Beating the Indian Navy without going broke

[Milspec]

I do wonder how PN will operationalize it without extensive Chinese space and air assets. ASBM is not just the missile, its a whole eco-system of capabilities. Also China can enforce an air-dominance in the waters near its coasts, allowing its air-borne radars to function and provide real-time updates of the sea. Not to mention Chinese satellite cover over the region in which this system operates. Due to the very geography of the Arabian sea, Chinese air-borne assets can't function effectively. If India demonstrates anti-sat capability this will make things harder for China, they will not like Chinese sats being targeted by Indian ASMs during war.

Carrier Killer is just one of them, Both of the cruise missile derivatives that Pakistan operates are with Chinese engines, multiplied with the fact that KH55 - the original long range cm was proliferated by OKB raduga to the chinese decades ago. Chinese also have the bootleg Pj10 version and a multitude of Anti ship long range systems that can be proliferated to Chinese. If push comes to shove, even dropping a fleet PLAAN vessels and Submarines in Pakistani ports is not out of the question as a deterrence for Pakistan.

 

[randomradio]

This is what I have to say about it.

Building such an ASBMS would also mean that the Indian carrier air-wing operating from a standoff ranges would require mid air refueling if it attempted to attack the Pakistani coastal assets or our surface fleet, which is an unfeasible proposition unless India can establish total air-dominance over Pakistan, which is simply not going to happen. In simple terms, the Indian carrier borne jets would run out of combat worthy fuel before they even reach their intended targets close to or at the Pakistani coastline.

Why is there a need to establish air dominance over Pakistan to perform mid air refueling over the Arabian Sea?

Mid air refueling can be performed by fighter jets as well.

Land based fighters can also be used for this role.

which in layman terms means that Pakistan can develop and deploy a potent arsenal of 50 -100 Sensor Network Enabled, all terrain, road mobile ASBM systems

That's not a lot to defeat.

Importantly there is no reliable countermeasure against such a system available to the Indian navy, nor is it likely to come anytime soon.

Yes, there is. There are four missiles being developed in India that can perform this role. And all four can become available very quickly if the need becomes serious enough.

Rather, it is Pakistan that could take years or even decades to make a reliable ASBM.

So essentially, Harba gives Pakistan the capability to maintain effective area denial capability only if this system is produced in enough strong numbers to make a dent in the overall war-fighting strategy.

You first need an active or IIR seeker. You can't use your current missiles against moving targets.

it becomes imperative to also build a strong fleet of new advanced Anti Air Warfare Frigates, Littoral Patrol Ships, a sizeable fleet of AIP Submarines, a Nuclear Powered SSBN for completing the nuclear triad and air-borne attack assets including fixed, rotary wing aircraft and unmanned systems.

So the discussion has come down to actually building a navy.

Pakistan finds itself in a position to develop those cutting edge technologies which can overwhelm India’s carrier fleet in a limited or full scale shooting war, at a very manageable cost; thus deterring a more powerful and aggressive adversary by neutralizing its tactical and strategic advantage from the battlespace.

"Very manageable cost" is quite subjective.

All the author has done is say that Pakistan needs a modern navy to counter India's modern navy.

The author believes that Pakistan will benefit immensely by opening a strategic dialogue with friendly countries like Maldives, Indonesia, Somalia, Yemen and Sudan to grant naval bases or rotation and replenishment rights from their own installations.

Very tall task considering the political ramifications of going against India for the sake of Pakistan.

And of course, overseas base means Pakistan needs to build a proper navy, with an expeditionary force. That's a recipe for going broke.

 

[Shajida Khan]

Both of the cruise missile derivatives that Pakistan operatives are with Chinese engines, multiplied with the fact that KH55 - the original long range cm was proliferated by OKB raduga to the chinese decades ago. Chinese also have the bootleg Pj10 version and a multitude of Anti ship long range systems that can be proliferated to Chinese. If push comes to shove, even dropping a fleet PLAAN vessels and Submarines in Pakistani ports is not out of the question as a deterrence for Pakistan.

I am not questioning the cruise missiles. Its a known threat in PN-IN calculus. India is also possessing Arrow anti air system to deal with such threats. I was only referring to ASBMs which to me feels difficult to operationalize in Arabian sea region without risking valualbe space and air-borne assets.
As far as bringing in PLAAN in Arabian sea goes, they will have a very long journey from Chinese east coast to Arabian sea. I am sure during hostilities, Indian navy will blockade any chinese involvement by blocking Malaka choke points. There is a reason why India is acquiring islands in that region.

 

[safriz]

@safriz Recently the arguments have purely shifted from offensive to defensive strategy and it seems like being able to hold on Indian aggression is now considered as victory in Pak strategist quarters. How are you going to free Kashmir if India do not respond to table talk or UN keeps mum? Kashmiris are on their own to die for Pak wishes? @Azlan Haider

Why we need 100% blockade? The idea is to hamper pak supply chains and thus creating discomfort in Pak war capabilities, also impacting day to day public business. Even 50-70% would do wonders.

well no.
Pakistan never had offensive military strategies or planning. Always defensive.
Yet we went 300 Km into Rajistan in 1965 war

 

[Shajida Khan]

All the author has done is say that Pakistan needs a modern navy to counter India's modern navy.

Thats what I found most laughable in this article. Sure you can counter an enemy with better equipment, but it does not come cheap. Especially if you are not building it yourself.

It would have been a more instructive read if the author had covered tactics involving cheaper hardware.

 

[Shajida Khan]

well no.
Pakistan never had offensive military strategies or planning. Always defensive.
Yet we went 300 Km into Rajistan in 1965 war

And lost half of the nation in '71.

 

[Milspec]

Indian navy will blockade any chinese involvement by blocking Malaka choke points. There is a reason why India is acquiring islands in that region.

The above part I am not very sure of.

 

[Arvind]

I will say that it creates a peaceful stalemate between the two countries at least for the time being. Pakistani military feels victory in ensuring that India does not attack Pakistan and call it a victory and Indian are assured that Pakistani won't attack India and call that a victory.

If Indian government has an ounce of wisdom, they will start changing the demographics of Kashmir. Bring in Jatts from Hariyana and Delhi, Sikhs from Punjab, UPites from UP and Bihar and give them false documentation to prove that they were Kashmiri to being with. Settle 10-20 million of such people and allow them to vote in Kashmiri elections. Fill all the administrative positions, police, health-care, education etc with such people. Ensure that most of Kashmiri kids are educated in boarding schools, away from their parents and are kept busy in sports, studies, heck even foreign educational trips if it comes to it. Those who are too keen in Kashmiri 'cause' should be given free narcotics.

Give them absolute protection by Army and in 10-12 years dissolve Article 35 completely ofcourse with the consent of 'Kashmiris'. Heck hold a plebiscite as well for the heck of it. With proper 'support' of 'UN' : mainly French and Israeli forces providing security during that time under the aegis of UNSC peacekeeping forces.

That's imminent at the right time. Just see when China start acting in Xinxiang.

 

[Arvind]

well no.
Pakistan never had offensive military strategies or planning. Always defensive.
Yet we went 300 Km into Rajistan in 1965 war

So you started 1965 war with operation gibraltor to free Kashmir based on defensive strategies?

That says Mushy was not the only one doing blunders.

Who captured more land??

 

[safriz]

Hi,

Your staff HQ prepares the drills , tactics and formations for the well meaning strategic defense, but your leadership, specifically military leadership throws all of that hard gained knowledge out of the window when it comes to actual war, and embarks on ridiculous strategy.

operation: Gibraltor, operation: Brasstacks, Operation: Searchlight, Siachen and Kargil: All poorly planned and sloppily executed offensives not by my measure but by the account of multiple decorated Pakistani military dignitaries (Will provide actual references if you need).

Pakistani war planning has displayed such dearth of planning that they would embark on an strategic armored thrust into India without air cover, and then display tactical lousiness to mistake a 200 soldier platoon to be a brigade head and stop dead in its own tracks for on of the biggest Thermopylae like fiasco to go down in the history books.

Then there is the Navy, where during all out hostilities, PN just capitulated without even showing the will to fight, not to mention the PA who choose self preservation above all to go down in the books as the the largest unilateral surrender since WWII within a span of two weeks.

So there is this Staff HQ Pakistani fighting force that is extremely competent, learned, and well planned unit, but then when the hostilities start, it is guided by ridiculous philosophies like 1 muslim=10 (operation Gibraltar), Security of the East lies in the West (1971) and then bleeding by thousand cuts (asymmetry 1989 to present)

Thus as far as IN vs PN goes, Pakistan has the ability to leverage Chinese systems to put up some fight, but it's current modernization plan doesn't seem to even put it in the same league as the Indian Coast guard.

All the operations you are mentioning were political failures not military failures.
In 1965 India could not come more than 4-5 Km inside Lahore or Sialkot Borders. Pakistan went 300 Km inside Rajistan borders.
But Ayub Khan agreed with Shastri to just go back to Pre-war positions.
Kargil the same. Musharraf and his non regular "Northern light infantry" or NLI took up heoights of Kargil and stayed there. Indian army and Ir force both had to be sent to try and defeat them and India even lost one or two air force jets. But the men maintained their positions until Nawaz Sharif was summoned by Clinton and ordered to ask Military to just go back. It was on return journey when our troops left the safety of the peaks that they were killed and taken POW. Even today at least one peak from the era is still under Pakistan custody.

I am not saying that the political debacle wont happen again, and it can happen, but thread is about military strategy only, not politics.

 

[randomradio]

Now to the point o discussion Pakistanis do have an ace of spade, i.e being a proxy for China, and thus can leverage a lot to gain Off the shelf systems from China or even lease systems in lieu of gawadar port etc. And then there is finally the ballistic kill vehicle for carriers that the chinese have supposedly tested, it wouldn't be difficult for China to proliferate that to Pakistan to keep IN in check.

The Chinese are not going to deliver their superweapons to Pakistan.

The level of intelligence gathering capabilities we have developed in Pakistan can potentially compromise their superweapons. Not to mention, if the Chinese escalate weapons sales to Pakistan, we will do the same with their neighbours, starting with Vietnam. The Chinese don't want that to happen.

All I see the Chinese giving them is mid-end weapons.

 

[safriz]

And lost half of the nation in '71.

Well yes.
But we are still here and kicking, and thats what matters.

 

[Shajida Khan]

The above part I am not very sure of.

Well remember, those CBGs chilling in Bay of Bengal? This should be a task for them.
Chinese naval forces will be operating far far away from their home bases and will have limited refuling and re-arming capabilities. Perfect for interdiction by Indian CBGs.
Also, Nicorbar Island bases.

 

[Shajida Khan]

Well yes.
But we are still here and kicking, and thats what matters.

So is everyone else. Whats the point?

 

[Milspec]

All the operations you are mentioning were political failures not military failures.
In 1965 India could not come more than 4-5 Km inside Lahore or Sialkot Borders. Pakistan went 300 Km inside Rajistan borders.
But Ayub Khan agreed with Shastri to just go back to Pre-war positions.
Kargil the same. Musharraf and his non regular "Northern light infantry" or NLI took up heoights of Kargil and stayed there. Indian army and Ir force both had to be sent to try and defeat them and India even lost one or two air force jets. But the men maintained their positions until Nawaz Sharif was summoned by Clinton and ordered to ask Military to just go back. It was on return journey when our troops left the safety of the peaks that they were killed and taken POW. Even today at least one peak from the era is still under Pakistan custody.

I am not saying that the political debacle wont happen again, and it can happen, but thread is about military strategy only, not politics.

And I respectfully disagree.

Let me quote ACM Nur Khan


ACM Nur Khan said it perfectly "Since the 1965 war was based on a big lie and was presented to the nation a great victory, the Army came to believe its own fiction and has used since, Ayub as its role model and therefore has continued to fight unwanted wars — the 1971 war and the Kargil fiasco in 1999."

Just a reminder about ACM Nur Khan before you even think of dismissing his views on the matter
Hilal-e-Jurat
Hilal-e-Shujaat
Hilal-e-Quaid-i-Azam
Sitara-e-Pakistan

PAF Base Chaklala was renamed as PAF Base Nur Khan in 2012.

 

[Milspec]

The Chinese are not going to deliver their superweapons to Pakistan.

The level of intelligence gathering capabilities we have developed in Pakistan can potentially compromise their superweapons. Not to mention, if the Chinese escalate weapons sales to Pakistan, we will do the same with their neighbours, starting with Vietnam. The Chinese don't want that to happen.

All I see the Chinese giving them is mid-end weapons.

If you want to prepare for decisive victory, you have to account for the worst case scenario. If we go about with famous assumptions like the PA does, we will have similar results.

 

[Shajida Khan]

All the operations you are mentioning were political failures not military failures.
In 1965 India could not come more than 4-5 Km inside Lahore or Sialkot Borders. Pakistan went 300 Km inside Rajistan borders.
But Ayub Khan agreed with Shastri to just go back to Pre-war positions.
Kargil the same. Musharraf and his non regular "Northern light infantry" or NLI took up heoights of Kargil and stayed there. Indian army and Ir force both had to be sent to try and defeat them and India even lost one or two air force jets. But the men maintained their positions until Nawaz Sharif was summoned by Clinton and ordered to ask Military to just go back. It was on return journey when our troops left the safety of the peaks that they were killed and taken POW. Even today at least one peak from the era is still under Pakistan custody.

I am not saying that the political debacle wont happen again, and it can happen, but thread is about military strategy only, not politics.

Indian forces indeed took back Tiger hill, the biggest threat to Indian connectivity to Kashmir. I remember a picture of the same being posted a lot in BR and other forums in such kind of threads.

In the end, all conflicts are for a purpose. Pakistan has a huge history of failing to meet those goals. All so called battles victories end-up in smoke. BTW, this does not mean India didn't have victories. They did, and quite a few of them. But Pakistan's record is full of few Battle victories and lack of any war victories. India has atleast twice won the war against Pakistan. '71 and Operation Meghdoot when they captured Siachen Glacier.

 

[Shajida Khan]

If you want to prepare for decisive victory, you have to account for the worst case scenario. If we go about with famous assumptions like the PA does, we will have similar results.

If I were in Indian diplomacy, I would be focusing on getting a defence pact with USA. Incase of any Chinese hostilities, US will declare war on China. Given the buffoon in the office, it may just be possible. These kind of pacts are usually secret. Basically do an Indra Gandhi over Chinese all over again.

 

[Arvind]

And I respectfully disagree.

Let me quote ACM Nur Khan


ACM Nur Khan said it perfectly "Since the 1965 war was based on a big lie and was presented to the nation a great victory, the Army came to believe its own fiction and has used since, Ayub as its role model and therefore has continued to fight unwanted wars — the 1971 war and the Kargil fiasco in 1999."

Just a reminder about ACM Nur Khan before you even think of dismissing his views on the matter
Hilal-e-Jurat
Hilal-e-Shujaat
Hilal-e-Quaid-i-Azam
Sitara-e-Pakistan

PAF Base Chaklala was renamed as PAF Base Nur Khan in 2012.

Whats the point of controlling the nation if Pak army can't paint their failures on others?

let me tell you a joke -

Mushy took orders from Nawaz and withdraw from Kargil. He was an obedient general. @safriz

 

[Milspec]

@safriz from Military standpoint these gentlemen would disagree with your take too.

Air Chief Marshal: Asghar Khan

Air Chief Marshal: Nur Khan

Brig (Retd) Saeed Ismat

Major (Retd.) Agha Humayun Amin

Col. S.G Mehd (SSG Commander)







What do you have to say about 1965 war?



If you were to ask me this question when I was a young officer, my reply would have been quite different because I fought in that war, saw tactical action and in my perception we did well and beat back the aggressor and won the war. As one matures, learns and has the ability to analyze, one begins to differentiate between myth and reality, of course, with the advantage of the hindsight. 1965 War manifested the shortsightedness and immaturity of our political and military leadership. Pakistan started with ‘Operation Gibraltar’ in Kashmir. We have been made to think it was very bold and imaginative in conception and prepared by a great General. In my opinion it was bold, unimaginative, unpracticable plan. It was not in harmony with prevailing environment in Indian Held Kashmir. It was based on dangerous assumptions and its time frame was unrealistic and quixotic. The plan reflected strategic naivety and immaturity. To top it all the preparation and subsequently the execution displayed lack of professionalism. Since it lacked politico-strategic framework and vision it placed Pakistan in a very precarious position. On its failure, ‘Operation Grandslam’ was launched, which did make military sense since it enjoyed the superiority of strategic orientation. The capture of objective (Akhnur Bridges) would sever the Indian lines of communication in Kashmir and force them to retract. This operation was to suffer a major setback when the advance was halted because of an explainable change of command in the middle of the battle. Indians were so threatened by this move that they attacked with full might across the international border threatening Lahore and Sialkot. Our leaders panicked, ‘Operation Grandslam’ was brought to a grinding halt. Later, a brilliantly conceived Riposte from Khem Karan failed because a correct mix of units was not mustered to achieve a superior relative strength situation at the right time at the right place. We won a lot of battles but lost the war as we failed to attain the political aim of defreezing and the ultimate liberation of the Kashmir. Ayub Khan thus ruined the national economy by one wrong decision that had taken him several years to build.



Brig (Retd) Saeed Ismat, SJ



Cover Story



This in short is Nur Khan’s version of 1965 war, which he calls an unnecessary war and says that President Ayub for whom he has the greatest regard should have held his senior generals accountable for the debacle and himself resigned.



This would have held the hands of the adventurers who followed Gen Ayub. Since the 1965 war was based on a big lie and was presented to the nation a great victory, the Army came to believe its own fiction and has used since, Ayub as its role model and therefore has continued to fight unwanted wars — the 1971 war and the Kargil fiasco in 1999, he said.



In each of the subsequent wars we have committed the same mistakes that we committed in 1965.



Air Marshal Khan demanded that a truth commission formed to find out why we failed in all our military adventures. It is not punishment of the failed leadership that should be the aim of the commission but sifting of facts from fiction and laying bare the follies and foibles of the irresponsible leaders in matters with grave implications for the nation. It should also point out the irregularities committed in training and promotions in the defence forces in the past so that it is not repeated in future





Nur Khan reminisces ’65 war - Newspaper - DAWN.COM





Excerpt From the conclusion:

Major (Retd.) Agha Humayun Amin:

Ambition, lust for glory etc are perfectly reasonable aspirations where they are matched with military talent pertaining to operational strategy, low intensity operations, strategic insight or statesmanship! All these were sadly lacking at all levels, except unit level bravery and enthusiasm! Gibraltar failed because of pure and unadulterated military incompetence and Akhtar Malik bears the principle responsibility for Gibraltar! The Grand Slam story was different!It wasnot a case ofbalanced distribution of lack of talent at all levels that resulted in the failure of Grand Slam! The principle reason why Grand Slam failed was delay in initial launching and change of command!





Grand Slam - A Battle of Lost Opportunities









this is your Air Chief Marshal Asghar Khan.

Some of Col. S.G Mehdi wisdom.



Conclusion by SSG’s commander: “Had our Government initiated a probe into concept, conduct and consequences of 1965 War’, and raised the curtain from the acts of gross omission or that of the criminal commission, the ignominy of 1971 could have been avoided. “



1965 War — Some Harsh Realities | Ehtisham Siddiqui