Pakistan's NSA sees ‘greater design’ behind US support for India's NSG membership

[Taimoor Khan]

Mr Janjua is a person who ripped apart the forigen sponsored insurgency inside Baluchistan. The man knows what he is talking about. But I think most of educated Pakistani are already aware of what the honorable minister mentioned.

 

[randomradio]

1.) Pakistan can't afford an arms race with India.
As I've mentioned multiple times, Pakistan is not trying to maintain absolute parity. It is simply maintaining a minimum defensive deterrence which is proving effective at containing Indian aggression.

And that's exactly what I said, and you tried to counter it.

2.) China and India being at parity.
Wow, are you serious? Have you compared defense budgets? Have you seen their indigenous military tech? This would require opening another thread --- pls do if you're interested in delving into this, though it will be an embarrassing exercise. The recent Chinese supercomputer is leaps and bounds ahead of the current best US effort. If you are pushing the narrative that Pakistan shouldn't compare itself with India, then India certainly should not compare itself with China (at least between India and Pakistan there is a massive difference in size; with China, you don't even have that excuse).

Does Pakistan have a space program? India and China do.
Does Pakistan have a submarine construction plan? India and China do.
Does Pakistan make carriers and other large warships? India and China do.
Does Pakistan have a massive mil-industrial complex? India and China do.
Does Pakistan plan to have multiple fighter jet production lines? India and China do.
Does Pakistan have multiple hypersonic programs? India and China do.

So India can easily get into an arms race with China. The difference is not as massive as you think it is. That's why I use the one evergreen word that works every time when a Pakistani starts comparing Pak to India: Denial.

Comparing defence budgets is pointless. What matters is what the funding has done to improve the mil-industrial complex. India's system has worked quite well, and so has China's.

Building a supercomputer is not difficult, it is determined by purpose and money. And it has nothing to do with an arms race. It's like building the tallest building.

This makes no sense. If China is aiming to counter countries with vastly more technologically advanced Armed Forces than India's, I'm sure India will get countered too.

You forget that India is importing weapons from these countries as well. So the other countries are not vastly advanced, they are mostly as advanced as India's military in many fields. When it comes to China and India, it is mostly a numbers game. But when it comes to India and Pakistan, there is literally no comparison in any way.

That's why I said the Pak argument that India's acceptance into the NSG will trigger an arms race is a meaningless bogey.

 

[R Wing]

And that's exactly what I said, and you tried to counter it.



Does Pakistan have a space program? India and China do.
Does Pakistan have a submarine construction plan? India and China do.
Does Pakistan make carriers and other large warships? India and China do.
Does Pakistan have a massive mil-industrial complex? India and China do.
Does Pakistan plan to have multiple fighter jet production lines? India and China do.
Does Pakistan have multiple hypersonic programs? India and China do.

So India can easily get into an arms race with China. The difference is not as massive as you think it is. That's why I use the one evergreen word that works every time when a Pakistani starts comparing Pak to India: Denial.

Comparing defence budgets is pointless. What matters is what the funding has done to improve the mil-industrial complex. India's system has worked quite well, and so has China's.

Building a supercomputer is not difficult, it is determined by purpose and money. And it has nothing to do with an arms race. It's like building the tallest building.



You forget that India is importing weapons from these countries as well. So the other countries are not vastly advanced, they are mostly as advanced as India's military in many fields. When it comes to China and India, it is mostly a numbers game. But when it comes to India and Pakistan, there is literally no comparison in any way.

That's why I said the Pak argument that India's acceptance into the NSG will trigger an arms race is a meaningless bogey.

While India and China have the things you mentioned in common, the numbers I last checked put China in a different league. Having those things in common does not have any bearing on the quality/stage/numbers that pertain to the outputs of each of those programs.

You are incorrect that building a supercomputer is building the tallest building (i.e. that it's just about affording the hardware) --- in fact, this very point was emphasized by the creator of supercomputing metrics (an American professor) who mentioned that it is precisely the opposite of what you said, which makes me question the rest of your conclusions too.


You feel that the India-China difference in military power and technological prowess is not as great as "I think it is" --- you are entitled to your opinion, though I obviously disagree with it --- therefore allow me to use your favorite word when it comes to your own perception of how you compare to China: denial.

 

[randomradio]

While India and China have the things you mentioned in common, the numbers I last checked put China in a different league. Having those things in common does not have any bearing on the quality/stage/numbers that pertain to the outputs of each of those programs.

Everything China has, India also has. The numbers don't put China in a different league, they are quite literally at a similar level as India is. The added advantage is China has less deployed forces across its border with India.

You are incorrect that building a supercomputer is building the tallest building (i.e. that it's just about affording the hardware) --- in fact, this very point was emphasized by the creator of supercomputing metrics (an American professor) who mentioned that it is precisely the opposite of what you said, which makes me question the rest of your conclusions too.

What the American professor said is the Chinese have used their own chips. But that's irrelevant to supercomputing since supercomputers are built using only COTS. It is determined by how much money you want to spend for your supercomputing needs. Having the fastest supercomputer is pointless when you can have three or four different supercomputers of lower speed which are cheaper and consume lesser energy in total while doing the same amount of work in parallel.

You feel that the India-China difference in military power and technological prowess is not as great as "I think it is" --- you are entitled to your opinion, though I obviously disagree with it --- therefore allow me to use your favorite word when it comes to your own perception of how you compare to China: denial.

There is no denial from my side here. In fact, 'assuming' China has a large superiority over India puts you in denial. For example, India has been operating fighter ESA for 15 years now, that's roughly a 15 year lead over PLAAF.

India has the means to get into an arms race with China. Pakistan cannot. I think that should end the discussion.

 

[SrNair]

Pakistan's NSA sees ‘greater design’ behind US support for India's NSG membership
By Kamran Yousaf
Published: June 22, 2016
20SHARES
SHARE TWEET


ISLAMABAD: National Security Adviser Lt-Gen (retd) Nasser Janjua on Tuesday viewed American efforts to include India in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) as part of a ‘greater design’ to contain China on the one hand and to prevent the resurgence of Russia on the other hand.

Speaking at a seminar on ‘Pakistan’s case for NSA membership’, Janjua said the current move by the US to induct India into the 48-nation exclusive nuclear club should be seen in the context of ‘global power politics trends’.

Making India an NSG member state will be a mistake

He then listed ‘contain China, prevent the resurgence of Russia and keep the Muslim world in a controlled chaos’ as some of the leading trends in the current global power politics.

“So, it’s [part of] a greater design,” he argued, referring to the US decision to lead the campaign for an NSG membership for India. It is unprecedented that a top Pakistani official publicly made such a candid statement about a sensitive issue, though Gen Janjua clarified that this was his ‘personal opinion’.

Talking about the implications of these developments, Janjua cautioned that American policies would ultimately bring Pakistan even closer to China.

Pakistan is upset at the US decision to aggressively campaign for India while ignoring Islamabad’s aspirations to become an NSG member. Last month, Pakistan formally applied for a membership of the NSG, setting the stage for a showdown with India at the group’s plenary session that began on Monday in Seoul.

Islamabad sought the membership of the nuclear trading nations’ club after the Western countries led by the US quietly launched diplomatic efforts to induct India into the NSG.

Pakistan seeks NSG membership to curb nuclear proliferation

The campaign for India’s membership into the group is seen as carrying the risk of antagonising Pakistan as well as China, which could veto any Indian application.

Pakistan fears that the induction of India into the NSG would disturb strategic balance and trigger a new arms race in South Asia.

India has launched a hectic diplomatic push to secure the support of 48 members of the NSG. Last week the Indian foreign secretary paid an unannounced visit to Beijing to seek China’s support.

However, India’s efforts were dented by China’s announcement on Monday that India’s admission to the exclusive nuclear club was not on the agenda of the NSG’s meeting currently under way in the South Korean capital.

The announcement made by Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying in Beijing is seen as a rebuff to India’s effort to join the NSG. “The inclusion of non-NPT members has never been a topic on the agenda of NSG meetings. In Seoul this year, there is no such topic,” Chunying said.

The spokesperson said the opinion within the member countries was divided on including not just India but all countries that are not signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 22nd, 2016.

Why should he drag Russia and muslim nations in to this ?
Russians are our close friends .Only area even US wont dare to touch .
GCC are also our top partner .
NSA should remember about gap between India and other SA nations .
Pakistan is not a match to India.

India shouldn't get too smug about the fact that the US is overlooking all of its issues simply because it needs to prop it up as a counterweight to China in the region.

My advice to India would be not to buy into this illusion and learn from Pakistan's experience --- what happens when US interests change and suddenly Modi is back to being a blacklisted thug and support of various terror movements (Baloch, Tamil, etc.) are highlighted day and night by the NYT and others? It ain't pretty!



I believe we can easily maintain our minimum defensive deterrent in the face of an aggressive neighbor. It's not about absolute numbers, remember..

We are not Pakistan .First fact you should remember .
Dealings between India and US are closely revolving around their own mutual interest and issue.
Both cant touch each others permanent interests .
That is why the US still didnt dump Pakistan and US wont even try to touch our close relation with Russia .
We didnt go anything but they come to us and for mutual benefit .We welcomed them .

We know how to handle relations because we have our own clout and strength.

While India and China have the things you mentioned in common, the numbers I last checked put China in a different league. Having those things in common does not have any bearing on the quality/stage/numbers that pertain to the outputs of each of those programs.

You are incorrect that building a supercomputer is building the tallest building (i.e. that it's just about affording the hardware) --- in fact, this very point was emphasized by the creator of supercomputing metrics (an American professor) who mentioned that it is precisely the opposite of what you said, which makes me question the rest of your conclusions too.


You feel that the India-China difference in military power and technological prowess is not as great as "I think it is" --- you are entitled to your opinion, though I obviously disagree with it --- therefore allow me to use your favorite word when it comes to your own perception of how you compare to China: denial.

Do you know how we developed our own super computer in 1990's ?
We asked for Cray computer series for climate prediction purposes.But as usual they rejected , then Pakistan was their most trusted ally. Then we didnt asked or beg to anyone .
Our govt just initiate a program with C-DAC and within few years ,from nothing or from just scratch ,we developed PARAM Series .
What I am trying to say is if we want exaflop ,we surely can develop within record time .
But now we dont need or dont have purpose .

 

[R Wing]

Why should he drag Russia and muslim nations in to this ?
Russians are our close friends .Only area even US wont dare to touch .
GCC are also our top partner .
NSA should remember about gap between India and other SA nations .
Pakistan is not a match to India.



We are not Pakistan .First fact you should remember .
Dealings between India and US are closely revolving around their own mutual interest and issue.
Both cant touch each others permanent interests .
That is why the US still didnt dump Pakistan and US wont even try to touch our close relation with Russia .
We didnt go anything but they come to us and for mutual benefit .We welcomed them .

We know how to handle relations because we have our own clout and strength.



Do you know how we developed our own super computer in 1990's ?
We asked for Cray computer series for climate prediction purposes.But as usual they rejected , then Pakistan was their most trusted ally. Then we didnt asked or beg to anyone .
Our govt just initiate a program with C-DAC and within few years ,from nothing or from just scratch ,we developed PARAM Series .
What I am trying to say is if we want exaflop ,we surely can develop within record time .
But now we dont need or dont have purpose .

1.) The first fact you should remember is that there is no such thing as permanent interests. Of course the US will come to you because it needs to build the only reasonable option (only other country in the world with over a billion people / neighbor and rival of China) to counter China's influence in the region. This has no bearing on your JVs and defense cooperation with Russia, as you mentioned. This is similar to the US working with us (especially when it needed us against the Soviets and later the Taliban in Afghanistan), while we had (and continue to have) JVs and defense cooperation with China.

2.) Thanks for sharing the supercomputer example, though it has no bearing on anything. Nations find ways to build what they need, when they need it, using whatever means necessary (usually a combination of clandestine support from another nation, theft of technology, massive domestic R&D and testing, etc.). Most nuclear nations developed their bombs along these lines. You missed my point --- I am saying that building a supercomputer that works well is not simply about putting the hardware together. Whatever you mentioned does not change this --- we both can say anything (i.e. that XYZ can build ABC in record time), but it means nothing because we can only compare what's readily available. The Chinese supercomputer is an achievement in global computing --- it's not just that they could afford the hardware --- but that they got all of it to work very efficiently together. Three of the six finalists for a prestigious high-performance computing award are applications built to run on TaihuLight. And, on the hardware side, the most significant thing about this achievement (especially given such supercomputers have manhy potential applications in cyber warfare) is that all the parts are indigenous, including (critically) the processors. The US Dept of Commerce banned the export of Intel processors to Chinese supercomputing labs after a request from the NSA, which uses supercomputers effectively. This is very significant --- China doesn't need JVs to build its most advanced (and often deadly) tech.

 

[kṣamā]

Please excuse for Off topic post.

Just to make things clear around here, peak performance of a super computer is something like peak power output by an automobile engine. Peak power dose mater. Races are won and lost by a diffrence of few puny horses. But one should also note that engines are not always operating under such extreme conditions. Engines deliver power differently through the power curve and have different operating efficiency at different point on the curve. And almost exclusively they are not most efficient at both extreams of the power band.

Now similarly SC also have an power rating and an efficiency curve. No matter how efficient the chips are, they will not be operating at peak performance all the time. Moreover having a very big performance number also brings in its own idiosyncrasies. Like you cannot ever ever ride a Lambo on a cobbled roads or think of taking it into city traffic (Case in point Pune-vimannagar traffic) on a hot sunny day. Similarly these huge SC have there own problems. Like cost of operating huge sc for small jobs will be higher than that of medium sized SC. The cooling cost of these huge SC will make there operation prohibitive. In the same place you can have multiple tera flop grade SC processing huge jobs pararlley will produce results much more efficiently. And not to forget they will have a way higher level of fault tolerance.

In layman's terms, I would any day take multiple smaller powerful computational nodes in parallel than have one giant a$$ power hungry mamoth SC.