What's new

Indian Brahmos missle crashes in Mian Channo

...........

India's 'dismissive' stance on missile issue 'worrisome': NSA Moeed Yusuf

Dawn.com
March 15, 2022


A file photo of National Security Adviser Moeed Yusuf. — APP/File


A file photo of National Security Adviser Moeed Yusuf. — APP


National Security Adviser Moeed Yusuf called on Tuesday India's "indifferent and dismissive" approach to the firing of a missile inside Pakistan last week "worrisome", after New Delhi said for the second time that the launch of the projectile across the border was "accidental".

The incident had taken place on March 9, when the Air Defence Operations Centre of the Pakistan Air Force had picked up what was then identified as an "high-speed flying object" inside the territory.

"From its initial course, the object suddenly manoeuvred towards Pakistani territory and violated Pakistan's air space, ultimately falling near Mian Channu at 6:50pm," Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Director General Maj Gen Babar Iftikhar had shared during a press briefing a day later and called for an explanation from India.
Subsequently, the Indian defence ministry had expressed regret over the incident, terming it "accidental" and attributing it to a "technical malfunction".

Pakistan, however, demanded further explanation, calling India's stance on the matter "simplistic". The country also called for a joint probe into the incident.

Following these developments, Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh told his country's parliament today that New Delhi was conducting a review of its standing operating procedures for operations, maintenance and inspection of weapons systems after the March 9 incident.

"We attach the highest priority to the safety and security of our weapon systems. If any shortcoming is found, it would be immediately rectified," Rajnath Singh said, repeating India's earlier stance that the missile was launched accidentally during routine maintenance and inspection.

NSA Yusuf pointed out today that the "claim" made by India for the second time was a "simplistic explanation without evidence" that "is insufficient and should be unacceptable to the world".

In a series of tweets, he said, "We remind India and the world that this was a highly sophisticated supersonic missile which could have caused loss of life in Pakistan and resulted in escalation between two nuclear-armed countries."


"Once again, everyone must see for themselves which is the responsible state," he added. "We all know that such incidents can easily escalate — history is full of such instances."
The NSA said that Pakistan had once again acted responsibly during the episode to avoid any escalation, "exactly how we acted in 2019 when we shot down intruding Indian fighter planes after India tried to bomb us".

"We even voluntarily returned their downed pilot to avoid escalation, Yusuf recalled.

The NSA further said the world should realise that "escalatory actions by India are a pattern, not an exception".

"This is a classic character of an irresponsible and untrustworthy state when it comes to [the] handling of such sensitive weapon systems," he added.

He highlighted that India’s "continued demonstration of lack of adequate safety and security protocols of their high-end weapons systems raises serious questions that remain unanswered" by Delhi.

"Their indifferent and dismissive approach after the incident is even more worrisome," the NSA said, adding that "only a transparent joint probe can address the many unanswered questions about this so-called mistake".

The NSA's statement is the latest in a string of responses by Pakistan and the country's politicians in the days following the March 9 incident.

Previously, the Foreign Office (FO) had issued a list of questions seeking explanations from India on multiple aspects of the incident, while the Indian envoy and charges d'affaires were summoned by the FO.

'Incident could have resulted in a major disaster'​

The issue was also discussed during the 248th Corps Commanders’ Conference at the general headquarters in Rawalpindi today.

Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Qamar Javed Bajwa presided over the conference, the military's media wing said, adding that the "forum reviewed with concern the recent incident of missile firing, claimed [to be] accidental by India, which could have resulted in a major disaster"....


....
 
.
So, you are assuming that all Brahmos launches will always & ever be nuclear. Great.

Why are all hyper-nationalists so damn predictable?
It's always best to plan for the worst case than be sorry. A wrong assumption carries a huge risk which is not entertainable by any nuclear power. Whatever makes you think I am a nationalist?
 
.
I am sorry, but this is pure speculation. I can not consider this as a valid argument.

Edit: Not a good idea at all when there are passenger planes within range of an AD missile. Until there is something more substantial, I am sticking with Brahmos running out of fuel theory since the condition of the wreckage supports it more than other alternatives.
you are free to believe what you wish.
 
. .
Pakistan rejects India's response to accidental missile launch, demands joint probe.
PTI / Updated: Mar 15, 2022, 17:38 IST

Read more at:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
Previously Pakistan used to bring up kashmir at every event.. now Pakistan needs to bring up kashmir + this "accident" at every event. This should be our daily mantra SCO, OIC, UN , MTCR. NSG. ICJ...I dont care..take them to the cleaners.. all this plus yadav and the nazi rss mindset makes our point stronger .. let's see what the FO does.
 
Last edited:
. .
India has done what it wanted to do.It's not a failure of Pakistan's operational preparedness but rather a simple fact that no operational posture can deter enemy's grey zone operations.We can't curse our military here and we don't need to either.We need to respond inovatively at a time and place of our chosing.There can be no loss of life as a result of our response.However it should be loud and sharp enough to smash the Indian ego to smithereens.
 
.
Now pakistan should repeat the same mistake and see the world reaction….
 
.
These are the short answers prompted by foolish assertions by fanboys who should never have opened their mouths.

My quarrel is with the dates that your friend talked about.

It is really disappointing that with superficial knowledge of India, of Indian politics of the period, of the organisation of the Indian border security arrangements, of the creation of Indian intelligence organisations, and of the leadership and primary objectives of the Indian Army, people should make these assertions.

If I had made similar suggestions about Pakistan and about affairs in Pakistan, I would rightly have become a laughing stock. In this case, I shall restrict myself to saying that you need to read what I have to say below before ever commenting on this aspect.

I'm afraid that the facts completely are against you. It isn't a question of patriotism, or even of facts interpreted by two sides.

These are not my personal assumptions or likings. Everything I say below is a matter of public record, or of personal experience and knowledge.

First, the Army was indifferent, and unconcerned with affairs in the east.

From 1965 to 1971, we had two Army Chiefs, the well-liked but quiescent Kumaramangalam, and following him, Manekshaw, who had been separated from HQ for several years and spent a lot of time coping with renewing contacts in Army HQ in Delhi and keeping the Army out of the political turmoil that gripped the nation. There was no time for fiddling around creating terrorist organisations in the east.

The primary objectives of the Indian Army were to guard against the Chinese; at the time of Manekshaw's taking over, (in 1969, it was just seven years before that the traumatic defeat at the hands of the PLA had occurred), and to strengthen the order of battle in the west, where we had won some, and lost some encounters in 1965. The failure of the Indian 1st Armoured Division was uppermost, followed by the disastrous surrender of the Haji Pir Pass in the Tashkent peace agreement, something that the Army regrets bitterly to this day. There was also the trauma of the Nagas to deal with, although the Assam Rifles took the brunt of the burden, as the Indian Army objected strongly to being engaged as a substitute for the failed apparatus of civil administration. There was nobody in the Army even aware of events in East Pakistan; both Jagjit Arora and his Chief of Staff, Jacob, were focussed on the activities of XXXIII Corps and on the northern borders. Only IV Corps had some responsibility for the rest of Eastern Command, and they were deployed in Assam and Nagaland. There was no organisation within the Army, and no apparatus for fiddling around creating terrorist operations in the east. In fact, the boot was on the other foot.

In 1966, the Mizo National Front staged an armed revolt, and killed and fought the security forces, at that time, their own constabulary, as well as a battalion of the Assam Rifles. They failed, the Indian Army and Indian Air Force were called out, and by 1967, the MNF were driven out; two battalions of regulars, three battalions of Assam Rifles, and four battalions of CRPF were involved in pacifying the territory. MNF forces retired to the Chittagong Hill Tracts, where, in 1971, Brigadier Z. A. Khan found them in well-organised barracks, with regular service weaponry, and subsidised by the ISI. This last is on record in the Pakistani army officer's memoirs.

There was not even a local civil organisation to fiddle around creating terrorist organisations in the east.

In 1965, the only hostilities in the east were between the West Bengal armed police, three battalions of constables armed with .303 SMLE rifles of World War II vintage. Until hostilities became intense, there were not even Light Machine Guns available. There was also one battalion of the Eastern Frontier Rifles.

Against this, there were 10,000 enlisted men of the East Pakistan Rifles, composed of units of the old Eastern Frontier Rifles, less the Gorkhas, who stayed back in India, in West Bengal, units of the Calcutta Armed Police and nearly one thousand ex-servicemen of the Pakistan Army transferred here. In 1965, they were commanded by Brigadier Torgul, whose name sticks to my memory because it was the first exotic name from the north-west that I had encountered.

Largely as a reaction to facing the organised covert operations of the Pakistan Army in Operation Gibraltar, very well recorded in Pakistani accounts, a senior officer with experience of armed operations was pulled out of the Madhya Pradesh and asked to organise a border guard, that became the Border Security Force. This force was raised with 25 battalions in December 1965, and had four or five battalions in the east, and was still trying to find its feet over the next two to three years. By 1968, when they had settled down, these formations, not exceeding 3,000 in the east, were faced by a tough, well-armed EPR with 10,000 people in it.

Whether this force could organise terrorism under the noses of the well-armed and well-equipped and officered by the Regular Army EPR is for you to judge. But since you don't know the facts, and will not take the trouble of taking my laconic statements at face value but ascribe them to an ego problem, it is difficult for you to accept that you are mistaken.

Things were worse on the political front.

We had the political turmoil of Shastri's tragic death at Tashkent, and the succession problem. Indira Gandhi was elected Prime Minister by the Congress Legislative Party in Parliament, but power lay with a set of powerful, conservative leaders who despised her and thought of her as a figurehead who would allow them to govern just as they pleased. This was clearly an untenable situation; over 1968 and early 1969, Indira Gandhi challenged the old guard of the Congress, put up her own candidate for president . Mr. V. V. Giri won the elections in 1969, and became President. Indira Gandhi then set about consolidating her grip on the party, and on the administration, and was completely caught up in those political affairs. Even in 1971, events in East Pakistan, as it then was, came as a shock to the entire political establishment, and for several months, the Indian response was confused and undecided. None of the politicians had any clue about the possibilities of organising terrorism in the east.

That leaves one factor to be dealt with, the intelligence agencies.

Following the debacle in 1962, it was already clear that the Intelligence Bureau would not be capable of handling extra-territorial intelligence gathering. in 1968, a policeman named Kao was asked to build such an organisation, and he was appointed to the Cabinet Secretariat. There was no constitutional provision for such an agency other than as an arm of the bureaucracy. If you have read any of the books published by former senior officers of the intelligence agencies, you will have known that the IB spent most of its time in Kashmir, and RAW spent most of its time in monitoring the Pakistan Army. These are on record. Not one person, not one source, within or outside the government, has ever even suggested that there was an eastern initiative. RAW was setting up, selecting officers for its cadre positions and recruiting the rank and file. RAW was completely in set up mode through 1969, 1970 and most of 1971. They had no time fiddling around building terrorist organisations in the east.

Finally, the role of Mujib and the Awami League. That is something that did not amount to building a terrorist organisation, and that is something for which India, and Indian intelligence agencies, or security forces, or the Indian military cannot be blamed.

When I speak about a subject, you may be sure that I do that with a thorough awareness of the facts, both public and private. It is disappointing that you chose to consider my brief remark as a knee-jerk reaction and to use foul language about a body of knowledge acquired over a lifetime of service. On these matters that I have described above, I challenge anyone to contradict me on any fact.

I believe you owe me an apology.


You should find out first what the facts are and how faithfully I present them.
Wish I had a nickel for everytime I heard the Indians justifying their interference in Pakistan's internal affairs in 1971 like that. Mods can we get an ultra BS rating button??
 
.
uhm the range of the HQ9 is 300km buddy, not 70km. and yes, AD waited and rightly so given that the missile was flying on the same altitude and route of civilian air. I would've done the same...so there goes your claim of the missile falling right before getting into the range of the batteries, just laughable.
your claim was that intruder missile was downed by our AD.. you have remained unbale to substantiate that claim till now.
 
.
Baba USA confirms it was a mistakenly fired …. State department spokesman skiped 2nd question on this issue ….
Yes the same USA that is still looking for WMD in Iraq.
When India tested it's Nuclear weapons on 11 May 1998, Pakistan waited for 17 days to observe World's reaction before testing it's own devices.....let's wait and see until the OIC meeting, the Pakistan day celebrations and the PDM circus is over.
 
. .
..............

We don't have a comment beyond what India has said: US State Dept

  • Spokesperson Ned Price issues statement on the missile incident in Mian Channu
BR


623034b605f28.jpg



The US has said that it does not have a comment beyond what India has said regarding an incident that took place last week when the neighbouring country “accidentally” fired a supersonic nuclear-capable missile into Pakistan because of a “technical issue”.

During a weekly press briefing, State Department spokesperson Ned Price was asked to comment on the incident, to which Islamabad warned New Delhi “of unpleasant consequences”.

“We have no indication, as you also heard from our Indian partners, that this incident was anything other than an accident.

“We refer you, of course, to the Indian Ministry of Defense for any follow-up. They issued a statement on March 9 to explain precisely what had happened. We don’t have a comment beyond that.”

His statement comes after India said on Friday it accidentally fired a missile into Pakistan due to a “technical malfunction” during routine maintenance.

“On 9 March 2022, in the course of a routine maintenance, a technical malfunction led to the accidental firing of a missile,” the government said in a statement.

.......
 
.
your claim was that intruder missile was downed by our AD.. you have remained unbale to substantiate that claim till now.
the pictures of the brahmos wreck AND size of the crater make it very obvious. if you choose to ignore the fact that crater isn't deep enough to look like one made by an object traveling at speeds of over mach 3 then that's your problem, not mine.
 
. .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom