Breaking news: Coast guard intercepted terrorist boat

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 03 Jan 2015 22:03

the blast was a way of diverting the attention from the 2-3 other boats, and it seems they succeed , but have to wait and see

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Jan 2015 22:04

ravi_g,

It is getting repetitive with no disrespects to you.

Why NTRO did not ask the Navy first, which is officially responsible. That is the question. This is confusing.

Anyway, more confusion on the way.

MoD says that it was Arabian Sea deal.

NTRO says - The occupants of the two explosives-laden boats from Karachi which had entered the Indian waters off Gujarat had plans to carry out a 26/11 type attack in Porbandar city, the officials probing the incident said.

Badly handled PR.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 03 Jan 2015 22:08

Only you seem to calling it as confusion in this thread, Chacko Ji. No one else is confused.

Sad that Frontier India is becoming a source of FUD.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 03 Jan 2015 22:16

chackojoseph wrote:NTRO says - The occupants of the two explosives-laden boats from Karachi which had entered the Indian waters off Gujarat had plans to carry out a 26/11 type attack in Porbandar city, the officials probing the incident said.

Is there any official statement released by NTRO ??? Media can put any words in the mouth of any organization claiming "sources" doesn't mean that it is the truth. Government has given out an official press release, why doubt it based on media speculation??

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 03 Jan 2015 22:20

Sagar G wrote:
chackojoseph wrote:NTRO says - The occupants of the two explosives-laden boats from Karachi which had entered the Indian waters off Gujarat had plans to carry out a 26/11 type attack in Porbandar city, the officials probing the incident said.
Is there any official statement released by NTRO ??? Media can put any words in the mouth of any organization claiming "sources" doesn't mean that it is the truth. Government has given out an official press release, why doubt it based on media speculation??

How else do you demonstrate your impeccable credentials to qualify for Track thoo membership and the attending gravy train??

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 03 Jan 2015 22:22

One 'terror' boat occupant should have been caught alive: Congress leader

‘Come clean’ on Pakistani boat issue: Cong to govt

“How did they (government) come to the conclusion that it was a terrorist boat? It is very strange. Nothing has been explained. Which terrorist organisation was behind it?” party spokesperson Ajoy Kumar said citing media reports which have questioned the government version about the interception and the subsequent blast on board and sinking of the fishing boat.

“I do not know. Either it is done to get recognition or keeping in view the Vibrant Gujarat meeting,” Kumar said.

He he ensoi.

srin · Post by **srin** » 03 Jan 2015 22:24

Face it, Chacko. Your navy sources are either too low in the chain to be in the know or are lying to you - highly likely they think national interest comes above the cosy relationship with journos. You should be worried.
Each time that you say that the entire IN didn't know about this op without any named source, thereby passing off unsubstantiated opinion and rumors as news, it just justifies the term "news traders"

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 03 Jan 2015 22:25

Re: CON party antics. If the boat did end up succeeding in creating the next 26/11 guess who would be the first in line to start blaming yeeeevil Modi admin on security lapse.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 03 Jan 2015 22:27

HT: Pakistan boat crew 'didn't look like fishermen'; search on for wreckage

The Coast Guard has also stepped up patrolling and aerial surveillance along the Gujarat maritime border in view of the Pravasi Bharatiya Divas (January 7-9) and Vibrant Gujarat events (January 11-13), which will be attended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and several foreign leaders.

The Coast Guard followed the standard operating procedure (SOP) while intercepting the hostile boat, which -- according to intelligence inputs -- had set sail from the port city of Karachi from Pakistan for some "illicit transaction".

Just posting these two quotes from the article to make it clear that the Coast Guard has a job to perform and they followed SOP. There is no confusion.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 03 Jan 2015 22:27

For clarity, the official statement from MoD

Coast Guard Intercepts Suspect Boat Carrying Explosives in Arabian Sea

An intelligence based midnight operation was conducted on the intervening night of Dec 31 and yesterdayby the Indian Coast Guard ships and aircraft to intercept a suspect fishing boat in Arabian Sea near Indo-Pak maritime boundary, approximately 365 km from Porbander.

As per the intelligence inputs received on 31st December, a fishing boat from KetiBunder near Karachi was planning some illicit transaction in Arabian Sea. Based on the input, Coast Guard Dornier aircraft undertook sea - air coordinated search and located the suspect fishing boat. Thereafter, the Coast Guard ship on patrol in area was diverted and intercepted the unlit boat at about midnight of 31st December in position 365 km West-South West of Porbandar.

The Coast Guard ship warned the fishing boat to stop for further investigation of the crew and cargo; however, the boat increased speed and tried to escape away from the Indian side of maritime boundary. The hot pursuit continued for nearly one hour and the Coast Guard ship managed to stop the fishing boat after firing warning shots. Four persons were seen on the boat who disregarded all warnings by the Coast Guard ship to stop and cooperate with investigation. Soon thereafter, the crew hid themselves in below deck compartment and set the boat on fire, which resulted in explosion and major fire on the boat.

Due to darkness, bad weather and strong winds, the boat and persons on board could not be saved or recovered. The boat burnt and sank in the same position, in early hours of 1st January. Coast Guard ships and aircraft are continuing operations in area to search for any possible survivor. Coast Guard and other security agencies are maintaining high vigil in maritime and coastal areas since last couple of months due to several inputs on threat from the sea.

Regarding Navy not being a part of the operation, I would like to see the official SoP regarding handling such incidences which specifically states that Navy must be informed about such operations. Please no media "sources" but GoI statement.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 03 Jan 2015 22:33

From Parrikar's twitter handle

I congratulate coast guards for timely action of intercepting a boat carrying suspected terror groups with surgical precision.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 03 Jan 2015 22:49

chackojoseph wrote:ravi_g,

Anyway, more confusion on the way.

MoD says that it was Arabian Sea deal.

NTRO says - The occupants of the two explosives-laden boats from Karachi which had entered the Indian waters off Gujarat had plans to carry out a 26/11 type attack in Porbandar city, the officials probing the incident said.

Badly handled PR.

Shocker.....how many died because of this confusion?

I'm sure this confusion is the least of India,s worries.
You are not following.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 03 Jan 2015 22:54

Guys could it be that there is another boat that got through and this drama by media (paid or unpaid by ISI) is a deliberate attempt to force GOI to spend energy elsewhere?

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 03 Jan 2015 22:55

The butthurt that some section of media is carrying around is because a possible terror attack has been foiled and they have lost a golden chance to do an == between the present GoI with the previous. Of course congress will latch onto it since it suits their purpose of showing Modi in poor light no matter what happens to India and her people. Besides this sudden "inquisitiveness" regarding the veracity of current operation by ICG is coming from the same section of media which is in congresses pocket. Consider if the IN had carried out this operation then the "innocent" questions would have been, why wasn't the ICG involved hain ??? Such "inquisitiveness" is going to be displayed with increasing frequency till 2019.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 03 Jan 2015 22:56

My suspicion is that it was a saturation attack, to see where the security holes are in our borders. Like filling a balloon with water to detect holes.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 03 Jan 2015 22:58

If the IN was not in the loop for this operation it is a matter of some concern, not because things did not go well this time, but because of its implications for future encounters e.g. if Pakistan believes that the Indian Coast Guard is all that it has to deal with in the future when sending more such "fishing boats" out towards India (and there will be more of them coming no doubt), then there is nothing to prevent them from having some of these "fishing boats" shadowed by PN submarines, to let loose some torpedoes against any intervening Indian Coast Guard ships. That will be a huge PR victory for them. As such it is important to keep the IN fully in the loop in case of future encounters where the Coast Guard does not have the sensors/firepower to deal with an escalating situation which may involve the PN.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 03 Jan 2015 23:06

^^^ A pretty foolish move that will be because that will mount to escalation and direct support to terrorists. India would retaliate by sinking their damn submarines and taking out their naval ships as well.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 03 Jan 2015 23:07

fanne Ji, the second boat is said to have returned to Pakistani waters after being detected by the Coast Guard.

Again, this is from unnamed officials and "top sources".

Source: Did another boat of terrorists get away?

They lost the element of surprise.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 03 Jan 2015 23:10

shiv wrote:The army is a territorial dominance force. The BSF is a border police force.

The navy is a sea dominance force. The coast guard is a coastal police force.

If Muthalik happens to raid a rave party, the army need not be called in. Only the police.

The navy was not physically involved but were surely in the loop. That is what Adm (R) Prakash said.

It is a strange form of public and media naivete that asks if Navy was involved or not in this kind of action. The coast guard exists for this role.

As far as the media is concerned, I wouldn't call it naivete. It is a stupidity that is criminal for all practical purposes. The stupidity is of a quality and level that is hard to believe, if we didn't have overwhelming evidence in front of our own eyes.

Public naivete is generated and fed by media stupidity.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 03 Jan 2015 23:13

Sagar G wrote:So chacko what is your CT ???

Modi is a hindutva and therefore a liar and not to be trusted. Hence everything this admin says is a lie.

that's basically it.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 03 Jan 2015 23:13

Those concerned about the lack of involvement of the Navy should first question the veracity of their sources. Why speculate and be concerned over FUD?

It seems like pankaj Ji's excellent post needs to be repeated.

pankajs wrote:There is a patented process that is followed by MSM and this process has been called by various names my fav being "Salma quotes Sabrina".

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... g-to-govt/
“How did they (government) come to the conclusion that it was a terrorist boat? It is very strange. Nothing has been explained. Which terrorist organisation was behind it?” party spokesperson Ajoy Kumar said citing media reports which have questioned the government version about the interception and the subsequent blast on board and sinking of the fishing boat.
First Sabrina, here Praveen Swami, makes an unsubstantiated claim. Then Salma, everyone in MSM in this instance, quotes Sabrina as if that was gospel truth. That is how a story is manufactured in MSM.

So all THE interested party has to do is bribe someone i.e one person to become the "Sabrina". The distrust of Modi in our agenda driven MSM is enough for this to take the form of a major story. Also note, that THE interested party may not even be ISI in this case. It can an internal enemy of Modi or even other external countries/organization. The US, the Europeans and the Chinese would be willing to pay a goodly sum to create distrust of Modi within the mango junta and bring him down a couple of notches.

The above report further states
However, there has been no official confirmation of that conjecture with the Defence Ministry merely stating that the boat from Keti Bunder near Karachi “was planning some illicit transaction” in the Arabian Sea.
So even when no claims have been made by GOI, someone in the media has done it for the GOI and hung it around the GOI's neck.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 03 Jan 2015 23:14

Sagar G wrote:^^^ A pretty foolish move that will be because that will mount to escalation and direct support to terrorists. India would retaliate by sinking their damn submarines and taking out their naval ships as well.

If the nearest IN ship is 200 nm away(because the IN was not in the loop), what retaliation are you talking about? Pakistan will issue a statement ," a PN submarine came across an Indian Coast Guard vessel attacking a Pakistani fishing board and fired 2 torpedoes at the Indian Coast Guard vessel which sank." By the time the IN ships reach the scene, the PN submarine and the "fishing boat" are long gone. Is India going to launch an attack on Karachi based on this encounter? Hence the importance IMO of coordinated operations between the IN and Coast Guard so that the IN is always available to provide backup to the Coast Guard if needed.

PS: Pakistan's modus operandi on land is for the PA and Rangers to provide covering fire to slip terrorists into India. No reason why the PN will not attempt to that on sea to terrorists on "fishing boats" attempting to slip into India. India has to be prepared on all fronts.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 03 Jan 2015 23:20

Sinking a coast guard ship, that too with torpedoes is an act of war. We'd do the same thing we would do if pakis launch a couple of missiles at an airfield.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 03 Jan 2015 23:21

Idev Ji, is your problem that you don't know what the SOP between the Navy and the Coast Guard is?

Or are you insinuating that there is no such SOP?

There is one last option: That there is a SOP but it wasn't followed.

Anyone insinuating the last option carries the burden of proof. Where is it? FUD and self-induced confusion doesn't count as proof.

Without incontrovertible proof, how is this insinuation anything but an attempt to create a rift between the Navy and Coast Guard? I can see how such a rift might be beneficial to India's enemies or enemies of good governance now that we have a working defense.

SanjayC · Post by **SanjayC** » 03 Jan 2015 23:33

PratikDas wrote:Those concerned about the lack of involvement of the Navy should first question the veracity of their sources. Why speculate and be concerned over FUD? It seems like pankaj Ji's excellent post needs to be repeated.

Communists and missionary historians use the same technique in their books -- they quote each other to prove their case.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 03 Jan 2015 23:35

chackojoseph wrote:
shiv wrote:It is a strange form of public and media naivete that asks if Navy was involved or not in this kind of action. The coast guard exists for this role.
Navy is the over all incharge as per the govt after 9/11 and in no ambiguous words. There is no change in policy till now. All exercises including Defence of Gujarat Exercise is headed by navy.

This is not public or media creation. it is what Govt states specifically.

Strange reasoning.

PM is overall in charge of national administration. A police constable in Delhi goes after a petty criminal and the PM doesn't get involved. Does it mean PM was bypassed or there is something fishy?

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 03 Jan 2015 23:38

ldev wrote:If the nearest IN ship is 200 nm away(because the IN was not in the loop), what retaliation are you talking about? Pakistan will issue a statement ," a PN submarine came across an Indian Coast Guard vessel attacking a Pakistani fishing board and fired 2 torpedoes at the Indian Coast Guard vessel which sank." By the time the IN ships reach the scene, the PN submarine and the "fishing boat" are long gone. Is India going to launch an attack on Karachi based on this encounter? Hence the importance IMO of coordinated operations between the IN and Coast Guard so that the IN is always available to provide backup to the Coast Guard if needed.

PS: Pakistan's modus operandi on land is for the PA and Rangers to provide covering fire to slip terrorists into India. No reason why the PN will not attempt to that on sea to terrorists on "fishing boats" attempting to slip into India. India has to be prepared on all fronts.

Are you joking or what ??? First you come up with an imaginary situation then try to justify it by imagining more things like Pottynation issuing statement confirming it's hand in sinking a ICG ship !!! Even if we consider that the same happens will you care to point out what will stop India from carrying out a retaliatory attack on PN submarines or naval ships ??? I am all for co-ordination but please don't create possible scenarios and then try to justify it by creating some more.

We have no information regarding patrolling of IN submarines so how are you taking it as a fact that the area wasn't sanitised and safe for ICG ship to chase the boat ??? Complete information hasn't been shared and rightfully so, please don't expect a cricket commentary like ball by ball update and analysis of each and every operation that our security forces carry out.

Rangers/PA get hammered for providing support to terrorists as was done recently and will be done again since Pottynation has broken ceasefire. If the same is carried out by them at sea then they will get hammered equally like their land brethrens.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 03 Jan 2015 23:40

PratikDas wrote:Idev Ji, is your problem that you don't know what the SOP between the Navy and the Coast Guard is?

Or are you insinuating that there is no such SOP?

There is one last option: That there is a SOP but it wasn't followed.

Anyone insinuating the last option carries the burden of proof. Where is it? FUD and self-induced confusion doesn't count as proof.

Without incontrovertible proof, how is this insinuation anything but an attempt to create a rift between the Navy and Coast Guard? I can see how such a rift might be beneficial to India's enemies or enemies of good governance now that we have a working defense.

Insinuating!! Interesting word, but no, nothing like that.

A report was published:

Conspicuous: silence on navy

The Coast Guard, which pursued the boat, is responsible, along with Marine Police, for the waters in the immediate vicinity of the coastline - up to 12 nautical miles of territorial seas. An additional 12 nautical miles of contiguous seas is also the responsibility of the Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard operates with the Indian Navy for up to 200 nautical miles that include the Exclusive Economic Zone. Since the Indian agencies are saying the boat blew up and sank around 191 nautical miles from the Porbandar coast, the navy should have had a role.

Given the sensitivity of Gujarat - which houses several industries, including oil refineries and shipyards, on its coastline - the security watch in the region is almost always on high alert.

The navy conducts a "Defence of Gujarat" exercise every year. The navy has been officially designated the "nodal agency" for coastal security after 26/11.

Last month, the navy also inaugurated its Information Management and Analysis Centre, touted as the nerve centre collating all intelligence inputs and disseminating them on a need-to-know basis.

If this report is accurate then SOP dictates that outside the 12 nm territorial but within the 200 nm Economic Zone, the CG and IN coordinate security and operations. The IN "appears" not to know anything about this operation, (I dont think the IN has issued any formal statement).

Pakistan has been in an undeclared war with India for a long time and in war every side adapts its tactics to changing circumstances. If Pakistan believes that the IN is not backstopping the CG then it can change its tactics and provide cover to terrorists at sea via the PN. That is what I am talking about. Nothing is being insinuated. I am telling you directly.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 03 Jan 2015 23:53

ldev wrote:If this report is accurate then SOP dictates that outside the 12 nm territorial but within the 200 nm Economic Zone, the CG and IN coordinate security and operations.

I give you another report providing another "SoP"

Coast Guard beefs up patrolling along Gujarat coast

Addressing mediapersons on Saturday, ICG also raised suspicion over the identity of the crew who, according to the maritime law enforcement agency, did not resemble fishermen since they were not found be carrying any nets. ICG stated that the interception was part of its standard operating procedure (SOP) based on intelligence input which suggested the vessel had set sail from Karachi in Pakistan for some illegal transaction.

ldev wrote:The IN "appears" not to know anything about this operation, (I dont think the IN has issued any formal statement).

Why does the IN need to issue any statement when MoD has released one ??? When the body under which IN functions has provided one why this focus on statement coming out from IN ??? What is this a statement marathon ??? There hasn't been any official statement from any of our intelligence agencies as well, are you going to start to doubt them as well now ???

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 03 Jan 2015 23:59

ldev wrote:If the IN was not in the loop for this operation it is a matter of some concern, not because things did not go well this time, but because of its implications for future encounters e.g. if Pakistan believes that the Indian Coast Guard is all that it has to deal with in the future when sending more such "fishing boats" out towards India (and there will be more of them coming no doubt), then there is nothing to prevent them from having some of these "fishing boats" shadowed by PN submarines, to let loose some torpedoes against any intervening Indian Coast Guard ships. That will be a huge PR victory for them. As such it is important to keep the IN fully in the loop in case of future encounters where the Coast Guard does not have the sensors/firepower to deal with an escalating situation which may involve the PN.

Glad you said "if the IN was not in the loop..." We only have the word of mediapersons of demonstrably dubious intellect and integrity to suggest that it wasn't.

member_28911 · Post by **member_28911** » 04 Jan 2015 00:01

Neela wrote: Shocker.....how many died because of this confusion?

I'm sure this confusion is the least of India,s worries.
You are not following.

Only NDTV journos and Praveen Swamy (who surely have some kind of agenda against Indian Armed Forces) seems to be confused here. They are all quoting their fictional "sources" to give credibility to their theories discomfiting Indian Armed Forces and giving options to Pakistan to choose from.

jerry · Post by **jerry** » 04 Jan 2015 00:07

Just tweeted:User Actions
Follow

Saurav Jha
‏@SJha1618
Moreover this 'was the Navy kept in the loop' business is an attempt to get somebody to reveal our coastal command structure.

jfk

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 04 Jan 2015 00:12

ldev wrote:
PratikDas wrote:Idev Ji, is your problem that you don't know what the SOP between the Navy and the Coast Guard is?

Or are you insinuating that there is no such SOP?

There is one last option: That there is a SOP but it wasn't followed.

Anyone insinuating the last option carries the burden of proof. Where is it? FUD and self-induced confusion doesn't count as proof.

Without incontrovertible proof, how is this insinuation anything but an attempt to create a rift between the Navy and Coast Guard? I can see how such a rift might be beneficial to India's enemies or enemies of good governance now that we have a working defense.
Insinuating!! Interesting word, but no, nothing like that.

A report was published:

Conspicuous: silence on navy

The Coast Guard, which pursued the boat, is responsible, along with Marine Police, for the waters in the immediate vicinity of the coastline - up to 12 nautical miles of territorial seas. An additional 12 nautical miles of contiguous seas is also the responsibility of the Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard operates with the Indian Navy for up to 200 nautical miles that include the Exclusive Economic Zone. Since the Indian agencies are saying the boat blew up and sank around 191 nautical miles from the Porbandar coast, the navy should have had a role.

Given the sensitivity of Gujarat - which houses several industries, including oil refineries and shipyards, on its coastline - the security watch in the region is almost always on high alert.

The navy conducts a "Defence of Gujarat" exercise every year. The navy has been officially designated the "nodal agency" for coastal security after 26/11.

Last month, the navy also inaugurated its Information Management and Analysis Centre, touted as the nerve centre collating all intelligence inputs and disseminating them on a need-to-know basis.
If this report is accurate then SOP dictates that outside the 12 nm territorial but within the 200 nm Economic Zone, the CG and IN coordinate security and operations. The IN "appears" not to know anything about this operation, (I dont think the IN has issued any formal statement).

Pakistan has been in an undeclared war with India for a long time and in war every side adapts its tactics to changing circumstances. If Pakistan believes that the IN is not backstopping the CG then it can change its tactics and provide cover to terrorists at sea via the PN. That is what I am talking about. Nothing is being insinuated. I am telling you directly.

The report that you quoted is stupid. Firstly there is no evidence presented that the IN and CG were, in fact, not coordinating. Secondly, they are presenting a functional scenario in which IN involvement constitutes the CG, in effect, coming to a screeching halt 24 miles from the coast and waiting for a navy ship to steam in and take over the chase. This is beyond idiotic.

Why would you quote such a piece of garbage as your supporting authority?

jerry · Post by **jerry** » 04 Jan 2015 00:14

Factual reporting by Nitin Gokhale
http://www.abplive.in/india/2015/01/03/ ... in-Gokhale

jfk

member_28911 · Post by **member_28911** » 04 Jan 2015 00:18

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 04 Jan 2015 00:20

Morons, indeed.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 04 Jan 2015 00:24

Another news report on the IN not being in the loop.

Why did the Navy not use its UAV squadron at Porbandar?

A vital asset – one closest to the scene of the dramatic December 31 Coast Guard operation – that could have helped identify and elicit more information about the ‘terror’ boat was with the Navy’s Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) squadron at Porbandar. Yet, on December 31, the squadron had no information whatsoever nor was it pressed into action even after the National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) tracked a communication between a Karachi-based handler and crewmembers of a boat said to be carrying terror operatives from Pakistan.

If sources in the Navy’s Western Command are to be believed there was little information available to them to launch an operation similar to the one carried out by the Coast Guard on December 31.

INAS 343 – the UAV base – when commissioned at Porbandar in January 2011 was considered to be a shot in the arm for the Indian Navy considering Karachi’s proximity, about 450 kilometres from Porbandar, and particularly the presence of Pakistan’s Special Services Group (SSG) in the Pakistani city.

The UAV squadron with Israeli Herons and Searcher MK-II was well suited to carrying out a reconnaissance, identifying and even intercepting any further calls being made by the crew of the ‘terror’ boat that sank about 356 kilometres off the Porbandar coast. Though one of the UAVs had crashed in November last year, the Navy had three more capable of gathering both electronic and imagery intelligence. Navy sources said that the Searcher MK-II – a third generation UAV – is equipped with a sophisticated electro optic camera and with equipment to gather communication intelligence (COMINT).

The NTRO-Coast Guard operation also raises serious questions about the standard operating procedures laid down by the cabinet committee on coastal security (CCCS) after the 26/11 Mumbai terror strike. To avoid a fiasco of the magnitude of 26/11, the CCCS had appointed the Indian Navy as the nodal agency for coastal security. The decision saw INS Angre in Mumbai being designated as the Joint Operations Centre (JOC) for the western maritime frontier.

Hotlines to coordinate with various agencies, and state-of-the-art rapid messaging service technology to communicate with ships were installed to thwart any threat in real time. The JOC (West) was to operate under the command Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief (FOC-in-C) of the Western Naval Command.

“If the JOC was alerted about any such actionable intelligence, the Navy would have definitely moved its assets,” said a navy official, requesting anonymity. The criticality of the region, the unresolved border issues near Sir Creek coupled with Pakistan’s escalation of firing on the Line of Control (LoC) had seen the Western Command deploy its assets in the region, the official said.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 04 Jan 2015 00:25

I wonder if the occupants of the peaceful boat were on a track 2 aman/peace meeting in Porbandar. The largest FUD campaign is emanating from the track thoo folks.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 04 Jan 2015 00:28

jerry wrote:Factual reporting by Nitin Gokhale
http://www.abplive.in/india/2015/01/03/ ... in-Gokhale

jfk

The report directly contradicts the claim by praveen swami as well as chackojoseph that the navy was "bypassed".

What happened here? Did a BRFite tell a flat-out lie on this thread, writing in a professional capacity as a journalist?

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 04 Jan 2015 00:30

Apparently Indian UAVs can capture a boat and investigate its occupants. It also has cray vision that can see what's hidden in a vessel from 40 km height.