Pakistan-US joint air exercise - Falcon Talon III

[araz]

Hi Araz
I hope you don’t mind answering me about what happened in 62 when Chinese were asking us to invade Kashmir as Indians were busy with Chinese
And if we didn’t act at that time is it right to blame Chinese about not supporting us in 65
Now I’m not blaming you but your are very learned member on this forum would you like
To shed some light regarding about my Q
Thank you

https://www.dawn.com/news/1454124/smokers-corner-how-did-pakistan-and-china-become-close-allies
Hello my friend.
I would not say I am learned, but have just been kicked around a bit more than you guys, so the dust of times gone by has stuck.
It is indeed fortunate that there was an article in Yesterday's Dawn about this very topic(Quoted above). Please read it to gain a perspective on what the pak Heirarchy was thinking in 62. Contrary to popular belief I think the kind of relations that exist today did not do so. Pakistan, rather foolishly, was blindly persuing US agenda and although the relationship with China was beginning to thaw out there was not sufficient confidence in the Pak Heirarchy to go along with that suggestion. Again possibly the best chance was squandered.
One of the things you need to understand is that Pak setup was very lazy and immersed in the panacea of US being the mother of All and doer of everything possible. Through sheer neglect and laziness we avoided local production of basic armaments which could have saved our Arses in 65. We were offered tank production in house but we chose to buy. The Army lacked maturity and inspite of a very good chance of achieving victory in Kashmir, squandered that chance due to poor planning, change of leadership mid offensive and latency.
unfortunately the rest is history. We still have this notion of we are the best when we clearly are not and Allah will help us when He Izza Wa Jal wants to punish us for our evil deeds and misdemeanors. Things will not change till we take ownership of our country and stop relying on US, China or Saudia Arabia, but construct our country on our own steam. We lack this character building and the sooner we get going the better we will be. Imran is a good choice but whether he has the gumption to steer the country in the right direction remains to be seen.
Kind regards
A

 

[Readerdefence]

https://www.dawn.com/news/1454124/smokers-corner-how-did-pakistan-and-china-become-close-allies
Hello my friend.
I would not say I am learned, but have just been kicked around a bit more than you guys, so the dust of times gone by has stuck.
It is indeed fortunate that there was an article in Yesterday's Dawn about this very topic(Quoted above). Please read it to gain a perspective on what the pak Heirarchy was thinking in 62. Contrary to popular belief I think the kind of relations that exist today did not do so. Pakistan, rather foolishly, was blindly persuing US agenda and although the relationship with China was beginning to thaw out there was not sufficient confidence in the Pak Heirarchy to go along with that suggestion. Again possibly the best chance was squandered.
One of the things you need to understand is that Pak setup was very lazy and immersed in the panacea of US being the mother of All and doer of everything possible. Through sheer neglect and laziness we avoided local production of basic armaments which could have saved our Arses in 65. We were offered tank production in house but we chose to buy. The Army lacked maturity and inspite of a very good chance of achieving victory in Kashmir, squandered that chance due to poor planning, change of leadership mid offensive and latency.
unfortunately the rest is history. We still have this notion of we are the best when we clearly are not and Allah will help us when He Izza Wa Jal wants to punish us for our evil deeds and misdemeanors. Things will not change till we take ownership of our country and stop relying on US, China or Saudia Arabia, but construct our country on our own steam. We lack this character building and the sooner we get going the better we will be. Imran is a good choice but whether he has the gumption to steer the country in the right direction remains to be seen.
Kind regards
A

Hi araz im pleased to read and learn from your kicking around in that case You will get some more kicking hopefully to answer our questions with providing us the source also
As I’m getting more and longer info fro you if possible can you comment on the following also
Isn’t it better for our country to send our mid care officers to Russia and China also instead of relying holy solely on American training and their infrastructure in 50-60 beside this
A relitevly political question wouldn’t it be better if the armed forces keep them out of politics
Specially in early decades of Pakistan history so we might be having a better and much up to date political leadership with consecutive elections and the people can elect their Leaders according to their desire and country prospective
Once again thank you for providing me the detail
Thank you

 

[araz]

Hi araz im pleased to read and learn from your kicking around in that case You will get some more kicking hopefully to answer our questions with providing us the source also
As I’m getting more and longer info fro you if possible can you comment on the following also
Isn’t it better for our country to send our mid care officers to Russia and China also instead of relying holy solely on American training and their infrastructure in 50-60 beside this
A relitevly political question wouldn’t it be better if the armed forces keep them out of politics
Specially in early decades of Pakistan history so we might be having a better and much up to date political leadership with consecutive elections and the people can elect their Leaders according to their desire and country prospective
Once again thank you for providing me the detail
Thank you

Tbank you. Iam happy to be of ssistance. I am perhaps not the right person for the first part of your question. Someone with morw insight like @Knuckles @Bilal Khan 777 or @Bilal Khan (Quwa) or @Oscar might have bwtter insight. What I do know is that the original PAF officers were British trained. It was somewhat natjral to look westwards in line with their ethos. The West also had a more robust tradition of Air warfare with well developed and tested doctrine. This was non existent on the Eastern side with Chinese experience being minimal nd even Rjssian experience was limited. So from the purely doctrinal point of view it was perhaps inst8nctive foe Pakland to look westwards. The most robust and well developed and experienced in Air warfare were the USAF. When Pakistan allied itself with the US, US offered training opportunities and Pakistan grabbed it with both hands. So from that point of view the decision was very sound. However, what subsequently happened was a total sh9ft towards West ignoring the Russians and evsn snubbing them which in my opinion was technically and strategically incorrect. Pakistan should hqve maintained its non alligned status and had robust relations with both the US and USSR.
The second question is a no brainer. Army is an institution meant for defence of the country. However its remit is not politics. Political meddling by the army was instrumental in the destruction of the political setup and its maturity. We had poor traditions in Western Pakistan as with the exception of Lahore and partly Karachi none of the areas were actually involved in the struggle for Pakistan. So what ensued was opportunistic politics based on petty and short sighted motives. To top it off Mr Jinnah died in 48 and Liaquat Ali Khan was assasinated in 1951. There really was no opportunity for the nation to settle down from the ensuing chaos. The army brass seized the opportunity whereas it should have allowed the system to mature and the political toilet to work. Ghat did not happen amd we had more years of Army rule than political rule. This has caused immense damage to the country. The judiciary also did not display any spine and gave in to pressure thereby giving legitimacy to the heavy handed tactics of the Army. The rest is History.
A

 

[SQ8]

Tbank you. Iam happy to be of ssistance. I am perhaps not the right person for the first part of your question. Someone with morw insight like @Knuckles @Bilal Khan 777 or @Bilal Khan (Quwa) or @Oscar might have bwtter insight. What I do know is that the original PAF officers were British trained. It was somewhat natjral to look westwards in line with their ethos. The West also had a more robust tradition of Air warfare with well developed and tested doctrine. This was non existent on the Eastern side with Chinese experience being minimal nd even Rjssian experience was limited. So from the purely doctrinal point of view it was perhaps inst8nctive foe Pakland to look westwards. The most robust and well developed and experienced in Air warfare were the USAF. When Pakistan allied itself with the US, US offered training opportunities and Pakistan grabbed it with both hands. So from that point of view the decision was very sound. However, what subsequently happened was a total sh9ft towards West ignoring the Russians and evsn snubbing them which in my opinion was technically and strategically incorrect. Pakistan should hqve maintained its non alligned status and had robust relations with both the US and USSR.
The second question is a no brainer. Army is an institution meant for defence of the country. However its remit is not politics. Political meddling by the army was instrumental in the destruction of the political setup and its maturity. We had poor traditions in Western Pakistan as with the exception of Lahore and partly Karachi none of the areas were actually involved in the struggle for Pakistan. So what ensued was opportunistic politics based on petty and short sighted motives. To top it off Mr Jinnah died in 48 and Liaquat Ali Khan was assasinated in 1951. There really was no opportunity for the nation to settle down from the ensuing chaos. The army brass seized the opportunity whereas it should have allowed the system to mature and the political toilet to work. Ghat did not happen amd we had more years of Army rule than political rule. This has caused immense damage to the country. The judiciary also did not display any spine and gave in to pressure thereby giving legitimacy to the heavy handed tactics of the Army. The rest is History.
A

The Gold Bird is a great read into early PAF officer mentality. But the US tilt generation was after the Aid embrace.

However, the US embrace was also a great change for Pakistan because the culture of methods and safety were well engrained into PAF ethos and the horror that is Pakistani mentality of shortcuts in everything was negated to a large extent.

 

[Readerdefence]

Tbank you. Iam happy to be of ssistance. I am perhaps not the right person for the first part of your question. Someone with morw insight like @Knuckles @Bilal Khan 777 or @Bilal Khan (Quwa) or @Oscar might have bwtter insight. What I do know is that the original PAF officers were British trained. It was somewhat natjral to look westwards in line with their ethos. The West also had a more robust tradition of Air warfare with well developed and tested doctrine. This was non existent on the Eastern side with Chinese experience being minimal nd even Rjssian experience was limited. So from the purely doctrinal point of view it was perhaps inst8nctive foe Pakland to look westwards. The most robust and well developed and experienced in Air warfare were the USAF. When Pakistan allied itself with the US, US offered training opportunities and Pakistan grabbed it with both hands. So from that point of view the decision was very sound. However, what subsequently happened was a total sh9ft towards West ignoring the Russians and evsn snubbing them which in my opinion was technically and strategically incorrect. Pakistan should hqve maintained its non alligned status and had robust relations with both the US and USSR.
The second question is a no brainer. Army is an institution meant for defence of the country. However its remit is not politics. Political meddling by the army was instrumental in the destruction of the political setup and its maturity. We had poor traditions in Western Pakistan as with the exception of Lahore and partly Karachi none of the areas were actually involved in the struggle for Pakistan. So what ensued was opportunistic politics based on petty and short sighted motives. To top it off Mr Jinnah died in 48 and Liaquat Ali Khan was assasinated in 1951. There really was no opportunity for the nation to settle down from the ensuing chaos. The army brass seized the opportunity whereas it should have allowed the system to mature and the political toilet to work. Ghat did not happen amd we had more years of Army rule than political rule. This has caused immense damage to the country. The judiciary also did not display any spine and gave in to pressure thereby giving legitimacy to the heavy handed tactics of the Army. The rest is History.
A

Hi araz once again thanks for your reply
Thank you

 

[Aamir Hussain]

Sending officer to get trained in USSR & China, when we had western equipment would have been foolish then. Russian tanks were cheap to build and their employment doctrine depended upon mass attack against the enemy and overwhelm them with numbers. The western tank design and doctrine dictated superior gun and armour and crew survive-ability. This and and use of Air power centering upon the Sabre platform dictated that we seek Western training.

These days officers are being sent to China for attachment to Chinese air units.

Once again let u not play a zero sum game here. There are definitive advantages to seeking western technology, and training they are at this point in time at the cutting edge of weapons technology. We need to get the best from both, USA/Europe, and China/Ukraine/Russian/Turkey. Learn from all and adjust according to your own ground reality!!!

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

Pakistan has its own role and place, and other countries are only suppliers. I heard Gen. Yeager say to my face that F86 Sabre was made by the Americans, but mastered by the Pakistanis. We should remain fiercely independent, and use any country we have to buy, acquire, or have what we need to cater for our adversaries, that will always be many times our size. Lord known it never put a dent in my morale as I pulled up on my ADAs nor does it scare any of the young lads today even if they flay a dainty Mig 21 knockoff carrying sidewinders. PAF will always be special, brave, and resolute. Long live the Hawks that protect our free skies.

 

[Maxpane]

Pakistan has its own role and place, and other countries are only suppliers. I heard Gen. Yeager say to my face that F86 Sabre was made by the Americans, but mastered by the Pakistanis. We should remain fiercely independent, and use any country we have to buy, acquire, or have what we need to cater for our adversaries, that will always be many times our size. Lord known it never put a dent in my morale as I pulled up on my ADAs nor does it scare any of the young lads today even if they flay a dainty Mig 21 knockoff carrying sidewinders. PAF will always be special, brave, and resolute. Long live the Hawks that protect our free skies.

sir we are living in peace because of brave people like you. we are thankful for your grandeur services . long live the shaheens

 

[nahtanbob]

Sir by taking forward the same train of thought....the Germans, Japanese, and the Koreans are dumb asses? Sir i don't think they are. They did what suited them to ensure their revival as significant economic powers. Why put in money on war fighting capability when someone else will do it for u.

And sir i did my bachelor n my master from USA, worked there for many years and to utter surprise of many, i served there too!! So i do know a little about the mind set of Americans and their institutions. And very few people here on this forum can grasp the robustness of US institutions and its policy making apparatus as you have been rightly pointing out in a number of your posts.

What we see today vis a vis India n US, the policy was formulated in late seventies, got delayed due to Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, further delay due to collapse of Soviet union. The plan got started in earnest during Clinton era, then got side tracked due to 9/11 and its fall out and Iraq war. Now the policy formulated good 48 years back is now panning out.

there is no master plan regarding American relations with India. The aim of American foreign policy is to prevent a single power from dominating the Eurasian landmass. During the cold war the main target was USSR. Right now there is no real target even though China is a potential threat. Whether Pakistanis like it or not India is a powerful hedge against China

 

[ARMalik]

there is no master plan regarding American relations with India. The aim of American foreign policy is to prevent a single power from dominating the Eurasian landmass. During the cold war the main target was USSR. Right now there is no real target even though China is a potential threat. Whether Pakistanis like it or not India is a powerful hedge against China

Your assumptions are laughable.
-Firstly, you need to understand that India is no hedge against China. Having a population in excess of 1-billion does not automatically qualify India vs China since China is vastly more powerful country as evidenced by the fact that the President of the current Superpower US is actually calling the President of China to resolve trade disputes. This makes China a Superpower. India is a poor country where 700 million people defecate in the open. You comparing India to China is ludicrous.

-Secondly, you assume that somehow US and the West will make India stronger so that it can compete with China. Again a highly flawed and ludicrous assumption. And here is why the US and the West will NEVER want a strong India - because they made ONE mistake with China which has resulted in the creation of a China Superpower who they cannot control. They will NEVER make the same mistake again to create another Superpower who they cannot control.
They will only use India to destabilize the region and in the process also slowly but surely take economic control of India. This has already started and will only expedite in 2019 - just have a look at how much government and private infrastructure the foreign big multinationals have bought in the past 5-years.

NO ONE makes another country SUPERPOWER!!

 

[nahtanbob]

Your assumptions are laughable.
-Firstly, you need to understand that India is no hedge against China. Having a population in excess of 1-billion does not automatically qualify India vs China since China is vastly more powerful country as evidenced by the fact that the President of the current Superpower US is actually calling the President of China to resolve trade disputes. This makes China a Superpower. India is a poor country where 700 million people defecate in the open. You comparing India to China is ludicrous.

-Secondly, you assume that somehow US and the West will make India stronger so that it can compete with China. Again a highly flawed and ludicrous assumption. And here is why the US and the West will NEVER want a strong India - because they made ONE mistake with China which has resulted in the creation of a China Superpower who they cannot control. They will NEVER make the same mistake again to create another Superpower who they cannot control.
They will only use India to destabilize the region and in the process also slowly but surely take economic control of India. This has already started and will only expedite in 2019 - just have a look at how much government and private infrastructure the foreign big multinationals have bought in the past 5-years.

NO ONE makes another country SUPERPOWER!!

You have a problem with comprehension. There is no connection between hedge and superpower.
It makes significant difference in balance of power whether India buys Huawei or Cisco equipment, whether Indian elites & middle class horde dollars or yuans, whether Indians work for Chinese or American technology companies, whether they buy American or Russian military hardware

It is upto India to make itself a superpower. American support does not decide whether India becomes one.
USA gave both South Korea and Pakistan the same billions. The results could not be starker.

China is not a superpower in the same right as USA. It has the ability to become one in the future
American President asking China to resolve trade dispute indicates a lopsided trade imbalance.

 

[Aamir Hussain]

there is no master plan regarding American relations with India. The aim of American foreign policy is to prevent a single power from dominating the Eurasian landmass. During the cold war the main target was USSR. Right now there is no real target even though China is a potential threat. Whether Pakistanis like it or not India is a powerful hedge against China

Sir, it is a classic rope a dope being played by US on China by propping up India. China was, is and will remain a threat to US unless it is strategically contained...it automatically will be in a position to challenge its sole power status in the next ten years or so. It has to be contained.

Yes true, India is an important market and a player in the geopolitical game in this region.

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

Sending officer to get trained in USSR & China, when we had western equipment would have been foolish then. Russian tanks were cheap to build and their employment doctrine depended upon mass attack against the enemy and overwhelm them with numbers. The western tank design and doctrine dictated superior gun and armour and crew survive-ability. This and and use of Air power centering upon the Sabre platform dictated that we seek Western training.

These days officers are being sent to China for attachment to Chinese air units.

Once again let u not play a zero sum game here. There are definitive advantages to seeking western technology, and training they are at this point in time at the cutting edge of weapons technology. We need to get the best from both, USA/Europe, and China/Ukraine/Russian/Turkey. Learn from all and adjust according to your own ground reality!!!

This has got to be the most sane idea I have read on this forum. It's all about gaining that knowledge and making something jew out of it. Something that works for us and is better then the others.

 

[Raider 21]

Sending officer to get trained in USSR & China, when we had western equipment would have been foolish then. Russian tanks were cheap to build and their employment doctrine depended upon mass attack against the enemy and overwhelm them with numbers. The western tank design and doctrine dictated superior gun and armour and crew survive-ability. This and and use of Air power centering upon the Sabre platform dictated that we seek Western training.

These days officers are being sent to China for attachment to Chinese air units.

Once again let u not play a zero sum game here. There are definitive advantages to seeking western technology, and training they are at this point in time at the cutting edge of weapons technology. We need to get the best from both, USA/Europe, and China/Ukraine/Russian/Turkey. Learn from all and adjust according to your own ground reality!!!

Met a squadron leader recently who had done a flying instructors course from China. Not very up to par with international standards.

 

[Darwin]

Too much being read into a exercise.
The Americans want to exit afgh and are using the carrot and stick policy with Pakistan. So you see all the overtures to the talibans via Pakistan and also these proposed exercises. Also hints that Pakistan might again start receiving military aid.
2ndly people here seriously believe that the present Jf17 is of interest to the Americans ?
And I agree with others here that Americans have realized that India won't play ball against China. Their is no advantage for India in picking fights with more neighbours for vague geopolitical reasons. India will do just enough to keep USA on its side incase of trouble with China as Russia is no more a reliable partner.