Washington Post: Did India shoot down a Pakistani F-16 in February? This just became a big deal.

[GumNaam]

Look at the selling point now, you have all the Russian tech and see what happened to you, do you think S400 will save you

Hmm, good point. Oh well, they can get american platforms and spend everything they have buying them, we'll still rip them a new hole!

 

[IceCold]

That's one reason, why i believe Pakistan should not have hesitated in it's response.

Hesitated? We hit them in broad day light panicking them so much that they shot down their own helicopter killing 6 of their jawans and lost two jets to PAF. A response cannot be any clearer than this.

 

[The Eagle]

The recent clash favoured us with multiple achievements starting with firstly world acknowledged Pakistan's resolve for peace instead of calling for war on first day of intrusion by India. Pakistan retained escalation ladder.

Secondly ,Pakistan was acknowledged in regard to deserving the right of self defence so, we struck India deep inside IoK and delivered what we promised as well as called Indian military bluff.

Thirdly, Indian narrative is widely rejected while IAF proven to be only force that recovers a piece of AMRAAM and then claim it a kill (shooting down platform) yet trying to cover the fact that it's a missile to shoot down rival and F-16 wreckage.

Above all, Pakistan used every asset without any string, sanction threat or so-called sale condition of use and none of OEMs/suppliers had any issue nor anyone paid any heed to Indian rants as well as usual complaining habit. Indian lost assets and so diplomatically humiliated. What happen next will be told by time.

India will continue with feel good propaganda campaign for domestic achievements so, Indian populace is the better judge while outside world has already shown the mirror.

 

[Falcon26]

The recent clash favoured us with multiple achievements starting with firstly world acknowledged Pakistan's resolve for peace instead of calling for war on first day of intrusion by India. Pakistan retained escalation ladder.

Secondly ,Pakistan was acknowledged in regard to deserving the right of self defence so, we struck India deep inside IoK and delivered what we promised as well as called Indian military bluff.

Thirdly, Indian narrative is widely rejected while IAF proven to be only force that recovers a piece of AMRAAM and then claim it a kill (shooting down platform) yet trying to cover the fact that it's a missile to shoot down rival and F-16 wreckage.

Above all, Pakistan used every asset without any string, sanction threat or so-called sale condition of use and none of OEMs/suppliers had any issue nor anyone paid any heed to Indian rants as well as usual complaining habit. Indian lost assets and so diplomatically humiliated. What happen next will be told by time.

India will continue with feel good propaganda campaign for domestic achievements so, Indian populace is the better judge while outside world has already shown the mirror.

Pakistan did not retain the escalation ladder, it dominated it. India was given a brute beating and dared to retaliate...it didn’t despite its aggressive anti-Pakistan rhetoric. “Shining India” was forced to script a fake news of downing an F-16 to salvage some pride. Weeks later, Indians continue to claim that they shot down an F-16 even though the entire world is laughing at them.

 

[LeGenD]

Oh mate I know, anyway the order from the higher-ups was to avoid conflict. The Indians even acknowledged this, although part of that might be face saving.

Yes, Mike Pompeo intervened and told India to stand down. He also told Pakistan to show restraint which we did. Shah Mahmood Qureshi confirmed this.

 

[swnjo]

If the IAF did not, in fact, shoot down a Pakistani F-16, voters might conclude that India carried out airstrikes and has nothing to show for them but lost a pilot, a warplane, a helicopter and six other military personnel.

That about sums it up. A clear conventional loss.

National security adviser John Bolton tacitly gave a green light for India’s February retaliatory airstrikes.

Nope, and there's many reasons to doubt this.

as well as shortfalls in military capabilities that leave India lagging far behind China.

Far behind, that's being too generous many would say no where on the same horizon.

BJP have lots of other things to worry about. This incident will play with the core voters or the rich folks but for majority voters (poor & middle class people like us) domestic issues like state of economy, unemployement and some other regional issues are major factor. Even the opposition are not bringing up anything about the incidents. On radio/print ads its mostly economy, citizenship issue, mundane things like LPG supply seems to be major issue. To be honest foreign newspaper are making out it a big deal out of this issue vis-a-vis election, but over here its completely different.

 

[IbnAbdullah]

Salaam

Military analysts point to India’s notoriously lethargic procurement process, meager defense budgets, Modi’s defense indigenization campaign and dysfunctional civil-military relations as reasons for the gap between Indian military intentions and capabilities.

This is the main reason for this article being written by WP.

It is essentially saying that the Indians should spend a lot more money on defence procurements from foreign (US) companies (that is why defence indigenisation campaign is also a problem, so that India could further the goal of the US against China on the region.

I really don't see how the interests of India and the US align. The US wants India to essentially antagonise China as well as buy expensive weaponry from the US. The increased military budget will have to take away from national development budget, which, given the stage of Indian development, seems counter productive.

Tgere is also the fact that as India positions itself as a counter to China, the Chinese will start to view them more and more a threat. This would further cause India to have two nuclear armed rivals as neighbours.

The Americans are intelligent in that they have done a lot of work to keep their neighbourhood safe. That is why they went ballistic during the cuban missile crisis. Without a lasting peace around you, you can't have proper development.

For Indians, they seem to want the opposite and the Indians seemingly are enthusiastic about it.

The Indians are falling for the same thing the Arabs and Iranians have fallen for. A little more influence in the neighbourhood at the cost of strategic longterm development and peace is hardly worth much.


...

 

[PradoTLC]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...ni-f-back-february-this-just-became-big-deal/

Democracy Dies in Darkness
Monkey Cage | Analysis

Did India shoot down a Pakistani F-16 in February? This just became a big deal.
There are broader implications for India — and the United States
By Emily Tallo

April 17, 2019 at 6:00 AM


Defense officials in New Delhi on Feb. 28 display part of an air-to-air AMRAAM missile allegedly fired by a Pakistani aircraft, violating Indian airspace. Indian Air Vice Marshal R.G.K. Kapoor said parts of the missile were recovered in Indian territory. India said it shot down a Pakistani warplane, something Islamabad has denied. (Manish Swarup/AP)
With voting underway in India’s general election, February’s Kashmir conflict is likely to weigh on the minds of voters, especially given last week’s social media uproar over the reported downing of a Pakistani F-16 fighter jet during the crisis.

The controversy flared up when a Foreign Policy article stated that the Pentagon had accounted for all of Pakistan’s F-16 jets. This report, based on anonymous statements by two U.S. Defense Department officials, contradicted the Indian air force’s (IAF) narrative of the dogfight. The IAF claims an Indian pilot shot down a Pakistani F-16 fighter plane before a Pakistani missile took down his own third-generation MiG-21 warplane.

The IAF responded last week by releasing “irrefutable” evidence — including electronic signatures and radio transcripts — that Pakistan lost a fighter jet during the February aerial combat. A number of U.S. and Indian defense analysts called the evidence circumstantial. Indian media reported that a U.S. Defense Department spokesman said he was unaware of any investigation. The Pentagon, like the State Department, has yet to issue a public statement on the F-16 count, but there have been no counter-leaks contradicting the Foreign Policy report.

What happened in the India-Pakistan crisis?

The informational conflict is the latest outcome of February’s India-Pakistan crisis, which threatened to escalate to all-out war. After a Feb. 14 terrorist attack attributed to Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammad killed 40 paramilitaries in Indian-administered Kashmir, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi faced powerful domestic political incentivesto follow through on his promise for vengeance against Pakistan.


Related: After terrorist attack in Kashmir, will India seek vengeance or de-escalation?

Research by one of us and Hannah Haegeland suggests that the onset of international crisis stems from leaders “selecting into a crisis” because of political contexts and calculations — rather than being compelled by material conditions. Cross-border terrorist attacks targeting women and children have not triggered crises, but in this case, the proximity to the Indian national election seemed to demand retribution.

On Feb. 26, the IAF launched airstrikes against what it said were terrorist camps in Pakistan. Pakistan retaliated with fighter planes dropping their payloads in Kashmir and, in an ensuing air battle, shot down an Indian MiG-21 warplane and captured its pilot.

India claims the MiG-21 pilot shot down a more advanced Pakistan F-16 fighter aircraft before his own aircraft was downed — but Pakistan’s civilian and military leadership vehemently denied this.

Why does it matter to India?

India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) used the Kashmir crisis to project Modi as a strong leader against Pakistan — capitalizing on this opportunity ahead of India’s general election, which takes place from April 11 to May 19. Recent surveys suggest Modi and his party have profited from heightened nationalist sentiment with a modest but visible bump in popularity.

Related: In India, the world’s largest election has started. Keep an eye on these 5 things.

But these latest details about the India-Pakistan air battles threaten to discredit the BJP narrative and undermine its electoral prospects. Open-source satellite imagery suggests India did not hit any targets of consequence in the airstrikes it conducted after the terrorist attack on the paramilitaries. Additionally, reporting indicates that during the Feb. 27 air battle, friendly fire from an air-defense missile brought down an Indian military helicopter, killing six military personnel.


If the IAF did not, in fact, shoot down a Pakistani F-16, voters might conclude that India carried out airstrikes and has nothing to show for them but lost a pilot, a warplane, a helicopter and six other military personnel.

Any news that may tarnish perceptions of Indian military superiority over Pakistan isn’t good news for a government that pledged to improve India’s hard-power capabilities and punish Pakistan for its alleged support of terrorism. The research suggests material advantages — planes, weapons — are no guarantee of military effectiveness. This will no doubt raise questions both inside and outside of India about the IAF’s conventional advantage if it is unable punish a weaker adversary to reestablish deterrence. This could encourage Pakistan to behave more aggressively in a future India-Pakistan crisis. Both countries are nuclear powers, so any conflicts between the two raise deeper concerns about the risks of escalation and a mushroom cloud over the subcontinent.

Related: The Kashmir attack could prompt a crisis in South Asia. Here’s why.

Will there be fallout for the Indian military? Its competence and professionalism could also be called into questioned if it turns out military leaders knowingly defended an inaccurate position — particularly a partisan one that bolstered the BJP’s electoral narrative.

What does this controversy mean for the United States?

The United States also has high stakes in the F-16 controversy because of its interest in India as a rising power in Asia. Washington would no doubt have preferred to see India acquit itself well in the recent India-Pakistan conflict. National security adviser John Bolton tacitly gave a green light for India’s February retaliatory airstrikes.

Analysts think India might play a heavyweight role in the Asian balance of power if it were able to “de-hyphenate” from its western rival and “raise its gaze from Pakistan.” This might happen if the India-Pakistan conventional military asymmetry were sufficiently stark such that “Pakistan wouldn’t even dare retaliate,” as the Indian analyst Shekhar Gupta suggests.


The U.S. “Indo-Pacific Strategy” envisions India balancing against China while playing the role of a regional “net security provider” in a region that is critical to U.S. economic and strategic interests. U.S. policymakers fear that the more successful Pakistan is at trading punches with India, a more distracted India is less likely to concentrate on projecting and protecting U.S. interests in the region.

But the United States also may have an interest in seeing India become more aware of the risks of escalation in conflicts with Pakistan — as well as shortfalls in military capabilities that leave India lagging far behind China. Military analysts point to India’s notoriously lethargic procurement process, meager defense budgets, Modi’s defense indigenization campaign and dysfunctional civil-military relations as reasons for the gap between Indian military intentions and capabilities.

These criticisms include deficits in India’s air power, ammunition and “jointness” — the capability of services within the Indian military to cooperate. If the Indian government emerges sobered by the latest conflict, it might be able to surmount bureaucratic hurdles and organizational routines that constrain military adaptation, an important ingredient to seriously balancing China.

The “battle of perceptions” played heavily into the February crisis and has once again surfaced — threatening to throw a wrench into Indian and American interests alike.

Sameer Lalwani (@splalwani) is a senior fellow and director of the South Asia Program at the Stimson Center and co-editor of Investigating Crises: South Asia’s Lessons, Evolving Dynamics, and Trajectories.

Emily Tallo (@emily_tallo) is a research assistant with the South Asia Program at the Stimson Center and the deputy editor of South Asian Voices.

public humilation for the indians

John Bolton did say India has a right to defend itself.

against what?

a pissed off indian kashmiri who attacked military targets?

you guys are just anti muslim nothing else. there is no legitimacy to what you are doing

 

[atya]

But still that scoundrel is winning.

Let's hope he does win, he has caused more damage to India then Pakistan would in 20 years

 

[crankthatskunk]

Even though the article is mostly written from Indian's point of view.
But still the writer in an effort to appear "neutral" ended up unwittingly screwing the Indian narrative altogether. Despite use of ifs and buts.

If the IAF did not, in fact, shoot down a Pakistani F-16

And

The controversy flared up when a Foreign Policy article stated that the Pentagon had accounted for all of Pakistan’s F-16 jets. This report, based on anonymous statements by two U.S. Defense Department officials, contradicted the Indian air force’s (IAF) narrative of the dogfight.

The writer knows very well that the Indian narratives and lies are already dead and buried of shooting down of F 16 after FPJ's article. She is still using "IF".

A number of U.S. and Indian defense analysts called the evidence circumstantial. but there have been no counter-leaks contradicting the Foreign Policy report.

In short Emily is quiet certain in her head that the Indians claims are nothing but lies.

 

[PradoTLC]

RSS scum is too stupid. Serves us well though. Modi will do a lot of harm to India.

we like modi

Never interrupt an enemy when he is making a mistake.

Why do you think Imran khan want BJP to win

 

[Ghessan]

After India with its intentions and capabilities, Feb 26 misadventure, exposed. a decision taken and there was a military intention on the this side of the border that was clear and delivering with a political will too.

after years this time we experienced which i always dream of, a clear foreign policy stance was in place either from PM or foreign minster both representing country at highest level. although there were few steps taken in a hurry.

but there is one thing clear as crystal when sovereignty is at stake all the stake holders in this country will be on one page, although we take steps forward to address it willingly or not which humiliate us several times in the past.

one of the steps that was taken in a hurry was announcing the return of the pilot and latter acting upon it immediately. a hurry may be because of a pressure from some other state and that it may snatch credit if delayed but it could have been exercised in a better way.

it is because the way we respond that India is in toss and turn mode the whole night since feb 27. it will not let them sleep in peace. and if we will engage things better in the future, it will be India every time who if act like this again will be considered a "misadventure"

US within its circle of defense and govt would surely have a new point of discussion regarding "India - rival to China" which may go either way. more are the chances that they will more aggressively address the issues with Indian military by effectively marketing the new hardware which will not only address those issues but will milk the cow more conveniently negating the Indian bureaucratic hurdles to some extent. hence this incidence has make the work little more easy for them even for India who is dreaming to become a regional power challenging China and this they share with the US.

for India going regional power but with war mongering concepts, snubbing the neighbors, progressing by stepping at the throat of the small states will not work. feb 27 was the prime example, one learns or not is a separate issue. besides India with its political narrative at the hands of military is a big hurdle.

 

[Mugwop]

do you really think America can offer india anything that it didn't already get from russia, europe or isreal?

Guts and courage are two things that can't be bought off the shelf!

Mera profile photo mulahyza farmaiyay!

Where the video for this? I kept trying to find it. How did you get the gif?

 

[Ghessan]

That's one reason, why i believe Pakistan should not have hesitated in it's response.

yes and it would have been alarming in front of us.

 

[Zee-shaun]

Where the video for this? I kept trying to find it. How did you get the gif?

This one?