China moves to counter India with arms sales to Pakistan

Good news for Pak

China moves to counter India with arms sales to Pakistan

Beijing’s first export of J-10C jets marks step-up in decades-old arms relationship with Islamabad

www.ft.com

Beijing’s first export of J-10C jets marks step-up in decades-old arms relationship with Islamabad


China will deliver 25 J-10C fighter jets to Pakistan within weeks as part of a deal that will bolster Islamabad’s military capabilities against mutual rival India.

Beijing’s first export of the advanced jets marks a big step-up in its decades-old arms relationship with Islamabad and entails providing its ally with some of the latest equipment that China’s own armed forces are using. China will also broaden its support to Pakistan’s navy.
The first batch of the combat aircraft is being tested in Chengdu, the base of its manufacturer Chengdu Aerospace Corporation, according to a journalist at a Chinese military publication.
“They will be transferred to Pakistan once Pakistan air force pilots and technicians have completed an introduction to the aircraft,” he said.

Senior officials in Islamabad said the jets would be delivered before the end of the month.
Last week, Chinese and foreign military watchers posted photos and a video showing several J-10C aircraft flying the colours of the Pakistan air force on social media.
China is also selling Pakistan four Type 054A frigates, the first of which began service in November, and is expected to begin delivery of up to eight Type 041 submarines, its quietest attack submarine, this year.
India, which has been engaged in a stand-off on its Himalayan border with China for nearly two years, believes the arms deliveries to Pakistan are an attempt to amplify the threat from Islamabad. India shares long land borders with both Pakistan and China.

“There’s a clear strategic nexus between China and Pakistan,” said Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the Centre for Policy Research, a New Delhi think-tank. “That nexus is clearly designed to contain India, to pin India down and keep it preoccupied. That’s the Chinese strategic aim.”
He described the latest arms deals as a significant shift, adding that “China is now selling or transferring its top of the line weapons systems to Pakistan”.

The J-10C aircraft will help Pakistan close the air-power gap with India following New Delhi’s acquisition of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France. “This is our response to [India’s] Rafale,” Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed, Pakistan’s interior minister, said when he revealed the J-10C agreement in December.

The new Chinese ships would boost Pakistan’s capabilities in the Indian Ocean, an area of strategic importance for Beijing.
“They want Pakistan to have naval bases ready that China could also use, and to be able to protect them,” said Siemon Wezeman, an arms trade expert at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
“The Chinese have shown that they will sell to Pakistan when others won’t. I suspect that China is very easy to persuade [to sell], not only for commercial but also for political reasons,” he said.
India is also planning a naval expansion. The navy’s deputy chief said late last year that it aimed to increase the size of its fleet from 130 vessels to 170 by 2027, including four frigates being developed in partnership with Russia.
Despite the upgrades, Chellaney said the Himalayan stand-off was draining India’s defence resources. “The Indian navy is supposed to be undergoing modernisation, but the modernisation is happening at a relatively slow pace, largely because of the land military confrontations that India faces,” he said.

 

[peagle]

I have spent a fair amount of time, looking at India and i have come to the conclusion that India genuinely has tremendous amount of potential. There are a few things that is keeping it back,

1. Extremely high population
2. Internal communal/religious/ethnic strife
3. Border issues with Pakistan & China

If India can control the over population, get rid of these Hindutva fanatics and resolves the land disputes with both China and Pakistan they will be another global power house. In case they are unable to control those 3 areas of concern, i reckon it will result in a major civil war and balkanization of India with millions of people dead.

Wouldn't you say this would also apply to Pakistan, especially with regards to 1 and 2, our internal is very much stable except terrorism. After all, our downward trajectory only came about after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Nationalisation was also a factor but that was malleable.

Pakistan is projected to have a population of 400+ million, if 1 and 2 are controlled, then a nation of 400 million is a potential world power by any measure.

 

[Chak Bamu]

"CHHITTAROL"

"Danda peer ae bigrheyaan tigrheyaan da ...."
(Syed Waris Shah)

Sir, chhitrol is not the solution. They have a wounded psyche & it just would not budge no matter how high the pain.

 

[Vapnope]

We are not comfortable with a communist China nor is the world comfortable with this.
China can be accepted as a world leader only if the people in china have the right to choose their leaders, no matter how painful the process might be.
Democracy is the best form of governance as of today.

Meanwhile you and the world are very comfortable with religious and dynastic dictatorship in many countries. Examples,
- Russia has been your best friend where Putin is dictator for long i can remember
- KSA is your best friend while it is a monarchy
- Iran has been your best friend and business partner while it is a religious dictatorship

No one buy this hilarious claim that West or you support countries based on democracy.

 

[S.Y.A]

After all, our downward trajectory only came about after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Nationalisation was also a factor but that was malleable.

not really, the downward trajectory began with separation of east pakistan, and the awesome rule of bhutto. '71 reinvigorated separatist efforts, leading to full blown engagement in balochistan in bhutto's time, jeay sindh movement raised its head, and of course, pashtunistan issue became active as well. it wasnt until bhutto supported insurgents inside afghanistan did daud come to his senses. Then bhutto did what he is most infamous for: nationalization, and wiped away Pakistan's industrial base that ayub khan had worked hard to put into place.

 

[peagle]

not really, the downward trajectory began with separation of east pakistan, and the awesome rule of bhutto. '71 reinvigorated separatist efforts, leading to full blown engagement in balochistan in bhutto's time, jeay sindh movement raised its head, and of course, pashtunistan issue became active as well. it wasnt until bhutto supported insurgents inside afghanistan did daud come to his senses. Then bhutto did what he is most infamous for: nationalization, and wiped away Pakistan's industrial base that ayub khan had worked hard to put into place.

I think you are taking a myopic view.
You are correct, but they were short term turbulences that were dealt with fairly quickly, the nationalisation would have been corrected over time.

But, it was the Soviet invasion, and the resultant 5 million refugees, the Kalashnikov culture, the drug trade, the Saudi/Iran Sunni/Shia fight on the streets of Pakistan, and resultant continued instability of 40+ years, and the linked terrorism which was the ever lasting cause.

Without the Afghan wars, all these issues would not have arisen and the turbulences of the 70s, would have been left in the 70s and we would have moved on.

 

[S.Y.A]

I think you are taking a myopic view.
You are correct, but they were short term turbulences that were dealt with fairly quickly, the nationalisation would have been corrected over time.

But, it was the Soviet invasion, and the resultant 5 million refugees, the Kalashnikov culture, the drug trade, the Saudi/Iran Sunni/Shia fight on the streets of Pakistan, and resultant continued instability of 40+ years, and the linked terrorism which was the ever lasting cause.

Without the Afghan wars, all these issues would not have arisen and the turbulences of the 70s, would have been left in the 70s and we would have moved on.

the turbulence may not have been dealt with fairly quickly, they arise due to a sense of deprivation etc. would have taken a lot of work. but the soviet invasion was a continuation of the events in 70s. had daud not deposed the king, pashtunistan movement may not have been revived (no sanctuaries or funding from a neighboring country). had daud not deposed the king, there would be no afghan commies gaining power and fighting among themselves and inviting the soviets to invade.

I agree that the afghan war did cause a lot of harm, what should have a decade of reversing bhutto's policies, was instead wasted away due to this. economic or other development was not a priority. even the shia sunni issue had its roots in iranian revolution, and attempts by iran to export it, the influx of arms and extremism did make it far worse, but it wasnt the root cause.

 

[peagle]

the turbulence may not have been dealt with fairly quickly, they arise due to a sense of deprivation etc. would have taken a lot of work. but the soviet invasion was a continuation of the events in 70s. had daud not deposed the king, pashtunistan movement may not have been revived (no sanctuaries or funding from a neighboring country). had daud not deposed the king, there would be no afghan commies gaining power and fighting among themselves and inviting the soviets to invade.

I agree that the afghan war did cause a lot of harm, what should have a decade of reversing bhutto's policies, was instead wasted away due to this. economic or other development was not a priority. even the shia sunni issue had its roots in iranian revolution, and attempts by iran to export it, the influx of arms and extremism did make it far worse, but it wasnt the root cause.

We are discussing Pakistan not Afghanistan, whatever the cause of the Soviet invasion, it resulted in being the primary factor in the continuous troubles for Pakistan, that was my original point. I do recognise the cause of the Sunni/Shia Saudi/Iran fight that is why I recognised it in my original point.

My point to which you disagreed did not deal with the causes, but the importance of those events in the continuous troubles of Pakistan. So, you've essentially agree that the long term troubles faced by Pakistan were the result of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. If Pakistan was not busy dealing with that mess, Pakistan would not have allowed the Iranian/Saudi fight to spill into Pakistan.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I have spent a fair amount of time, looking at India and i have come to the conclusion that India genuinely has tremendous amount of potential. There are a few things that is keeping it back,

1. Extremely high population

This has to be read against the drop in the reproductive rate. The expansion is slowing down rapidly. Chances of a further slow-down are at the moment bleak, for this reason: people have large families when they are uncertain about their own future when aged and unable to work, therefore they try to overcome child mortality and economic uncertainty through large families. When economic difficulties increase, there is a greater need for security, and (with a lag) larger families; when significant segments of the population are lifted out of property, there is a sense of relaxation of tension, and a willingness to enjoy the life that they never enjoyed before.

Now that relaxed feeling is gone; it is quite possible that the rate will rise further as tensions rise further.

2. Internal communal/religious/ethnic strife

Unfortunately, what was accidental and random for many years is carefully planned in the present environment.

3. Border issues with Pakistan & China

True. These may take longer, but can be addressed.

If India can control the over population, get rid of these Hindutva fanatics and resolves the land disputes with both China and Pakistan they will be another global power house. In case they are unable to control those 3 areas of concern, i reckon it will result in a major civil war and balkanization of India with millions of people dead.

Solving #3 would not solve #2, IMO

Their issue with Islam is not entirely dependent on Pakistan alone, they have a genuine hatred for Islam similar to how people hate homosexuality, it comes almost natural to them. Even solving issues with Pakistan would still keep them suppressing their Muslim population.

Once their fabricated unity built upon hating Pakistan disappears, communal tensions will rise because there's nothing to bind them.

What you need to do to understand that topic under discussion is to step into an Indian city and spend a few hours there.

That should settle, once and for all, this illusion that Hindu society is monolithic.

 

[SIPRA]

Sir, chhitrol is not the solution. They have a wounded psyche & it just would not budge no matter how high the pain.

Problem is that my limited study of history tells me that such issues, involving predominant collective psyche of a people, are scarcely settled by peaceful means. They are resolved, whether fully or partly, by use of force and violence. That is how, I find this world to be; though I personally don't like application of violent means.

 

[MH.Yang]

Have Indians ever wondered why India's relationship with all its neighbors is so bad? Are all India's neighbors wrong and only India is right?

Why is India unwilling to give up its ambition to dominate the whole of South Asia and let all South Asian countries concentrate on economic development and let all South Asians have a rich life?

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Have Indians ever wondered why India's relationship with all its neighbors is so bad? Are all India's neighbors wrong and only India is right?

Why is India unwilling to give up its ambition to dominate the whole of South Asia and let all South Asian countries concentrate on economic development and let all South Asians have a rich life?

Why don't you allow Taiwan to be a separate country?

 

[lastofthepatriots]

Cost effective solution for the Rafale?

@Windjammer

 

[Turingsage]

Have Indians ever wondered why India's relationship with all its neighbors is so bad? Are all India's neighbors wrong and only India is right?

India's relationship with Bhutan Sri Lanka Bangladesh Maldives Mauritius Nepal is fine. Neutral with Burma.

India has problems with Pakistan and China
Relations with China were passable until the rise of China led to China ignoring all understandings regarding portions of our boundary were thrown onto the bon fire and salami slicing territory through armed incursions was started by XI
China has maritime and territorial disputes with 18 neighbours. EIGHTEEN.

 

[American Pakistani]

I'm not defense expert but that's what I've been saying, that China should strengthen pakistan navy so that it have ability to secure Arabian sea Persian gulf supply lines which is lifeline of China and Pakistan wrt oil.

 

[Dr Androthi]

Frankly speaking J-31 is more the enough to handle India. Indian AMCA is just a paper plane. It may be another 50 years before we see it inducted.

shouldn't that be 150 years bro