Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 03 Aug 2010 05:19

‘US attempt to steal N-secrets was foiled’

Sunday, August 01, 2010
ISLAMABAD: Former DG ISI Lieutenant General Javed Ashraf Qazi has disclosed that Pakistan had foiled an attempt of a CIA official to steal documents of Pakistan N-secrets with the help of a Pakistani military officer.

Talking to a private TV channel here on Saturday, the former ISI head said that in 1994-95 secret agencies had foiled a theft attempt of Pakistan’s nuclear secrets and arrested several CIA officials as well as a major.

Qazi said he was informed about such a case at that time when he was working as DG ISI. He said that the CIA officials and Pakistan Army major were immediately arrested in a covert operation. He said the major was court martialled while the CIA agents were deported from the country.

The former ISI chief said that Western secret agencies have a double standard about Pakistan. On the one side, they appreciate Pakistan’s role and on the other hand defame the ISI on the international level. He alleged that in the name of cooperation, Western secret agencies are trying to steal nuclear secrets.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 03 Aug 2010 11:52

andy B wrote:Article in June ACM on TSPAF:

http://ifile.it/tdozrb2/TSPAF.zip

Thanks for the scan
can you find out earlier article on PAK AF and other mil since there is pattern of boosting their image at a time when they are having problem. There is no negative news about Pak mil development, or mil at all. everything is suppressed about the Pak military

Thomas Kolarek · Post by **Thomas Kolarek** » 04 Aug 2010 05:25

Craig Alpert wrote:‘US attempt to steal N-secrets was foiled’
Sunday, August 01, 2010
ISLAMABAD: Former DG ISI Lieutenant General Javed Ashraf Qazi has disclosed that Pakistan had foiled an attempt of a CIA official to steal documents of Pakistan N-secrets with the help of a Pakistani military officer.

Talking to a private TV channel here on Saturday, the former ISI head said that in 1994-95 secret agencies had foiled a theft attempt of Pakistan’s nuclear secrets and arrested several CIA officials as well as a major.

Qazi said he was informed about such a case at that time when he was working as DG ISI. He said that the CIA officials and Pakistan Army major were immediately arrested in a covert operation. He said the major was court martialled while the CIA agents were deported from the country.

The former ISI chief said that Western secret agencies have a double standard about Pakistan. On the one side, they appreciate Pakistan’s role and on the other hand defame the ISI on the international level. He alleged that in the name of cooperation, Western secret agencies are trying to steal nuclear secrets.

How funny, the so called Pakistan Nuclear secret, is itself a stolen one

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 04 Aug 2010 05:57

Acharya wrote:
andy B wrote:Article in June ACM on TSPAF:

http://ifile.it/tdozrb2/TSPAF.zip
Thanks for the scan
can you find out earlier article on PAK AF and other mil since there is pattern of boosting their image at a time when they are having problem. There is no negative news about Pak mil development, or mil at all. everything is suppressed about the Pak military

Found 2 more on TSPAF saar will post sometime todin...

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 04 Aug 2010 10:18

andy B wrote:

Found 2 more on TSPAF saar will post sometime todin...

FInd the date of the publication and list them out.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 05 Aug 2010 10:59

Increase in radicalization among pakistan naval officer ranks
...
Yet another example of extremism came through an email I received in response to my write-up on Education and bigotry (July 14) from a person describing himself as a retired naval officer who does not wish to be named here.

He had this to say, “The most worrisome part of our current education system may perhaps be this. As member of the faculty at Pakistan Navy’s premier institute, over a period I observed (much to my horror), the upcoming generation of officers imbued with a fanatical desire to go to war with India. Not only that, these officers are intolerant in mundane academic discussions, some even feel elated when acts of violence take place against minorities. This then is the trend that seems to be gathering momentum….”

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... lready-480

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 05 Aug 2010 17:36

Acharya wrote:
andy B wrote:

Found 2 more on TSPAF saar will post sometime todin...
FInd the date of the publication and list them out.

TSPAF Choppers AFM March 2010 http://ifile.it/ldij5p0/TSPAF%20CHOPPERS.zip

HIGH MARK Excercise covered in AFM July 2010 http://ifile.it/ipugo3b/TSPAF%20HIGH%20MARK%202010.zip

munda · Post by **munda** » 07 Aug 2010 12:32

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxceHYRF91w

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 07 Aug 2010 18:19

US-Pak defence teams agree to boost cooperation

The DCG plenary session reviewed the Exchanges on Defence Planning (EDP), which took place in June and July 2010 and identified Pakistan’s immediate and long-term defence needs. Both sides emphasised the importance of such exchanges in defining the mutual opportunities and challenges associated with multi-year cooperation between Pakistan and the US, and the value of prioritising and integrating Pakistan’s security and defence capability requirements.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 08 Aug 2010 02:37

India lags behind Pakistan in nuclear armoury: US expert
ALLAH KE NAAM PE DE DE BABA

NEW DELHI: The nuclear information director of Federation of American Scientists (FAS), Hans M Kristensen, has sought to settle the debate on India and Pakistan's nuclear arsenal by declaring that Pakistan doesn't only have more warheads and fissile material but also better delivery systems for such weapons.

Referring to a report in TOI last week, he said that India might again be discovering that Pakistan has a few more nuclear weapons than India. ``As far as I can gauge, apart from nuclear testing where India started first, Pakistan has always been a little ahead in warheads, fissile material and delivery systems,'' said Kristensen in his latest write-up for FAS.

The TOI report was based on a study carried out by Kristensen and Robert Norris which said that, apart from Pakistan having more nuclear warheads, it had fissile material for 90 more warheads. India, it said, had fissile material for 60-105 warheads.

Kristensen, however, went on to say that neither country can claim any nuclear moral high ground. ``Both are increasing their nuclear arsenals, both are producing more fissile material for nuclear weapons, and both are diversifying the means to deliver nuclear weapons and extending their range,'' he said. As per his latest estimate, while India has 60-80 warheads, Pakistan has 70-90.

``The two countries are now at a warhead level about equal to that of Israel (80 warheads). But whereas it took Israel 40 years to reach that level, India and Pakistan have done so in only 12 years. And they're apparently not done,'' he added.

Kristensen is also co-author of the `Nuclear Notebook' column in the `Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists', which claims to be the most accurate source of information on nuclear weapons and weapon facilities available to the public, and the `World Nuclear Forces' overview in the SIPRI Yearbook.

According to Kristensen, Indian and Pakistani security will probably be served better by trying soon to define just how big a nuclear force is sufficient for minimum deterrence so that "prudent planning" doesn't take them to a new and more dangerous level.

``Although neither government wants to say so publicly, India and Pakistan are in effect in a nuclear arms race. It might not be of the intensity of the Cold War arms race between the Soviet Union and the United States, but it is a race nonetheless for capability and systems,'' he said

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 08 Aug 2010 04:24

^^, Let people be ignorant. I can see here how much FAS knows about India's weapon systems. Just like they never believed India even know how to make a bomb, until some of them read newspaper in 1998, most of these FAS guys are totally ignorant, they might even say china does not know how to make a aircraft carrier ! loads of crap. They will wake up when chinese will be sitting on mars and they will be ranting that chinese dont know how make an aircraft. lol.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 08 Aug 2010 06:43

ashish raval wrote:^^, Let people be ignorant. I can see here how much FAS knows about India's weapon systems. Just like they never believed India even know how to make a bomb, until some of them read newspaper in 1998, most of these FAS guys are totally ignorant, they might even say china does not know how to make a aircraft carrier ! loads of crap. They will wake up when chinese will be sitting on mars and they will be ranting that chinese dont know how make an aircraft. lol.

Pak may have better WMD than China also.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 08 Aug 2010 08:28

It does not matter how much they have. We have enough to cover them. They can hit Northern India and inflict heavy damage even if they have less numbers. It will help them a lot. We are anyway worried. Russians are concerned too.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 08 Aug 2010 09:21

The NPA speak is very zimble onree...

1. they want to ferret out anything .. anything even a small statement on capabilities from the Indian establishment ...

2. These things have a link to the Sino-Pak play for an elevated status in the international nuclear framework

3. To show that "China" is in a different league.

India opted for the plutonium route for its weapons whereas Pak went the front end ( enrichment route). Given India's large PHWR fleet and research reactors that have been operating unsafeguarded ( till recently of course) for a long time there is no way in hell that India has "less" fissile material . That is utter BS.

The Pukis on the other hand did not have supercritical centrifuges and they joined the plutonium generating reactor game only much later. Any rational analysis will suggest that they should have waaay less than us.

As far as this nonsense of delivery systems go ... A country which finds water on the moon, regularly launches 5 different satellites into complex orbits from a single bus, makes indigenous RLGs, 2 m diameter solid rocket motors cannot be behind in "delivery" systems to a beggar rogue state that has mostly soviet era technology from various secondary sources.

And I wonder what the yields of the Puke warheads are, not to mention their weights and deliverability by different vectors, not to mention the CEP of their BMs.

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 08 Aug 2010 09:38

If Pukes do have the nuclear weapons and use them against India Mankind on this planet is finished.

Added later If pukes do try and do some funny stuff the Russians, Americans, Chinese will wipe Pakistan of the face of this earth.They will be quicker on the draw than India since Pakistan-India is not a two sum game and everybody who matters know this.
For all doubting Thomass's here just check out Chinese 'Three gorges dam' and the effect of a couple of missiles even without nukes would have on it.

JimmyJ · Post by **JimmyJ** » 08 Aug 2010 09:51

Well I guess the west going gaga is good for India, let Pakistan continue to become the bigger devil in their minds. We must encourage the west in its current path on this.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 08 Aug 2010 09:58

JimmyJ wrote:Well I guess the west going gaga is good for India, let Pakistan continue to become the bigger devil in their minds. We must encourage the west in its current path on this.

You are absolutely right on this. Unlike terrorism, which was local for some years, nuclear weapons are global problem even if they have local use.

Paki's have this world conqueror syndrome. After years of banging their heads with India, they are trying to grow other places like the Western hemisphere. Wish them luck in their syndrome.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 08 Aug 2010 11:49

andy B wrote:TSPAF Choppers AFM March 2010 http://ifile.it/ldij5p0/TSPAF%20CHOPPERS.zip

Excellent Pak Army PR @ work. And Alan Warnes makes good on his long association with Pakistan:

...If the Americans really want Pakistan to oust the number one threat to world peace they must provide Pakistan the right tools

AH-64 Apache aka Right Tool

Andy, can you obtain June 2009 issue of AFM "Himalayan Showdown".

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 08 Aug 2010 12:01

^^^ If we are going to buy our MMRCA's as well as the engines for the L.C.A from Europe there are going to be fallouts like this.Better go ahead and do what we want to do and let unkil and his rent boy tango together.

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 08 Aug 2010 13:11

Aditya G wrote:
andy B wrote:TSPAF Choppers AFM March 2010 http://ifile.it/ldij5p0/TSPAF%20CHOPPERS.zip
Excellent Pak Army PR @ work. And Alan Warnes makes good on his long association with Pakistan:

...If the Americans really want Pakistan to oust the number one threat to world peace they must provide Pakistan the right tools

AH-64 Apache aka Right Tool

Andy, can you obtain June 2009 issue of AFM "Himalayan Showdown".

http://ifile.it/bx68ig1/HIMALAYAN%20SHOWDOWN.zip

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 08 Aug 2010 19:36

andy B wrote:http://ifile.it/bx68ig1/HIMALAYAN%20SHOWDOWN.zip

Thanks! It is Air Cmde Tufail's article by different name

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 08 Aug 2010 22:14

andy B wrote: TSPAF Choppers AFM March 2010 http://ifile.it/ldij5p0/TSPAF%20CHOPPERS.zip

Excellent Pak Army PR @ work. And Alan Warnes makes good on his long association with Pakistan:

...If the Americans really want Pakistan to oust the number one threat to world peace they must provide Pakistan the right tools

AH-64 Apache aka Right Tool

Andy, can you obtain June 2009 issue of AFM "Himalayan Showdown".

http://ifile.it/bx68ig1/HIMALAYAN%20SHOWDOWN.zip

They are running a good PR machine regularly as and when required. When there is need for support and more military aid to PAK the PR machine and the defence companies in US run and fund these PR campaigns so that the US congress and public give support. This has been going on for some time now.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 11 Aug 2010 08:06

India-US review Defence Cooperation

Asked whether the U.S. was monitoring weapon sales to Pakistan in order not to upset the military balance with India, Ms. Flournoy {Under Secretary of Defence on Policy} pointed out that since terrorism came home to Pakistan, there had been a shift in political will, which was reflected in the military operations in South Waziristan. U.S. weapon sales to Pakistan, she said, were focussed on equipment efficiency to support the current counter-insurgency operations. {And, nobody questioned her further on this travesty of truth}

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 11 Aug 2010 14:43

US no to combat drones for Pakistan

Mindful of the Indian concern about the misuse of its military supplies to Pakistan, the US has refused to provide combat drones to Islamabad. It will offer them tactical, short-range UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) instead.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 13 Aug 2010 04:09

Pak Hands Over Body of Flash flood Victim to India

naird · Post by **naird** » 16 Aug 2010 11:40

Pak fiziyaan documentary -- the intro is hilarious --reminds me of mahabharat

...anyways got some interesting radar screen captures in the documentary.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Aug 2010 22:48

I thought TSPA was a combat drone in the litteral sense of bees.

Meanwhile rohitvats posted this in the Managing Pak failure thread:
---------
[

shiv wrote:
rohitvats wrote:
Shiv, TSPA has initiated steps to counter the Cold Start Doctrine - in terms of raising new formations to ensure that ARN/ARS are not sucked in - and these formations can absorb/counter the CS Formations.

I can post the military calculus if it helps (I did post some of it in the past).
Yes, please do that Rohit

Here is a brief analysis of developments in the TSPA and implications with respect to the CSD:

To start with, we go back a bit in time to Operation Parakram. During the latter and final stages of Op. Parakram (May-June), IA had arrayed the three Armored Divisions in parallel across the Lower Punjab-Upper Rajasthan-Middle Rajasthan Sector. This force consisted of the might of two of the three Strike Corps (one of the Armored Division was switched from another sector) backed by two Pivot Corps. Bulk of Indian Mechanized might was in this sector.

Facing this were two PA Pivot Corps plus ARS plus re-inforcements from their western sector. Needless to say, this gravely exposed the soft under-belly of PA and sent alarm bells ringing in the GHQ. There was no way in hell that they could have stopped such a large concentration of IA from achieving considerable results. This is the main reason Musharraf came on PTV with the piss speech. And why the movement by Lt. Gen. Vij created the stir it did. PA was shit scared.

Cut to the announcement of CSD and plans of IBG. A doctrine which not only will lead to creation of powerful Strike Assets with Pivot Corps but create serious assymetry in the balance of power. PA Pivot Corps would have limited Counter-Strike potential to take on/absorb these IBG equipped IA Pivot Corps...this will entail the involvement of PA Reserve formations - ARN/ARS. Post such committment of reserves by PA, IA can choose the deployment of Strike Corps in time and space and inflict maximum damage on the PA.

What PA has done is raised Armored Divisions - which go by the name of Mechanized Divisons - with Bahawalpur based XXXI Corps and Karachi based V Corps. V Corps-Karachi was always suuposed to have 2-3 Independent Armored Brigades and these could have been given a higher Formation HQ. In case of XXXI Corps, additional raisings (at least an Armored Brigade) would have been required. This could have been merged with existing (I) Armored Bde. with the Corps HQ to raise a Mechanized/Armored Division. The Corps (I) Armored Bde. can/could have been re-raised. In addition, the Infantry Divisions are being Mechanized. PA has been in market to purchase 2nd-hand M113 plus domestic production of M113 variant in under way. Though, I cannot comment on the scale of this Mechanization.

What this does is, it gives PA Pivot Corps to react localy to the IBG lef offensive in their AOR - without the recourse to ARN/ARS. Not only can these formations handle the CSD but also initiate limited counter-offensive. Now, the strength and weaknesses of these Armored/Mechanized Divisions is another matter. But, PA at least has capability on the ground. And it does not face a situation similar to Op. Parakram.

Hope this helps.
-----------------

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Aug 2010 22:56

how effective is the M113 as a mounted IFV...does it have night sensors and permits infantry to fire on move?
can it stop HMG rounds? it doesnt have a turret and cannon, so any BMP/ATGM would be able to shred it if caught in the open.

pretty ancient design...but probably cheap and the PA loves its x-country mobility.

I figure even x-country AL stallion tracks are about equivalent in mobility , with better payload and a higher perch to shoot from

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 16 Aug 2010 23:33

Singha wrote:how effective is the M113 as a mounted IFV...does it have night sensors and permits infantry to fire on move?
can it stop HMG rounds? it doesnt have a turret and cannon, so any BMP/ATGM would be able to shred it if caught in the open.

pretty ancient design...but probably cheap and the PA loves its x-country mobility.

I figure even x-country AL stallion tracks are about equivalent in mobility , with better payload and a higher perch to shoot from

Singha, the point is this - what is the basic requirement of the Mechanization of Infantry? IMO, the need to keep pace with Armored thrust. To this basic requirement, you can add all the bells and whistles you want - with the result that a Mechanized Infantry Battalion of US Army could take on the Iraqi Armored Division (they did have embedded M1).

What those M113 do is that they offer the mobility to the running Infantry Divisions of the 6th and 1st Armored Divisions. Look at our own Strike Corps - II Corps - 1st Armored+14th RAPID+22nd Infantry Division. So, in all you've (4+8+9) infantry battalions and of this, only 6 are Mechanized i.e. 30%. I will any day opt for M113 or XYZ with some 12.5/14.5mm HMG plus ATGM launcher for the rest 70% infantry....as it is, you're not going to find Stallion for this whole lot of Infantry.

Thomas Kolarek · Post by **Thomas Kolarek** » 17 Aug 2010 01:34

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKqpGjCb ... r_embedded
see how enemy perceives things, when you talk of peace.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 17 Aug 2010 02:51

who cares what the rat says.

what else is he going to say??

and whats new about it

yeah we had weaknesses in other areas - but what would the pukis have done??

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 17 Aug 2010 03:05

Thomas Kolarek wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKqpGjCb ... r_embedded
see how enemy perceives things, when you talk of peace.

Fvcking mass murderer has gone bonkers, must be the lack of the constant smell of sh1t has made him lose his balance. The idiot seems to be openly admitting the role of Pyook Military in Kargil, wasn't it supposed to have been the Hijdaideen only that fought in Kargil?

I don't know if this interview is a recent one or not but I trust that the wimp Karan Thapar did not press him on the question of Saurabh Kalia.

sawant · Post by **sawant** » 17 Aug 2010 07:34

Why do we even interview that a****** Could not keep his pants as a Gen or as a dictator.. really our media p***** me off under the guise of freedom... typical alpha male syndrome that guy has... why doesnt Thapar ask if we were weak and the forces were concentrated could not we outflank them too in other ways... no wonder these Pukis are emboldened ... Najam Sethi did a far better job than Thapar if search for his interview on the tube...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Aug 2010 08:17

my question was: can the stalion trucks mounted with HMG and infantry
[a] go where the M113 can go
offer same level of protection (with some modifications)

since we are never going to have enough 'proper' IFV for such a large infantry army, isnt it time to explore paki type third world solutions to our unique problem.
the euros with barely a brigade or two can afford to equip with best IFV but we cannot.

we can even think of a cheaper BMP with the turret removed and extra 4 troops added , with a couple of HMG and a ATGM launcher - a desi M113 if you will. and NBC protection , extra roof armour for artillery protection and a air conditioner and better seats.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 17 Aug 2010 09:17

Singha, a M113 or similar type of APC is much better than any Stallion kind pf vehicle.....remember, we had Lorried Infantry Battalions with our Armored Divisions and then we moved on to Mechanized Regiments?

To achieve scale, we need a cheap and sturdy solution to rectify this mechanization inbalance...while every Mechanized Battalion cannot be equipped with Abhay or BMP-II, we can sure get BTR-XX or Stryker (plain vanilla version) or some domestic product - and given our budget, we can equip them with decent sensor and weapon package. Numbers is the key....and get some decent 105mm Light Tank going with these Battalions and a Platoon of NAMICA.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Aug 2010 09:42

even stryker or btr-xx will be too expensive. everyone will take us to the cleaners.

it has to be a domestic design, fabrication, armour and engine. some of the stuff like thermal imager and atgm(kornet?) could be bideshi.

its amazing we have been sleeping on this and just focussed on turning out low numbers of BMP.

if its stryker has to be a license made model, with a domestic engine and all the fizzy us army stuff ripped out to reduce cost.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 17 Aug 2010 09:43

With more specialized mechanized units, the demands on the logistics and supply system of the Army increases significantly. Spares are also harder to come by as they would be have to be sourced from the manufacturer. The Stallion can be repaired/replaced much more easily and it is by far more fuel efficient compared to the heavily armored Styrker type vehicles, not the mention the fact that in case of an emergency they can get fuel from nearby civilian habitation or fuel sources.
Some kind of battle truck/ MPV type of vehicle with a 50 call and a 40 mm cannon with from decent cargo capability wouldn't be too difficult to engineer for India and also could be easily manufactured in both private and public enterpises in India in massive numbers.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 17 Aug 2010 09:45

Singha wrote:even stryker or btr-xx will be too expensive. everyone will take us to the cleaners.

it has to be a domestic design, fabrication, armour and engine. some of the stuff like thermal imager and atgm(kornet?) could be bideshi.

its amazing we have been sleeping on this and just focussed on turning out low numbers of BMP.

if its stryker has to be a license made model, with a domestic engine and all the fizzy us army stuff ripped out to reduce cost.

True.

And to think, IA was to have 7 Mechanized Divisions as per IA Plan 2000.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Aug 2010 09:56

Reading about Rohit post it seems PA has come up with an effective response to Cold Start Doctorine , I think its all about battle of nerves be it Cold Start or PA response , any one who looses the battle of nerves ( politically ) will wink first and will have to back down.

Probably we will end up in a stale mate and then we are back to square one , some how the Nuclear Detterent will work more in favour of Paki and their dirty tricks then actually deter them doing that.

manoba · Post by **manoba** » 17 Aug 2010 11:56

Thought this is interesting.

Some truth, lot of India bashing, about Mumbai attacks, CIA agent Headley's link to the attacks, Indo-Israeli ties and lot more.

Former Pakistani ISI Chief Hamid Gul's interview with the radio host Alex Jones.

DELETED.

Mods, I'm not sure if this is the right place to post these videos. If not please move it to appropriate thread.