What's new

India’s Balakot Story A facade - BS Dhanoa reiterates debunked Indian Claims

So many self contradicting statements in this interview which make it look like a satire than an interview of a Professional who had served in one of defence organization of his country for 30-35 years, just as an example of his 'innocence'
It was according to plan because at that time the terrorists were still in bed; yet to rise for the fajr namaaz at 4am.
on the one hand he is claim that he had exact intelligence about people who were residing in certain section of different buildings but highly professional intelligence agencies failed to tell them in the month of February Namaz-e-Fajar is not offered at 4:00 O'clock in the morning .... this thing appear bad on his basic IQ and shows that he does not even know timing of the Sun rise in the month of February but as Air Chief was a person who was the incharge Air force which carried Night Raid again the enemy state

BTW as I read and decoded this interview it appears to me that Balakot is used in this interview as 'Faced' and main objective of the interview is to share the political burden of fallout of Balakot operation and to clear the name of Modi from his earlier Idiotic Narrative in which he tried to take all the credit for the action in Balakot in an interview in which purpose his "Famous Cloud Cover" theory, Following parts clear this objective.
After Pulwama, for the first time, all three services told the political leadership that should it escalate, we were ready. That is why the Modi government gave the go-ahead.
Admiral Sunil Lanba, as chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, made it clear that should it escalate, all should be ready for an all-out war.
Readers can listen the relevant part of the interview of Modi here in which he took all the credit to himself and tried to use it as political stunt against his political opponents.

All can clear see that earlier in media Balakot action was sold as exemplary display of Modi's Strong and Courageous Leadership, who is capable to teach lesson to Pakistan, but now it seems the effort is to float the idea that it was INSTITUTIONAL decision not the personal initiative, reference of Admiral Sunil Lamba and all 3 Services Chief indicate this.

it seems the Second objective is to make a public narrative for more Rafale with particular reference of 27th Feb situation.
 
Last edited:
fine institute like Indian airforce.

All of India has become a RSS fundamentalist entity. There is no other way to look at it. Over 99% of Indian Hindu support this new theocratic state.

Indian armed forces have been also taken over.

The world worried about Muslim fundamental getting their hands on the Pakistani nuclear bomb. Which never happened. ... Instead, it is the Indian nuclear bomb that has fallen into the hands of the Hindu crazed fundamentalist.
 
unfortunately this is written to muddy the waters with their narrative and nothing more. why is this retired or rather told to get lost ex serviceman still gassing? This is clearly an attempt to keep itself above board by any means which will involve making up fiction.
 
Pakistan’s version on F-16 a facade, says former IAF chief BS Dhanoa

Close to one year after the Balakot air strike, Dhanoa talks about the details of the operation, what it took to plan and execute, what it means for India’s future military equation with Pakistan, and the capabilities of the Rafale jets.

Updated: Feb 11, 2020 15:11 IST
By Shishir Gupta, Hindustan Times New Delhi


Former Chief of the Indian Air Force, Air Chief Marshal (retd) BS Dhanoa, spoke to Hindustan Times close to one year after the Balakot air strike about the details of the operation, what it took to plan and execute, what it means for India’s future military equation with Pakistan, and the capabilities of the Rafale jets. Edited excerpts:

Pakistan has tried to project the Balakot operation as a military and diplomatic victory — the Imran Khan government says it brought down an Indian Air Force jet and captured the pilot. It says it brought focus on Kashmir and projected India as a global threat. What do you say about these claims?

Military victory is measured on the scale of whether you have achieved the stated political objective or not. Our objective in Balakot was to hit the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terrorist group as a retaliation for February 14 Pulwama suicide attack on a CRPF convoy. It so happened that the JeM camp was inside Pakistan in Manshera and not in Occupied Kashmir. We hit the camp at Jaba top in Balakot.

The fact that we hit the camp is very clear, as is evident from the open-source satellite imagery. Then there is circumstantial evidence as they (Pakistan) isolated the place. If it was just a seminary, and not a military establishment, there was no need to isolate the place. They did not allow anyone to go near the site for 40 days, and then took a guided tour to a mosque in the facility, which Indian bombs had deliberately avoided. The fact is that the terror camp was hit with a lot of casualties, which the Pakistanis were hiding. So the military victory statement is false.

Secondly, Pakistan’s military response the day after Balakot was against Indian military targets, though we had hit a non-military target at Markaz Syed Ahmad Shaheed in Balakot. The Pakistanis missed their military targets south of Pir Panjal because of the calibre of weapons used. When you do signalling, either you drop a very small weapon so that nobody dies unintentionally, or you drop it outside the safety distance of the target.



Most of these bombs have fallen 500 metres to 1.5km of the targets. It is evident from this that these were not intended misses but poor targeting. Most probably, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) must have used commercial digital elevation models. The type of weapons they have used is first-generation standoff ammunition, whereas we used a third-generation standoff weapon. So that is how you judge a military victory.

A classic example is the World War I Jutland naval battle, in which the British lost more ships and sailors but prevented the Germans from achieving their military objective. So you don’t measure by bean counting. We lost a MiG-21, but Pakistan lost an F-16 that we cannot prove. Technically we have information beyond doubt that two aircraft fell in that area on February 27, 2019. One aircraft belongs to us, second aircraft we are saying is an F-16 on basis of evidence from our electronic sensors. Abhinandan Varthaman was flying a MiG-21 Bison that does not have non-cooperative target recognition capability which the Su-30 or other modern aircraft have got. So he on his own cannot confirm that he shot down an F-16. Our other sensors — AWACS and radars — have all confirmed that the aircraft that went down in that sector appears to be a Pakistan F-16 fighter.

Is the aircraft that went down the one IAF identified as Red Mike?

No, the one we identified we showed to the media too. The Pakistanis wanted us to show the full video. The fact is, if we show you the full video, do you want us to expose our technical capability, given there are gaps due to mountainous terrain, or our ability to intercept their secure communication — all this just to win brownie points in the media?

Let me give you an example, the same thing happened on September 7, 1965, the day IAF’s Mystere aircraft raided Sargodha airbase in hinterland Pakistan and Squadron Leader AB Devayya got a Mahavir Chakra many years later. In that raid, IAF lost a Mystere aircraft that fell on their side, and we did not claim the kill that time. But PAF lost a vastly superior Starfighter. Many years later, Pakistan acknowledged the fact.

Pakistan says that they are for global peace and India is a threat to it?

If they are for global peace, why are they sponsoring terrorism on our soil? They did not even keep their air force in the loop, or else they would have put terminal defences outside the Balakot camp. After all, their air force has an approximate idea of what kind of weapons we own. And if they know our standoff weapon capability, they would have put terminal defences at Balakot. Why was the site devoid of any defence? Why did the entire air defence of Pakistan react to the IAF’s feint towards Bhawalpur (headquarters of JeM). I don’t think PAF was even aware that Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was running a terrorist training camp at Balakot.

So was it purely a Pakistan Army-ISI operation, and the Air Force was kept out?

Otherwise they would have defended it with terminal weapons. PAF are capable of deploying terminal weapons — they would have deployed; I would have deployed. They did not deploy, as they were out of loop.

About the aircraft going down in that sector, PAF launched a combat search-and-rescue mission, which is always launched to pick up your own pilot as you know the location. It is not done to pick up a prisoner of war who will never be static, and for that you give this task to the ground troops. They have lost a combat aircraft and we have recordings of it.

Do you think it was a Jordanian F-16 A/B that went down on February 27?

The evidence from the electronic intelligence is that it was an F-16. The Pakistanis have tied themselves in knots over the whole issue. Where was the need for the DG ISPR to say that we have not used an F-16. After all, what was there to hide? It is because Pakistan were building a story, a facade. Why say one pilot was captured, and two more were in the area? It must be a two seater F-16.

Then they said that one was being located and other had reached military hospital. And then suddenly, in the night, the hospital guy vanishes! Our claim is based on our electronic signatures, not what Pakistan is saying. The kill is attributed to Abhinandan as there was nobody else in that sector.


What was Pakistan’s game plan the next day when they tried to retaliate? Was PAF intending to attack?

Yes. PAF had a clear-cut intent to attack, but we thwarted the move. We were prepared for retaliation. We expected them to attack. IAF along with the navy and the army were prepared for an all-out escalation. After Pulwama, for the first time, all three services told the political leadership that should it escalate, we were ready. That is why the Modi government gave the go-ahead. We did not even bat an eyelid. For Pakistan alone, we are always ready.

Our air defence responded well. We used a lot of tricks but I can’t tell you those. They launched stand-off weapons. Their plan was to hit some of our forward installations. Many of them are well with the range of their own artillery. But they wanted to prove a point. They had a package of 24-26 aircraft; they had the initiative, the time and the place. But we were prepared with two upgraded Mirage 2000s, two SU-30 MKIs and six Bisons got airborne from Srinagar. If we had signed the contract in time, it would have been six Rafales.

And six Rafales would have added a totally different dimension?
Totally. All the PAF aircraft, including F-16s would have been scurrying for cover against Rafales.

You talk a lot about the Rafale. Can you explain the capabilities of the Rafale fighter in such situations?

In beyond visual range combat, it is basically your situational awareness which wins you the day. Your ability to look first and shoot first. This is where Rafale comes first.

If you were to compare Rafale with F-16 or F-18 fighters…

We evaluated the two US-made fighters and rejected them. Only Rafale and Eurofighter met the operational requirements. The American aircraft are good, but those are the F-35 and F-22.

Was the only action south of Pir Panjal or at other places along the Indo-Pak border?

They had done other feints and decoys all along to ensure that we don’t push all our forces to the north. The Pakistanis did not come after February 27. Remember the message in Balakot was to the JeM terror group. Did they get the message? Answer is yes, as till the Indian general elections, there was not a single terrorist attack. They knew that all the three services were forwardly deployed.

This was the first time that the Indian Air Force attacked Pakistan. It was always the Indian Army that was preferred in the past. Did you really come out saying that IAF will go in first?

That meeting is classified, so I am not telling you. Not only me. Air Chief Marshal AY Tipnis (Kargil), Air Chief Marshal Krishnaswamy (2001) and Air Chief Marshal Fali Major (2008) had also said that they were ready. IAF has always been ready.

When did you focus on Balakot?

When the target was given to me by the Indian intelligence agencies. We got exceptional, pinpointed, actionable intelligence, including who is staying in which building. Targets were chosen after that. We don’t hit kids only learning to recite the holy Quran.

How closely guarded was the information on Balakot attack?

Admiral Sunil Lanba, as chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, made it clear that should it escalate, all should be ready for an all-out war. Which service would go in first was decided on the basis of the chosen target. Balakot had to be the air force. If it was a kill-all destroy-all mission, we would have used supersonic low level Brahmos missile, to which Pakistan did not have any answer.

Was PM Modi in know of the operation from start to end?

Ask the National Security Adviser (NSA) Ajit Doval; it is above my pay grade. All I know is that the hit took place at 3.30am IST at Balakot. It was according to plan because at that time the terrorists were still in bed; yet to rise for the fajr namaaz at 4am. I was monitoring from my home using secure communications, the Vice-Chief and Western Air Commander were in operations room. I briefed the defence minister, the NSA, and the two chiefs after the attack.

Were you sure that the target was hit?

The weather was the main criterion. It could have been an abort due to the weather. The decision was with Western Air Command. If this plan was aborted, we would have launched other weapons. We hit the target with five stand-off weapons. The ‘target hit’ information was delayed as weapons for video recording the kill failed, and the satellite pass at 8.30am could not pick up much due to clouds. The first confirmation came through synthetic aperture camera, showing penetration in the roof of Balakot buildings. We hit three buildings and left one deliberately. The weapon is designed in such a way that building survives but the occupants don’t.

Latest intelligence reveals that Pakistan has reactivated the Balakot site. Will things change on the terror front?

With the induction of the S-400 missile system and the Rafales, we will be in position to effect a behavioural change within the Pakistan establishment. If we had these two platforms or only Rafale with us on February 27, and we had shot down four or five of their aircrafts, the behavioural change would have taken place immediately.

On August 2, 2002, after the Machchil Sector attack by IAF under Krishnaswamy, the Pakistanis did not respond as they were technically not capable. Their air force did not even try to bomb our positions as we took out Pakistan Army post intruding into our side of the Line of Control (LoC).

What if Pakistani forces do not learn from Balakot, and try a Pulwama-like attack again?

I think the government will hit them again. This time harder, and take out the buildings also so that there is no doubt in anyone’s mind.

https://m.hindustantimes.com/india-...FvD5qvl95L_amp.html?__twitter_impression=true
Sach aik baar bola jaata hai aor jhoot ko sabit karnay k liya 100 baar bolna padta hai...

He trying hard to win Modi's favor to get some political position but Modi knows how much humiliated Doana Indian Govt....
 
Pakistan’s version on F-16 a facade, says former IAF chief BS Dhanoa

Close to one year after the Balakot air strike, Dhanoa talks about the details of the operation, what it took to plan and execute, what it means for India’s future military equation with Pakistan, and the capabilities of the Rafale jets.

Updated: Feb 11, 2020 15:11 IST
By Shishir Gupta, Hindustan Times New Delhi


Former Chief of the Indian Air Force, Air Chief Marshal (retd) BS Dhanoa, spoke to Hindustan Times close to one year after the Balakot air strike about the details of the operation, what it took to plan and execute, what it means for India’s future military equation with Pakistan, and the capabilities of the Rafale jets. Edited excerpts:

Pakistan has tried to project the Balakot operation as a military and diplomatic victory — the Imran Khan government says it brought down an Indian Air Force jet and captured the pilot. It says it brought focus on Kashmir and projected India as a global threat. What do you say about these claims?

Military victory is measured on the scale of whether you have achieved the stated political objective or not. Our objective in Balakot was to hit the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terrorist group as a retaliation for February 14 Pulwama suicide attack on a CRPF convoy. It so happened that the JeM camp was inside Pakistan in Manshera and not in Occupied Kashmir. We hit the camp at Jaba top in Balakot.

The fact that we hit the camp is very clear, as is evident from the open-source satellite imagery. Then there is circumstantial evidence as they (Pakistan) isolated the place. If it was just a seminary, and not a military establishment, there was no need to isolate the place. They did not allow anyone to go near the site for 40 days, and then took a guided tour to a mosque in the facility, which Indian bombs had deliberately avoided. The fact is that the terror camp was hit with a lot of casualties, which the Pakistanis were hiding. So the military victory statement is false.

Secondly, Pakistan’s military response the day after Balakot was against Indian military targets, though we had hit a non-military target at Markaz Syed Ahmad Shaheed in Balakot. The Pakistanis missed their military targets south of Pir Panjal because of the calibre of weapons used. When you do signalling, either you drop a very small weapon so that nobody dies unintentionally, or you drop it outside the safety distance of the target.



Most of these bombs have fallen 500 metres to 1.5km of the targets. It is evident from this that these were not intended misses but poor targeting. Most probably, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) must have used commercial digital elevation models. The type of weapons they have used is first-generation standoff ammunition, whereas we used a third-generation standoff weapon. So that is how you judge a military victory.

A classic example is the World War I Jutland naval battle, in which the British lost more ships and sailors but prevented the Germans from achieving their military objective. So you don’t measure by bean counting. We lost a MiG-21, but Pakistan lost an F-16 that we cannot prove. Technically we have information beyond doubt that two aircraft fell in that area on February 27, 2019. One aircraft belongs to us, second aircraft we are saying is an F-16 on basis of evidence from our electronic sensors. Abhinandan Varthaman was flying a MiG-21 Bison that does not have non-cooperative target recognition capability which the Su-30 or other modern aircraft have got. So he on his own cannot confirm that he shot down an F-16. Our other sensors — AWACS and radars — have all confirmed that the aircraft that went down in that sector appears to be a Pakistan F-16 fighter.

Is the aircraft that went down the one IAF identified as Red Mike?

No, the one we identified we showed to the media too. The Pakistanis wanted us to show the full video. The fact is, if we show you the full video, do you want us to expose our technical capability, given there are gaps due to mountainous terrain, or our ability to intercept their secure communication — all this just to win brownie points in the media?

Let me give you an example, the same thing happened on September 7, 1965, the day IAF’s Mystere aircraft raided Sargodha airbase in hinterland Pakistan and Squadron Leader AB Devayya got a Mahavir Chakra many years later. In that raid, IAF lost a Mystere aircraft that fell on their side, and we did not claim the kill that time. But PAF lost a vastly superior Starfighter. Many years later, Pakistan acknowledged the fact.

Pakistan says that they are for global peace and India is a threat to it?

If they are for global peace, why are they sponsoring terrorism on our soil? They did not even keep their air force in the loop, or else they would have put terminal defences outside the Balakot camp. After all, their air force has an approximate idea of what kind of weapons we own. And if they know our standoff weapon capability, they would have put terminal defences at Balakot. Why was the site devoid of any defence? Why did the entire air defence of Pakistan react to the IAF’s feint towards Bhawalpur (headquarters of JeM). I don’t think PAF was even aware that Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was running a terrorist training camp at Balakot.

So was it purely a Pakistan Army-ISI operation, and the Air Force was kept out?

Otherwise they would have defended it with terminal weapons. PAF are capable of deploying terminal weapons — they would have deployed; I would have deployed. They did not deploy, as they were out of loop.

About the aircraft going down in that sector, PAF launched a combat search-and-rescue mission, which is always launched to pick up your own pilot as you know the location. It is not done to pick up a prisoner of war who will never be static, and for that you give this task to the ground troops. They have lost a combat aircraft and we have recordings of it.

Do you think it was a Jordanian F-16 A/B that went down on February 27?

The evidence from the electronic intelligence is that it was an F-16. The Pakistanis have tied themselves in knots over the whole issue. Where was the need for the DG ISPR to say that we have not used an F-16. After all, what was there to hide? It is because Pakistan were building a story, a facade. Why say one pilot was captured, and two more were in the area? It must be a two seater F-16.

Then they said that one was being located and other had reached military hospital. And then suddenly, in the night, the hospital guy vanishes! Our claim is based on our electronic signatures, not what Pakistan is saying. The kill is attributed to Abhinandan as there was nobody else in that sector.


What was Pakistan’s game plan the next day when they tried to retaliate? Was PAF intending to attack?

Yes. PAF had a clear-cut intent to attack, but we thwarted the move. We were prepared for retaliation. We expected them to attack. IAF along with the navy and the army were prepared for an all-out escalation. After Pulwama, for the first time, all three services told the political leadership that should it escalate, we were ready. That is why the Modi government gave the go-ahead. We did not even bat an eyelid. For Pakistan alone, we are always ready.

Our air defence responded well. We used a lot of tricks but I can’t tell you those. They launched stand-off weapons. Their plan was to hit some of our forward installations. Many of them are well with the range of their own artillery. But they wanted to prove a point. They had a package of 24-26 aircraft; they had the initiative, the time and the place. But we were prepared with two upgraded Mirage 2000s, two SU-30 MKIs and six Bisons got airborne from Srinagar. If we had signed the contract in time, it would have been six Rafales.

And six Rafales would have added a totally different dimension?
Totally. All the PAF aircraft, including F-16s would have been scurrying for cover against Rafales.

You talk a lot about the Rafale. Can you explain the capabilities of the Rafale fighter in such situations?

In beyond visual range combat, it is basically your situational awareness which wins you the day. Your ability to look first and shoot first. This is where Rafale comes first.

If you were to compare Rafale with F-16 or F-18 fighters…

We evaluated the two US-made fighters and rejected them. Only Rafale and Eurofighter met the operational requirements. The American aircraft are good, but those are the F-35 and F-22.

Was the only action south of Pir Panjal or at other places along the Indo-Pak border?

They had done other feints and decoys all along to ensure that we don’t push all our forces to the north. The Pakistanis did not come after February 27. Remember the message in Balakot was to the JeM terror group. Did they get the message? Answer is yes, as till the Indian general elections, there was not a single terrorist attack. They knew that all the three services were forwardly deployed.

This was the first time that the Indian Air Force attacked Pakistan. It was always the Indian Army that was preferred in the past. Did you really come out saying that IAF will go in first?

That meeting is classified, so I am not telling you. Not only me. Air Chief Marshal AY Tipnis (Kargil), Air Chief Marshal Krishnaswamy (2001) and Air Chief Marshal Fali Major (2008) had also said that they were ready. IAF has always been ready.

When did you focus on Balakot?

When the target was given to me by the Indian intelligence agencies. We got exceptional, pinpointed, actionable intelligence, including who is staying in which building. Targets were chosen after that. We don’t hit kids only learning to recite the holy Quran.

How closely guarded was the information on Balakot attack?

Admiral Sunil Lanba, as chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, made it clear that should it escalate, all should be ready for an all-out war. Which service would go in first was decided on the basis of the chosen target. Balakot had to be the air force. If it was a kill-all destroy-all mission, we would have used supersonic low level Brahmos missile, to which Pakistan did not have any answer.

Was PM Modi in know of the operation from start to end?

Ask the National Security Adviser (NSA) Ajit Doval; it is above my pay grade. All I know is that the hit took place at 3.30am IST at Balakot. It was according to plan because at that time the terrorists were still in bed; yet to rise for the fajr namaaz at 4am. I was monitoring from my home using secure communications, the Vice-Chief and Western Air Commander were in operations room. I briefed the defence minister, the NSA, and the two chiefs after the attack.

Were you sure that the target was hit?

The weather was the main criterion. It could have been an abort due to the weather. The decision was with Western Air Command. If this plan was aborted, we would have launched other weapons. We hit the target with five stand-off weapons. The ‘target hit’ information was delayed as weapons for video recording the kill failed, and the satellite pass at 8.30am could not pick up much due to clouds. The first confirmation came through synthetic aperture camera, showing penetration in the roof of Balakot buildings. We hit three buildings and left one deliberately. The weapon is designed in such a way that building survives but the occupants don’t.

Latest intelligence reveals that Pakistan has reactivated the Balakot site. Will things change on the terror front?

With the induction of the S-400 missile system and the Rafales, we will be in position to effect a behavioural change within the Pakistan establishment. If we had these two platforms or only Rafale with us on February 27, and we had shot down four or five of their aircrafts, the behavioural change would have taken place immediately.

On August 2, 2002, after the Machchil Sector attack by IAF under Krishnaswamy, the Pakistanis did not respond as they were technically not capable. Their air force did not even try to bomb our positions as we took out Pakistan Army post intruding into our side of the Line of Control (LoC).

What if Pakistani forces do not learn from Balakot, and try a Pulwama-like attack again?

I think the government will hit them again. This time harder, and take out the buildings also so that there is no doubt in anyone’s mind.

https://m.hindustantimes.com/india-...FvD5qvl95L_amp.html?__twitter_impression=true
FYI: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/no-evidence-of-the-loss-of-an-f-16.618802/
 
Indira Gandhi was right---Pakistani generals are cowards---.

What did you think would have happened if indian generals were taken out ? Don't you think that would have been a bad choice given the state of numerical and technological superiority of enemies ?
 
I read the first few paragraphs.

I have a simple question. If PAF is so bad why did the Indian airforce not take off on the 27th feb and give us good hiding?
No wonder sikhs have no nation and are slaves of hindus
 
Pakistan’s version on F-16 a facade, says former IAF chief BS Dhanoa

Close to one year after the Balakot air strike, Dhanoa talks about the details of the operation, what it took to plan and execute, what it means for India’s future military equation with Pakistan, and the capabilities of the Rafale jets.

Updated: Feb 11, 2020 15:11 IST
By Shishir Gupta, Hindustan Times New Delhi


Former Chief of the Indian Air Force, Air Chief Marshal (retd) BS Dhanoa, spoke to Hindustan Times close to one year after the Balakot air strike about the details of the operation, what it took to plan and execute, what it means for India’s future military equation with Pakistan, and the capabilities of the Rafale jets. Edited excerpts:

Pakistan has tried to project the Balakot operation as a military and diplomatic victory — the Imran Khan government says it brought down an Indian Air Force jet and captured the pilot. It says it brought focus on Kashmir and projected India as a global threat. What do you say about these claims?

Military victory is measured on the scale of whether you have achieved the stated political objective or not. Our objective in Balakot was to hit the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terrorist group as a retaliation for February 14 Pulwama suicide attack on a CRPF convoy. It so happened that the JeM camp was inside Pakistan in Manshera and not in Occupied Kashmir. We hit the camp at Jaba top in Balakot.

The fact that we hit the camp is very clear, as is evident from the open-source satellite imagery. Then there is circumstantial evidence as they (Pakistan) isolated the place. If it was just a seminary, and not a military establishment, there was no need to isolate the place. They did not allow anyone to go near the site for 40 days, and then took a guided tour to a mosque in the facility, which Indian bombs had deliberately avoided. The fact is that the terror camp was hit with a lot of casualties, which the Pakistanis were hiding. So the military victory statement is false.

Secondly, Pakistan’s military response the day after Balakot was against Indian military targets, though we had hit a non-military target at Markaz Syed Ahmad Shaheed in Balakot. The Pakistanis missed their military targets south of Pir Panjal because of the calibre of weapons used. When you do signalling, either you drop a very small weapon so that nobody dies unintentionally, or you drop it outside the safety distance of the target.



Most of these bombs have fallen 500 metres to 1.5km of the targets. It is evident from this that these were not intended misses but poor targeting. Most probably, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) must have used commercial digital elevation models. The type of weapons they have used is first-generation standoff ammunition, whereas we used a third-generation standoff weapon. So that is how you judge a military victory.

A classic example is the World War I Jutland naval battle, in which the British lost more ships and sailors but prevented the Germans from achieving their military objective. So you don’t measure by bean counting. We lost a MiG-21, but Pakistan lost an F-16 that we cannot prove. Technically we have information beyond doubt that two aircraft fell in that area on February 27, 2019. One aircraft belongs to us, second aircraft we are saying is an F-16 on basis of evidence from our electronic sensors. Abhinandan Varthaman was flying a MiG-21 Bison that does not have non-cooperative target recognition capability which the Su-30 or other modern aircraft have got. So he on his own cannot confirm that he shot down an F-16. Our other sensors — AWACS and radars — have all confirmed that the aircraft that went down in that sector appears to be a Pakistan F-16 fighter.

Is the aircraft that went down the one IAF identified as Red Mike?

No, the one we identified we showed to the media too. The Pakistanis wanted us to show the full video. The fact is, if we show you the full video, do you want us to expose our technical capability, given there are gaps due to mountainous terrain, or our ability to intercept their secure communication — all this just to win brownie points in the media?

Let me give you an example, the same thing happened on September 7, 1965, the day IAF’s Mystere aircraft raided Sargodha airbase in hinterland Pakistan and Squadron Leader AB Devayya got a Mahavir Chakra many years later. In that raid, IAF lost a Mystere aircraft that fell on their side, and we did not claim the kill that time. But PAF lost a vastly superior Starfighter. Many years later, Pakistan acknowledged the fact.

Pakistan says that they are for global peace and India is a threat to it?

If they are for global peace, why are they sponsoring terrorism on our soil? They did not even keep their air force in the loop, or else they would have put terminal defences outside the Balakot camp. After all, their air force has an approximate idea of what kind of weapons we own. And if they know our standoff weapon capability, they would have put terminal defences at Balakot. Why was the site devoid of any defence? Why did the entire air defence of Pakistan react to the IAF’s feint towards Bhawalpur (headquarters of JeM). I don’t think PAF was even aware that Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was running a terrorist training camp at Balakot.

So was it purely a Pakistan Army-ISI operation, and the Air Force was kept out?

Otherwise they would have defended it with terminal weapons. PAF are capable of deploying terminal weapons — they would have deployed; I would have deployed. They did not deploy, as they were out of loop.

About the aircraft going down in that sector, PAF launched a combat search-and-rescue mission, which is always launched to pick up your own pilot as you know the location. It is not done to pick up a prisoner of war who will never be static, and for that you give this task to the ground troops. They have lost a combat aircraft and we have recordings of it.

Do you think it was a Jordanian F-16 A/B that went down on February 27?

The evidence from the electronic intelligence is that it was an F-16. The Pakistanis have tied themselves in knots over the whole issue. Where was the need for the DG ISPR to say that we have not used an F-16. After all, what was there to hide? It is because Pakistan were building a story, a facade. Why say one pilot was captured, and two more were in the area? It must be a two seater F-16.

Then they said that one was being located and other had reached military hospital. And then suddenly, in the night, the hospital guy vanishes! Our claim is based on our electronic signatures, not what Pakistan is saying. The kill is attributed to Abhinandan as there was nobody else in that sector.


What was Pakistan’s game plan the next day when they tried to retaliate? Was PAF intending to attack?

Yes. PAF had a clear-cut intent to attack, but we thwarted the move. We were prepared for retaliation. We expected them to attack. IAF along with the navy and the army were prepared for an all-out escalation. After Pulwama, for the first time, all three services told the political leadership that should it escalate, we were ready. That is why the Modi government gave the go-ahead. We did not even bat an eyelid. For Pakistan alone, we are always ready.

Our air defence responded well. We used a lot of tricks but I can’t tell you those. They launched stand-off weapons. Their plan was to hit some of our forward installations. Many of them are well with the range of their own artillery. But they wanted to prove a point. They had a package of 24-26 aircraft; they had the initiative, the time and the place. But we were prepared with two upgraded Mirage 2000s, two SU-30 MKIs and six Bisons got airborne from Srinagar. If we had signed the contract in time, it would have been six Rafales.

And six Rafales would have added a totally different dimension?
Totally. All the PAF aircraft, including F-16s would have been scurrying for cover against Rafales.

You talk a lot about the Rafale. Can you explain the capabilities of the Rafale fighter in such situations?

In beyond visual range combat, it is basically your situational awareness which wins you the day. Your ability to look first and shoot first. This is where Rafale comes first.

If you were to compare Rafale with F-16 or F-18 fighters…

We evaluated the two US-made fighters and rejected them. Only Rafale and Eurofighter met the operational requirements. The American aircraft are good, but those are the F-35 and F-22.

Was the only action south of Pir Panjal or at other places along the Indo-Pak border?

They had done other feints and decoys all along to ensure that we don’t push all our forces to the north. The Pakistanis did not come after February 27. Remember the message in Balakot was to the JeM terror group. Did they get the message? Answer is yes, as till the Indian general elections, there was not a single terrorist attack. They knew that all the three services were forwardly deployed.

This was the first time that the Indian Air Force attacked Pakistan. It was always the Indian Army that was preferred in the past. Did you really come out saying that IAF will go in first?

That meeting is classified, so I am not telling you. Not only me. Air Chief Marshal AY Tipnis (Kargil), Air Chief Marshal Krishnaswamy (2001) and Air Chief Marshal Fali Major (2008) had also said that they were ready. IAF has always been ready.

When did you focus on Balakot?

When the target was given to me by the Indian intelligence agencies. We got exceptional, pinpointed, actionable intelligence, including who is staying in which building. Targets were chosen after that. We don’t hit kids only learning to recite the holy Quran.

How closely guarded was the information on Balakot attack?

Admiral Sunil Lanba, as chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, made it clear that should it escalate, all should be ready for an all-out war. Which service would go in first was decided on the basis of the chosen target. Balakot had to be the air force. If it was a kill-all destroy-all mission, we would have used supersonic low level Brahmos missile, to which Pakistan did not have any answer.

Was PM Modi in know of the operation from start to end?

Ask the National Security Adviser (NSA) Ajit Doval; it is above my pay grade. All I know is that the hit took place at 3.30am IST at Balakot. It was according to plan because at that time the terrorists were still in bed; yet to rise for the fajr namaaz at 4am. I was monitoring from my home using secure communications, the Vice-Chief and Western Air Commander were in operations room. I briefed the defence minister, the NSA, and the two chiefs after the attack.

Were you sure that the target was hit?

The weather was the main criterion. It could have been an abort due to the weather. The decision was with Western Air Command. If this plan was aborted, we would have launched other weapons. We hit the target with five stand-off weapons. The ‘target hit’ information was delayed as weapons for video recording the kill failed, and the satellite pass at 8.30am could not pick up much due to clouds. The first confirmation came through synthetic aperture camera, showing penetration in the roof of Balakot buildings. We hit three buildings and left one deliberately. The weapon is designed in such a way that building survives but the occupants don’t.

Latest intelligence reveals that Pakistan has reactivated the Balakot site. Will things change on the terror front?

With the induction of the S-400 missile system and the Rafales, we will be in position to effect a behavioural change within the Pakistan establishment. If we had these two platforms or only Rafale with us on February 27, and we had shot down four or five of their aircrafts, the behavioural change would have taken place immediately.

On August 2, 2002, after the Machchil Sector attack by IAF under Krishnaswamy, the Pakistanis did not respond as they were technically not capable. Their air force did not even try to bomb our positions as we took out Pakistan Army post intruding into our side of the Line of Control (LoC).

What if Pakistani forces do not learn from Balakot, and try a Pulwama-like attack again?

I think the government will hit them again. This time harder, and take out the buildings also so that there is no doubt in anyone’s mind.

https://m.hindustantimes.com/india-...FvD5qvl95L_amp.html?__twitter_impression=true

Yes, there is hope, Rafale is coming. The narrative we have been hearing since past 1 year.
 
Pakistan’s version on F-16 a facade, says former IAF chief BS Dhanoa

Close to one year after the Balakot air strike, Dhanoa talks about the details of the operation, what it took to plan and execute, what it means for India’s future military equation with Pakistan, and the capabilities of the Rafale jets.

Updated: Feb 11, 2020 15:11 IST
By Shishir Gupta, Hindustan Times New Delhi


Former Chief of the Indian Air Force, Air Chief Marshal (retd) BS Dhanoa, spoke to Hindustan Times close to one year after the Balakot air strike about the details of the operation, what it took to plan and execute, what it means for India’s future military equation with Pakistan, and the capabilities of the Rafale jets. Edited excerpts:

Pakistan has tried to project the Balakot operation as a military and diplomatic victory — the Imran Khan government says it brought down an Indian Air Force jet and captured the pilot. It says it brought focus on Kashmir and projected India as a global threat. What do you say about these claims?

Military victory is measured on the scale of whether you have achieved the stated political objective or not. Our objective in Balakot was to hit the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terrorist group as a retaliation for February 14 Pulwama suicide attack on a CRPF convoy. It so happened that the JeM camp was inside Pakistan in Manshera and not in Occupied Kashmir. We hit the camp at Jaba top in Balakot.

The fact that we hit the camp is very clear, as is evident from the open-source satellite imagery. Then there is circumstantial evidence as they (Pakistan) isolated the place. If it was just a seminary, and not a military establishment, there was no need to isolate the place. They did not allow anyone to go near the site for 40 days, and then took a guided tour to a mosque in the facility, which Indian bombs had deliberately avoided. The fact is that the terror camp was hit with a lot of casualties, which the Pakistanis were hiding. So the military victory statement is false.

Secondly, Pakistan’s military response the day after Balakot was against Indian military targets, though we had hit a non-military target at Markaz Syed Ahmad Shaheed in Balakot. The Pakistanis missed their military targets south of Pir Panjal because of the calibre of weapons used. When you do signalling, either you drop a very small weapon so that nobody dies unintentionally, or you drop it outside the safety distance of the target.



Most of these bombs have fallen 500 metres to 1.5km of the targets. It is evident from this that these were not intended misses but poor targeting. Most probably, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) must have used commercial digital elevation models. The type of weapons they have used is first-generation standoff ammunition, whereas we used a third-generation standoff weapon. So that is how you judge a military victory.

A classic example is the World War I Jutland naval battle, in which the British lost more ships and sailors but prevented the Germans from achieving their military objective. So you don’t measure by bean counting. We lost a MiG-21, but Pakistan lost an F-16 that we cannot prove. Technically we have information beyond doubt that two aircraft fell in that area on February 27, 2019. One aircraft belongs to us, second aircraft we are saying is an F-16 on basis of evidence from our electronic sensors. Abhinandan Varthaman was flying a MiG-21 Bison that does not have non-cooperative target recognition capability which the Su-30 or other modern aircraft have got. So he on his own cannot confirm that he shot down an F-16. Our other sensors — AWACS and radars — have all confirmed that the aircraft that went down in that sector appears to be a Pakistan F-16 fighter.

Is the aircraft that went down the one IAF identified as Red Mike?

No, the one we identified we showed to the media too. The Pakistanis wanted us to show the full video. The fact is, if we show you the full video, do you want us to expose our technical capability, given there are gaps due to mountainous terrain, or our ability to intercept their secure communication — all this just to win brownie points in the media?

Let me give you an example, the same thing happened on September 7, 1965, the day IAF’s Mystere aircraft raided Sargodha airbase in hinterland Pakistan and Squadron Leader AB Devayya got a Mahavir Chakra many years later. In that raid, IAF lost a Mystere aircraft that fell on their side, and we did not claim the kill that time. But PAF lost a vastly superior Starfighter. Many years later, Pakistan acknowledged the fact.

Pakistan says that they are for global peace and India is a threat to it?

If they are for global peace, why are they sponsoring terrorism on our soil? They did not even keep their air force in the loop, or else they would have put terminal defences outside the Balakot camp. After all, their air force has an approximate idea of what kind of weapons we own. And if they know our standoff weapon capability, they would have put terminal defences at Balakot. Why was the site devoid of any defence? Why did the entire air defence of Pakistan react to the IAF’s feint towards Bhawalpur (headquarters of JeM). I don’t think PAF was even aware that Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was running a terrorist training camp at Balakot.

So was it purely a Pakistan Army-ISI operation, and the Air Force was kept out?

Otherwise they would have defended it with terminal weapons. PAF are capable of deploying terminal weapons — they would have deployed; I would have deployed. They did not deploy, as they were out of loop.

About the aircraft going down in that sector, PAF launched a combat search-and-rescue mission, which is always launched to pick up your own pilot as you know the location. It is not done to pick up a prisoner of war who will never be static, and for that you give this task to the ground troops. They have lost a combat aircraft and we have recordings of it.

Do you think it was a Jordanian F-16 A/B that went down on February 27?

The evidence from the electronic intelligence is that it was an F-16. The Pakistanis have tied themselves in knots over the whole issue. Where was the need for the DG ISPR to say that we have not used an F-16. After all, what was there to hide? It is because Pakistan were building a story, a facade. Why say one pilot was captured, and two more were in the area? It must be a two seater F-16.

Then they said that one was being located and other had reached military hospital. And then suddenly, in the night, the hospital guy vanishes! Our claim is based on our electronic signatures, not what Pakistan is saying. The kill is attributed to Abhinandan as there was nobody else in that sector.


What was Pakistan’s game plan the next day when they tried to retaliate? Was PAF intending to attack?

Yes. PAF had a clear-cut intent to attack, but we thwarted the move. We were prepared for retaliation. We expected them to attack. IAF along with the navy and the army were prepared for an all-out escalation. After Pulwama, for the first time, all three services told the political leadership that should it escalate, we were ready. That is why the Modi government gave the go-ahead. We did not even bat an eyelid. For Pakistan alone, we are always ready.

Our air defence responded well. We used a lot of tricks but I can’t tell you those. They launched stand-off weapons. Their plan was to hit some of our forward installations. Many of them are well with the range of their own artillery. But they wanted to prove a point. They had a package of 24-26 aircraft; they had the initiative, the time and the place. But we were prepared with two upgraded Mirage 2000s, two SU-30 MKIs and six Bisons got airborne from Srinagar. If we had signed the contract in time, it would have been six Rafales.

And six Rafales would have added a totally different dimension?
Totally. All the PAF aircraft, including F-16s would have been scurrying for cover against Rafales.

You talk a lot about the Rafale. Can you explain the capabilities of the Rafale fighter in such situations?

In beyond visual range combat, it is basically your situational awareness which wins you the day. Your ability to look first and shoot first. This is where Rafale comes first.

If you were to compare Rafale with F-16 or F-18 fighters…

We evaluated the two US-made fighters and rejected them. Only Rafale and Eurofighter met the operational requirements. The American aircraft are good, but those are the F-35 and F-22.

Was the only action south of Pir Panjal or at other places along the Indo-Pak border?

They had done other feints and decoys all along to ensure that we don’t push all our forces to the north. The Pakistanis did not come after February 27. Remember the message in Balakot was to the JeM terror group. Did they get the message? Answer is yes, as till the Indian general elections, there was not a single terrorist attack. They knew that all the three services were forwardly deployed.

This was the first time that the Indian Air Force attacked Pakistan. It was always the Indian Army that was preferred in the past. Did you really come out saying that IAF will go in first?

That meeting is classified, so I am not telling you. Not only me. Air Chief Marshal AY Tipnis (Kargil), Air Chief Marshal Krishnaswamy (2001) and Air Chief Marshal Fali Major (2008) had also said that they were ready. IAF has always been ready.

When did you focus on Balakot?

When the target was given to me by the Indian intelligence agencies. We got exceptional, pinpointed, actionable intelligence, including who is staying in which building. Targets were chosen after that. We don’t hit kids only learning to recite the holy Quran.

How closely guarded was the information on Balakot attack?

Admiral Sunil Lanba, as chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, made it clear that should it escalate, all should be ready for an all-out war. Which service would go in first was decided on the basis of the chosen target. Balakot had to be the air force. If it was a kill-all destroy-all mission, we would have used supersonic low level Brahmos missile, to which Pakistan did not have any answer.

Was PM Modi in know of the operation from start to end?

Ask the National Security Adviser (NSA) Ajit Doval; it is above my pay grade. All I know is that the hit took place at 3.30am IST at Balakot. It was according to plan because at that time the terrorists were still in bed; yet to rise for the fajr namaaz at 4am. I was monitoring from my home using secure communications, the Vice-Chief and Western Air Commander were in operations room. I briefed the defence minister, the NSA, and the two chiefs after the attack.

Were you sure that the target was hit?

The weather was the main criterion. It could have been an abort due to the weather. The decision was with Western Air Command. If this plan was aborted, we would have launched other weapons. We hit the target with five stand-off weapons. The ‘target hit’ information was delayed as weapons for video recording the kill failed, and the satellite pass at 8.30am could not pick up much due to clouds. The first confirmation came through synthetic aperture camera, showing penetration in the roof of Balakot buildings. We hit three buildings and left one deliberately. The weapon is designed in such a way that building survives but the occupants don’t.

Latest intelligence reveals that Pakistan has reactivated the Balakot site. Will things change on the terror front?

With the induction of the S-400 missile system and the Rafales, we will be in position to effect a behavioural change within the Pakistan establishment. If we had these two platforms or only Rafale with us on February 27, and we had shot down four or five of their aircrafts, the behavioural change would have taken place immediately.

On August 2, 2002, after the Machchil Sector attack by IAF under Krishnaswamy, the Pakistanis did not respond as they were technically not capable. Their air force did not even try to bomb our positions as we took out Pakistan Army post intruding into our side of the Line of Control (LoC).

What if Pakistani forces do not learn from Balakot, and try a Pulwama-like attack again?

I think the government will hit them again. This time harder, and take out the buildings also so that there is no doubt in anyone’s mind.

https://m.hindustantimes.com/india-...FvD5qvl95L_amp.html?__twitter_impression=true
who should I trust
this guy who thinks these building have been blown up...? common I am not on weed
fv-1200x480.jpg
 
Ok, let Dhanoa's rhetoric aside, what exactly are we doing to counter Rafale and the combat ecosystem that it brings to the region, including armaments?
 
Indira Gandhi was right---Pakistani generals are cowards---.

Scared of consequences. This fall in to the category of cowardice.
Here some object to use of such language and terminology. But in fact this is the truth.

1- In Feb 2017 : The reasons given for not fully attack India on 27th Feb and hit as many of their jets as possible, hit their installations, hit their HQ to kill their generals, etc. were that full scale war would break out. Or that it would be declaration of war.

2- But in this show of cowardice presented as "restrain" by PA was a fig leaf. Indians attack Pakistan sovereign land on 26th , not just the area of Azad Kashmir, they carried out airstrikes in our country. It wasn't declaration of war!! So what consequences we were worried about, the war was already declared by the Indians.

3- The reason given for targeting open space rather than HQ and installations was that no casualties and injuries were reported after IAF air strikes. Therefore, the response from Pakistan should be proportional.
The fact of the matter is Indians carried out the strikes to cause maximum damage and loss of lives. If they failed was due to their un-professionalism and not due to lack of intents. Why PA was showing restrain when the enemy attacked to cause deaths and in fact until today claims that they killed 100s of Pakistanis!!

4- Indians despite PAF attacks on their installations (which they and PA both claim didn't hit the targets) didn't respond until today. Therefore, escalation's excuse is just an excuse.
Indians would have been more deterred if we caused casualties and massive damage to their installations and shot down 8/10 jets.

5- The excuse that Indians would have got strengthen their arsenal and attack is once again a bogus claim.
The evidence from 27th onward amply proves that Indians have gone on purchase spree to plug the gaps and in fact are getting ready to attack Pakistan, as it is clear from their military and political leadership's statements.
 
Scared of consequences. This fall in to the category of cowardice.
Here some object to use of such language and terminology. But in fact this is the truth.

1- In Feb 2017 : The reasons given for not fully attack India on 27th Feb and hit as many of their jets as possible, hit their installations, hit their HQ to kill their generals, etc. were that full scale war would break out. Or that it would be declaration of war.

2- But in this show of cowardice presented as "restrain" by PA was a fig leaf. Indians attack Pakistan sovereign land on 26th , not just the area of Azad Kashmir, they carried out airstrikes in our country. It wasn't declaration of war!! So what consequences we were worried about, the war was already declared by the Indians.

3- The reason given for targeting open space rather than HQ and installations was that no casualties and injuries were reported after IAF air strikes. Therefore, the response from Pakistan should be proportional.
The fact of the matter is Indians carried out the strikes to cause maximum damage and loss of lives. If they failed was due to their un-professionalism and not due to lack of intents. Why PA was showing restrain when the enemy attacked to cause deaths and in fact until today claims that they killed 100s of Pakistanis!!

4- Indians despite PAF attacks on their installations (which they and PA both claim didn't hit the targets) didn't respond until today. Therefore, escalation's excuse is just an excuse.
Indians would have been more deterred if we caused casualties and massive damage to their installations and shot down 8/10 jets.

5- The excuse that Indians would have got strengthen their arsenal and attack is once again a bogus claim.
The evidence from 27th onward amply proves that Indians have gone on purchase spree to plug the gaps and in fact are getting ready to attack Pakistan, as it is clear from their military and political leadership's statements.

I would not comment on other things but 1...

--The evidence from 27th onward amply proves that Indians have gone on purchase spree to plug the gaps and in fact are getting ready to attack Pakistan--

As per reports... India is scrapping or deferring purchase of various defence products due to LACK OF FUNDS...
 
After reading his interview, I am even more convinced that PAF should have killed their generals and destroyed their installations, instead of locking them and then dropping the ammunition in close by empty spaces.
He is mocking it and calling it use of 1st generation SOW.

@MastanKhan when you dither, give your enemy the opportunity to boast and bash.

First thought that came to mind. Dead men don't talk sh1t. What a pity - nine aircraft locked, only 1 shot.
 
So many self contradicting statements in this interview which make it look like a satire than an interview of a Professional who had served in one of defence organization of his country for 30-35 years, just as an example of his 'innocence'

on the one hand he is claim that he had exact intelligence about people who were residing in certain section of different buildings but highly professional intelligence agencies failed to tell them in the month of February Namaz-e-Fajar is not offered at 4:00 O'clock in the morning .... this thing appear bad on his basic IQ and shows that he does not even know timing of the Sun rise in the month of February but as Air Chief was a person who was the incharge Air force which carried Night Raid again the enemy state

BTW as I read and decoded this interview it appears to me that Balakot is used in this interview as 'Faced' and main objective of the interview is to share the political burden of fallout of Balakot operation and to clear the name of Modi from his earlier Idiotic Narrative in which he tried to take all the credit for the action in Balakot in an interview in which purpose his "Famous Cloud Cover" theory, Following parts clear this objective.


Readers can listen the relevant part of the interview of Modi here in which he took all the credit to himself and tried to use it as political stunt against his political opponents.

All can clear see that earlier in media Balakot action was sold as exemplary display of Modi's Strong and Courageous Leadership, who is capable to teach lesson to Pakistan, but now it seems the effort is to float the idea that it was INSTITUTIONAL decision not the personal initiative, reference of Admiral Sunil Lamba and all 3 Services Chief indicate this.

it seems the Second objective is to make a public narrative for more Rafale with particular reference of 27th Feb situation.
I think Dhanoa is feeling fuzy about the details of the day, he talks about not to reveal the technology & the capability IAF possess to tap into secure coms of PAF, yet completely ignores the fact that PAF on Feb27 had tapped into their coms - a capability demonstrated clearly......
 
Why were IAF mirage and MKI not able to fire a single shot at the F16s? This is the first question that the journalist should have started with!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom