had trained nearly 1,120 officials of the Pakistan Army, air force and navy.
“Pakistan is the largest recipient of… IMET funding in the world, with an annual budget of approximately $5 million for this program,” the fact sheet added.
The US also provides critical equipment, ranging from advanced communications gear to surveillance aircraft, to Pakistani troops conducting counterinsurgency and counterterrorism operations in the border region and to enhance Pakistan’s participation in international maritime security operations.
“In addition, the US has refurbished and upgraded military helicopters and maritime surveillance aircraft.”
Consequently, Pakistan has significantly increased the effectiveness of its operations against terrorist groups, the embassy said.
Unlike its past do-more attitude, the US embassy expressed satisfaction over the steps Pakistan had recently taken to check the production of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that are said to be used against the ISAF troops in Afghanistan.
“Pakistan has taken positive steps over the past year to increase its controls and interdiction of the illicit supply of the materials used to produce IEDs,” the embassy viewed.

http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2014/03/17/national/pakistan-army-m...

India's continuing abject failure to build a robust defence industrial base (DIB) has come to into focus once again, with an international thinktank holding its arms imports are now almost three times as high as those of the second and third largest arms importers, China and Pakistan.

As per the latest data on international arms transfers released by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), the volume of Indian imports of major weapons rose by 111% between 2004-08 and 2009-13, and its share of the volume of international arms imports increased from 7% to 14%.

The major suppliers of arms to India in 2009-13 were Russia (accounting for 75% of imports) and the US (7%), which for the first time became the second largest arms supplier to India, said SIPRI. As earlier reported by TOI, the US has already bagged defence deals close to $10 billion over the last decade in the lucrative Indian defence market, with the latest being the $1.01 billion one for six additional C-130J "Super Hercules" aircraft.

The other deals on the anvil are the ones for 22 Apache attack helicopters, 15 Chinook heavy-lift helicopters, four P-8I maritime patrol aircraft and 145 M-777 ultra-light howitzers, together worth another $4 billion or so.

SIPRI, on its part, said the USA's share of Pakistani imports in the same period was 27%. China was also a major supplier in the region, accounting for 54% of Pakistani arms imports and 82% of Bangladeshi imports.

"Chinese, Russian and US arms supplies to South Asia are driven by both economic and political considerations," said Siemon Wezeman of SIPRI. In particular, China and the US appear to be using arms deliveries to Asia to strengthen their influence in the region, he added.

The five largest suppliers of major weapons during the five-year period 2009-13 were the United States (29% of global arms exports), Russia (27%), Germany (7%), China (6%) and France (5%).

Despite India's emergence as the world's largest arms importer over the last decade, the modernisation of its armed forces continues to take place in a haphazard manner due to the lack of concrete strategic planning in tune with the country's long-term geopolitical objectives, as reported by TOI earlier.

The Indian armed forces are still grappling with critical shortages in fighter jets, submarines, helicopters, howitzers, night-fighting capabilities and the like. The IAF, for instance, is down to just 34 fighter squadrons when it requires at least 44 to be "comfortable" against the twin-challenge posed by Pakistan and China.

A K Antony, who has been India's longest-serving defence minister, may have often chanted the mantra of "indigenisation" during his seven-and-a-half year tenure, especially after defence scams erupted one after the other, but failed to deliver meaningful systemic reforms on the ground.

There was, for instance, no concrete revamping of the DRDO and its 50 establishments as well as the five defence PSUs, four shipyards and 39 ordnance factories to ensure they deliver weapon systems without huge cost and time overruns.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Indias-arms-imports-almost...

Here's Navy Times on mine resistant US heavily armored vehicles for Pakistan:

WASHINGTON — While controversy swirls over reports that Pakistan may receive some of the excess Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles that the United States has sitting in Afghanistan, American and Pakistani officials are on the verge of completing a deal to send new and excess MRAPs to Islamabad, sister publication Defense News has learned.

The 160 vehicles, all of which would be the MaxxPro MRAP variant made by U.S. manufacturer Navistar, would be a mix of new builds and some from U.S. Army prepositioned stocks in Kuwait, according to a person familiar with the negotiations who is not authorized to speak for attribution.

While no formal notification of the deal has yet been sent to Congress since the last stages of the vetting process are still being completed, the official expected a notification to head to Capitol Hill by the end of this month.

The spat over the potential MRAP sale began in March when the Washington Post reported that the United States was considering giving Pakistan some MRAPs that the U.S. didn’t want to pay to ship home once the mission in Afghanistan draws to a close. The report came at the same time as Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford, commander of the coalition and U.S. Forces in Afghanistan, said there are more than 1,200 excess MRAPs in country.

For a while, U.S. forces were literally shredding to bits the hulking MRAP infantry carriers that it doesn’t want to pay to bring home, but Dunford has since put a halt to that program while final decisions on the ultimate fate of the fleet are being made.

The holdup on the deal for the 160 MRAPs centers around a congressionally mandated human rights vetting process that all U.S. foreign training and equipping programs must undergo.

Known as the “Leahey Amendment” after the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Patrick Leahey of Vermont, the law stipulates that U.S. forces cannot train or equip foreign military or police units that have been accused of human rights abuses.

The 160 MRAPs would be split among the branches of the Pakistani armed forces. Although specific army and air force units have been identified and vetted, the Pakistani Navy has yet to submit all of the required information, according to the official.

While it hasn’t been reported previously, the Pakistani armed forces have already been supplied with 22 MRAPs — 20 MaxxPro’s along with two “haulers” to move them if damaged — under a now-canceled State Department program known as the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund. The vehicles were drawn out of the U.S. Army’s existing stock in Kuwait.

The fund was axed in the U.S. government’s fiscal 2014 budget.

The State Department and the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad have been tying themselves in rhetorical knots over the past week trying to explain the situation over the potential MRAP transfer, all without giving specifics or mentioning the MRAPs already sent to Pakistan or the deal currently in the works.

On March 31, the Islamabad embassy issued a statement confirming that Pakistan has requested “a variety of Excess Defense Articles (EDA). The U.S. is currently reviewing Pakistan’s request.” In what appears to be a nod to the pending deal, the embassy added that “if approved, this EDA is likely to be sourced from U.S. stock outside Afghanistan.”

The State Department weighs EDA requests on a “case-by-case basis taking into consideration a range of factors including the need of potential recipients, regional security dynamics, how the recipient nations intend to use the equipment and the ability of an EDA recipient to sustain the equipment,” the embassy said.

http://www.navytimes.com/article/20140402/NEWS04/304020051/Source-P...

Here's a Dawn report on Pakistan Air Force inducting old Jordanian F-16s:

Pakistan received on Sunday its first batch of F-16 fighter jets delivered from Jordan, DawnNews reported.

Sources said that the Pakistan had signed a contract with Jordan for the supply of 13 fighter jets out of which five were delivered at the Mushaf Mir Airbase in Sargodha and inducted in the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) fleet.

The inclusion of the 13 jets would take the strength of the PAF F-16s to 76.

Media reports indicated the PAF had agreed to purchase an entire squadron from Jordan, consisting of 12 A models and one B model. According to one news report, the jets "were in good condition since they had attained Mid-Life Update (MLU) and they would be providing service for another 20 years with almost 3,000 hours on average available to them for flying."

http://www.dawn.com/news/1102621/paf-inducts-first-batch-of-f-16-fi...

The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to Pakistan for GRC43M Cutters and associated equipment parts training and logistical support for an estimated cost of 350 million.

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale this week with a statement stressing that the sale will help improve the security of a country vital to U.S. foreign policy and national security goals in South Asia.

Pakistan has requested the purchase of 8, 43 meter Global Response Cutters (GRC43M).

Each Cutter will be a mono hull design made of Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP). Also included in this sale outfitted 8, 25mm or 30mm Naval Gun Systems 32 M2 HB .50 caliber machine guns 32, 7.62mm guns 8, 8 meter Rigid Inflatable Boats ballistic armor protection of critical spaces command and control equipment, communication equipment, navigation equipment, support equipment, spare and repair parts tools and test equipment, technical data and publications, personnel training U.S. government and contractor engineering technical and logistics support services and other related elements of logistics and program support.

The total estimated cost is 350 million.

This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a country vital to U.S. foreign policy and national security goals in South Asia the DSCA said in a statement.

This sale will enhance Pakistan’s ability to enforce the rule of law over its coastal areas to safeguard seaborne energy corridors deter the outbreak of piracy along the north Arabian Sea and curtail the trafficking of narcotics and other illicit goods.

These vessels provide the Pakistan Navy with the capability for medium to long endurance coverage of its 660 miles of coastline.

Pakistan will have no difficulty absorbing GRC43M Cutters into its armed forces.

This sale will not alter the basic military balance in the region, the DSCA said. (APP)

http://www.geo.tv/article-164469-US-okays-sale-of-8-Global-Response...

In #India-#Pakistan Conflict, the Stakes Are Higher Than Ever | Stratfor. #Modi #BJP #Nukes https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/india-pakistan-conflict-stakes-ar... …

Forecast

Indian and Pakistani military doctrines that evolved over the past decade will greatly raise the stakes in any future Indo-Pakistani conflict.
Pakistan will continue to invest in tactical nuclear weapons to use on the battlefield to compensate for India's growing conventional military advantage.
Introducing battlefield nuclear weapons will lower the threshold of nuclear weapons use while raising the possibility of a full nuclear exchange on the Indian subcontinent.
Analysis

Ever since India adopted a proactive military strategy toward Pakistan in 2004, Islamabad has felt increasingly threatened and has sought to rely more on its nuclear arsenal as a counter, elevating the stakes for conflict in the Indian subcontinent. Despite political constraints to nuclear conflict, New Delhi and Islamabad's evolving doctrines and force postures have lowered the barrier for a nuclear conflict. For instance, on Oct. 19, Pakistani Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry officially confirmed Islamabad's plans to use low-yield nuclear weapons to impede advancing Indian troops under New Delhi's "Cold Start" doctrine.

Cold Start — a rapid military response doctrine — is technically not an official Indian policy. In fact, Indian military leaders deny the existence of Cold Start as a concept, attributing the terminology to off-the-cuff remarks by Indian officers. Nevertheless, during the past decade India has adopted a strategy that has greatly alarmed Pakistan, driving Islamabad to invest in tactical nuclear weapons and alter its own nuclear posture.

Changes in India's Strategy

From Indian independence in 1947 until 2004, the Indian military had maintained a largely defensive military strategy on the border with Pakistan, relying on deployed border units until it mobilized forces for a counteroffensive. For example, the Sundarji Doctrine set up by former Indian Chief of the Army Staff Gen. Krishnaswamy Sundarji in the early 1980s called for a largely static defense along the Pakistani border with seven infantry-heavy "holding corps" backed by a few mobile units that would respond to any enemy penetrations of the Indian lines. As the Indian holding corps weakened attacking Pakistani units, India would then mobilize its own offensive forces in central India, consisting of three heavily armored "strike corps" that would counterattack deep into Pakistan under the protection of the Indian air force, which would be expected to have gained air superiority by this time.

Pakistan's Reaction

Islamabad is aware of the widening gap in conventional military capabilities between itself and India and is further troubled by more frequent fighting with insurgents on its frontier with Afghanistan that could create a two-front commitment. Unable to match India's growing military investments, Pakistan has taken an asymmetric approach to the new threat, building up and relying on an arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons.

----
Understanding India's rapid response doctrine (Cold Start) could also galvanize terrorists into attempting to trigger India's Cold Start, as was apparently the case with Lashkar-e-Taiba's 2008 Mumbai attacks. Pakistan's dependence on tactical nuclear weapons greatly expands the risk of a disastrous nuclear confrontation in the subcontinent as well, enhancing the potential for the use of nuclear weapons in either a real or perceived Cold Start offensive. The stakes are now much higher in any potential Indo-Pakistani conflict.

#Pakistan enhancing its #military capability to combat #terrorism. Buying more new equipment. #RaddulFasaad

http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ani/pakistan-enhancin...

Pakistan has speeded up its efforts to fight terrorists as it is silently enhancing its military capability by acquiring equipment and weapons required to combat terrorism.

This move comes after a recent wave of terror attacks in Pakistan which have claimed more than 100 lives.


Three such deals involving helicopters and military vehicles have been reported by the U.S. media.

Pakistan had earlier this week, concluded a deal for purchasing an unspecified number of AW139 helicopters with an Italian aerospace and defence firm, Leonardo S.p.A, reports Dawn.

Pakistan is also acquiring weapons from the United States (U.S.) despite uncertainty about bilateral relations with the latter under the Trump administration.

The sale of eight F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan was stopped by the U.S. Congress last year but this did not affect Pakistan's move to acquire weapons needed to fight terrorism.

According to U.S. media reports, three Bell AH-1Z Viper twin-engine attack helicopters would be delivered to Pakistan by an American aerospace manufacturer Bell Helicopter in 2017.

Four Russian-made Mi-35M attack helicopters would also be received by Pakistan this year.

In an another deal, Pakistan signed USD 35million contract with a US firm, Navistar Defence, for manufacturing 40 mine-resistant ambush-protected MaxxPro Dash DXM vehicles.

The manufacturing of 40 mine-resistant ambush-protected MaxxPro Dash DXM vehicles will be completed by October 31 next year and will be manufactured in in West Point, Mississippi.

The vehicles will be used by Pakistan to protect troops against attacks from jihadist militants and other insurgents in the country, said a press release announcing the deal.

Here's an except from "Army and Nation" by Steven Wilkinson:

Overall, though, it seems likely, given important studies by various experts on Indian military, that the civil-military constraints that have helped prevent a coup have hurt 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 (Cohen and Dasgupta 2010; Menon 2009; Mukherjee 2011). 


The February 2000 Kargil Review Committee, for instance, pointed out that India's strategy of developing and controlling nuclear weapons outside of the army while it may make sense from the perspective of civil-military relations, "puts the Indian Army at a disadvantage vis-a-vis its Pakistani counterpart. While the former was in the dark about India's nuclear capability, the latter as the custodian of Pakistani nuclear weaponry as fully aware of its own capability. Three former Indian Army Chiefs of Staff expressed unhappiness about this asymmetric situation" (Menon 2009, 114-115, 117)


https://books.google.com/books?id=B-qaBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA28&lpg=...

Richard Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, told Defense News the speculation can be put aside with the unveiling of a Pakistani ship-launched ballistic missile, dubbed P282.

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2021/11/09/pakistan-receives-new-...

“Imagery revealed during the commissioning of Tughril confirms that the ‘P282′ is the China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC) CM-401 hypersonic-speed capable anti-ship ballistic missile,” Fisher said. The CM-401 is a short-range ballistic missile that can maneuver to avoid interception and can allegedly travel at Mach 6.


Highlighting the flexibility of the Type 054A/P, Fisher said the Tughril is the “first Chinese export warship to feature a 32-cell vertical launch system that can be armed with an array of anti-aircraft missiles, ship and land-attack cruise missiles and anti-submarine missiles, as they are on PLA Navy Type 054A frigates.”

The Type 054A/P also carries HHQ-16 medium-range air defense missiles that provide an area defense capability. Pakistan has experienced a capability gap since its lease ran out with the United States for four American Brooke-class frigates in 1994.

Pakistan’s four F-22P Zulfiquar (Type 053H3-derivative) frigates are incapable of dealing with modern missile threats, but might receive upgrades with the fielding of the Type-054A/Ps.

Tom Waldwyn, a naval expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said the Type 054A/P ships “will be a considerable improvement … particularly in terms of [anti-submarine warfare] capability” over the 1970s-era ex-British Type 21 frigates that Pakistan acquired in the 1990s. The Type 21s will now undergo decommissioning.

However, he added, India’s Navy “maintains a significant numbers and capability advantage over Pakistan” despite its own programs having suffered “significant delays” and the service’s spread-out deployment among several coastal areas.

Furthermore, the “potentially more lucrative Indian market” had lured European, Russian and American firms away from supplying Pakistan, essentially forcing Islamabad to rely on Beijing for defense equipment, he said.

Though this may have hampered Pakistan’s ability to acquire cutting-edge defense equipment, Waldwyn said the delivery of eight Type 039B Yuan/Hangor II-class submarines will “enlarge the fleet and be a significant capability improvement, particularly if they are fitted with long-range cruise missiles.”

Citing Pakistan’s tests of the submarine-launched Harbah nuclear-capable cruise missile, he said their service entry “would be far more significant to the strategic balance than a handful of new frigates.”

Pakistan resumes armor modernization as terror threat recedes

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/11/19/pakistan-resumes-armor-...

ISLAMABAD — Pakistan’s armor modernization efforts are maturing amid a refocus toward archrival India and away from operations against the militant group TTP, otherwise known as Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan.

With India having ordered the advanced T-90MS tank, built a large fleet of T-90A tanks and upgraded most T-72M1 tanks, Pakistan is countering with its own acquisition and upgrade programs for new types of vehicles and improved battlefield integration.

Though low-level acquisition continued throughout the TTP campaign, author, analyst and former Australian defense attache to Islamabad Brian Cloughley explained that necessity demanded larger programs be cut back or frozen.

“The expansion of Taliban and other militant activity, particularly in regions along the border with Afghanistan which are inaccessible to heavy vehicles, focused the army on COIN [counterinsurgency]. It was a budgetary decision, backed by tactical pragmatism,” he said. “But it was acknowledged that as counterinsurgency wound down, so could armor programs be reinstituted.”

The Pakistan Army effectively defeated the TTP-led threat after first launching Operation Zarb-e-Azb (or “Cutting Blow” in English) from 2014 to flush out domestic and foreign terrorists in the ungoverned spaces along the border with Afghanistan.


The TTP and its allies had until then mainly held territory in rugged Waziristan, in the essentially self-governed Federally Administered Tribal Areas that were later absorbed into the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

This was followed by Operation Radd-ul-Fasaad (or “Elimination of Strife”) from early 2017, a combined ongoing military-civilian effort to eliminate terrorist sleeper cells nationwide.

Fencing along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border is also largely complete, restricting the movement of remaining TTP forces.

The Taliban recently retook control of Afghanistan following a U.S. withdrawal from the country. The group subsequently assured Pakistan it will not allow TTP remnants to attack the country.

Though there are occasionally low-level terrorist attacks in Pakistan, the government there has felt confident enough to offer amnesty to TTP members on the condition they lay down arms and surrender.

However, Cloughley said, the Army “has not effected a ‘switch’ from counterterrorism, which as in all armies continues to be a very high priority in asset management, technology and training.”

Still, he added, “the years of emphasis have been productive, and the Army now feels its primary role — continental defense against India — can be allocated more resources than it has been able to commit for the past 20 years.”

What armor upgrades are in the works?
Some of Pakistan’s latest armor developments were revealed during a Nov. 9 visit by Army chief Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa to state-owned armored fighting vehicles manufacturer Heavy Industries Taxila, or HIT.

Bajwa inspected the upgraded production facilities and ongoing projects, including:

Newly developed protection measures and remote weapon stations for main battle tanks.
An indigenously developed 155mm artillery gun barrel.
Ballistic and improvised explosive device protection for armored fighting vehicles.
Programs to manufacture, rebuild and upgrade armored personnel carriers and tanks.

Notably, footage of the visit shows the indigenous Viper infantry fighting vehicle and a modernized version of the Type-85APII main battle tank. At one point, a Type-85APII turret is visible with an exposed composite armor module, possibly indicating replacement with a new type.

An industry source with knowledge of HIT’s ongoing programs told Defense News on the condition of anonymity that the Viper was undergoing pilot production. The source also said Ukrainian-supplied T-80UD tanks have been equipped with a new thermal gunner’s sight and a locally developed solid-state autoloader.

Pakistan resumes armor modernization as terror threat recedes

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/11/19/pakistan-resumes-armor-...


Though he was unable to provide details on the Type-85APII upgrade, Defense News understands it was upgraded along similar lines to the T-80UD.

HIT officials previously told Defense News that the T-80UD and Type-85APII tanks would receive upgrade after undergoing a pilot rebuild, although the Type-85APII fire and gun control systems had already received some attention, and the gunner was already equipped with a thermal sight.

The Type-85APII has also received an upgraded power pack, with some sources now referring to the platform as the Type-85UG.

Future hopes are pinned on the VT-4, with the first delivered in April 2020. It entered service around June 2021.

Though derived from the Type-90II/Al-Khalid, the VT-4 features the improved gun of China’s high-end Type-99A main battle tank and therefore can fire the same rounds with greater penetrative power compared to Pakistan’s other tanks. The VT-4 also has more advanced composite and reactive armor; China’s third-generation thermal imaging systems; more advanced fire and gun control systems; and a Chinese-made powertrain.

Richard Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said the VT-4 and related technology will deliver an element of parity between India and Pakistan.

“NORINCO’s VT-4, as a direct purchase or as the basis for the domestically produced Al-Khalid 2, would offer Pakistan a wide array of modern tank technologies competitive with the Russian T-90MS being acquired by India, from powertrain to fire control, high velocity gun, gun-launched anti-tank missiles and active protection systems,” he said.

However, he cautioned, “rough parity may be unsatisfactory for both Pakistan and India, so both likely will seek regular available upgrades or next-generation options.”

Unlike with the original Al-Khalid, Pakistan avoids with its VT-4 a reliance on expensive European sighting systems and the occasionally problematic supply of Ukrainian powertrains. But there is no indication that the Chinese powertrain will replace that shared by T-80UD and Al-Khalid tanks.

The Viper is based on the Saad armored personnel carrier (similar to the American Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle), featuring additional armor protection and the unmanned Slovakian Turra 30 combat module with a 30mm gun and two anti-tank missiles. It carries a crew of three, plus nine dismounts.

Pakistan’s shift to infantry fighting vehicles comes many years after other major armies, which Cloughley said was unavoidable.

“IFVs are expensive, and their operation requires a great deal of training at all levels, which the Army, of necessity concentrating on counterinsurgency operations, did not want to commit to,” he explained. “The [Pakistan Army] has always wanted IFVs, and now sees the opportunity for a balanced introduction program, taking into account unit training.”

The Army is also sharpening its armored warfare skills, having this year held a series of large-scale exercises to improve integration among the various branches of its ground force, including infantry, mechanized forces, combat aviation, surveillance platforms, air defense and artillery.

Cloughley believes emphasis is also “being placed on maneuvers in the nuclear battlefield, and that closed-down operations are being practiced on almost all exercises.”

“HIT has always been conscious of the importance of developing [nuclear-, biological- and chemical-protected] technology, and crew comfort has received attention,” he said.

While the Army will be relieved its armor modernization program is back on track, Cloughley issued a word of warning: “While I agree that it is very important that the [Pakistan Army] continues to improve interoperability and must upgrade its armored capabilities, it must not lose sight of the COIN imperative, which is a significant aspect of its mission.”

What's behind Pakistan's rumoured purchase of Chinese fighter jets?


https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/what-s-behind-pakistan-s-rumoured...


While there is no official confirmation from Islamabad, Ejaz Haider, a Pakistani military analyst, also says that “the purchase has been made and the first batch will fly on 23rd March, which is Pakistan's Republic Day,” according to multiple reports.

The primary threat against Pakistan comes from India, resulting in wars and conflicts, says Haider, reminding us that the most recent escalation happened in Feb 2019 “when India aggressed against Pakistan.”

Why now?

“India operates the French Rafale and the capability is boosted by the Russian S-400 A2-AD system. As a result, that threat has to be tackled not just in relation to intentions but also capabilities. Pakistan cannot afford to allow major asymmetries in relation to its adversary,” Haider tells TRT World, explaining why Pakistan is making the purchase.

In July, the Indian defence ministry announced its purchase of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France. Interestingly, Pakistan will also procure 36 warplanes from China, suggesting it’s a direct retaliation against New Delhi’s move.

“Pakistan’s F-16 fighters are aging already and Pakistan’s own JF-17 Thunder is in the making. We actually needed to create a deterrent to face India’s purchase of Dassault Rafale,” Javed tells TRT World.

Pakistan Air Force (PAF) fighter jet F-16 performs to commemorate the country's 'Operation Swift Retort', following the shot down of Indian military aircrafts on February 27, 2019 in Kashmir, during an air show in Karachi, February 27, 2020.
Pakistan Air Force (PAF) fighter jet F-16 performs to commemorate the country's 'Operation Swift Retort', following the shot down of Indian military aircrafts on February 27, 2019 in Kashmir, during an air show in Karachi, February 27, 2020. (Akhtar Soomro / Reuters Archive)
While Pakistanis cannot create a direct symmetry with the Indians considering the size of New Delhi’s military, Islamabad wants to ensure with the purchase of Chinese jets that it can compete in near-equal terms, according to Javed.

“The Pakistan air force is one of the top air forces in the world,” he says.

Haider agrees with that assessment.

“PAF is a professional air force which, despite constrained resources, has performed brilliantly against the Indian Air Force. The February conflict proved that once again. That said, even top-shelf human resource and training requires state-of-the-art platforms,” he says.

Why Chinese jets?

China is a close ally of Pakistan due to various clashing points between Beijing and New Delhi across South Asia as Asia’s two major powers compete with each other to secure their political and economic interests in the strategically vital region.

This equation means Pakistan and China share plenty of common ground on a number of issues, developing strategic ties and increasing military cooperation. But there are also other reasons for Pakistan’s purchase of Chinese jets.

“Pakistan Air Force needs a 4.5 generation multirole fighter. European fighters are very expensive and the US is not an option because of suspension of security assistance with Islamabad, despite Pakistan being nominally a Non-Nato Ally,” Haider says.

“Pakistan faces remarkable sanctions from the US despite its purchase of F-16s,” Javed says. As a result, like Turkiye, Pakistan has moved to create indigenous solutions to develop its military hardware in the face of US opposition, he says.

Even operating F-16s is problematic for Pakistan because Washington places restrictive conditions on their use, Javed says. There are also problems related to its repair process, he adds. China does not usually place conditions on the weapons it sells to other countries.