Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 07 Jun 2011 08:40

http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-news ... hole-ahead

Caution! Black hole ahead
By Khalid Iqbal | Published: June 7, 2011

A section of the American intelligentsia has since long been advocating that unless the Pakistani leadership is embarrassed and discredited thoroughly and repeatedly, both domestically and internationally, it is not likely to change its nuclear policy. It seems that Washington has adopted this notion, as its state policy and is incrementally implementing it.

Interesting thought. In a way, grinding the Pak military's nose in the dust.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 07 Jun 2011 08:49

This is really interesting. Life is getting even more tumultous across our weatern borders. For once I believe the Americans without any reservations.

http://www.dawn.com/2011/06/07/us-pakis ... death.html

US, Pakistan authorities dispute Kashmiri’s death

Reuters
(55 minutes ago) Today

LONDON: US and Pakistani authorities disagree sharply over claims that senior al Qaeda leader Ilyas Kashmiri was killed in a recent missile strike, officials from both countries said on Monday, suggesting sharp strains persist between authorities in Washington and Islamabad.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 07 Jun 2011 10:26

shiv wrote:Atomic weapons cannot be exploded without state support. they are too complex. There can be no such theing a JDAM. Pakistan cannot hide behind a burqa of JDAM. For a detailed discussion look at the "Pakistan nuclear capability and sites" thread in the other forum

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... &start=200

I understand that atomic weapons cannot be exploded without state support, for that matter the number of terrorist attacks on India cannot be carried out without such support either. And the good ambassador alludes to this by pointing out "non-state" actors. In effect, Pak could very well take such a stance, and I am not entirely convinced that the world/India won't buy it. Esp. if they promise a nuke retaliation to any ahem, "aggression" from India.

Again, assuming such tracking is possible, what if the fissile material is tracked to some plant in China? US going to attack China? or would India? Would work great for both the Pak and Chinese - cause India as much harm as they can without truly being emrbroiled in the dhamaka!

Just a thought anyway.

CM.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 07 Jun 2011 22:54

Shiv wrote:Atomic weapons cannot be exploded without state support. they are too complex. There can be no such theing a JDAM. Pakistan cannot hide behind a burqa of JDAM. For a detailed discussion look at the "Pakistan nuclear capability and sites" thread in the other forum

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5936&start=200

This is very important.
Unfortunately the public discourse is that terrorists are state less madmen.
That these madmen can steal a nuclear bomb and can transport it across national boundaries and explode them.

That is how hollywood, writers project this thing.

The fact that nuclear bombs are too complex to be useable by purely non-state actors has to be spread widely, so that no one can use that as an excuse.

If Pakistan ever uses a JDAM, India needs to escalate rapidly, give out ultimatums in private, ultimatums that have deadlines that end in a matter of hours, and if Pakistan fails to comply, then proceed with the military option.

Pakistan will deliver only if there is a threat of severe punishment, and they think they can't escape punishment.

Thomas Kolarek · Post by **Thomas Kolarek** » 07 Jun 2011 23:18

I don't believe Porkistan has any A-Bmb which is working. Its just a clear disguise to keep India shiver without getting washed out by IA.

VinodTK wrote:Pakistan's alarming nuclear arsenal

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 08 Jun 2011 01:01

VinodTK wrote:Pakistan's alarming nuclear arsenal

Good points - this article needs to be highlighted more.

Indian policy makers should look at possible scenarios involving use of nuclear weapons by Pakistan against Indian targets, and take steps to protect its civil population. Even very basic civil defence measures against nuclear attacks can reduce civilian casualties and suffering considerably. However, there is no sign of any concrete measures being taken by the government in this direction.

With the rapid increase and sophistication and build up of nuclear warheads with the military establishment in Pakistan, there is always a risk that such devices may fall into the hands of non-state actors, or renegade extremist actors working for their own agendas within the state organs.

The international community would do well to consider how to deal with such a threat.

(The author is a former Ambassador of India. He has served in West Asia and Africa, including three years in Syria. [email protected])

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 08 Jun 2011 03:01

http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2005/12/0 ... E3247.html

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/05/2015
TAGS: NL ETTC MARR PK BE PREL MAS
SUBJECT: NETHERLANDS: EXCESS F-16 INQUIRY

REF: A. THE HAGUE 1438
¶B. STATE 218729

Classified By: Charge D'Affaires Chat Blakeman,
reasons 1.4 (b,d)

¶1. (C) The GONL is not/not interested in selling F-16s to
Pakistan -- either directly or through the United States.
Dutch MOD State Secretary Cees van der Knaap told Charge and
ODC Chief December 2 that the re-sale issue is very clear:
the Dutch will not sell F-16s to Pakistan, and will not be
associated will any re-sale to Pakistan. Van der Knaap added
that the Dutch were looking at selling additional F-16s to
Jordan beyond the three previously agreed to planes.

Comment
-------

¶2. (C) Van der Knaap was well-versed in the state-of-play in
Belgium and the United States on the possible F-16 re-sale to
Pakistan. Charge pushed van der Knaap, suggesting there
might be some wriggle room (as indicated ref A) if the deal
was done discretely. Van der Knaap replied that "there is no
issue for the Dutch -- we will not sell F-16s or other
weapons to Pakistan" that could potentially reach Kashmir.
For example, the Dutch would be willing to sell ships to
Pakistan, but not F-16s. While ref B was transmitted closely
following the meeting with van der Knaap, the points were
covered during the conversation. Van der Knaap is the Dutch
authority on arms transfers, and we take his stated position
as authoritative.
BLAKEMAN

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Jun 2011 05:20

Aditya G wrote:http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2005/12/0 ... E3247.html

DECL: 12/05/2015

Odd date

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 08 Jun 2011 07:26

shiv wrote:DECL: 12/05/2015 Odd date

12/05/2015 is not the date, the cable is dated 5 Dec 2005. that should be some reference # rather than a date. Seen that in many other Wikileaks cables.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Jun 2011 11:04

Seems Paki and China are working on MIRVng their missile

Pakistan's growing nuclear programme

Pakistani engineers, with help from the Chinese, are also said to be in the advance stages of developing MIRV technology for its missiles. This would allow the military to fit several warheads on the same ballistic missile and then launch them at separate targets.

arun · Post by **arun** » 11 Jun 2011 07:16

Just a matter of time before such a story would become public given that the Military of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has no conception as to what constitutes the legitimate use of force and hence no qualms regards the use artillery and air power to suppress its civilian population:

Unarmed man shot at point blank range by military police who casually watch as he bleeds to death in the street

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 11 Jun 2011 07:58

Sorry if this is a repost.

This is FAS datasheet that summarises (published january 2011) list of weapons sold to tsp from 9/11 till date. We already know most. Noteworthy being the fact that on data sheet says that only 2 onions were delivered to TSP @ the time of data collection. It also indicates how financing was done for the same. (whether its was Baksheesh fund or officially from tsp govt coffers).

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/pakarms.pdf

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 13 Jun 2011 06:26

AFM had this image of a supposed JF-17 twin seater version PS.

Not bad looking, but rather poor forward visibility for the rear seater, since there is no slope of the cockpit whatsoever.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Jun 2011 08:08

shiv wrote:http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2005/12/0 ... E3247.html

DECL: 12/05/2015
Odd date

Declassify.

negi · Post by **negi** » 13 Jun 2011 08:48

As compared to contemporary designs even for a single seater bandar's canopy design indicates the pilot won't have as good a visibility in the rear hemisphere as compared to say LCA or F-16. Vina succinctly described the bandar design as cropped delta wings with LERX on a Mig-21sque barrel like fuselage.

Avik · Post by **Avik** » 13 Jun 2011 09:24

The JF 17 seems to have similarities with the Northrop F -5 Tiger. The fuselage shape and air intakes seem to have close resemblance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_F-5

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 13 Jun 2011 09:26

Avik wrote:The JF 17 seems to have similarities with the Northrop F -5 Tiger. The fuselage shape and air intakes seem to have close resemblance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_F-5

I made a post about origins of the JF-17 on page 57 of this thread. Maybe I will cross post in FAQ thread
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 4#p1052254

sum · Post by **sum** » 13 Jun 2011 16:01

^^ Spotted a Paki Il-78 landing and then relaxing at Attaturk airport... Is any joint excercise going on with the turks?

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 13 Jun 2011 17:35

sorry if it's a repost -

US deployed three aircraft carriers to support Operation Geronimo (Updated)

interesting bits. even if pakistan had known about the mission, could they have opposed this??

Incidentally, in an unrelated but milestone development, USS George H W Bush is commanded by a lady officer, Rear Admiral Nora Tyson. It is the first time that a woman is heading a carrier strike task force, and the event also marks the centenary of US naval aviation.

As for Operation Geronimo, it can safely be assumed though that the Pakistani Air Force (PAF) would have been warned off if its aircraft had taken to the skies, and there would have been no clash.

Nonetheless, as reports emanating from Washington DC indicate that should the Pakistanis – or somebody else – would have interfered, then the US was ready to risk a military confrontation.

The New York Times, which revealed new details of the operation quoting an Administration official, says: "Their instructions were to avoid any confrontation if at all possible. But if they had to return fire to get out, they were authorized to do it.”

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 13 Jun 2011 19:48

pragnya wrote:sorry if it's a repost -

US deployed three aircraft carriers to support Operation Geronimo (Updated)

interesting bits. even if pakistan had known about the mission, could they have opposed this??

Incidentally, in an unrelated but milestone development, USS George H W Bush is commanded by a lady officer, Rear Admiral Nora Tyson. It is the first time that a woman is heading a carrier strike task force, and the event also marks the centenary of US naval aviation.

As for Operation Geronimo, it can safely be assumed though that the Pakistani Air Force (PAF) would have been warned off if its aircraft had taken to the skies, and there would have been no clash.

Nonetheless, as reports emanating from Washington DC indicate that should the Pakistanis – or somebody else – would have interfered, then the US was ready to risk a military confrontation.

The New York Times, which revealed new details of the operation quoting an Administration official, says: "Their instructions were to avoid any confrontation if at all possible. But if they had to return fire to get out, they were authorized to do it.”

wish they opposed it. 2 squadrons of f/a 18s would have bomber TSP/TEP to stone age.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 13 Jun 2011 19:50

3 CBG's operating off the pakistani coast would have elicited interest from not just us but also the iranians
i wonder if anything was said before hand to ensure no one got too interested... (especially the iranians)

arun · Post by **arun** » 14 Jun 2011 07:18

You do not have to be a genius to understand an organisation such as the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan which has opted to adopt the motto such as “Iman Taqwa Jihad fi Sabilillah” or translated from Urdu “Faith, Piety Jihad in the path of Allah” is inevitably going to be infected by the virus of Islamic Jihadi Terrorism as some its own members will at some point of time take the organisational motto seriously:

Pakistan’s army battles enemy within

By James Lamont in New Delhi

Published: June 13 2011 16:31 | Last updated: June 13 2011 16:31

The Pakistan military is under attack: from militants who fight full-scale battles daily with its troops; from a US administration suspicious about its loyalties; and most alarmingly from within, where there is growing evidence of dissent and radicalisation in its ranks.

In the days that followed the killing of Osama bin Laden by US forces, one of the most urgent tasks for General Ashfaq Kayani, head of the Pakistan military, was to address restive garrisons in Rawalpindi, Sialkot and Kharian. There he was confronted by officers outraged not at the discovery of the al-Qaeda leader in the country but at the audacity of the US in trampling Pakistan’s sovereignty.

Gen Kayani and his intelligence chief, General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, who heads the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, have so far weathered the storm unleashed by the US operation. But the cost has been the weakening of their leadership.

Once a symbol of national unity, the army now appears divided over the fight against Islamist extremists, while the bin Laden killing and a high-profile Taliban attack on a naval air base in Karachi have left Pakistanis wondering whether the military is at war with itself as much as with militants in its border regions.

A former official close to General Pervez Musharraf, the former ruler, says some in the officer corps are still unable to accept that the jihadists they supported during the 1980s and 1990s against the Soviet Union and India are now terrorists to be hunted down. “Inside, among the lower ranking officers there is a view that [the militants] are fighting the Americans in the same way that they did the Soviets,” he says……………………………………………..

Financial Times, UK

jimmy_moh · Post by **jimmy_moh** » 14 Jun 2011 09:34

source :wiki

Pakistan replied to India's Cold start Doctrine with successful testing of its nuclear-capable battlefield range ballistic missile (BRBM) Nasr. Nasr, or Hatf-IX, is a solid fuelled nuclear-capable battlefield range ballistic missile (BRBM). Nasr is a quick response system with “shoot-and-scoot’’ nuclear delivery capability.

According to defence analysts, the Nasr missile has been developed in response to and is intended to counter India's "Cold Start Doctrine."[3] "It is a low-yield battlefield deterrent, capable of deterring and inflicting punishment on mechanized forces like armed brigades and divisions,” said an expert in the field of missile technology".

Referring to Nasr's impact on India's Cold Start Doctrine, former Director-General of the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI), Dr. Shireen Mazari, observes:

“India has always felt that Pakistan had a loophole in terms of lacking short range battlefield nuclear weapons, which it could exploit on the assumption that it made little sense for Pakistan to respond to such conventional attacks with strategic nuclear weapons. With Nasr, Pakistan has plugged that loophole. Indian dreams of a limited war against Pakistan through its 'cold start' strategy have been put into permanent 'cold storage.' This will allow for a reassertion of a stable nuclear deterrence in the region."[3]
The Indian Institute for Defence Studies & Analyses (IDSA) observes:

"The development of Nasr indicates that Pakistan views India’s Cold Start doctrine with concern. The Nasr is meant to deter India’s launch of Cold Start. Since Nasr is reportedly nuclear capable, short range and light weight, it could imply the use of tactical nuclear weapons were such a conflict to occur. Fearing a lower nuclear threshold, implied by availability of tactical nuclear weapons, India may be deterred from embarking on Cold Start

can some experts shed some more light on the affect of Nasr and possible our counter actions in future conflicts....

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Jun 2011 09:56

well India has made it clear that any n-weapon attack on indian forces within or outside indian borders will result in the release order of strategic nuclear weapons....

so Pak will end up hitting a indian division but get wiped off the worlds map in return. if the chinese want to enter on paks behalf and take 50 hits in exchange for wiping india off the map, they are welcome. with 25 top cities wiped off the map their dreams of world conquest and middle kingdom will be postponed by .... 300 years

by which time the radioactive rats and cockroaches in what was india will invade the world and establish a new militant order of Arachnid and Ratpeople

n-weapons is not a game of two kids throwing stones of smaller -> bigger size..

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Jun 2011 15:10

jimmy_moh wrote:source :wiki
Pakistan replied to India's Cold start Doctrine with successful testing of its nuclear-capable battlefield range ballistic missile (BRBM) Nasr. Nasr, or Hatf-IX, is a solid fuelled nuclear-capable battlefield range ballistic missile (BRBM). Nasr is a quick response system with “shoot-and-scoot’’ nuclear delivery capability.

According to defence analysts, the Nasr missile has been developed in response to and is intended to counter India's "Cold Start Doctrine."[3] "It is a low-yield battlefield deterrent, capable of deterring and inflicting punishment on mechanized forces like armed brigades and divisions,” said an expert in the field of missile technology".

Referring to Nasr's impact on India's Cold Start Doctrine, former Director-General of the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI), Dr. Shireen Mazari, observes:

“India has always felt that Pakistan had a loophole in terms of lacking short range battlefield nuclear weapons, which it could exploit on the assumption that it made little sense for Pakistan to respond to such conventional attacks with strategic nuclear weapons. With Nasr, Pakistan has plugged that loophole. Indian dreams of a limited war against Pakistan through its 'cold start' strategy have been put into permanent 'cold storage.' This will allow for a reassertion of a stable nuclear deterrence in the region."[3]
The Indian Institute for Defence Studies & Analyses (IDSA) observes:

"The development of Nasr indicates that Pakistan views India’s Cold Start doctrine with concern. The Nasr is meant to deter India’s launch of Cold Start. Since Nasr is reportedly nuclear capable, short range and light weight, it could imply the use of tactical nuclear weapons were such a conflict to occur. Fearing a lower nuclear threshold, implied by availability of tactical nuclear weapons, India may be deterred from embarking on Cold Start
can some experts shed some more light on the affect of Nasr and possible our counter actions in future conflicts....

Pakistan has no nukes that will fit into a Hatf/Nasr.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Jun 2011 16:26

by suggesting that it is fitting tactical nukes to short range missiles, pakistan is actually indicating that it is open to limited nuclear war... which is a departure from the previous 'we will fly a green mushroom cloud from lal qila' all out option
which seems to be a convoluted way of preserving the rump state and TSPA control...
beyond that i'm at a loss to explain their tactical and strategic brilliance
on the other hand, india is advocating MAD with China and overkill with Pakistan
my brain is too feeble to figure out the paqui brilliance...

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 14 Jun 2011 19:31

Lalmohan wrote:by suggesting that it is fitting tactical nukes to short range missiles, pakistan is actually indicating that it is open to limited nuclear war... which is a departure from the previous 'we will fly a green mushroom cloud from lal qila' all out option

It is Paktical way of stating the obvious - We don't have enough nuclear bums to bomb the yindoos. it is also a GUBO saying, we are nuke nood, so give me conventional weapons. Nasr is at best a FOUR barreled 300mm MBRL

Multatuli · Post by **Multatuli** » 14 Jun 2011 23:33

Gagan wrote:

If Pakistan ever uses a JDAM, India needs to escalate rapidly, give out ultimatums in private, ultimatums that have deadlines that end in a matter of hours, and if Pakistan fails to comply, then proceed with the military option.

Pakistan will deliver only if there is a threat of severe punishment, and they think they can't escape punishment.

I think it would be the wrong thing to do. You don't issue ultimatums after a JDAM has taken place, instead you make absolutely clear to the Porki's that India will hold Porkistan responsible, and Porkistan will get the same response as when Porkistan's military used a nuke against India, before a JDAM takes place. After a JDAM in India, India has to nuke Porkistan out of existence, period.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 16 Jun 2011 08:07

Apologies if already posted:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/16/world ... istan.html

Pakistan’s Chief of Army Fights to Keep His Job

By JANE PERLEZ

Published: June 15, 2011

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan’s army chief, the most powerful man in the country, is fighting to save his position in the face of seething anger from top generals and junior officers since the American raid that killed Osama bin Laden, according to Pakistani officials and people who have met the chief in recent weeks.

Read the rest.

Which may exlpain why the Pakis are now becoming to act increasingly tough against the Yanks.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 16 Jun 2011 14:18

Looks like a VIP version of Mi-17:

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Jun 2011 14:29

the SSG kamandu standing next to door seems to be carrying a nuclear briefcase.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 16 Jun 2011 14:32

^^^ that's what they want you to think, but it looks a bit slim to carry any real hardware and comms equpt apart from his cell phone and chaddis for overnight trip (plus tube of vaseline)
i suspect its another puqui bluff

sum · Post by **sum** » 16 Jun 2011 14:35

^^ Will mostly be the files/ papers/notes for the visit which Jernail sahib is too lazy/TFTA to carry himself...

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 16 Jun 2011 14:56

^^^That would be the job of the ADC.

satya · Post by **satya** » 16 Jun 2011 15:51

Regarding the photo:

1) Security guy/commando( extreme left of photo ) with some sort of automatic seem bulk up around his stomach or sort of beer belly/pot belly type guy .? Is he wearing some sort of vest below his khaki or just tht he is TFTA with Big Belly ?

2) ADC with briefcase again same carrying a bit more bulk than necessary around his belly?

Am i seeing wrong or this is normal for TSPA officer cadre even young ones if its so am very surprised seem like thullas of desh police . Assuming both the man with gun n with briefcase at most of major rank still in IA officers in rank of major dont seem to carry such heavy bellies other than ASC types

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 16 Jun 2011 15:59

Well, they always said that the Pak armed forces were well fed.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jun 2011 16:15

satya wrote:Regarding the photo:

1) Security guy/commando( extreme left of photo ) with some sort of automatic seem bulk up around his stomach or sort of beer belly/pot belly type guy .? Is he wearing some sort of vest below his khaki or just tht he is TFTA with Big Belly ?

2) ADC with briefcase again same carrying a bit more bulk than necessary around his belly?

Am i seeing wrong or this is normal for TSPA officer cadre even young ones if its so am very surprised seem like thullas of desh police . Assuming both the man with gun n with briefcase at most of major rank still in IA officers in rank of major dont seem to carry such heavy bellies other than ASC types

They may be wearing BPJs inside

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 16 Jun 2011 16:22

Singha wrote:the SSG kamandu standing next to door seems to be carrying a nuclear briefcase.

That bag looks really small unless pakis have minaturised thier button to the size of a Netbook.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 16 Jun 2011 16:23

iphone app onlee...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Jun 2011 16:35

Just a normal briefcase with files , papers ,USB , DVD

etc unless we want to see nuclear in every thing

There are just two nations that are known to carry briefcase with real Nuclear command and control and all that ding dong becuase of their perpetual active state of their weapons.