Comment by Riaz Haq on March 15, 2015 at 8:52am

Here's an Indian analyst's view of "The Consequences of a Pakistani Sea-Based Nuclear Second Strike Capability"

Last week, Franz-Stefan Gady provided a helpful round-up of the confusing evidence surrounding the existence of Pakistan’s sea-based second nuclear strike capability. Since 2012, when Pakistan created its Naval Strategic Force Command, there has been considerable concern, in India and elsewhere, that Pakistan is close to imminently operationalizing a sea-based second strike capability. Though analysts remain divided over the question of how far Pakistan has taken its sea-based deterrent (we know, for example, that Pakistan has neither the quantity nor quality of submarines to effectively implement this yet), it’s worth understanding the consequences of such a development on strategic stability in South Asia.

First, what we know now suggests that any Pakistani sea-based second strike capability will depend on a sea-launched variant of the Hatf-VII Babur cruise missile. The Hatf-VII, a medium-range subsonic cruise missile, tops out at a range of 700 km, meaning that a submarine-based launch system would need to operate in waters relatively close to the prospective enemy’s shores (in Pakistan’s case, India). This brings up a problem for Pakistan’s plans for a sea-based deterrent that more established nuclear powers with sea-based deterrents such as the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom haven’t faced. The credibility of a second strike capability lies in the difficult of detecting submarines carrying submarine-launch ballistic missiles. Undersea radars and other anti-submarine warfare techniques, already a major point of interest for the Indian armed forces, could undermine Pakistan’s sea-based deterrent.

Interestingly, this observation means that the actual specifications of the submarine being engineered for Pakistan’s sea-based deterrent, with the help of China, is less interesting than the actual delivery vehicle. Even if Pakistan manages to operate submarines on par with China’s Type 032 Qing-class or Type 041 Yuan-class, capable of launching longer-range land attack cruise missiles (a max range of 1,500 km), these missiles are only capable of being armed with “unitary tactical nuclear warheads,” according to globalsecurity.org – a far cry from the strategic nuclear deterrent necessary to credibly field a second strike capability. Experts note that Pakistan will need a submarine fleet comprising 14 vessels in order to keep one nuclear-armed sub on stand-by at all times. Back under Pervez Musharraf’s leadership, Pakistan planned to expand its fleet to 12 vessels.

Additionally, as Bruno Tertias noted in a thoughtful post over at the Lowy Interpreter last year, even if we generously acknowledge a credible strategic sea-based second strike capability to Pakistan, there is no reason to believe that conventional strategic stability logic would apply; i.e., sea-based second strike capabilities existing on both sides of the India-Pakistan nuclear balance would lead to better long-term stability.

Also worth noting is that currently, nuclear escalation in South Asia is not an entirely frictionless process given India’s mostly credible No First-Use doctrine and Pakistan’s claim that it keeps its warheads separated from its launchers (even though it maintains a First-Use policy for deterrent purposes). For a conflict across the Radcliffe Line to escalate into a full-blown strategic nuclear exchange, Pakistan’s National Command Authority (NCA) would have to explicitly authorize nuclear use. A Pakistani sea-based deterrent would make this traditional decoupling of warheads from launchers less viable and, as a result, make nuclear first-use by Pakistan more likely. Not only will this possibility cause Indian strategic planners to lose sleep, but it would draw considerable concern from the United States and other nuclear powers.


http://thediplomat.com/2015/03/the-consequences-of-a-pakistani-sea-...

Comment by Riaz Haq on May 20, 2015 at 7:30am

#Pakistan is the only #Muslim nuclear state – so why is #Israel's hysteria reserved for #Iran? http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.657319 …


Unlike Iran, Pakistan doesn't call for Israel's destruction. But in certain ways, Islamabad poses more of a threat to Israel than Tehran does.


U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry caused a stir recently, when he said in an interview with Israel’s Channel 10 that Israeli critics of the emerging deal with Iran were guilty of “a lot of hysteria.” He has a point. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the Lausanne deal would “endanger Israel – big time” and “make the world a much more dangerous place.” 

Yet in March, Pakistan test-fired a nuclear-capable ballistic missile, the Shaheen III, which Pakistani officials said can reach Israel. This event was barely noticed in Jerusalem.

In view of the disturbing nuclear developments in Pakistan as well as in North Korea and Russia, the hysteria expressed by prominent Israeli politicians and journalists over the recent draft agreement with Iran is unwarranted. The threat posed to India, South Korea, Poland and the Baltic states from their nuclear-armed neighbors is arguably at least as great as that which Israel is facing from Iran. 

Regular warnings are sounded in Israel about the dangers facing the world from nuclear terrorism once Iran obtains a nuclear weapon, but is this not a case of locking the stable door after the horse has bolted? The threat of nuclear terrorism has existed since the collapse of the Soviet Union and has grown significantly as Pakistan has cemented its status as a nuclear weapons state.

Indeed, one could argue that Islamabad poses more of a threat to Israel than Tehran does. After all, we cannot be certain that Iran will take the next step and acquire a nuclear weapon, but Pakistan already possesses over 100 nuclear warheads. 

It is understandable why this is rarely discussed in Israel: Though Pakistan is the first Muslim state with a nuclear weapons program, it does not call for Israel’s destruction or sponsor terror attacks against Israel. A nuclear Iran, by contrast, would receive cover to step up its hegemonic ambitions in the region and intensify its support for terrorism against the Jewish state.

In addition, Pakistan has taken measures in recent years to strengthen oversight for its nuclear facilities and has dismantled proliferation networks. And even if Pakistan were to disintegrate tomorrow, it would be India, not Israel, that would be first in line to face Islamabad’s nuclear warheads, whereas Israel would certainly believe itself to be the first potential target of a nuclear Iran.

But despite Islamabad’s obsession with India, Pakistani officials have also spoken on occasion about the need to deter Israel. And were Pakistan to disintegrate, it could pose an imminent threat not only to India but also to the Middle East, including Israel.

During his first term in office, U.S. President Barack Obama reportedly told his staff that the possible breakup of Pakistan and the subsequent danger of a scramble for nuclear weapons was his greatest national security concern. Indeed, terrorists have tried on several occasions to assassinate the former president of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf. In such circumstances, Pakistan’s nuclear weapons could be stolen or smuggled out of the country, with the possibility of rogue elements targeting Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.657319

Comment by Riaz Haq on May 31, 2015 at 8:06am

#India's #Modi to Visit #Israel, 1st by an #Indian PM - 

The New Indian Express http://bit.ly/1AFTaoU via @NewIndianXpress

NEW DELHI: Narendra Modi will be travelling to Israel, the first by an Indian Prime Minister to the Jewish country with which bilateral defence cooperation is on an upswing. 

No dates have been finalised for Modi's visit which will take place on mutually convenient dates, External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj said.

Swaraj said she will be travelling to Israel this year, besides Palestine and Jordan. 

India had established "full" diplomatic relationship with Israel in 1992 though it had recognised the country in 1950. No Indian Prime Minister or President has ever visited that country. 

The then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had become the first premier from that country to visit India when he came here in 2003. He is credited with transforming bilateral relations from diminutive defence and trade cooperation to the strategic ties of today. 

"As far as my visit is concerned, it will take place this year. I will visit, Israel, Palestine and Jordan. As far as Prime Minister's visit is concerned, he will travel to Israel. No dates have been finalised. It will take place as per mutually convenient dates," she said replying to a question at a press conference. 

At the same time, she asserted, "There was no change in India's policy towards Palestine." 

L K Advani had visited Israel when he was Home Minister in the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government. Jaswant Singh and S M Krishna had visited the Jewish nation as External Affairs Ministers. Recently Home Minister Rajnath Singh had also visited Israel.

Describing Israel as a friendly country, Swaraj said India had never "let down" the Palestinian cause and it will continue to support it. 

Asked whether the Prime Minister will visit Iran, she said no such visit has been finalised so far but he will be visiting Turkey to attend G-20 Summit later this year. Swaraj said she will travel to Iran to attend the NAM Summit this year. 

Talking about government's efforts to reach out to various countries, Swaraj said Prime Minister will visit five Central Asian countries including Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan when he travels to Russia to attend the BRICS Summit. 

"When he goes to Ufa in Russia for BRICS summit, he will visit five Central Asian countries," Swaraj said, adding "the foreign policy has been spread quite significantly. We achieved a lot."

Comment by Riaz Haq on December 11, 2015 at 8:34am

This #Pakistan #nuclear missile, Shaheen III with 2,750 Km, can hit targets anywhere in #India. #Nukes #Missiles http://journalobserver.com/2015/12/this-pakistan-missile-can-hit-ta... …

Pakistan test-fired a nuclear-capable ballistic missile on Friday (Dec 11), the military said, two days after the government confirmed it would resume high-level peace talks with arch-rival India.

The military said it had fired a Shaheen III surface-to-surface ballistic missile which can carry nuclear and conventional warheads within a range of 2,750km.

Shaheen-III has a maximum range of 2,750 kilometers (1, 700 miles).

According to Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), the test flight was aimed at validating various design and technical parameters of the weapon system.

Pakistan became a declared nuclear power in 1998.

The test was witnessed by senior officers from Strategic Plans Division, Strategic Forces, Scientists and Engineers of Strategic Organisations. He said Pakistan desires peaceful co-existence in the region for which nuclear deterrence would further strengthen strategic stability in South Asia.

It may be noted here that the Shaheen-I and Shaheen-II missiles were test-fired in Pakistan a year ago.

India and Pakistan are longtime foes engaged in a regional arms race, stemming from a conflict dating back to Britain's partitioning of its Indian protectorate into what now are India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Comment by Riaz Haq on January 19, 2016 at 11:35am

#Pakistan successfully tests Ra’ad air launched cruise missile with 350 km range: ISPR http://www.dawn.com/news/1234015 

Pakistan on Tuesday conducted a successful flight test of the indigenously developed Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) – Ra’ad – said the military’s media wing in a statement.

The flight test of the cruise missile, which is also known as Hatf VIII, was the seventh since it was first tested in 2007.

It is essentially a flying bomb, generally designed to carry a large conventional or nuclear warhead many hundreds of miles with high accuracy. Modern cruise missiles can travel at supersonic or high subsonic speed.

These guided missiles are self-navigating and fly on a non-ballistic very low altitude trajectory in order to avoid radar detection.

The most common mission for cruise missiles is to attack relatively high value targets such as ships, command bunkers, bridges and dams. The modern guidance system permits precise attacks.

The Inter-Services Public Relations said Ra’ad, with a range of 350km, “enables Pakistan to achieve air delivered strategic standoff capability on land and at sea.” The missile is approximately five metres long and could weigh up to 1,000kg.

Read: Pakistan's tool of war: Why the Mi-35 Hind-E is an excellent choice

Special “terrain hugging low level flight maneuvers enable it to avoid detection and engagement by contemporary air defence systems,” the statement added.

Cruise technology is extremely complex and has been developed by only a few countries in the world.

The president and the prime minister congratulated the scientists and engineers behind the development for their outstanding achievement on the successful flight test of Ra’ad.

Director General Strategic Plans Division, Lt Gen Mazhar Jamil, termed the success a major step towards complementing Pakistan’s deterrence capability.

He said achievement of “this milestone will surely enhance strategic stability and contribute to peace in the region.”

Comment by Riaz Haq on January 5, 2017 at 8:28pm

#China Newspaper: Range of #Pakistan's #nuclear #missiles will increase if #India continues to extend its range.

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1027113.shtml

On Monday, India successfully tested its long-range ballistic missile, Agni-IV, which can travel 4,000 kilometers and carry a nuclear warhead, in the wake of an earlier successful test-firing of Agni-V that has a range of more than 5,000 kilometers. The country's media were elated in their reports, stressing that India's tests of the nuclear-capable ballistic missile "covers entire China." "Agni-V can deter China," said The Times of India.

India has broken the UN's limits on its development of nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missile. The US and some Western countries have also bent the rules on its nuclear plans. New Delhi is no longer satisfied with its nuclear capability and is seeking intercontinental ballistic missiles that can target anywhere in the world and then it can land on an equal footing with the UN Security Council's five permanent members.

India is "promising" in vying for permanent membership on the UN Security Council as it is the sole candidate who has both nuclear capability and economic potential.

China should realize that Beijing wouldn't hold back India's development of long-range ballistic missiles.

However, Chinese don't feel India's development has posed any big threat to it. And India wouldn't be considered as China's main rival in the long run. It is simply believed that currently there is a vast disparity in power between the two countries and India knows what it would mean if it poses a nuclear threat to China. The best choice for Beijing and New Delhi is to build rapport.

If the Western countries accept India as a nuclear country and are indifferent to the nuclear race between India and Pakistan, China will not stand out and stick rigidly to those nuclear rules as necessary. At this time, Pakistan should have those privileges in nuclear development that India has.

China is sincere in developing friendly ties with India. But it will not sit still if India goes too far. Meanwhile, New Delhi understands that it does little good to itself if the Sino-Indian relations are ruined by any geopolitical tricks. 

In general, it is not difficult for India to produce intercontinental ballistic missiles which can cover the whole world. If the UN Security Council has no objection over this, let it be. The range of Pakistan's nuclear missiles will also see an increase. If the world can adapt to these, China should too.

India still maintains a strategic defensive posture before China. The Chinese people should not be led astray by India's extreme words online about its deterrence ability against China. There are similar rhetorics targeting at India in China's cyber world. But, these aggressive online rhetorics count for little.

At present, India's GDP accounts for about 20 percent of China's. China's strategic nuclear missiles have long ago realized global coverage, and China's overall military industrial capacity is much better than that of India.

For India, China is something to inspire ambition and invoke patriotism. However, India should realize that owning several missiles does not mean it is a nuclear power. Even though India does become a nuclear power, it will be a long time before it can show off its strength to the world.

Comment by Riaz Haq on January 24, 2017 at 3:57pm

The Pakistan military has reportedly conducted the first successful flight test of a new medium range ballistic missile (MRBM), according to the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), the media arm of the Pakistan Armed Forces.

The test involved the successful launch of the surface-to-surface MRBM Ababeel, reportedly capable of carrying multiple warheads using Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicle technology (MIRV). The new missile purportedly has a maximum range of 2,200 kilometers (1,367 miles).


---------------

A third MRBM, the Shaheen-III, a multi-stage fueled ballistic missile with an estimated range of 2,750 kilometers (1,700 miles) is currently still under development by the National Development Complex. It is possible that the Ababeel is a more robust and redesigned variant of the Shaheen-III fitted with an improved terminal guidance system, among other modifications. Indeed, in order to accommodate a MIRV warhead, the Shaheen-III would in all likelihood have undergone a complete redesign.

Based on the press release it is unclear, however, whether Pakistan has mastered MIRV technology given that it merely mentions that the missile is “capable” of being fitted with a MIRV warhead, rather than announcing that it has mastered the technology and developed MIRV payloads.

And while the test will cause alarm in New Delhi, Islamabad will need to further invest in and develop intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities including satellite technology (e.g., by adapting and refining China’s Beidou-II satellite navigation system for Pakistan’s sea- and land-based missile systems) to operationalize ballistic missiles capable of carrying multiple warheads and field a credible MIRV capability.

Nevertheless, the possible introduction of MIRV warheads is a clear sign that the nuclear arms race between India and Pakistan is escalating. The mentioning of MIRV technology in the press release announces a new and more dangerous stage in the nuclear arms competition in South Asia.

http://thediplomat.com/2017/01/pakistan-tests-new-ballistic-missile...

Comment by Riaz Haq on May 4, 2018 at 7:39am

Pakistan pushes for homegrown satellite development
By: Usman Ansari

https://www.defensenews.com/space/2018/05/03/pakistan-pushes-for-ho...

Pakistan has launched an ambitious satellite program as part of ongoing efforts to wean itself off dependence on foreign-owned assets for civil and military applications.

Pakistan’s domestic space agency, the Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission, or SUPARCO, will receive a budget of just more than $40 million for fiscal 2018-2019.

Of this, some $22 million has been allocated for space centers related to the Pakistan Multi-Mission Satellite in Islamabad, Karachi and Lahore, plus the establishment of a research center in Karachi.

To get all the news about space and strategic systems delivered to your inbox every month, be sure to sign up for our Military Space Report newsletter.

However, the final cost of all three aspects of the project is reported in local media as being in the region of $470 million.

No response from SUPARCO was forthcoming when asked by Defense News regarding details about foreign cooperation on this endeavor, although existing information on planned remote sensing satellite programs list an electro-optical sensor-equipped satellite, and a synthetic aperture radar-equipped example.

An existing communications satellite partially co-developed in Pakistan, PAKSAT-1R, was launched by China Great Wall Industry Corporation in 2011.

“It is essential for all countries that they free themselves from dependence on U.S.-location satellite programs,” said Brian Cloughley, author, analyst and former Australian defense attache to Islamabad.

“I have no doubt this has been [in] the cards for some time and that the Chinese are helping.”

Defense News previously reported that Pakistan’s military had access to China’s BeiDou satellite navigation system for military applications, which had special implications for the effectiveness of its sea-based deterrent.

Pakistan also has a long-standing satellite development agreement with Turkey, which has its own recently unveiled observation satellite program.

However, at present it is unknown if anything has resulted from this, or if it will be pushed further down the road.

Cloughley believes it would take a long time to come to fruition, making cooperation with China more likely still.

Also, on cost grounds alone for the new program, Cloughley believes it likely that reliance on China will grow.

“The big question about this development is about where the money is to come from. Pakistan’s economic situation is dire, and commitment to such a program will not meet with [International Monetary Fund] approval. The China connection will probably deepen even further,” he said.

Whether China’s satellite technology will meet Pakistan’s requirements is unknown.

Brian Weeden, director of program planning at Secure World Foundation and an expert in space technologies and satellites, is unaware of the details of any satellites China may be building for Pakistan. However, he “would rate China’s technology in these areas as fairly good.”

“They’re not yet as capable as the most advanced American or European commercial technology, let alone the U.S. or European military satellites, but the Chinese technology is rapidly improving,” he said. 

Comment by Riaz Haq on May 4, 2018 at 7:54am

It would appear that Iran chose to choose to use two identical half length solid motors of identical diameter for a second and third stage instead of the Shaheen-2 like first stage one with a sea level nozzle and the second one with an altitude nozzle as the second stage.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/solid-prop-1.htm

It would appear that Pakistan in fact plans to lengthen the Shaheen-2 first and second stage solid motors to obtain higher performance for its space booster while retaining the existing M-11 based Shaheen-1 solid motors strap–on boosters. In any case both developments could and would lead to potential IRBM/ICBM development masquerading as space boosters for both countries. 

--------------

Iran ’s missile solid propellant rocket motor program is not believed to be advanced enough compared to its liquid fuel rocket engine program, launch vehicle program to provide much more than strap on solid motors or upper and last stage satellite orbit injection solid motor for launch vehicles. This is based on the examples of the Naze’at-6 (NP-110), Naze’at-10 (NP-110A), Zelzel-1 (Mushak-100), Zelzel-2 (Mushak-200), and Fateh-110/110A. This solid motor program is known to be years behind the liquid propellant program but it is making systematic deliberate and critical strides that will eventually bring it up to IRBM, ICBM potential. Iran is believed during the year 2000 to have started the development of a new multi-stage solid propellant motor based Ghadr-101, and Ghadr-110, which may be an Iranian variant on the Shaheen-1, and Shaheen-II design of Pakistan . This advance is presumably thanks to the A. Q. Khan network, which in turn can thank China for its M-9, M-11 and M-18 technology.

Comment by Riaz Haq on May 4, 2018 at 8:17am

The Link Between Space Launch and Missile Technology

March 16, 2000 By Gary Milhollin

Presentation at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies

Honolulu, Hawaii

https://www.wisconsinproject.org/the-link-between-space-launch-and-...

In 1963, NASA began the Indian rocket program. NASA launched a U.S. sounding rocket from India’s first test range, which the United States helped design. We also trained the first groups of Indian rocket scientists. NASA invited them to NASA’s Wallops Island test site located southeast of Washington, DC in Virginia.

While at NASA, Mr. A.P. Kalam, a member of the Indian delegation, learned about the U.S. Scout rocket, which was being flown at Wallops Island. The Scout was the only four-stage, solid-fueled, small payload space launcher in the world. Indian engineers saw the Scout’s blueprints during their visit. Two years later, the head of India’s Atomic Energy Commission asked NASA for design information about the Scout. Mr. Kalam then proceeded to build India’s first big rocket, the SLV-3, which became the only other four-stage, solid-fueled, small payload space launcher in the world. It was an exact copy of the Scout. The first stage of the Scout then became the first stage of India’s first large ballistic missile, the Agni-I. The Agni-I’s second stage was liquid-fueled, and was based on a surface-to-air missile called the SA-2 that India bought from Russia.

France also helped India master liquid-fuel technology by selling India the technology used to build the “Viking” engine used on the Ariane space launcher. India calls its version the “Vikas.” The Agni also needed a guidance system. The German Space Agency obliged with a long tutorial in rocket guidance, which allowed India to develop a guidance system and learn how to produce its components (gyroscopes, accelerometers and so forth). The German Space Agency also tested a model of the first stage of the SLV-3 in one of its wind tunnels in Cologne and helped India build its own rocket test facilities. Germany also trained Indians in how to make composite materials.

--------------

The story in Pakistan is similar. NASA launched Pakistan’s first rocket in 1962. Pakistan’s project was also led by the head of Pakistan’s Atomic Energy Commission. We must wonder what was going through NASA’s mind at this time – it keeps getting requests for space cooperation from the heads of atomic energy commissions. Apparently NASA thought this was normal. NASA also trained Pakistani rocket scientists at Wallops Island, and launched rockets in Pakistan until 1970.

-------------------

We can see that our cooperation with India and Pakistan was a mistake. Both countries are now making nuclear missiles.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 5
• Next ›
• Page