US expelled Turkey from F-35 fighter jet program

S-400 Missile Systems

Expulsion of Turkey from F-35 jet program is a major crisis faced by NATO in this century, this also marks the lowest point in Washington-Ankara relations. If expulsion is going through and US imposes sanctions under CAATSA then relations between two counties are going to worse and not reversible in foreseeable future (in the absence of any major events).

Current state of affairs between Turkey and US is not simply due to purchase of S-400 system from Russia. It’s an outcome of a long series of events.

Here we need to consider four important points

1. Turkey's inability to buy US/EU missile defense systems.
2. American Alliance with Kurds in Syria and Iraq.
3. Insecurities of Erdogan.
4. Russian powerplay.

Let's see what happened over the years.

Turkey has the second largest standing army in NATO after US. She is also considered as a bulwark between chaos in the West Asia and Europe. Though she is not a member of European Union, Turkey is a member of NATO from 1952 onward.

First Gulf War

During the First Gulf War, Ankara requested for air missile defense systems from NATO to defend against possible SCUD attacks from Saddam Hussein's Iraq. United States, Germany and the Netherlands deployed their Patriot batteries under NATO. Though designed during cold war time, Patriot defense system become legendary during first gulf war. Later, whenever requirements came, Ankara requested US(Patriot)/European (Eurosam SAMP/T) systems.

Buying new Air Defense systems

Later Ankara wanted to have their own missile systems with technology transfer and options to manufacture locally. A competition was initiated between Patriot PAC 2, Europe systems, Russian, and Chinese systems. US was not ready to transfer missile defense related sensitive technologies even to a NATO partner. Raytheon and US Department of Defense (US DoD) started negotiations. After a while, Syrian civil war started, and Erdogan became personally involved in discussions. Stunning US and NATO members, Erdogan announced in 2013 that Ankara is going to buy Chinese FD-2000 missile system. Chinese allowed some licensed production. However, in 2014 Ankara dropped Chinese offer and started a new round of bids.

Russia in Syria; Kurds and IS (Islamic State)

In 2015 Russia landed in Syria to support her losing ally Bashir Assad. Turkey and US were not able to agree on how to handle Russians. At the same time, US had to ally with Kurds in Syria and Iraq to halt the whirlwind of IS conquest of vast regions in Syria and Iraq. Kurds and Turkey are not in good terms, Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) is a designated terrorist organization in Turkey and on low intensity conflict with Ankara in South East Turkey. While Washington saw Kurds as an ally against IS, Ankara viewed them as threat to Turkey. At the same time, Kurds were the only reliable Syrian force to operate on both Syria and Iraq which has the capability to halt IS advance.

During this time, US announced the withdrawal of Patriot (deployed in Turkey since 2013) to Germany for maintenance and training. Though US deployed additional F-15s, Turkey felt themselves as vulnerable to missile attacks and probably lost confidence with systems owned by other countries.

Shooting down Russian fighter plane

In November 2015, Turkey shot down a Russian plane which reportedly entered Turkish air space. This brought up the possibility of retaliatory strikes from Russia. May be due to possibility of a war with combined NATO power, or other reasons there were no retaliatory strikes.

Turkish Military Coup and Fethullah Gulen

This was a game changer. In 2016 part of Turkish military tried to overthrow Erdogan when he was not in the capital. Coup was crushed. What followed next was a massive purge in military, civil services, academics etc. Whoever having any known/unknown/suspected link to Fethullah Gulen (Erdogan's erstwhile ally) found themselves in prison. Erdogan declared Gulen as the master mind behind failed coup. Gulen lives in US and Washington denied Ankara's request for extradition; citing lack of evidence. From there onward relation between Ankara and Washington spiraled down rapidly.

When Enemies become friends

Putin made the right moves and suddenly Ankara got a new partner - Moscow. Erdogan even went to the extent of suggesting that it is due the fault of a Gulenist pilot, Ankara shot down Russian plane. Putin saw a chance to cement the relations further and offered S-400 missile system (one of the most advanced in the world) to Ankara in July 2017. Two months later in Sep 2017 Erdogan announced that Ankara would buy S-400.

It's a known fact that US will never allow integration of F-35 with Russian made S-400 systems. For long US officials maintained that, “Russian missile system’s high-end radar capabilities could collect intelligence on stealthy F-35 if the two were used by the same country” and they won't let it happen. When S-400 deliveries reached Turkey on July 12, US announced that Turkey will no longer be part of F-35 program. In addition to that, Turkish companies which currently supplies 900 parts to F35 program will be replaced soon. This is going to cost around $600mn to US.

CAATSA (Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act)

In addition to expulsion there is CAATSA to deal with. CAATSA sanctions will kick in when countries buy Russian made defense equipment’s. It is yet to see whether Trump will give a waiver (very unlikely) for Turkey. In case of any absence of waiver, there will be sanctions and Turkey will be moving closer to Russia.

Conclusion

Turkey is still a critical member in NATO and a long-standing US ally. Though geographically located close to West Asian and Middle East conflict zones Turkey doesn't have the influence matching its size. Though politically considered to be a European country, Turkey is not part of EU or any other European affairs. However, Turkey is aspiring to become a key player and want to recover the lost prestige of Ottoman empire. Apart from Syrian theatre Turkey didn't get a major role in other key issues. Turkey became a major player in Egypt when Muslim Brotherhood got power. However, the revival of military in Cairo (when Sisi got power) reversed it.

It might not be possible for Turkey to suppress Kurds who spread over four countries. Turkey might need Washington to have a meaningful dialogue with Kurds. To become a major player in Middle East and West-Asia Turkey has to deal with Iran and its Shiite crescent as well as Gulf monarchies and Wahhabi Islam. Neither Iran and not the Saudi Arabia is going to shed their role and without backing of Washington Turkey may not be able to reach there.

Economically also Turkey is not doing good. Adverse relations with Washington only created more problems in economy. In 4th quarter of last year, after currency crisis devalued lira (Turkish currency) by nearly 30% against USD, economy contracted 3%. It drove inflation to 15 year high, severely limited Turkish companies' ability to service foreign debt. Bad loans are creating problems in banking sector. As per Reuters poll, economy will contract 0.3 percent this year. Turkey requires IMF support in recapitalizing state banks and restructuring debt. Erdogan's ideas on interest rate policies are not helping the economy either.

A way forward

S-400 is already in Turkey, F35 integration with S-400 is politically impossible. However, Ankara and Washington can work out behind the scenes - probably an IMF package to alleviate Turkish difficulties and sale of some other weapon systems to Turkey. May be giving more say to Turkey on future of Syria; there are still options for Washington to work with. It may not be a good idea for Washington to turn its back on a long-term ally. Let's wait and watch.

Sajeev

Reference

1. Warontherocks
2. WSJ
3. National Interest

Taliban - Marching towards Kabul

Taliban religious Police beating woman

The word 'Deadly' is not enough to describe Taliban's 10 members strong squad's strike on North Afghanistan's largest military base. More than 140 soldiers (and counting) died in the attack. It is to be remembered that Taliban soldiers came in an army vehicle and went past 7 check points before firing on soldiers returning after Friday prayers.

Last year 6,700 Afghan soldiers lost their lives to the insurgency. The tragedy continues in this year as well. Taliban, on the other hand, is gaining heavily in country side; many cities are now on the verge of falling into their hands.

What makes this attack more important is, this happened on the north of the country; that also at one of the biggest bases of Afghan Army - 209 corps. This army group is responsible for providing security to 9 provinces of Afghanistan.

If things are going in this way, this war of attrition going in Taliban's favor. They are winning and have enough fighters. At the same time, Afghan Army which has more manpower and firepower slowly but steadily losing the control. Outside force cant props up Afghan Army forever. If security forces are not getting their act together, then it won't take much time for the world to see Taliban flag flying high over Kabul.

Sajeev

Chinese Method for Testing the Waters

USNS Bowditch

The cat and mouse game is on in South China sea, where most of the waters are claimed by China (nine dashed lines). What China don’t know is, how far US will go in South China Sea disputes to protect allies. Will they walk the talk? No one knows. Hence, China is doing what they can do at best. Test the situation… What make this game more interesting is, the actual policy of Donald Trump towards China when he comes to power.

Latest in the chain of events is the capture of US underwater drone. Pentagon claims that it is a scientific research vessel. However, it is quite possible that the vessel was researching Chinese navel assets deployed on contested waters. It is believed that, while launching underwater drone US ship - Bowditch - was just 50 miles away from Subic Bay (former US Navy base in Philippines). This means Bowditch might be outside of nine dashed lines.

As expected Philippines, didn’t make any hue and cry after the incident; which happened within the waters claimed by them. Philippines hardly said a word when new satellite images uncovered weapon installations on artificial islands around Spartly chain.

There may be two reason for this. First, Philippines navy is not in a position to take on Chinese; second, country is looking for Chinese investments; and finally, current president Durette wants more warm relations with China and slowly drifting away from US.

Well US protested formally and after a lot of exchanges Chinese agreed to return the captured Drone.

This incident happened days after US President-elect called Taiwanese president; which was first such official contact by any US president (or president elect) after Jimmy Carter recognized China on 1979. China didn’t take it well.

Where it is heading?

1. I believe Chinese is testing US; to know what extent America will go?

2. Most of the actions by Chinese till now are below a carefully defined threshold; beyond which US has to respond. Problem is, exactly where the threshold is?

3. These types of incidents will cement Chinese authority on entire South China Sea. When one of the contested party – the Philippines – is not ready to protest, US can hardly do much.

4. This incident also raise questions about the future of ‘US – Philippines’ relations

5. No consequence for Chinese actions will only make them bold to go ahead with this policy.

Sajeev

Al-Qaeda coming to India?

I often wonder why world’s renowned intelligence agencies are over focusing on Al-Qaeda?  Is it because they are considering them as most powerful and influential terrorist organization or simply because they carried out 9/11 attacks? I think more than their capacity, 9/11 made them star.

You may be wondering why I am telling so. Let me explain, any terror group having a wonderful plan and an execution engine will be able to carry out an attack on an unsuspecting city; but it is altogether different matter to continuously fight against state machinery (however weak it may be), overthrow it and run a country for years. That is what Taliban did. 

In terms of capacity, training and support base LeT, TTP, JeM already proved their strength in Pakistan. Al-Queda may be able to destabilize some of the areas, but they are yet to prove their capacity in running a functional state or waging continuous war against well oiled state machinery. Moreover, Al-Qaeda is losing to IS and other terror groups in Iraq and Syria. AQAP is continuously under attack. 

Designs for India

In recent videos Al-Zawahiri was talking about bringing India to their radar. Do we need to worry about that? I think not much, more than a direct threat to India, that message is more like a booster for people in their own ranks. I think after the success of IS (Islamic State) in Iraq and Syria, they already replaced Al-Qaeda as the number one terror company for future terrorists to join.

We need to focus more on organizations like LeT, HUJI, JeM, IM etc and their potential links with Indian terrorist organizations. This doesn’t mean we should ignore the threat posed by Al-Qaeda. We should keep an eye on them, but we shouldn't over focus on them and leave others.

Now it is necessary for Al-Qaeda to prove their strength for its own survival, hence they may orchestrate something. Hence Indian agencies need to be on alert, but we should get our priorities right - focus more on LeT, HUJI, Jaish-e-Mohammad and the possibility of potential flow of fighters from Af-Pak border to Indo-Pak border.

Sajeev

Dhruva - 3 Platform is Operational Now

A couple of days back DG-DRDO Avinash Chander Inaugurated Dhruva-3 computing platform.

“It is one of the fastest computing facility in the country and will also play a very good role in cyber security and information processing”, Chander said.

"CVS Sastry, informed that DHRUVA-3 will be used for designing aero-frame structures, stress analysis of materials and simulation of complex systems."

This product came out from the stable of 'Advanced Numerical Research & Analysis Group (ANURAG)'. ANURAG was established in 1988, "to execute specific, time-bound projects/ programmes leading to the development of custom designed computing systems and software packages for numerical analysis and other applications".

Other important products came out from ANURAG are, PACE, ANAMICA (ANURAG's Medical Imaging and Characterization Aid), general purpose microprocessors - ANUPAMA (32-bit RISC processor, and works at 33 MHz clock speed) and ABACUS.

Hope that Dhruva will contribute significantly for the advancement of aircraft design and simulations.

Sajeev.

References

1. Government of India

2. DRDO

3. Wikipedia

Fishing in troubled waters? Major General Luo Yuan needs to think twice about his statements

Sino - Indian border at Nathu La pass

“The Indian side should not provoke new problems and increase military deployment at the border areas and stir up new trouble,”... “India is the only country in the world that says that it is developing its military power because of China’s military threat,”...“So I believe that India should be very cautious in what it does and what it says.” - SCMP

Two statements mentioned above are from Luo Yuan who enjoys the rank of Major General and currently the deputy-director general of the world military research department at a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) academy.

According to him, India is the trouble maker and our deployments at Indo-Sino border are creating all the problems!!! What he unintentionally or intentionally forgot, is the situation in Chinese side of border and PLA’s deployment patterns. They created complete physical infrastructure required for rapid deployment of forces to border areas even from remote military bases; Infrastructure they are creating in the land (belongs to J & K) occupied by their all weather friend; recent intrusion of their troops to Indian territories, that also not one or two kilometres, which resulted in three week stand off. If India is building road and rail links in our side of border, to connect the remote villages to mainland, we are accused of trouble making!!!

Take a look at his second statement. Are we the only country? News coming out of East & South China Sea indicates something else.

Now, read his third statement. He is right, we should be cautious. In fact, I think we are. We are sometimes over cautious about Indo-Sino relationship - take a look at any of India's summit with Japan or US or Australia. We often don't take sides which make the Chinese uncomfortable. Isn't this rule applicable to him? Do he really need to release this statement when Indian Defence Minister is about to visit (first such trip in seven years) China? Does he have to say India is a trouble maker?

I think an official of his position should think about what he says and how others will perceive it. China which implements a strict framework for freedom of speech and internet policy, these type of statements will easily interpreted as the views of Chinese policy makers. If Chinese wants to test Indian waters first with a negative statement and then balancing the same with denial (after some time), I have to say it is wrong way test the mood.

Sajeev

References

1. Chinese general Luo Yuan warns India against ‘newtrouble’ - SCMP

Collaborating with private sector on cyber security

Cyber warfare is one of the new frontiers in modern warfare. In future wars, governments (as well as other groups) will employ their cyber potential to cripple their enemy's defences and infrastructure. Recent incidents across the globe shows that, governments can start a cyber war without going through a formal declaration of war. In such a situation it is important for India to invest in securing her cyber systems, networks and other infrastructure.

A recent Joint Working Group (JWG) report indicates that, GOI is walking in the right direction to secure our cyber space.  JWG report on engagement with Private Sector for strengthening Cyber Security Architecture put forward some important suggestions.

1. Setting up of a permanent Joint Working Group under the aegis of National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) with representatives from government as well as private sector.
2. Setting up of the Joint Committee of International Cooperation of Advocacy (JCICA).
3. The private sector will set up information Sharing & Analysis Sector (ISACs) in various sectors and cooperate with the sectoral Computer Emergency Response Teams (CERTs) at the operational level.
4. The Joint Working Group has identified four pilot projects for collaboration which include:
   (I) Setting up of Pilot Testing Lab.
   (II) Conducting a test audit of a specified sector.
   (III) Studying vulnerabilities in a sample critical information infrastructure.
   (IV) Establishment of the multi – disciplinary Centre of Excellence

In these days, when we are frequently hearing about breaches in various government systems by foreign elements, a tie up between government and private sector - harnessing the potential of private companies acquired in this area over time - may prove good in securing nation's cyber infrastructure.

Sajeev.

References

1. Government of India.

Honeywell ‘F-125IN Turbofan’ to power 125 IAF Jaguars

Honeywell ‘F-125IN Turbofan’ engine components

What will happen, if you are adding more components to an existing airframe without correspondingly increasing the engine power? Obviously, this will result in low thrust and other problems.

Jaguars first came to India (18) as a loan from British Royal Air Force (RAF), then 40 came from Warton, another 45 assembled at HAL plants in India so on and so forth. Jaguars participated in IPKF operations in SriLanka (1987-90), 1999 Kargil war etc. As the aircraft become older, India carried out many modernizations, especially in the 90s and in early 2000s. Now it’s the time for engine.

It is believed that with current modifications, Juguars life can be extended up to 2030. Honeywell F-125IN will provide higher thrust and reduce the life cycle maintenance costs. According to Honeywell, engine replacement doesn't need any structural modifications. After Rolls-Royce withdraw from the race, only Honeywell remained in competition for completely re-engine 125 Jaguars. On Monday, Indian Air Force issued Request for Proposal (RFP) for engines to Honeywell.

According to Honeywell, the benefits of using F-125IN Turbofan engines will be,

I. Enhanced mission capabilities:
a. 23% shorter high – hot takeoffs
b. 17-40% higher thrust
c. Greater mission range
d. Faster climbs to 20,000 feet without afterburner
e. 36% extended fuel range
  f. Increased combat survivability – auto re-start after flame out

II. Technical superiority with increased performance:
a. Drop-fit replacement
b. 555 pounds lighter than current aircraft configuration
c. 4,400 pounds greater high – hot takeoff payload
d. Decreased pilot workload, increased safety
e. Increased pilot safety – F124 – F125 has 500,000 hours without a loss of a single aircraft due to engine failure
f. Decreased pilot workload – Engine FADEC, EMS

III Improved reliability and reduced life-cycle costs:
a. Greater time between maintenance
b. 2,000 hours minimum time between overhaul
c. Lower cost maintenance
d. Reduced fuel consumption
e. Rupees 7,000 Crores (US$1.5 billion) in reduced life-cycle costs

Hope that without much time loss, Jaguars will be back on Indian skies.

Sajeev

Reference

1. Honeywell Inc.
2. Wikipedia.

Photo Courtesy: Honeywell Inc.

‘East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet’? - China, Japan and the spat over East (China) Sea

Territorial borders on South and East China Sea are as good as line drawn in water. Too many claims, for this stretch of water body which assumed to have riches, in the form of oil and gas, under her seabed - too valuable for many to drop the claims.

China, Japan and ASEAN

Countries which have powerful navies can assert their arguments by constant patrolling, initiating oil and gas drilling etc in disputed areas; but difficult to assert full control as there are too much things on stake. It is difficult for ASEAN countries, individually or combined, to move against China - whose economic and military strength are still on the assent. After all, many ASEAN countries need Chinese investment. For China, it may be easy to handle ASEAN members one by one, but as a block it’s difficult; especially, when it is clear that both ‘US’ and ‘Japan’ will support ASEAN.

Even though historic rivals, there are a lot of dependency between China and Japan. In terms of power as well as influence in the neighbourhood, there is not much difference between China and Japan.

So anyone can claim a lot of areas, but difficult to change already established claims. Any such action from Chinese end will political isolate her in international arena, and escalate Chinafobia which is already on rise.

In East China Sea

There are a group of islands in East China Sea, called 'Senkaku' by Japanese and 'Diaoyu' by Chinese. Recently, Japanese government bought three of these islands, located between Okinawa and China, from a Japanese family. After this incident, six Chinese maritime patrol vessels entered Japanese controlled waters near the islands in Friday morning, even after the warning issued by Japanese Coast Guard. All ships left the area after spending half a day.

Unlike in the case of standoff with Philippines, this time unarmed Chinese vessels entered the area. Probably to show that, the island is still a contested territory and they are not accepting its nationalization. At the same time Japanese didn't try to stop the vessels, probably to avoid an escalation of tensions.

It may be easier to accept these actions as a measure of protest at the government level, but difficult to sell the points to citizens. For Chinese, it is like Japan occupied their territory; for Japanese, China violated their sovereignty. Apart from this, the entrance of Chinese vessels, even though unarmed (according to New York Times report), to Japanese controlled waters will raise the temperature in the region.

Conclusion

When global economy is slowly recovering, when peace is a rare commodity, there is little stomach for others to digest another spat between China and her neighbours. Claiming an area is one thing, but sending naval assets to show the strength is altogether a different game. If something went wrong, even though accidently, it may assume gigantic proportions and may go out of hand.

Sajeev.

Maoists strikes again - Three CRPF members killed in two separate incidents

Demonstration of the 'One Minute Drill' by CRPF

Blood again started flowing through the roads of Chhattisgarh's Bijapur and Dantewada districts in the form of IED blasts. On Monday (August 06, 2012) two CRPF commandos killed in an IED blast, two days before another IED blew up an anti-landmine vehicle (August 04, 2012 - Dantewada, Chhattisgarh) and killed one security personal.

I think Maoists triggered this blast to show their strength especially after CRPF increased their operations in Maoist strongholds. It’s not the first time Maoists are using IED's to blow up vehicles of security personals. In these forest areas - where not much alternate routes are available - security personals often become a prey for IED.

Let's analyse the facts.

The second blast on August 6 was happened when CRPF commandos where bringing rations to their base. Notice the type of vehicle they used - it’s a Tata-407. This blast killed two. From the news reports it’s not clear how many people where there in the vehicle.

Earlier one on August 4 which blew up a Mine Protected Vehicle (MPV) killed one while some others were injured. According to the reports this blast happened when an 80 personal group were on patrol.

Now my question is why we are using Tata-407 for transporting rations? Even if its costly, isn't better to use heavy lift helicopters for bringing in the supplies? Using this we can skip the vulnerable transportation through the ground. As Maoists are not known to possess anti-aircraft missiles air-lifting the supplies offer better protection for the force as well as supply chain.

The saga of MPV (Mine protected vehicles) is not so good with CRPF in the Maoist hit areas. According to some reports the MPV's manufactured by Government Company and one private company can withstand only 21-24kg of explosives. However Maoists now-a-days Maoists are using 80kgs of explosives while targeting MPVs (MSN India #3) which will make the current MPV's useless. Apart from this problem current MPV's in CRPF's arsenal are much more vulnerable if the blast happens at rear wheel area.

MRAPs role in Iraq and Afghanistan

The cousin of MPVs, Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles were very much helpful for marines in Iraq as well as in Afghanistan. According to USA Today report, "As U.S. troop deaths from IEDs have soared to more than 1,500, defence officials who had shown little interest in MRAPs as recently as last fall have made the vehicles their top purchasing priority. The Pentagon has ordered about 6,400 MRAPs this year at $500,000 or more apiece and vows to buy thousands more to replace the less heavily armored Humvees as its all-purpose vehicle in Iraq." - February, 2007.

In 2008 USA Today wrote, 'In May, 11 U.S. troops were killed by blasts from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) compared with 92 in May 2007, records show. That's an 88% decrease".

One of the main reasons they identified was,

"New vehicles. Almost 7,000 heavily armored Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles have been rushed to Iraq in the last year. "They've taken hits, many, many hits that would have killed soldiers and marines in uparmored Humvees," Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in a recent interview. - June 2008

So in this situation I think it will be a good idea to acquire MRV/MRAP's which can withstood much stronger IED blasts. If these vehicles can prove their role in mine clearance as well as in mine protection, they will be very much useful, mobile and safe in the insurgent hit areas of Central India. There are a number of MRAP's like Cougar, RG 33, Caiman from General Dynamics Land Systems, BAE Systems Land Systems etc. Some of them are proved their utility in the insurgent hit Afghanistan and Iraq.

CRPF and IED's

CRPF recovered 1,547 IEDs during 2006-11, and the number is not going to reduce. IED are killing many Jawans every year. If we are not able to find a way to overcome this situation then there may be more IED blasts which will bleed the nation.

Sajeev

References:

1. Two CRPF commandos killed in IED blast - The Statesman
2. Two CRPF commandos killed in IED blast: Hindustan Times
3. Mine protected vehicles reduced to ''coffin on wheels'' in Naxal - MSN India

Photo Courtesy: Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF)

Mine resistant vehicles should be available for the Security forces operating in Maoist areas

One of the recent news titles read like this – “Maoist rebels ambushed a patrol team in central India on Tuesday, killing atleast 15 paramilitary Police men” (Gadchiroli District, Maharashtra). Reason? A land mine blew up their vehicle.

This was not the first time security personals became prey for land mines. But what make me anxious is we are yet to plug the gaps. Now-a-days it is possible to assemble mines and IEDs without much effort or input cost. This scheme is easy for insurgents, as they can inflict heavy damages on the state apparatus without losing anyone from their rank and file.

Now read another title, ‘More Mine-resistant Vehicles Flow to Afghanistan’ - US Department of Defence (June 9, 2009). Reason? According to former US Navy Admiral Mike Mullen IEDs become more and more sophisticated over time. Combined with increasingly sophisticated Taliban attacks, they pose an increasing threat to deployed troops.

Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) is a term indicating armoured fighting vehicles used by the forces for surviving from explosion of Improvised Explosive Device (IED) attacks and ambushes. It’s peculiar design act as a shield for the crew.

Earlier MRAP designs draw much criticism because of the excessive weight and low comfort offered to the crew. However the subsequent designs are showing much improvement in these areas.

Armoured Caterpiller D9R

Another important category of vehicles which can be used in this kind of hostile environments are Armoured Bulldozers like IDF Caterpiller D9R - the customized version of Caterpillar D9. This can be used for Mounting sand barriers, building fortifications, clearing landmines, detonating IED's and explosives etc. During the fighting this vehicle even withstood RPGs and belly charges with more than 100 kg and even half a ton of explosive.

We are not the only forces facing the threat of land mines and IEDs; U.S. and British forces too faced the same in Iraq and Afghanistan. So as armies of many other countries operating in various conflict zones. If MRAP's and vehicles of similar class are able to reduce the causalities, there should not be any reason for any delay in absorbing it to the Paramilitary and Police forces operating in the Maoist hit areas.

Sajeev.

Photo courtesy: Wikipedia (Later edited to suit this article)

Afghanistan - Winding Up

Afghan Parliament

For US, exiting from Afghanistan is becoming more and more complex after the recent unfortunate events. As the time passes the bargaining power of US vis-a-vis Taliban is drawing a curve of steep decline. The recent incident of killing 16 people including kids by a US soldier only added the complexity and shattered the hope for any further nation building process - if there is any.

Afghan always taught many lessons to the strategic thinkers - to the British, to the Soviets and now to the United States. This also shows how difficult for a country – even if it is mighty US - to transform the victory acquired through air strike to a ground one; especially in a country where the culture, religion, values are totally different. This is not medieval times, so the methods applied in those days to bring the restive cities under control are no longer valid. At the same time strategic thinkers are yet to devise working plan for bringing peace to an invaded country.

Japan and Germany after WWII are examples, but in those days peace came after two devastating wars and the faith was not involved in the war. But Afghan is totally a different theatre, people can quite easily think that an external country belongs to a different faith is trying to implement values which are dear to them. In many cases the stress will be on the word faith rather than on the word - 'values'. Nation building process won't happen here if you are not committing for an indefinite period, ready to suffer more causality with enough economic war chest - options not easily digestible at home.

Najibulla regime lasted for three more years after the pull out of Soviet troops. How long the current regime will last? Three main things for any regime to remain at helm is legitimacy, power and honesty. Out of this, first two are very much critical, and the third one is an essential factor. So where is Afghanistan in this scale?

Even though there are allegations of wrong doings current Afghan government rose to power through elections, so we can say it is legitimate. But in the second case its score is bad. Will Afghan National Army (ANA) and Afghan National Police (ANP) will be able to replace NATO forces? Will it be able to fight Taliban insurgency and Warlords at the same time? Questions which are yet to be answered!!! Administration's worst rating is coming in the third front. Allegations of corruption are widespread and people tend to believe less and less on Afghan government in any cases related to honesty.

If no miracles happened an inglorious exit is waiting for NATO forces. But if we are analysing the facts without any prejudice we can see that US in fact achieved their goal and objectives.

Current Al-Qaida is a far cry from its (In)glorious days, its former chief  - US's primary target - is no longer alive. US eliminated many key figures, who can become a potential threat in the future. Even though in a limited form, NATO and US were able to achieve co-operation from the Russian dominated Central Asian Republics (CAR). Northern Distribution Network (NDN) and Manas Airbase many not be a great achievement in paper but a fairly good piece to show.

Drone - the fear in the sky - able to generate panic among the militants even in the previous safe heaves like inaccessible terrains of Af-Pak tribal belts. Its precision strike already took many key militant leaders off the field. Apart from this Afghan borders Iran, military presence in Afghanistan helps US keep a very close watch on Iran. Whatever be it is, US and its allies are leaving behind a regime selected by the people with some kind of adjustments with Taliban.

So even if they leave today, according to me it’s a successful exit for US as far as their goals and objectives are concerned. If they are able to bargain a air/army base close to Iran border or Af-Pak tribal belt it’s an added advantage.

For India

Soon India can find Taliban leaders sitting in the Parliament created using Indian funds.  We don’t have much reasons to be happy. Unfortunately, India centric militant organizations are not a threat to west, making them the last priority in the list...

Sajeev.

Photo Courtesy: Wikipedia (Edited later to suit for this article)

DRDO's Successful Test of Interceptor Missile

Advanced Air Defence Missile

Interceptor capability is required for the defence of land from the attack of incoming missiles, especially ICBM (InterContinental Ballistic Missiles), which otherwise will create so much destruction in the land.

According to the reports, DRDO's Air Defence Missile (AAD-05) successfully hit the ballistic missile (modified Prithvi missile mimicking the ballistic missile) and destroyed it at a height of 15kms near Wheelers Island. During the flight on-board computer guided the missile and on-board radio frequency seeker identified the target system. Test was success as the missile hit the target.

Still we have to remember about the controversies related to the success rate of PATRIOT system during the Operation Desert Storm (First Gulf War), even thought it showed better success rates during Operation Iraqi Freedom (Second Gulf War). In many cases the speed of ICBM are too much for a tactical ABM (Anti Ballistic Missiles)'s. What we have to look forward is to achieve the capabilities of Russian A-135 systems or US Ground Based Mid-Course Defence (GMD).

This is certainly a good step in the way to achieve and deploy full Air Defence System for our cities. DRDO's achievement made us the fifth country in the world to have these capabilities.

Sajeev.

Photo Courtesy: Wikipedia - Picture is for the first test of AAD on 6th Dec 2007

Blocking the Strait of Hormuz – Will Iranians really do that?

"Closing the Strait of Hormuz is very easy for Iranian naval forces...Iran has comprehensive control over the strategic water way...” Iran's Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari told Press TV – a State run news Channel. Only a day before, Iran's Vice-President Mohammad Reza Rahimi warned that not a drop of oil would be allowed to pass through the Strait of Hormuz if sanctions are placed against Iran's oil exports.

The narrow Strait of Hormuz separates Oman and UAE from Iran. With 6 mile wide traffic lane (2 mile for inbound traffic, 2 mile for outbound traffic and another 2 mile act as separation median) is the only gateway to open seas for many of the major petroleum producing areas. According to a New York Times report, this Strait carried 33% of all the oil shipped by sea in 2009 (around 20% of all oil traded worldwide). To cover the strait ships needs to pass through the territorial waters of both Iran and Oman.

If Iran, currently under severe sanctions by US and Europe, cut the oil supplies through the Strait of Hormuz we may have to see another Oil Shock. Global economy, which is already suffering from various chronic deceases, may need to suffer one more. But the question is will Iran bloke the passage? If it did, will it be able to continue with the blockage?

Let’s take the first question; will it really block the passage? I think they will not be. Firstly, apart from the rhetoric it may not be possible for Iran to do so. This will not only hurt the enemies but their numbered friends as well. This action may not go down well with Chinese - one of the main importers of Mid-East oil and gas. If Iran hopes to block any future economic sanctions in UN it can happen only through China or Russia, as other veto empowered members US (no hope), UK (no hope especially after the recent Embassy crisis), France (in the end it may vote along with US and UK) will vote for sanctions.

Secondly, with one close ally - Syrian administration - facing existential threats, evaporated support from Turkey (a conclusion Iran may already reached after the deployment of NATO radars in Turkey) in multinational forums Iranians may became totally isolated.

Thirdly, by this action they will only end up in supporting US to insert more sanctions on them; as it will be easier for US to push forward more sanctions through Security Council. US, becoming more and more independent of Mideast oil may suffer less in face of Mideast oil crisis compared to Europe and developing countries of Asia. Europe may get supplies from Russia even though it will solidify their oil dependency relationship with Russia. So in the end of the day Iran will end up as a lonely player with more hostile neighbours.

Fourthly, it will become more difficult for Iranians to run the country under water tight sanctions. Without enough refined oil, squeeze on essential supplies it may not be easier for administration to pacify any future revolution - Now-a-days revolutions are not so peaceful anyway.

Consider the next case – Iran blocked the Strait. How long they will able to hold on that with US fifth fleet parked at nearby Bahrain? Apart from the three Russian built attack submarines, and ships loaded with Chinese built anti ship missiles most of the Naal assets are very old - bought form US at the time of Shah. Airforce also faces the same issue. ‘Navy of the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution’ - bigger in numbers than the regular Iran Navy, is also in a similar shape. Many of their bases are in the small islands of Persian Gulf – a vulnerable target to powerful enemy bombing.

In case of attacks - if restricted to sea, it may result in the destruction of major Iranian naval assets. In such a situation if US or Israel attempted for precision strike on Iranian nuclear sites, it may or may not end up with destroying the facility but it will certainly creates more problems. Moreover Iran possesess a good missile system capable of hitting many important targets in the region. This will create problems for US and its allies in the region. If US needed an administration change in Iran they need to wait, such changes should come through the efforts of common citizens otherwise it will only create instability.

But apart from the rhetoric chances for a real blockade of Hormuz strait is quite low. Iran may create some disturbances but it may not enlarge to the level of a naval engagement.

It will in be in the interest of Iranians to solve the problems peacefully. Iran is a country blessed with huge natural resources and geography. Located close to South Asia, Central Asia, Southern Europe and East Africa they can act as a trade source as well as hub for these regions. If assets are properly used and engaged peacefully with other countries they can achieve bigger influence than that of neighbours on other side of Persian Gulf. Europeans will be happy to buy more oil from Iran to reduce the dependency on Russian supplies, US may be happy to get an alternate route for NATO supplies to Afghanistan, relations with Israel may not improve much - but it will reduce the tensions in middle east, Sunni Arab countries may not like a powerful Shiite neighbour. But if both leaders displayed statesmanship, it can stop many bloody sectarian conflicts in the region.

Still a great path is available for Iran to move on. Now it’s on the hands of Iranian administrators to decide in which way they want to proceed, before taking any decision it will be helpful for them to travel in Ethihad airways to Dubai and to see what peace combined with oil money can do for the people. I am sure that everybody wants to write their name in the history using golden letters… the question is who will get the chance?

Sajeev

New developments in South China Sea - Who will talk first?

Various Claims on South China Sea

Being in a status of big and powerful league of countries can be turn out a liability. Who understands this better than that of China? The growth started on 1970’s took her to rapid industrialization and economic progress; people suddenly started saying about the rise of China and her economic as well as military might. Books stores where filled with the analysis reports regarding to the events in China. Now-a-days people even started thinking about a bipolar world where one pole is fixed on Beijing. It is true that, today China has the potential to exert its influence not only on its immediate neighborhood, but also on South Asia, South East Asia, Africa and as far away as South America; but it will take some more decades to acquire an influence close to that of US. That too will happen if it’s able to solve the problems in her immediate neighborhood – South China Sea.

It’s quite natural that, a giant neighbour in the vicinity can make others uncomfortable. It will be sorer if the relation carries bitter memories from the past and the conflicts of present. In such a situation if someone is demanding something extraordinary then it will only make the problem worse. This is what happened when China added the entire South China Sea to its core interest list. Panic suddenly spread across the capitals of South Chinese littoral states. The problems – fishing boat incident - with Japan in Senkaku/Diaoyu and with Vietnam and the Philippines in Paracels and the Spratlys group only added fuels to it.

Now to resolve these issues, the interested parties have to sit around the table and talk. Here comes the problem, China may be ready to speak with the nations individually in which case it holds enormous bargaining power not only in size but also in economic and military might but the small nations will not be agreeable to this idea as they know their weakness. They may be more comfortable with to talk with China in a multilateral framework like ASEAN, when as a combined group they have considerable power. But China will not be comfortable with the idea, as it will reduce its bargaining power and there is a possibility to bring the US to the equations. So other than rhetoric and some meetings here and there any speedy resolution is not in the horizon.



Vietnamese hold a rare protest in Hanoi

 But who will be the beneficiary in this situation? Certainly it will not be China. The open problem involving her in the neighborhood will restrict her freedom in playing a global role. Same thing will happen with India too. The ongoing problems with Pakistan will slowdown her rise to from South Asian framework to that of an Asian framework and them to a global framework. The beneficiary will be US, as it will get an opportunity to come back to South East Asia that too an invitation!!! Already US plans to create a base in Australia is in full swing. A place away from the range of Chinese anti-ship missiles as the existing bases like Guam is close to Chinese missile ranges.

Each aggressive move by China will be watched all over the world, these actions will not help her in creating a smooth international profile. So it will be better for China to sit with South East Asian nations and try to solve the problems peacefully under UN conventions on High Seas or according to any regional frameworks. They can also extract a guarantee from the littoral states for a safe passage of all supplies to China through Malacca Straits on all circumstances. Under any circumstances sea lanes should be open to international commercial navigation.

If China is able to work out the problems in South China Sea with littoral nations peacefully, it will not only assist in creating a peaceful SE Asia but will certainly raise China’s image. In that scenario more and more assignments will wait for her – Middle East crisis, African problems…

Sajeev.

Photo Courtesy: Voice of America

Importance of having hard military assets in India

Brahmos Missile - successful product of a Joint Venture

Now-a-days global tenders for high ticket military purchases are not rare. We saw big deals like MMRCA, Scorpene, Gorshgov, C17, heavy lift aircraft's, long range helicopters etc. These off-the-shelf purchases and attached service contracts will effectively transfer a huge amount of money from Indian government accounts to that of foreign partners (offset clauses may allow some money to stay here). But how far these activities will take us in the realm of sophisticated defence technologies? Will it help the Indian companies to acquire the technologies overtime?

If you are thinking that, I am also advocating for 100% indigenous production, I beg to differ, I am not. I am not a fan of that. We may be able to produce a-z of defence equipment indigenously, but at the cost of quality and profitability. What we have to focus is on differentiating the sectors where we can compete and where we need help. Isn’t better to study Newton’s laws of motion in school text than reinventing it every time?

But the catch here is the word ‘Differentiation’. We have to find the sectors where requires many years to catch up with the current level of sophistication and to implement the schemes to fix the problems. If we are going for off the shelf purchases like the ones we are doing in the case of Gorshgov Carrier or C-17 Globemaster we are not going to reach anywhere other than just plugging the gaps. It is as simple as paying 6000Rs rent when your salary is only 10000Rs. The scenario may be better, if we are doing the manufacturing through HAL or any other government companies under licensed production but certainly not enough.

The name of the game is creating hard assets in the country, no matter whether it belongs to us or to foreign companies. Once you have hard assets (in the areas where we are struggling) in the form of manufacturing plants, assembling hubs by foreign companies then it will be matter of time for people to acquire experience and take the initiatives to replicate the success.

Considering the fact that India will remain one of the biggest buyers of defence equipment for atleast next two decades we have considerable bargaining power. After all a country which faces both asymmetric warfare on land and potential threats in sea will end up buying more - a potential opportunity for defence firms.

But the million dolor question is how to attract them to come here and setting up the factories? For this to happen we have to rewrite our procurement procedures. The current offset clauses may be a good start, but it’s not enough for the foreign companies to come here and invest. By forcing them to shed some of their return here, we may have something to start with. But it won’t be enough as nobody will like to distribute their priced technological sophistication to win some contracts, after all it's the secret of their survival. How can we create a win-win situation?

The best way is to offer good terms to the foreigners, allow them to build manufacturing plants here with majority ownership (say 75%). Offer good terms to both eastern - like Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Toshiba etc and western - BAE Systems, GE, Lockheed Martin, Boeing etc - to come and invest. Good offer doesn’t mean cheap land but strict patent protection laws, good operating environments, protection from nationalization, strict enforcement of contracts, quick dispensation of justice, excellent infrastructure, reliable supply chain etc.

At the same time we have to force them to build hard assets like main factories, assembly hubs, service centres etc in India. The last mentioned things are very important for us, we need them to build factories here - instead of mere marketing offices, we need the assembly lines - instead of technicians coming here on demand, we need service centres - instead of waiting indefinitely for spare parts.

For all this to happen we need to remove some of the red tapes. There is no point of limiting foreign partner’s ownership to 25%. Will you ever invest huge amounts to beautify your room, if you are only entitled to 25% of ownership? Won’t you think about accumulating that money for a new home in the future? If majority of technologies are coming from foreign partner, how we can restrict their ownership to 25%? What the logic of stopping a foreign company from acquiring majority ownership in their joint ventures with Indian companies in the name of making our defence industry indigenous, if we are buying hundreds of weapons, missiles, launchers, avionics etc from abroad that too off the shelf. Let them have joint ventures - with majority ownership - with native companies without any string attached.

One of the good case in point - even though the foreign investment is limited to statutory 25% - is the recent announcement of joint venture (JV) between 'Mahindra and Mahindra' and Telephonics Corporation. Telephonics Corporation is an experienced player in integrated, advanced sensor and communication systems technology sectors; serving aerospace, defence and commercial markets. They are very much active in the fields of - Surveillance, Radar, Identification Friend or Foe Surveillance Systems, Mixed Signal IC, Wireless Communication Products etc.

Telephonics - a wholly owned subsidiary of Griffon Corporation – also had a contract with Boeing to supply Multi-Mode Radar (MMR) for India’s P-8i aircraft. This also includes systems for (8) P-8i Aft Radar installations, integration and support services. They are also responsible for the installation of sophisticated intercommunication systems in C-17 Globemaster contracted for Indian Air Force.

Let’s come back to the joint venture, according to the reports,

"...JV to provide the Indian Ministry of Defense (MOD) and the Indian civil sector with radar and surveillance systems, Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) devices and communication systems. In addition, the JV intends to provide systems for Air Traffic Management services, Homeland Security and other emerging surveillance requirements..."

"...envisages establishing a plant in India which would manufacture and service airborne radar systems that are already being supplied to Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) and to support airborne maritime surveillance systems for the Indian Navy and Coast Guard. The JV will license technology from Telephonics for use on a wide range of products that have both defense and civil applications."

Just imagine the potential of having a factory or hard asset in land. It will certainly create a win-win situation  for the nation as well as for the partners. Partnerships with foreign companies will certainly raise the standards, discipline, better financing, spread of technological know-how etc. We don’t have to go anywhere else to see the examples - just look at Indian IT service companies.

In this open world we should utilize the opportunities, especially in defence sector. It’s sweet hear about 100% indigenous production, manufacturing A-Z equipments etc. In practical, it’s not only difficult but also has the potential to become white elephant. If the companies like Mitsubishi etc are struggling to design a new generation aircraft on their own, even after having much technical know-how and experience, it will be much more difficult for us. Even if we made one, it won't guarantee the success of the project as it very much depend on the demand side too (otherwise it will end up as B2 bomber contracts).

Partnership with Sukhoi is one of the successful examples for joint production, but the point we missed in this case is bringing the Sukhoi (Physical assets) to India instead of contract manufacturing at HAL.

As I earlier said we need to differentiate where we are good and where we need assistance. We have to concentrate on our core areas and leave the rest to reliable foreign partnerships – as I mentioned earlier their physical assets should be on India. Consider the case of naval ship building; one of the areas where we are good, so concentrate in this area. Also consider the case of manufacturing engines for fighter planes; here we have to improve a lot. So instead of buying a GE engine outright, ask GE to build a plant (with ownership ratios of their choice) here for engines. If it’s not commercially profitable for them give incentives.

A joint venture with foreign companies will bring in expertise, discipline, new ideas etc. So for having better returns tomorrow we should concentrate on our strengths, rest can be outsourced – to the companies who have plants here. We have to make sure that we will not end up in buying the products off the shelf and then indefinitely wait for spare parts. Let them come to India and create factories here...
 
Sajeev.

Mumbai - Time for strengthening intelligence operations

Photos from Mumbai - After the blasts

The new series of bomb blasts - two in South Mumbai and one in central Mumbai - is going to open all the wounds again. First blast took place at the crowded Zaveri Bazaar, within short time blasts rocked Opera House and Dadar too. The point to be noted here is, these blasts took place just two days after the fifth anniversary of 2006 serial train blasts in Mumbai. Although authorities didn't confirm any links between them.

This is not the first time terrorists are targeting India's financial capital. Mumbai was the target of multiple bomb blasts in the past too. Targeting a major Indian metro will provide several incentives to the terrorists - it will help them to stamp the city as unsafe for business, more attraction in local and international media, creating confusion and panic among the citizens. Not only that, these events will create confusion among government circles too as they will be forced to act quickly and decisively; after all people are expecting their government to do something.

This moment calls for national unity and remember us about the necessity to be on alert around the clock. What happened to our coordinated anti-terrorist strategy? Tragedies like this reveals the importance of various government agencies to coordinate with each other, share information and come up with a joint strategy to face the threat. Remember that after 9/11, terrorists are yet to strike US mainland, after 7/7 London too didn't face any similar situation. Close calls were there, but authorities were able to act in time and fail those attempts.

It is true that in India situation is entirely different, we are close to the base of many terror networks. Over and above Indians and Indian cities are always hit list of various terror groups. In a country of 120 crore people it is difficult to track down various terror elements operating against the nation, but it is precisely the task awaiting for intelligence agencies. They have to penetrate these networks and foil the plots in the beginning itself. To achieve this we have to redefine the role of intelligence agencies, it should have the capability and access to all the modern equipments. Along with this government have to form small groups capable of executing covert operations in land, sea and air.

The spirit of India will never be down and Mumbai will be back in business with in no time.

Sajeev.

Photo Courtesy - Reuters

PNS Mehran Naval base attack - Time to reverse the policies or another nail in the coffin?

A fire truck is parked near a damaged aircraft

Abbottabad attack was some way justifiable for Pakistani army. After all, in normal situations not many countries in the world dare to attack a US aircraft even if it crossed the borders. In the case of Abbottabad US with its full stealth technology may be able to reach the city without making any traces in Pakistani radars (or all the Pakistani radars are facing east?), or simply Pakistani army allowed it, or simply they were unable stop it. As US drones regularly hitting targets inside Pakistan there is nothing new in that. It is another matter that Pakistani army may not be able to sell these arguments to the people or people may find it too hard to digest.

But in the case of PNS Mehran naval base attack things are different. This is one of the premier naval stations in the nation and also hosts US supplied PC-3 Orion aircrafts - the core group of Pakistan’s early warning system. 

According to the reports, insurgents scaled the rear wall to enter the base, then exploited a blind spot between the security cameras and moved (some reports indicate that they were able to travel 1.5km inside the facility) to the area where Orion aircrafts are parked. During the 16 hour long attack insurgents were able to destroy two Orion aircrafts (equipped with Hawkeye 2000 AEW system), another helicopter and at least 10 Pakistani officers. It is believed that four terrorists were killed and two managed to escape.

An armed military official cordons off the entrance

This is not the first time insurgents are targeting Pakistani institutions, earlier they attacked air force bases, busses carrying servicemen, visiting Sri Lankan cricket team, at least five offices of ISI, Army’s national Head Quarters in Rawalpindi - which killed 16 and lasted for at least 24 hours etc. Apart from this; numerous bomb blasts are rocking various Pakistani cities and the situation is worse in Af-Pak border - a place where Pakistani establishments have virtually no control apart from the geographical maps.

These insurgent activities raise many questions about the future of Pakistan as a working country. Already its economy is on the bottom - which for many decades after independence clocked more growth rate than her eastern neighbour, resources are flowing to strengthen its army - which is more concentrated in eastern border than on the places where it needs to be, chronic power shortages are crippling industry and people alike, civilian establishment- which for its part publishing statement after statements which seldom results in actions, growing terrorist activities - yet the authorities aren’t interested in cracking down India centric terror groups. 

There is no doubt that today or tomorrow US will exit from Afghanistan with or without making it stable - after all Afghanistan has no border with US but Pakistan has. The growing insurgency in Afghanistan may or may not offer a strategic depth for Pakistan but it will certainly keep the border provinces out of government’s control. Once after the exit, US may be more sensitive to the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and the growing insurgency in the country.

Contrary to Pakistani wishes, China may not be able to replace US completely in Pakistan equation. They have their own priorities, limitations and there is no doubt that a safe Pakistan will better serve Chinese interests too. They may help in developing natural resources and funding other projects but will not be interested in running Pakistani economy and may not be able to spend/grant that much amount of money to Pakistan as US does.

Pakistani army commandos drive through the main gate

As far as India threat is concerned - which Pakistani establishment used to play when all other doors are closed, a war with Pakistan will be the last option in New Delhi's priority list. India will not be interested in a full scale war with Pakistan, it is the last thing Indian industry and her delicate economy can afford. The situation in other neighbouring countries like Iran or Tajikistan will remain more or less the same as far as Pakistan is concerned.

It’s the time for Pakistani establishment to think about themselves. A bomb planted in street can’t recognize whom to kill and whom not - no matter even if it is a common man or a general in uniform. So if the military establishment is not ready to take the insurgency head on, it will not take much time to change the country from a working anarchy to full chaos.

According to a recent New York Times report "There is no evidence that any nuclear weapons were kept in the base’s arsenal, though they are believed to be stored in large numbers about 15 miles away." The words just 15 miles away requires special attention here, this raises questions about the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. If terrorists can attack and able to hold on for atleast 16 hours in a premier Pakistani naval facility, apart from destroying some of the priced assets of Pakistani Navy, then the attack on a nuclear installation is not a remote possibility.

Just imagine a takeover of a nuclear facility by terrorist organizations - they may not be able to launch a full bomb to a neighbouring or remote country. But certainly their hand will reach to the fuse of some of the killer weapons human beings ever developed. Do we really need any Chernobyl (accidental explosions) or Hiroshima (target bombing)?

Time is not too late; still they can deviate from the path which leads to total chaos and alter their future, but it requires a strong political will to carry out deep reforms. Reforms have to be started from the educational system - putting a blind eye towards a modern educational system will not lead the nation anywhere. The second one is to recognize what India really means to them - Partition and wars are part of the history, it should not come in the way of future. If Pakistani establishment is not able to solve the Kashmir problem then leave it for the time being, let the status-quo go on, if both nations are not able to find a solution for Sir-creek then leave it - let the status-quo go on. But there are many other fields where we can cooperate; for example trade, power etc. There are more things to trade than weapons, more things to study than military doctrines and certainly more ways to live than die as a suicide bomber.

Still she is the most powerful Islamic country. But the question is, will Pakistan try to become a working democracy country like India, Turkey and become a ray of hope or will it become another Somalia? Future is in the hands of current Pakistani military establishment and her civilian government. Mogadishu is not so far...

Sajeev

Photo Courtesy : Yahoo, OnePakistan

Hatf IX – A warm start for Nuclear Proliferation?

Hatf IX NASR

Short range missiles are used to target - neighbouring countries, advancing enemy columns, military formations etc. The same thing is applicable for Pakistan's new short range missile - Hatf IX NASR too, which, according to Pakistan's claims, successfully test fired on April 19, 2011.

What make this missile interesting is its nuclear delivery capability and short range. With a range as low as 60km; this surface to surface, multi tube ballistic missile can cover a distance equivalent to that of a bus in one hour (if it is travelling at a speed of 60kph).

Because of its short range it can only target neighbouring countries and cities close to its border, apart from the advancing conventional enemy formations. And who are these neighbours of Pakistan? - Afghanistan, Iran, India, China and Tajikistan.  The question of who is the target is irrelevant to a person who knows (/lives) something about the geopolitics of South Asia.

The main problem with this missile is its nuclear delivery capability over a short range. Hatf IX NASR can carry, low yield (less than one kiloton) nuclear war heads. This is believed to be Pakistan’s answer for India's ‘Cold Start’ war doctrine. If this shadow boxing is limited to doctrinal level then it was ok, but unfortunately this may not be the case.

Hatf IX is a multi tube ballistic missile which can be launched form a Transporter Erector Launcher (TEL), which can in turn carry two missiles at a time. For effective use at the time of war, this missile has to be in the battle field. Even in the absence of war, this missile can’t be far from Pakistan’s eastern border, as it is designed for a quick answer to India's Cold Start limited war doctrine.

This may act as an effective deterrent against a limited war as Pakistan says and likes; but in the battle field situation, who will determine when to fire? What will happen if officers in the battlefield overruled Military Head Quarters and fired the missiles with nuclear war head? Just imagine a PNS Meharan style coordinated terrorist attack (lasted for more than 10 hours and the insurgents were able to destroy two PC3-Orion aircraft) in the army bases were the Hatf IX NASR is deployed.  Won’t they get more than enough time to launch the rocket?  And nobody can guarantee that they will target only the institutions in Pakistan.
Moreover even if it is launched by Pakistani regulars, the results will not be good. Border cities in India are heavily populated and the after effects of nuclear pollution are severe, as the range is small this will affect Pakistan also.

These types of missiles will definitely lead to the miniaturization of atomic bombs which in turn not only increase the risk  but also help in its proliferation; just imagine the situation, where the terrorist are playing with miniaturized atom bombs as they are doing now with Kalashnikov rifles. Today desperate Gaddafi may not be able to launch a coordinate attack against NATO’s fighter formations, but tomorrow NATO may be welcomed by sub kiloton Plutonium bombs.

At this point it is good for the both nations (India and Pakistan) to concentrate on talks, even if it didn’t produce any results, at least it may establish a contact between them. For Pakistan, it is better to invest these huge amounts in infrastructure development, education, other necessities and go against domestic terrorists which killed more Pakistanis than all the wars with India combined.

Sajeev.

Photo Courtesy: Inter Service Public Relations (Pakistan Government)

ALH and Weapon Indigenisation policy of India (Are we on opposite poles?)

[HAL Dhruv ALH]

Now-a-days Indian Government is spending mind blowing amounts on the purchase of foreign weapons and other defence systems. No need to say, India became a favorite destination for foreign weapon manufactures – no matter whether it is fighter aircrafts, rocket launchers, missiles, submarines, tanks, radars etc. In India they are finding market for whatever they have.

As we moved from the socialist era to liberalized era (as someone pointed out; we can call this era as ‘half baked capitalism’, not fully there and not fully here) India opened her doors for everyone – which was until then favored the socialist weapons. Leaders know that we can’t fully rely on foreign weapons forever – in fact no country can. Not only because of the fact that the flow of money in the case of big ticket purchases are very high but also to make sure that we have to reach a stage where we can go on our own. But the recent activities in this area don’t offer much hope, at least for the near future. In order to analyze this situation we can take a look on the development and production of Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH) by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and the recent CAG report of it.

ALH, weighting 5.5 tonne, is a multi- role, multi mission helicopter fitted with two ‘Turbomeca’ TM 333 2B2 engines. The design started in 1984 and collaboration agreement was signed on 1984 (terminated in 1994 even though certain systems not developed, validated and integrated by that time), and five prototypes of basic version which was supposed to be certified in 1994 actually certified in 2003. More interesting thing is that the technical requirements finalized in 1979 by Army and Air force were not fully achieved and even now and the 74 helicopters supplied to the services are flying with concessions.

Problems started from the beginning itself (Its ok at that time as HAL is newly entering to the ALH world). Against the consultant’s advice for freezing the final design for successful implementation of product, company went on for open design phase- which they later defined as ‘concurrent Engineering Philosophy’. This led to 363 modifications carried out in 34 helicopters, and faced a large number of design problems during manufacturing. Apart from the design problems Advanced Light Helicopter turned out to be a heavier one. Earlier it was expected that the gross weight of basic version will be of 4 tons (Basic Empty Weight (BEW) of 2.24tones - BEW expected for TM 333 engine fitted in ALH was 2.55 tones) but in field (March 2002) it weighted 5.5 tones (BEW was 2.65 tones). Due to this over weight and limited engine power, the mission of 200 kg at an altitude of 6 km was not achieved.

In order to meet the additional performance requirements for weaponized version of ALH, an agreement was signed with Turbomeca(TM) in 2003 for the development of high powered ‘Shakti Engine’ which was to be certified at France in 2006. It was planned that HAL’s work share (read as ‘Indigenisation’) will be increased from 16.7% in phase 0 in 2009-10 to 73% in phase 4 by 2013, but due the failure in the creating the in-house facilities for gearboxes ( to be used in ‘Shakti Engine’), HAL outsourced that to ‘Turbomeaca’. The delay in this program also mirrored in its certification process (yet to be certified) and subsequently in the postponement in the delivery of 20 ALH.

In 1986 defence department observed that the ALH under development will be unsuitable in the attack role because of its overweight and volume. The Weapon System Integration (WSI) project was to be completed by 2003 is still in progress (as of Sep 2009). Selection of weapons, vendor were not addressed timely for the WSI integration project. As it didn’t meet its requirement Navy didn’t accept ALH in for Anti Submarine Warfare (ASW). The delay in the delivery of the ALH will also affect the defence preparedness of the country as it was supposed to be the successor of aging Cheetah/Chetak helicopters.

[Dhruv - Equador Air Force] [This photo is from Wikipedia and displaying under the CC 2.0 generic License]

During the practice in Bangalore (2007 Feb 1) an ALH (J-4062) was crashed; another one delivered to ‘Ecuador Air Force (FAE)’ crashed in 2009. Reasons for these incidents are attributed to the problems in control saturation. This also led to the non-receipt of a possible export order from Chile. This will put a question mark in customers mind about the confidence in company and its products. ALH was supposed to be an indigenous product, but in the current one 90% of value of material is foreign against the recommended level of 50%.

Indigenization is good; it will be the dream of every country to have in house production lines for advances weapons and to create a huge Military- Industrial Complex (MIC). But before going for indigenisation we have to do considerable amount of homework. First of all a delay of decades will make the product useless or outdated one. Problems will come for the first time but after two decades in development and considerable time in production the product is supposed to be stabilized – It can’t fly on concessions forever. When we are selling these products to the foreign customers, it’s our duty to make sure that; it is free of serious defects (if not all the defects). Otherwise it will affect not only create an adverse impact on the reputation of the producer but also affect the reputation of the country.

Now we are investing the huge amount of money for defence purchases ranging from multirole fighter planes to sub marines and night vision Equipment – the list is very long. Can any one imagine the thousands of jobs (if not lacks) these programs can create in India, if we had in-house production capabilities for these weapons? In such a case the amount of money flowing to the public exchequer as tax and profit will reduce our budget deficit (it may even show a positive margin – if we are not going to host any other games in the way we organized 2010 Common Wealth Games). Whatever be the reason – recession, famine etc. - there will not be any reduction in the sails of weapons for a foreseeable future.

[Army Aviation deploying US troops while training]

For the success of all these programs we should have a clear view on what to do. These types of helicopters (most of the defence products for that matter) already exist in the world with proven track records. We don’t have to reinvent the wheel. Instead bring the best brains in the industry and develop excellent training centers (not for the namesake) in the country. There will be many people in the foreign weapon production companies who will be ready to work for Indian companies if we are ready to offer considerable compensation and good opportunities in R&D. Hire them and train ourselves, the investment will not be a waste. Along with this remove all the restrictions on Indian private sector from entering the defence manufacturing industry. If the weapons we are manufacturing and using for critical purpose have considerable percentage (or full) of foreign parts, then what is the problem of having some parts from Indian players? This will not only result in the increment of efficiency but also transform our nation from a dumping ground for foreign weapons to that of a manufacturer and exporter level.

Sajeev.