What's new

Pakistani Military's Conventional Deterrence Against India's Cold Start Doctrine

Christine Fair lacks even the basic understanding of the military strategies. She's so unhinged that she's incapable of having a rational discussion on the subject.

Fair has called herself a "Rambo B**ch"; she supports US military interventions around the world; she encourages India's hawkish Hindu Nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi to invade Pakistan.

In a Facebook post, Fair called Pakistan “an enemy” and said “We invaded the wrong dog-damned country,” implying the U.S. should have invaded Pakistan, not Afghanistan, according to Salon magazine.

In another Facebook post, Fair insisted that “India needs to woman up and SQUASH Pakistan militarily, diplomatically, politically and economically.” Both India and Pakistan are nuclear states.

http://www.riazhaq.com/2016/12/christine-fairs-anti-pakistan-rants.html

Fair is a Provost's Distinguished Associate Professor in the Peace and Security Studies Program (SSP) within Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. She served as a senior political scientist with the RAND Corporation, political officer with the UN Assistance Mission to Afghanistan and as a senior research associate with the United States Institute of Peace.

You, Sir- are a blogger. Honestly, you are not the right representative to take on Fair. You have serious issues with poor credibility, playing very loose with facts and intentionally obfuscating data in your 'musings'. There are far more credible voices in Pakistan that have integrity and can refute Fair.

She is as passionate about S.Asia as you are about India and Pakistan. With the difference being, she is looked at as a credible authority among international think tanks even with her bellicose.
 
Last edited:
.
#Pakistan Has Just Tested the Ultimate #Nuclear #Ababeel #Missile: #SouthAsia's First MIRV with multiple warheads. #India

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...ust-tested-the-ultimate-nuclear-missile-24834


Pakistan has tested a ballistic missile with a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV), the United States confirmed this week.

During testimony to Congress outlining worldwide threats on March 6, Robert Ashley, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), stated: “In January 2017, Pakistan conducted the first test launch of its nuclear-capable Ababeel ballistic missile, demonstrating South Asia’s first MIRV payload.” It appeared to be the first time a U.S. official publicly confirmed that Islamabad tested a MIRVed missile; however, in a report last year on missile threats around the world, the Defense Intelligence Ballistic Missile Analysis Committee noted, “In January 2017, [Pakistan] began testing the MIRVed Ababeel MRBM.”

MIRVs allow a single missile to deliver multiple warheads against different targets.

The Pakistani military first announced its test of the MIRVed missile on January 24, 2017. “Pakistan has conducted its first successful flight test of Surface to Surface Ballistic Missile Ababeel, which has a maximum range of 2,200 kilometers,” the military announced in a press release at the time. “The missile is capable of delivering multiple warheads, using Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicle (MIRV) technology.” The statement added that the test was aimed at “validating various design and technical parameters.” No other tests of the Ababeel missiles are known to have taken place since the first one.

Despite these claims, many outside experts questioned whether Pakistan really had developed or tested a MIRV. As the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Missile Defense Project noted, “Some experts have expressed skepticism as to whether Pakistan has indeed surmounted the various technological hurdles required for MIRVed missiles. MIRV warheads are typically much smaller than unitary warheads, and thus require greater miniaturization. It is unclear if the country has manufactured a miniaturized nuclear warhead small enough to use in a MIRV.” Ashley’s confirmation should put this skepticism to rest.

---
Islamabad’s stated rationale for pursuing MIRV technology is to defeat India’s ballistic-missile defense systems. “Development of Ababeel Weapon System is aimed at ensuring survivability of Pakistan’s ballistic missiles in the growing regional Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) environment,” the Pakistani military said in the statement announcing the test last January. “This will further reinforce deterrence.”

MIRVs are undoubtedly useful for defeating missile defenses, as they present numerous targets in close range that interceptors must locate and destroy. At the same time, MIRVs are extremely valuable for counterforce attacks—that is, trying to destroy an adversary’s nuclear arsenal in a surprise first strike. In that sense, they are extremely destabilizing for strategic stability; during the Cold War MIRVs greatly exacerbated the nuclear arms race between the two superpowers.


--------
Pakistan is not the first country in Asia to test a MIRVed missile. That distinction belongs to China. It is unclear when China initially tested a MIRVed missile, but the Pentagon first acknowledged that Beijing had that capability in its 2015 report on Chinese military power. France, Britain, Russia and the United States also have MIRVed missiles. During his time in office, President Barack Obama removed all MIRVs on America’s land-based ballistic missiles, but Washington continues to have MIRVed submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

Now that Pakistan and China have them, it seems inevitable that India will join the MIRV club sooner rather than later.

Fair is a Provost's Distinguished Associate Professor in the Peace and Security Studies Program (SSP) within Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. She served as a senior political scientist with the RAND Corporation, political officer with the UN Assistance Mission to Afghanistan and as a senior research associate with the United States Institute of Peace.

You, Sir- are a blogger. Honestly, you are not the right representative to take on Fair. You have serious issues with poor credibility, playing very loose with facts and intentionally obfuscating data in your 'musings'. There are far more credible voices in Pakistan that have integrity and can refute Fair.

She is as passionate about S.Asia as you are about India and Pakistan. With the difference being, she is looked at as a credible authority among international think tanks even with her bellicose.

Fair knows nothing about military strategy. Being a professor or dean at a university doesn't change this fact.

I myself do not claim to be an authority on every subject I write about.

However, I do read experts' analyses and opinions on each subject and refer to them in my blog.

In this post, for instance, I have quoted Kings College war studies professor Walter Ladwig and Indian think tank researcher Menaakshi Sood from the Center for Land Warfare Studies in New Delhi.

I have also included quotes from Indian generals with first hand knowledge of the subject.
 
.
#Pakistan Has Just Tested the Ultimate #Nuclear #Ababeel #Missile: #SouthAsia's First MIRV with multiple warheads. #India

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...ust-tested-the-ultimate-nuclear-missile-24834


Pakistan has tested a ballistic missile with a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV), the United States confirmed this week.

During testimony to Congress outlining worldwide threats on March 6, Robert Ashley, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), stated: “In January 2017, Pakistan conducted the first test launch of its nuclear-capable Ababeel ballistic missile, demonstrating South Asia’s first MIRV payload.” It appeared to be the first time a U.S. official publicly confirmed that Islamabad tested a MIRVed missile; however, in a report last year on missile threats around the world, the Defense Intelligence Ballistic Missile Analysis Committee noted, “In January 2017, [Pakistan] began testing the MIRVed Ababeel MRBM.”

MIRVs allow a single missile to deliver multiple warheads against different targets.

The Pakistani military first announced its test of the MIRVed missile on January 24, 2017. “Pakistan has conducted its first successful flight test of Surface to Surface Ballistic Missile Ababeel, which has a maximum range of 2,200 kilometers,” the military announced in a press release at the time. “The missile is capable of delivering multiple warheads, using Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicle (MIRV) technology.” The statement added that the test was aimed at “validating various design and technical parameters.” No other tests of the Ababeel missiles are known to have taken place since the first one.

Despite these claims, many outside experts questioned whether Pakistan really had developed or tested a MIRV. As the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Missile Defense Project noted, “Some experts have expressed skepticism as to whether Pakistan has indeed surmounted the various technological hurdles required for MIRVed missiles. MIRV warheads are typically much smaller than unitary warheads, and thus require greater miniaturization. It is unclear if the country has manufactured a miniaturized nuclear warhead small enough to use in a MIRV.” Ashley’s confirmation should put this skepticism to rest.

---
Islamabad’s stated rationale for pursuing MIRV technology is to defeat India’s ballistic-missile defense systems. “Development of Ababeel Weapon System is aimed at ensuring survivability of Pakistan’s ballistic missiles in the growing regional Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) environment,” the Pakistani military said in the statement announcing the test last January. “This will further reinforce deterrence.”

MIRVs are undoubtedly useful for defeating missile defenses, as they present numerous targets in close range that interceptors must locate and destroy. At the same time, MIRVs are extremely valuable for counterforce attacks—that is, trying to destroy an adversary’s nuclear arsenal in a surprise first strike. In that sense, they are extremely destabilizing for strategic stability; during the Cold War MIRVs greatly exacerbated the nuclear arms race between the two superpowers.


--------
Pakistan is not the first country in Asia to test a MIRVed missile. That distinction belongs to China. It is unclear when China initially tested a MIRVed missile, but the Pentagon first acknowledged that Beijing had that capability in its 2015 report on Chinese military power. France, Britain, Russia and the United States also have MIRVed missiles. During his time in office, President Barack Obama removed all MIRVs on America’s land-based ballistic missiles, but Washington continues to have MIRVed submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

Now that Pakistan and China have them, it seems inevitable that India will join the MIRV club sooner rather than later.



Fair knows nothing about military strategy. Being a professor or dean at a university doesn't change this fact.

I myself do not claim to be an authority on every subject I write about.

However, I do read experts' analyses and opinions on each subject and refer to them in my blog.

In this post, for instance, I have quoted Kings College war studies professor Walter Ladwig and Indian think tank researcher Menaakshi Sood from the Center for Land Warfare Studies in New Delhi.

I have also included quotes from Indian generals with first hand knowledge of the subject.

Mr. Haq, She is a recognized subject matter expert and recognized authority by the highest of reputed think tanks in the word. Please don't compare yourself, your efforts and blog postings as even a remotely credible alternative source. Once again there are several credible Pakistanis who could do it and stand in I'm sure. Look- I don't like to come across as rude, so I'll let this conversation be the last one from my end.
 
.
Lol Pakistan army has only 30% of Indian arsenal .
 
. .
And then there is Christine fair too...
She’s just a propaganda tool on Zionist payroll.

Lol Pakistan army has only 30% of Indian arsenal .
Last time I heard Indian army lacks ammunition and don’t forget India got 40% more land to cover, with couple of internal independence movements going on be it Maoist, Tamil or Khalistan.
 
.


Compare each category

https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp

Manpower : 15%

Fos : 18%

Active personal :48%

Reserve personal : 8%

Total military personnel : 22%

Military budget : 13%

Air crafts: 46%

Flight interceptors : 44%

Attack aircraft : 38%

Transporters : 30%

helicopters : 47%

Tanks : 65%

Afv : 45%

Towed artillery: 38%

Rocket protectors: 46%

Aircraft carriers: 0%

Submarines: 50%

Frigets:70%

Destroyers: 0%

Corvettes:0%

Petrol craft: 12%

Mine warfare craft: 50%

https://www.globalfirepower.com/cou...untry1=india&country2=pakistan&Submit=COMPARE

So total Pakistani arsenal = 32% of Indian arsenal

 
.
Lol Pakistan army has only 30% of Indian arsenal .
She’s just a propaganda tool on Zionist payroll.


Last time I heard Indian army lacks ammunition and don’t forget India got 40% more land to cover, with couple of internal independence movements going on be it Maoist, Tamil or Khalistan.
Compare each category

https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp

Manpower : 15%

Fos : 18%

Active personal :48%

Reserve personal : 8%

Total military personnel : 22%

Military budget : 13%

Air crafts: 46%

Flight interceptors : 44%

Attack aircraft : 38%

Transporters : 30%

helicopters : 47%

Tanks : 65%

Afv : 45%

Towed artillery: 38%

Rocket protectors: 46%

Aircraft carriers: 0%

Submarines: 50%

Frigets:70%

Destroyers: 0%

Corvettes:0%

Petrol craft: 12%

Mine warfare craft: 50%

https://www.globalfirepower.com/cou...untry1=india&country2=pakistan&Submit=COMPARE

So total Pakistani arsenal = 32% of Indian arsenal
Indian Army ammunition won’t even last 10 days in event of a war, suggests CAG reports

Indian Amry's plan to stock up 50% ammunition by March 2015 remained far from realization with just 10% in stock.

army-759.jpg


If India were to go to war now, 90 per cent of its available ammunition would not last even for 10 days, inferred the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in a report tabled in Parliament on Friday. It said the ammunition roadmap drawn by the Army in 2012 for building up the stock to 50 per cent by March 2015 and 100 per cent by 2019 has remained far from realisation.

Coming down heavily on the Defence Ministry, the Army, ordnance factories and quality assurance agencies, the report highlighted that while the Army blamed the Ordnance Factories Board (OFB) for delays and slippage, the OFB asked for lesser money from the government than what was required to meet the Army’s projections. Seventeen of the import projects initiated in 2013 have not been concluded so far, the national auditor said.

As reported earlier, the Army had told a Parliamentary panel that the mountain strike corps was being raised by using ammunition from War Wastage Reserve (WWR).

According to the report, however, only 10 per cent of the ammunition is available to meet a 40-day WWR.

Further, 84 per cent of the high caliber ammunition of the country was “critical” — meaning of quantity that could last for just about 10 days.

The report has blamed the shortage on the inability of the Ordnance Factories Board to meet the demand of the Army as well as the delays in imports. It has highlighted that the minimum acceptable risk level (MARL) — which benchmarks a minimum availability of ammunition for 20 days and was set by the Army HQ in 1999 after the Kargil war — has not been achieved even 15 years later.

For the reviewed period of 2009-2013, the types of critical ammunition increased from 15 per cent in March 2009 to 50 per cent in March 2013.

The comprehensive report that examined 69 types of ammunition, the inability of the ordnance factories to meet the projected requirements by the Army was one of the reasons for the depleting ammunition ratios.

For instance, the OFB has been consistently meeting only between 63-72 per cent of the Army’s annual projected ammunition requirements.

The report has blamed the OFB for projecting lesser budgetary requirement from the government than what was needed to meet the targets given by the Army. It also said that close to Rs 94 crore worth of ammunition/components manufactured by the ordnance factories were rejected by the quality testing agencies, thus adding to the shortage.

According to the report, nine cases initiated to procure the ammunition from import/trade were delayed due to single vendor situation, complexities in transfer of technology, finalisation of requirements by the Army HQ and delays in receiving bids.

Interestingly, ammunition worth Rs 3,578 crore was lying in segregated condition even as ammunition worth Rs 2,109 crore was awaiting repairs.


http://indianexpress.com/article/in...-plan-to-fill-ammo-stock-yet-to-take-off-cag/
 
.
Indian Army ammunition won’t even last 10 days in event of a war, suggests CAG reports

Indian Amry's plan to stock up 50% ammunition by March 2015 remained far from realization with just 10% in stock.

army-759.jpg


If India were to go to war now, 90 per cent of its available ammunition would not last even for 10 days, inferred the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in a report tabled in Parliament on Friday. It said the ammunition roadmap drawn by the Army in 2012 for building up the stock to 50 per cent by March 2015 and 100 per cent by 2019 has remained far from realisation.

Coming down heavily on the Defence Ministry, the Army, ordnance factories and quality assurance agencies, the report highlighted that while the Army blamed the Ordnance Factories Board (OFB) for delays and slippage, the OFB asked for lesser money from the government than what was required to meet the Army’s projections. Seventeen of the import projects initiated in 2013 have not been concluded so far, the national auditor said.

As reported earlier, the Army had told a Parliamentary panel that the mountain strike corps was being raised by using ammunition from War Wastage Reserve (WWR).

According to the report, however, only 10 per cent of the ammunition is available to meet a 40-day WWR.

Further, 84 per cent of the high caliber ammunition of the country was “critical” — meaning of quantity that could last for just about 10 days.

The report has blamed the shortage on the inability of the Ordnance Factories Board to meet the demand of the Army as well as the delays in imports. It has highlighted that the minimum acceptable risk level (MARL) — which benchmarks a minimum availability of ammunition for 20 days and was set by the Army HQ in 1999 after the Kargil war — has not been achieved even 15 years later.

For the reviewed period of 2009-2013, the types of critical ammunition increased from 15 per cent in March 2009 to 50 per cent in March 2013.

The comprehensive report that examined 69 types of ammunition, the inability of the ordnance factories to meet the projected requirements by the Army was one of the reasons for the depleting ammunition ratios.

For instance, the OFB has been consistently meeting only between 63-72 per cent of the Army’s annual projected ammunition requirements.

The report has blamed the OFB for projecting lesser budgetary requirement from the government than what was needed to meet the targets given by the Army. It also said that close to Rs 94 crore worth of ammunition/components manufactured by the ordnance factories were rejected by the quality testing agencies, thus adding to the shortage.

According to the report, nine cases initiated to procure the ammunition from import/trade were delayed due to single vendor situation, complexities in transfer of technology, finalisation of requirements by the Army HQ and delays in receiving bids.

Interestingly, ammunition worth Rs 3,578 crore was lying in segregated condition even as ammunition worth Rs 2,109 crore was awaiting repairs.


http://indianexpress.com/article/in...-plan-to-fill-ammo-stock-yet-to-take-off-cag/
:rofl: comparing army's war wastage to a militaries arsenal

Pakistani military not only have inferior tech they are outnumbered with only 30% of Indian current arsenal

Fyi India defeated Pakistan in 71 in just 15 days

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_War_of_1971
 
.
Lol Pakistan army has only 30% of Indian arsenal .
No 1 percent and we have ten police men with sticks also and that's the real threat to India now go buy some tejas to counter our dandas
 
.
No 1 percent and we have ten police men with sticks also and that's the real threat to India now go buy some tejas to counter our dandas
I gave a international source not a propaganda link like raq, don't get butt hurt over simple math. Pakistan has 13% of the Indian budget , obviously India will have better & more equipment
 
.
:rofl: comparing army's war wastage to a militaries arsenal

Pakistani military not only have inferior tech they are outnumbered with only 30% of Indian current arsenal

Fyi India defeated Pakistan in 71 in just 15 days

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_War_of_1971
Credit Goes to Mukti Bahni,45000 Regular + 35000 Irregulars Pakistani Fighters backed by 18 Aircrafts & 40 Tanks, who were busy fighting Insurgency for 8 Months backed by India.
So 2000,00 Mukti Terrorists+ 250000 IA troops backed by 200 Fighter Aircrafts against above mentioned Force.That advantage India would never have again.
 
.
Credit Goes to Mukti Bahni,45000 Regular + 35000 Irregulars Pakistani Fighters backed by 18 Aircrafts & 40 Tanks, who were busy fighting Insurgency for 8 Months backed by India.
So 2000,00 Mukti Terrorists+ 250000 IA troops backed by 200 Fighter Aircrafts against above mentioned Force.That advantage India would never have again.
71 war was a genocide , resistance fighters were negligible .

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/opinion/the-politics-of-bangladeshs-genocide-debate.html?referer=https://www.google.ae/
 
. .
A Gonocide Only Parroted by Gulliable Indian Fanboys and AL supporters today.
That's newyork times , literally the most reputable news outlet in the world . Then again you only buy n.Korean tier propaganda
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom