Breaking news: Coast guard intercepted terrorist boat

[KLNMurthy]

As I was pointing out how come navy was not involved. We know that first info reaches Navy. This is a deviation.

Conspicuous: silence on navy

Navy sources surprisingly said here today that they were not involved in the operation off Gujarat. The sources cautioned that they need not be aware of tactical maritime operations......

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.

Ok, so now we have something somewhat concrete, after several rounds of beating about the bush.

How hard and fast is the rule that Navy has to be involved in followup of intel? Is it even a rule? IIRC, there has been talk for some time that the role of CG is to be expanded. Could this operation be an example of that?

In any case, is there something sinister about the CG handling this as opposed to the navy? (For reference, just how many such cases has the navy previously handled as opposed to CG? Is it 100000 for navy and 0 for CG?)

If there is nothing sinister in the operational change, then what is the point of reporting it as though it were sinister?

[chackojoseph]

Chackoji, your colleague (journalist) has said that it is quite normal for CG operations without involvement of Navy near the shore. Chackoji please show the sentence in press release about CG claim of being fired upon.

2) The 1st post above with news says so.

1) Journos have not said what you are quoting. They have quoted naval sources who have always told us that they will be the first to know. A point that I am trying to make which led to some kind of disbelief.

[Sagar G]

So chacko what is your CT ???

[KLNMurthy]

ravi_g,

I will explain. We have followed Navy / CG, asked them questions on coastal safety etc. What we have understood till now is that Navy (with information system) is the first one to know in such cases. That is how the chain of command works after 9/11. Navy is responsibly for the coastal (unfortunately) as well as outer. This is beyond we know.

Didn't the encounter start within India's territorial waters and then turn into a chase that went beyond? If it is a chase, do you expect the CG vessel to stop at the edge of the territorial zone and go through the chain of command to bring in the navy? Is it illegal for the CG to operate in international waters under these circumstances?

I shouldn't have to ask these questions. Anyone who calls himself a journalist should be assuming that the reader will have such questions, anticipate them, and address them. Otherwise the journalist is no good.

[Aditya G]

Tailing the vessel for as long as possible while hailing/forcing it to stop was the textbook thing to do. The guardsmen would want to capture the vessel or at least the crew.

BTW A point that is not being discussed is that our Naval installations in Gujarat are vulnerable to jehadi strikes from the sea too (recall PNS Mehran). So are BSFs Floating BOPs and posts in the Sir Creek region.

As I was pointing out how come navy was not involved. We know that first info reaches Navy. This is a deviation.

Conspicuous: silence on navy

Navy sources surprisingly said here today that they were not involved in the operation off Gujarat. The sources cautioned that they need not be aware of tactical maritime operations......

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.

This is purely speculation on my part: the Navy is silent because it may have been bypassed by NTRO by tasking the ICG. But this could be due to lack of available assets in the area. On other hand ICGS Rajratan is based at Porbandar. In almost all peacetime incidents I have seen IN to be fore front

The doubts being raised in the media about the boat are probably due to (mis?) information being fed from MoD or MHA folks.

[chackojoseph]

So chacko what is your CT ???

if you mean email id then frontierindia at gmail dat com

Aditya G,

Yes. See the problem is that Navy has the best assets to locate something in sea. They were bypassed.

[NRao]

Why all this Navy vs. CG vs. something vs. something?

Perhaps it has not been achieved as yet, but the whole idea is to "integrate" all of them. Sharing info between all.

[Sagar G]

if you mean email id then frontierindia at gmail dat com

Errr I meant conspiracy theory.

[d_berwal]

^^
Media raising doubts on anti-national issues? and trying to dis-credit govt. wow lowest point for any nationalist Indian.

Looks like MSM is working for ISI!!!

[KLNMurthy]

Chackoji, your colleague (journalist) has said that it is quite normal for CG operations without involvement of Navy near the shore. Chackoji please show the sentence in press release about CG claim of being fired upon.

2) The 1st post above with news says so.

1) Journos have not said what you are quoting. They have quoted naval sources who have always told us that they will be the first to know. A point that I am trying to make which led to some kind of disbelief.

Ok, what exactly is the disbelief about? What is the lie?

If you-all as journalists have only a general unspecified sense of disbelief, is it professionally responsible of you to rush to press with nothing more before digging further to get better definition of what it is that is awry?

As a reader I don't care that CG did the job instead of navy. I would only care if the change has some significance. The fact that you--as journalists--can't figure out how to serve the reader tells me that y'all are stupid; the fact that y'all are satisfied with just reporting vague "disbelief" tells me y'all are lazy.

[KLNMurthy]

So chacko what is your CT ???

if you mean email id then frontierindia at gmail dat com

Aditya G,

Yes. See the problem is that Navy has the best assets to locate something in sea. They were bypassed.

Is it necessary or feasible to deploy "best assets" in every case? Does any organization do this?

Your choice of the word "bypassed" is an insinuation that something sinister was done.

How do you conclude navy was "bypassed" instead of an operational decision being made that the CG should handle it?

[KLNMurthy]

^^
Media raising doubts on anti-national issues? and trying to dis-credit govt. wow lowest point for any nationalist Indian.

Looks like MSM is working for ISI!!!

I wouldn't necessarily go that far but it is becoming clear that, their feeble-mindedness is only exceeded by their vanity and sense of self-importance.

I suppose that if ISI is at all intelligent, they will hasten to exploit these wonderful "assets" that our media people bring to the table.

[shiv]

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.

[vishvak]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 739630.cms

Did another boat of terrorists get away?

<SNIP>
Top sources told TOI that the second boat, which also came from Karachi, was spotted around the same time as the first one, by the second sortie of a Coast Guard Dornier aircraft that flew in from Porbandar. The authorities have been monitoring the Pakistani vessel off Keti Bandar, a port on the Arabian Sea, in the Thatta district of Sindh province.
..
As soon as the terror outfit, suspected to be LeT, got wind of the first vessel having been tracked by the Coast Guard, the second boat went back into Pakistani waters and hence the Indian side is treading cautiously, said sources.
..
"The second boat is now back in Pakistani waters, and hence we are treading carefully. It is a high risk exercise for us too," said the official.
...
Another official said when the first boat was located and Coast Guard ship Rajratan was diverted to tail it, it altered its course towards Pakistani waters. "At that time, the sea was rough, the boat switched off its lights, we tried to communicate to channel 16 (a radio channel), but they did not reciprocate. We started firing, but they did not come out and they instead returned fire. They then blew themselves up."
..
Even as the operation unfolded, Coast Guard aircraft used gambit tactics to shadow the vessel, allowing it to enter deeper into Indian waters. It was only after that the first boat was intercepted by the Coast Guard ship.

If you read this much part, one is clear that the boat used special tactics to intrude deeper into Indian waters, then switched off lights then did not answer communication and then fired back and then blew themselves up.

The major doubt here is how we have no idea at all about what goes on in Pakistani waters. We should have a situation wherein journalists are allowed to investigate in Karachi so clearer picture emerges. It would obviously be an alarming situation however if a mob starts chanting religious slogans and starts throwing stones.

It is like how Kar-sevaks were burnt alive in train near Godhra station by a mob and no one found out who all were in the mob. We need to have much more investigations on Pakistani side - just so that everyone else does not have to prove what happened in all its complexities and that God exists and was on the side of CG. Following procedures should be good enough and in fact a medal should be awarded if this has resulted in avoiding a tragedy.

[pankajs]

http://pib.nic.in/newsite/mbErel.aspx?relid=114289
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.

To summarize the intelligence *before* the operation began
1. Fishing boat
2. *Suspected* illicit transaction

1. Does the Navy get involved *every time* a *fishing boat* is suspect? If not why the surprise on this being a CG ops?
2. IF the Navy gets involved in *every* trivial sounding ops like investigating a *fishing boat* that is suspected of an *illicit* transaction why have the CG at all? What purpose does it serve then?
3. Even IF some thing *more* than an *illicit* transaction by a *fishing boat* is suspected and a CG vessel is nearby does it mean the CG vessel is kept back while the Navy is tasked to *investigate*?

To me the whole discussion on CG vs Navy is pointless. My understanding is that it is CG's duty to investigate such *suspected* *illicit* transaction by a *fishing boat* so no surprises that it was called in. Navy is not called in such *suspected* trivial cases.

If the CG vessel was in the immediate vicinity or at least better positioned to respond than the navy then it makes even more sense. Only if the suspected vessel is a heavily armed enemy Warship the CG vessel might be held back in favor of the Navy.

1. Now the CG was sent in to investigate a *fishing* boat suspected to be involved in an *illicit* transaction. Perfectly reasonable.
2. When CG vessel challenges the fishing boat the fishing boat makes a bid to escape and the CG decides to give it a chase. Perfectly reasonable. No reason to suspect more than smugglers trying to escape capture.
3. When the CG vessel closes in the fishing boat starts firing and the CG vessel fires warning shots in return. Perfectly reasonable. Smugglers trying to avoid capture.
4. The CG vessel sees the boat occupant disappear below deck and after a while sees the boat catch fire and hears explosions. Only then does the CG commander have reasons to believe that the boat was on to something *more* than just *illicit* transaction. Smugglers would prefer capture to death. Only *suicide* bombers would embrace death over capture. But by then what is the point in calling for extra help or the Navy?

[chackojoseph]

BTW A point that is not being discussed is that our Naval installations in Gujarat are vulnerable to jehadi strikes from the sea too (recall PNS Mehran). So are BSFs Floating BOPs and posts in the Sir Creek region.

Some $ 55-60 billion worth of refined petrochemical products are exported from here. Reliance has given a proposal to raise some highly trained or specialised guards to protect the installations. On an estimate some 2000 personnel are required, as per an old survey by GOI. but Govt has given them 200 CISF personal for a fee. Govt, old and new have been sitting on this issue.

[shiv]

When we talk of terrorists returning fire we need to remember that the CG ship has a 30 mm gun with a 2-4 km range. The terrorists are likely to have had AK 47s with an affective range of about 1000 meters or less. The CG ship is unlikely to have deliberately come within range of AK 47 fire to make it a "fair" fight. A "fair" fight is the last thing they would want. So the terrorists may have shot back but the bullets would likely have fallen harmlessly into the sea. If you have a pair of binoculars or other good optics and you can see terrorists firing, the thing to do is to shoot back and keep out of range if possible. These are no brainer tactics.

[d_berwal]

@ KLNMurthy

you are being very generous and creative with your words, but to be blunt ISI is already doing DAMAGE control with their MSM friends in India.

The intensity and speed of MSM to dis-credit GOI gives them away.

That is how it looks to me.

[Akshay Kapoor]

KLN don't waste your breath. Mr C Joseph (PBUH) is upset that there were no Indian casualties so he is doing his best to look for reasons to turn a fantastic operation into a question mark or to snatch defeat from victory.

It is correct that Navy has overall command of coastal security post 26/11 (another chance foiled this time...sorry my media friends I know you are upset) and it is also true that Navy should have been kept in the loop. We have no info that they were not. Just because CJ's contact (FOC Guj area?) who is probably a Lt CMDR or CMDR says they have no knowledge does not mean that that the flag offrs/chain of command did not know. It is very recent and it is not always a top priority for PROs to be in loop so that they brief the samosa chai press. Maybe there was a reason..operational, int, counter int. Could be many possibilities.

There could be another possibility ( I doubt it though). CG did not keep Navy in loop. Not because they were engaging in some big conspiracy but because in heat of the moment that was not done, or the commander on spot DIG/IG range in this case took initiative and CO of the chase vessel also took initiative. INITIATIVE is a good thing. It wins wars. We train troops to take initiative. Probably the CG officers decided they did not need support, there obviously wasn't enough time and what should have they done ? Waited till we sent a destroyer or a frigate from Mumbai ? We cannot be everywhere in the vast sea. And if that had happened Chacko (PBUH) would have said oh such a big ship to intercept a small friendly boat. Overkill and aggression !

So Chacko (PBUH)is talking utter nonsense. Even a rookie midshipman would laugh at him. This is what happens when NONE of our reporters has actually been in uniform and seen action - doesn't matter if its land, sea or air...it gives you the right perspective and instinct to understand situations.

This was a CG job, the CG did it and good show. Navy is not meant for this. They are more than happy that CG is taking this responsibility without wasting war fighting resources. I can guarantee that even if CG did not keep Navy in loop Navy will tell them to do so in future, learn etc but congratulate them , and jolly well send them a case of scotch and say well done. And most importantly encourage them to do more.

[chackojoseph]

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.

[vishvak]

When it is the pakis who send terrorists across the international maritime waters, we need to increase strength of our good Navy and good CG too.

Plus we need to improvise presence of anti-ship aircrafts everywhere just so that no vessel can get away. A few Su-30MKIs could have taken out the other vessel that could ran away, then bombed fuel storage at Karachi and completely obliterated the Karachi harbor. No one should be able to raise head for a thousand years anywhere across from Indian shores. We need to increase air power to be able to take out anti-India assets quickly and may be stealthily. We need to plan a LOT more about any boats running away.

[d_berwal]

@ chacko....

since you are defending the anti-national efforts of MSM this Question is only for you.

Do you or any of your MSM ppl know how intelligence operations are conducted?

As per you and MSM line of argument, what should have been the right course of action after receiving such an intell.. report by GOI?
- Should GOI brodcast this intell on MSM TV and go after the boat?
- Should GOI ask one of its agencies to deal with it?
- Should GOI ask all of its agencies to deal with it?
- Should GOI Think and debate the options with MSM before taking and action?
- Should GOI ask IN to deal with it even if it means more TIME to response?
- Should GOI choose the fastest means under its disposal to deal with it?
- Should GOI talk to Pak befor doint something?
- Should GOI sit and let things playup?

[chackojoseph]

When we talk of terrorists returning fire we need to remember that the CG ship has a 30 mm gun with a 2-4 km range. The terrorists are likely to have had AK 47s with an affective range of about 1000 meters or less. The CG ship is unlikely to have deliberately come within range of AK 47 fire to make it a "fair" fight. A "fair" fight is the last thing they would want. So the terrorists may have shot back but the bullets would likely have fallen harmlessly into the sea. If you have a pair of binoculars or other good optics and you can see terrorists firing, the thing to do is to shoot back and keep out of range if possible. These are no brainer tactics.

It is obvious that they did not close up until they are very sure of it. I mentioned the same in the FB post in Afternoon

They wisely did not 'catch.' They normally maintain a distance till they are sure that they are safe to close in.

Since everyone is bit more calm

Here I didn't mean to say that they get a bullet hole. What I tried to say was that since no one believes, they have something to show. I realise that it has not come out in the intended way and was sounding insensitive. Hence I apologised. I was only listing why it was not being believed.

In the later post also I meant that I am being brutally honest about it. Not meaning that they had to get a bullet for us to believe.

[rgsrini]

Chackoji,
Do you know for sure that Navy was not involved, or did the forces for some reasons did not reveal the details of the entire operation. Was it decided on purpose to keep the Navy out for some unknown (to us) reasons. Do you know that the CG was not fired upon, even after CG had mentioned (according to you) that they were fired upon. Is there a possibility that the bullet didn't hit the CG vessel, especially when the terrorists are trying to escape in the middle of the night on high seas at high speed. Even if there are bullet holes, Why should they show the bullet holes to you or any one else. Is there a possibility that Indian forces are not releasing the entire story to guard some of their sources, and other aspects of national importance. What about the electronic intercepts. What about the radio with Pakistani markings (typically used by Pakistan armed forces) that seemed to have been found.

Is there another way to ask questions without an anti-nationalistic tone and painting the armed forces as liars as if they are trying to overblow an operation that went horribly wrong. When common mango man like me can think like this, why is the entire Indian media discrediting the Indian security forces, when they are the one protecting us from terrorists, without consideration for their own lives.

Added later:

Look how it feels to get your integrity suspected when you are only trying to do your job. The security forces were also doing the same thing, and their job is frankly far more important and far more dangerous. Just like you have the freedom to have "reasons other than press release", the armed forces will also have their reasons to not reveal the entire details. The media has the responsibility to understand this and ensure that the armed forces are not discredited, playing into the hands of the enemies.

[vishvak]

What I tried to say was that since no one believes, they have something to show.

At the risk of repeating myself, the CG deserves a medal for following procedures and averting tragedy.

Considering that India is amongst worst countries suffering terrorism, this should have been the norm rather than exception as no one seem to notice this part.

[chackojoseph]

rgsrini,

see, as mentioned. The first reaction was of disbelief that navy was not involved. It is till a shock for me, who have been drilled since 2010 that navy is responsible. Navy has UAV's and MIS which is used to pass info to Navy, CG etc. That is how they have been training. The bullet hitting I have clarified in previous post. CG said that they were fired upon. It is in news already since yesterday.

I do not think any of the journo's 'I know' have any interest in painting armed forces in a negative pic. But, journo's ask questions. Last Naval press conference, WNC commander was at pains to tell that they release information of even smaller incidents to press since it will definitely come from somewhere else etc and it will look even bad.

The CG press release was badly handled I suppose and they will most probably get a dressing down for this. That was a grand story by the first look of it. This is my reply.

I am replying to answers I feel is that I can give. So it might not be in full of what you ask, but I am limiting to what i understand out of this situation.

[chetak]

So chacko what is your CT ???

if you mean email id then frontierindia at gmail dat com

Aditya G,

Yes. See the problem is that Navy has the best assets to locate something in sea. They were bypassed.

If the Navy is not complaining, why are you trying to pour fuel on the fire.

As far as best assets are concerned, what you are saying is so much BS. In another thread you were pushing the rafale, here you are pushing the IN, are there some conflict of interest issues that we should know about or are you just currying favor and ensuring a good reception for yourself from these organisations??

The Coast Guard is as efficient as the IN in locating surface targets. Their resources are somewhat limited to the Dorniers which are definitely as well equipped as the IN Dorniers for this role and more importantly the CG has been at it for years. They fly maritime patrols EVERYDAY which the IN does not. The CG has intelligence sources that the IN does not access unless specifically tasked.

The CG is and will continue be the best fit for this task. Their crews are as professional and equally dedicated and quite a few IN pilots continue to fly for the CG.

[pankajs]

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/crew- ... ard-643679

Crew of Pakistani Boat That Blew Up Didn't Look Like Fishermen: Coast Guard

Gandhinagar: The Indian Coast Guard (ICG) today said suspicions were raised about the identity of the crew of the explosives-laden Pakistani boat intercepted by them, as they did not look like fishermen and carried no nets.

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

The maritime law enforcement agency reiterated that the vessel was set on fire by its crew members, causing it to explode and later sink. The incident took place about 365 km off the coast of Gujarat's Porbandar in the Arabian Sea on the intervening night of December 31 and January 1 after a hot pursuit by the Coast Guard.

"We saw four men on the boat, they were nowhere looking like fishermen, they wore T-shirts and half pants, and this raised suspicion on our side," Coast Guard Commander (North-West Region) Kuldip Singh Sheoran told reporters.

A search operation is on for the bodies of the crew members and wreckage of the vessel, he said.

"Multiple Indian intelligence agencies are jointly investigating the incident and they will go to the bottom of it," he said on being asked if the occupants of the boat were terrorists.

"We received intelligence input at around 8.30 in the morning (of Dec 31) about the suspicious boat. We dispatched our Dornier aircraft and ship in that direction and by 1 in the afternoon, we had positively identified the ship," he said.

"At around midnight, our vessel 'Raj Rattan' reached near the boat and tried to stop it by following standard operating procedure. But, instead of surrendering, the boat started moving in a zig-zag way and switched off the lights. We chased it for about one-and-a-half-hours.

"After the hot pursuit, we fired warning shots, but the boat did not stop. We fired more warning shots. After some time, the crew of the boat set it on fire and later it sank with them (occupants)," the Coast Guard officer said.

He added they had no information on reports that that there were two other suspicious boats in the high seas.

The Coast Guard Commander said they have increased vigilance along the Gujarat coast after the incident and also in view of two upcoming high-profile events in the state - Pravasi Bharatiya Divas and Vibrant Gujarat Summit.

"We are alert round-the-clock, but due to these events, we are on extra alert. Our ships and aircraft are doing their job of patrolling the sea," he added.

[Vayutuvan]

Why does a "journalist" have to be so eager to spin "his take" on it? What is the Khujli to do so? It may not be anti national but it is certainly not prudent.

Not only not prudent it is not even journalism. You are right in putting the quotes around journalist. I would call them journaliests.

[d_berwal]

@ chako..

where was your disbelief when a SLR was snatched in heart of Mumbai and Forces Memorial was dis-figured and dis respected.

Now you are in disbelief... LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Shame on MSM

[SanjayC]

Pak boat incident in Arabian Sea shows India learnt 26/11 lessons well

The Pakistani boat that exploded off Gujarat on New Year's Eve was on the radar of India's principal technical intelligence agency right after it left the shores of Karachi, highlighting the country's enhanced maritime security since the 26/11 attacks, experts said.

While Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists managed to reach within eight kilometres of Mumbai in 2008 after hijacking an Indian fishing vessel and used an inflatable speedboat to land in the city, in a thrilling high-sea chase on Wednesday night, Coast Guard ships and aircraft intercepted the suspicious fishing boat about 370 kilometres from Indian shores.

"We have learnt a lot since 26/11. The speed with which the Coast Guard reacted is commendable," defence expert Rear Admiral Raja Menon told a news organisation.

Ajmal Kasab and his nine companions commandeered the fishing vessel MV Kuber, incidentally off Gujarat's coast, killed four crewmembers and forced the boat's captain to navigate them to Mumbai before slitting his throat. They had intended to scupper the trawler after launching their dinghy to make the final journey, but left the vital evidence afloat, officials said.

Gujarat has a porous 1,660-km long coastal area considered sensitive because of its proximity to Pakistan. Indian marine agencies have intercepted several Pakistani boats, mostly fishing vessels, from Sir Creek.

Following the Mumbai attacks, the Indian government assigned the Coast Guard the additional responsibility of patrolling the territorial waters as well as coordinating between central and state security agencies.

A defence ministry statement said as per intelligence inputs received on December 31, a fishing boat from Keti Bunder was planning some illegal transaction in the Arabian Sea.

What went down

In an incident, eerily reminiscent of the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, an explosives-laden Pakistani boat blew itself up minutes into the New Year after being pursued by an Indian Coast Guard ship for over an hour.

All four crew of the fish trawler that exploded 200 nautical miles (371 km) off Porbandar are suspected to have died in the tense 16-hour-long drama in the Arabian Sea. Neither the boat nor its crew could be recovered due to rough weather.

“It (the boat) was on a suicide mission. The consequences would have been disastrous had the boat slipped past our defences,” a top navy official told HT.

Defence minister Manohar Parrikar heaped praises on the coast guard and those involved in the operation. "I congratulate coast guards for timely action of intercepting a boat carrying suspected terror groups with surgical precision," he tweeted.

Three days before the sixth anniversary of the Mumbai attacks, Parrikar had said a zero-tolerance policy on errors was required to avoid such incidents in the future and guarantee India's coastal security.

A defence ministry official said the trawler stopped only after the coast guard fired shots, but the crew had by then set it on fire, triggering a major explosion that sank the vessel.

The Indian Coast Guard ruled out the explosion being an accident, saying the men on the boat sped away because they were hiding "something really serious".

"If they weren't doing anything wrong, then they had no reason to run, to set the boat on fire. Why would anyone set (themselves) on fire?" said KR Nautiyal, deputy inspector general of the coast guard.

[Sagar G]

Cut the crap chacko regarding "I am just being inquisitive", tell us your CT or stop insinuating.

[pankajs]

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/after ... nce-643465

After Pakistani Boat Incident, Entire Gujarat Coastline Under Surveillance

A Dornier aircraft was launched at 11.30 am to search for the suspicious boat. Two more aircraft were launched later. The first Dornier aircraft spotted the Pakistani boat at around 12 noon, when it was 15 nautical miles in Indian waters and moving very slowly.

The Coast Guard ship "Raj Rattan" was sent after the boat. When it found the Pakistani boat, it was "sitting quietly without lights.

The boat, when asked to switch on its navigational lights, only moved away and changed its course several times to throw off the Coast Guard. "It had no intention of stopping, surrendering or getting caught," said a Coast Guard official.

The "hot pursuit" lasted for about an hour. The boat allegedly slowed down because it was low on fuel.

At around 3 am on Thursday, a sudden fire started on the Pakistani boat, followed by an explosion. Four men were seen on the deck before it sank. (18-Hour Operation to Find And Stop Pakistani Boat)

Senior Coast Guard officer Kirpa Ram Nautial told NDTV the boat did not blow up accidentally, it was deliberate.

[fanne]

Huh the randi media does not realize in MOdi rule it is no longer the arbiter of truth. Ya it was staged encounter, what will you do, suck it up and move on.

[member_20317]

Shiv ji,

the 4 km is the effective range. Effectiveness could be limited by range resolution also instead of being limited by actual range. 30 mm is merely the biggest of the smaller guns which do sport such a conundrum.


chackojoseph ji,

IN has 'overall' responsibility for coastal intel too post 26/11 does not mean that the Indian Navy has to discharge its responsibilities to the utter exclusion of ICG assets.

The reports keep mentioning that:
1) they saw a vessel
2) also saw 4 people in it (not stated at what range)
3) fired across the bow (not stated the order of #2 above and #3)
4) pursued vessel caught fire (firing up stored fuel by merely shooting itself is doubtful).

The fact that they mention that they saw, should itself a hint at what might have been used. They will have to see before they shoot above the bow of the small vessel that was their pursuit. They cannot just shoot over every fishing trawler that merely resembles the suspect vessels shape. Some intel need not be given out but can easily be inferred just as some SOPs need not be read out and can easily be believed to be in existence.

Apparently the IN set up to discharge this increased responsibility is only now coming up as a larger integrated system.

There is no way you are not being mislead by your own sources and also by your own utter tentativeness.

[chackojoseph]

Shiv ji,

chackojoseph ji,

IN has 'overall' responsibility for coastal intel too post 26/11 does not mean that the Indian Navy has to discharge its responsibilities to the utter exclusion of ICG assets.

The reports keep mentioning that:
1) they saw a vessel
2) also saw 4 people in it (not stated at what range)
3) fired across the bow (not stated the order of #2 above and #3)
4) pursued vessel caught fire (firing up stored fuel by merely shooting itself is doubtful).

That fact that they mention that they saw, should itself a hint at what might have been used. They will have to see before they shoot above the bow of the small vessel that was their pursuit. They cannot just shoot over every suspect fishing trawler. Some intel need not be given out but can easily be inferred just as some SOPs need not be read out and can easily be believed to be in existence.

Apparently the IN set up to discharge this increased responsibility is only now coming up as a larger integrated system.

There is no way you are not being mislead by your own sources and also by your own utter tentativeness.

The chronology in the start is

1) NTRO told them.
2) They Flew Sortie ----> navy ignored.
Then what you say.

However, a lot of new information has come since that time.

[pankajs]

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.

[member_28911]

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.

The National Technical Research Organization (NTRO), which had recorded the radio communication between the two boats, revealed that the terrorists had plans to repeat 26/11 carnage in Porbandar.

According to the transcripts of radio communication between NTRO and the Indian Coast Guard accessed by Aaj Tak show that both the vessels were in regular contact with Pakistan's maritime agency and the army.

After the NTRO alerted the coast guard, an intensive hunt was launched for the vessels. But around 5 a.m. on December 31, one of the boats exploded when the coast guard tried to intercept it. It is believed that the crew of the boat may have set off the blast to destroy any evidence.

There is, however, so far no information on the occupants of the boat.

A conversation recorded from the second boat said the boat, which was destroyed, has done its work and has handed over the things to the other boat, but it had to return back as it developed a hole in it.

The coast guard is still in search of the second boat.

The probe so far has revealed that the boat which exploded had explosives on board, evident from the bright light emitted after the blast.

Porbandar boat blast: Pak army was in control of 2 explosives-laden vessels, say officials

[member_20317]

chacko ji,

In that case my chronology can be shifted to 3, 4, 5 & 6 but that still would change nothing in the detect identify track loop in surveillance. Overflying can only help in understanding the broad contours. It cannot give names of vessels and there is zero likelihood of identifying persons by seeing them from a Donier.

[fanne]

What is the beaf that a certain Juno was not asked while CG tracked and killed a bunch of terrorist?