what does the Pak armed forces realiticially need to counter india conventially

[A2Z]

i was thinking about what the armed forces really need, to be able to match india conventionally, and I failed to think of any realistic solution.
The biggest issue is the navy/airforce, in order to hold our own against them the airforce would need atleast 100+ 4-5 generation aircraft in addition to the F-16s and JF-17BLK3s(the other blocks seem incapable of doing much) the navy would need a similar type of strike wing, and the army would need a massive Air defence network akin to what the arabs had agaisnt israel in 73. And with all this said none of what i stated is realistic.
i can see the pak army in its current form holding its own against the indian army if there was no air support for the indians but with constant airsupport the IA would be recieving it would only be a matter of time.

The most important thing that India and Pakistan can do is to look at EU and make peace with each other. If you compare the Europe and Sub-continent post WWII you would say sub-continent was in a better position, we weren't destroyed by war the way Europe was, especially Germany and France. But since that day Europe has made peace and worked together and on the other hand we have fought and worked against each other. Making peace won't be easy and believe me reminding who threw the first stone wouldn't help either.

If 68 years of rivalry has done nothing what good could it bring in future? We gain independence in 47, Singapore got it in 65 and look where Singapore stands today with just 6 million people. India and Pakistan have a combined population of nearly 1.5 billion and look where we stand, Pakistan has the most number of IDPs in world and India has most number of poor people. Are these the goals Jinnah, Gandhi, Nehru and Liaquat Ali had in mind?

Its not that the 2 nations have done nothing good yes they have but that is easily overshadowed by what could have been achieved if both had lived with peace. Unfortunately the common people who suffer the most aren't even the ones to be blamed and the culprits are the least effected. The common men want to live together in peace and natural disasters are the best examples. In 2005 India was the first nation to send help after the earthquake despite the fact that in 2002 both the nations were on the verge of war.

So its time that we start thinking with our brains and sort the matters out.

 

[General General]

As a response to the OP, a rock solid defence would lead to some assurity for Pakistan to not rely on non-conventional weapons. That would required a clear technological edge over India, however in a smaller force- enough for defending the air, sea and ground.
A comprehensive modern SAM system that covers the entire country.
About 8 squadron of powerful 5th generation multirole fighters with modern weaponry.
Three nuclear subs complemented by 3 Mistral-class amphibious assault ships.
300,000 troops supplemented with 200,000 reserves.

This would be a good defence network that will able to thwart any attack to the country. My 2 pence.

 

[Trumpcard]

The most important thing that India and Pakistan can do is to look at EU and make peace with each other. If you compare the Europe and Sub-continent post WWII you would say sub-continent was in a better position, we weren't destroyed by war the way Europe was, especially Germany and France. But since that day Europe has made peace and worked together and on the other hand we have fought and worked against each other. Making peace won't be easy and believe me reminding who threw the first stone wouldn't help either.

If 68 years of rivalry has done nothing what good could it bring in future? We gain independence in 47, Singapore got it in 65 and look where Singapore stands today with just 6 million people. India and Pakistan have a combined population of nearly 1.5 billion and look where we stand, Pakistan has the most number of IDPs in world and India has most number of poor people. Are these the goals Jinnah, Gandhi, Nehru and Liaquat Ali had in mind?

Its not that the 2 nations have done nothing good yes they have but that is easily overshadowed by what could have been achieved if both had lived with peace. Unfortunately the common people who suffer the most aren't even the ones to be blamed and the culprits are the least effected. The common men want to live together in peace and natural disasters are the best examples. In 2005 India was the first nation to send help after the earthquake despite the fact that in 2002 both the nations were on the verge of war.

So its time that we start thinking with our brains and sort the matters out.

Exactly, Even if we don't want to walk hand in hand let the status quo be and let's work towards our respective progress and peace in all dimensions! Believe me no family man or for that matter a soldiers mother would want a war, So let's just avoid discussing the possibilities of war again and again!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Look this is your country so i am nobody to lecture you...However given we are debating i shared my points...Civilian govt. will always remain weak...because Army is not going to relent and give control of foreign policy...I mean who loves giving away power?? Only Pakistanis can exert pressure for this power transfer...

You're essentially making the same point I did, that power is not going to be willingly given up. I argued in my previous post that in order for the civilian government to take back power and control it needs public support and public support for the civilian government will not occur until the government starts delivering on governance.

because this is plain stupid....help me understand how has your tactic helped?? How your DM reminding that you have nukes stopped India from making LOC/IB hot??

International pressure behind the scenes on the Indian government to put a lid on its inflammatory rhetoric.

Don't play with words...My point is simple...Pakistan has been threatening to use nukes irrespective of who in India is in power...It has nothing to with Modi and how you guys feel about him....Agree/deny that...

Pakistan's threats to use nuclear weapons as a defensive response to Indian military aggression threatening her survival have almost always been in the context of a response to inflammatory rhetoric from India.

You speak as if we were well disposed against them when the previous, non-genocidal, non-maniacal, secular dispensation was in power. ISI engineered a heinous attack on their commercial capital when the previous dispensation was in power. As usual, we denied our role, and that was first time that I am aware we threatened them with nukes. Face it, we hate them and our hatred has proven to be implacable so far.

Another lie - there is no credible evidence suggesting the ISI engineered the Mumbai attacks. And why wouldn't Pakistan deny a fabricated allegation and threaten the use of nuclear weapons as a defensive response to threats of armed aggression against her? So yes, given that the only thing you can come with are unsubstantiated allegations and conspiracy theories about the 'ISI engineering the Mumbai attacks', yes, I suppose we are well disposed and justified in responding to threats of Indian military aggression with threats of nuclear weapons as a means of deterrence.

The fact is that the publicly available statements and attitudes displayed by Indian politicians, Indian media and commentators on various platforms clearly point to the Indian side displaying significantly more implacable and irrational hatred towards Pakistan. Outside of deluded Pakistani fanboys on fora such as these and extremists, the level of 'implacable' hate and poison displayed by India is unmatched in Pakistan.

It seems the words of sundry other people like Hafeez Saeed, Zaki-ur Laqwi, Haqqani, etc. also carry a lot of weight in Pakistan. They are wanted criminals, and we should look at our own actions of allowing thugs like them a public platform instead of pointing fingers. In your world they might be "just normal citizens" of Pakistan. But if these are our model citizens then we should re-look at what we have become.

First of all, legally HS and Lakhvi are not 'wanted criminals' in Pakistan, given the lack of any conviction in a Pakistani court. Second, the actual evidence (in terms of the ability of these individuals to get elected in large numbers) does not support your claim of 'their words carry a lot of weight', and there is certainly no evidence to suggest that these individuals are looked upon as 'model citizens' by a vast majority of Pakistanis. So let's stop with the deluded and unsubstantiated allegations you're pulling out of the irrationally hateful Indian playbook.

They say we violate ceasefire line unprovoked, we say they do it. Only one party complains of ceasefire violations to UNMOGIP to keep the Kashmir issue alive, which is Pakistan.

Actually its more a case of only one party, Pakistan, willing to involve a neutral UN mandated party to investigate the ceasefire violations and monitor the LoC. Only the party with nothing to hide would take those steps, and it certainly isn't India

Only one party has anything to gain by ceasefire violations, and that is Pakistan.

Nonsense - Pakistan has no motive or benefit currently to initiate ceasefire violations or keep the LoC 'hot'. Given Pakistan's massive military and para-military deployments in FATA, Balochistan and Karachi, there is absolutely no reason for Pakistan to want to inflame tensions along the LoC at this point in time. The only party that benefits from these violations is India, especially given the public displays of a hate-mongering mindset displayed by India's leadership and media.

. Even if he is a Pakistani, he belongs to a rare delusional breed.

Adnan Sami Khan type (even if we assume he's Pakistani) - unsubstantiated, irrational and conspiracy theory laden Pakistan bashing (his comments are nothing but a regurgitation of most nonsensical allegations already spewed by Indian commentators and apologists) would only be considered 'honest, insightful and refreshing' by the irrational hate-mongering Indian crowd that buys into the poisonous rubbish spewed by their media and government with equal vigor.

 

[Humble Analyst]

Most don't. .

If they actually get down to understanding "pakistan's" policy - Indian policy makers will be sanctioning hundreds more nukes and coming up with a samson theory of their own to wipe out most of the sunni salafi world if threatened..its more of a sunni vs Hindu policy that Pakistan tries to sell to its masses and to other Co sunni countries.



None of them are on pdf unfortunately. .so haven't been able to communicate with them.

This is a hate mongering post @Oscar @waz please take note "wiping out and sectarial suggestions"

 

[Joe Shearer]

This is a hate mongering post @Oscar @waz please take note "wiping out and sectarial suggestions"

I don't think so. Bad geopolitics, perhaps, bad realpolitik, perhaps.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Well this is one of the more disturbing posts I've encountered on PDF so I thought I would dissect it point by point:

I have some time on my hand right now, so lets tangle and dismiss the myths you're trying to propagate.

72 hours is an incredibly long time in modern day warfare. Within 72 hours the IAF could quite easily have ensured air supremacy over the majority of Pakistan allowing their CAS assets to prosecute your ground units with impunity.

Time frame is contingent on the type of warfare that India wants to impose. Whether she will throw in full force or hold some back as Reserves and cover its Chinese flank. 72 hours is not enough for IAF to implement Air Supremacy, you might be confusing IAF with the USAF. in this scenario. IAF lacks the effective punch and hammer to knock out PAF in a 72 hours timeframe, PAF has enough Assets in its disposal to go head to head against the IAF for at least 2 weeks. A realistic timeframe would be 2-3 weeks to seriously degrade PAF's fighting capabilities, but than again that is a red line for Pakistan.

An entirely unqualified comment that is illogical to say the least. The disparity between the respective navies is perhaps the most considerable of any of the 3 wings and once your navy is pulverised there is little that can stop a) an economic blockade of your most prosperous city (what kind of reserves does Pakistan hold at any one time?) and b) the targeting of the aforementioned city by IN and IAF aircraft.

A very valid argument in my opinion from @MastanKhan . For a blockade to be be effective, IN needs to effectively implement a blockade for at least a month to cause serious consequences for Pakistan. Pakistan has more than enough reserves to withstand 2 to 3 days of blockade. But overall, i doubt it if IN can effectively implement a blockade against Pakistan because it will need lots of ships and spread them out thinly to implement a blockade, and will be under constant threat of harassment from PN's ASM which are very effective. Second, does India has the will to board and seize a Chinese or American Flagged Merchant Vessel. I highly doubt it.

Second, i fail to see how IN will effectively neutralize PN in 2 to 3 days. You would have a point if both the Navies slug it out in the Open Seas in which case the IN will clobber PN within a matter of hours. But within its own waters, PN has very impressive Area Deniability Capabilities. A tactic largely mimicking PLAN's strategy of dealing with USN in the South China Sea. IN will loose far more ships in this quest than it will sink.

India going nuclear is a pretty stupid thing to be fearful of given it has an officially stated NFU policy. India would only "go nuclear" IF attacked by nuclear weapons. Your fear should be of your leaders unilaterally escalating any conflict to this level and/or rogue elements in your state initiating such a confrontation by getting their hands on one of your (growing) stockpile.

These NFU Policies go right out the door once blood starts flowing. We are not worried about any rogue elements getting their hands on a nuke as our Security System is top notch. Pakistan will initiate a nuke strike if one of its Red Lines are crossed, and they have been listed many times here on this forum.

You make out that this is somehow a weakness. "To make money" in this region means escaping abject poverty and feeding your family- this is hardly the most devious or nefarious of goals. I don't believe you would honestly wish your nation to remain poverty stricken forever.

I think what he meant was, an escalation across the LOC will result in loss of Investment for both sides. During the 2001-2002 stand off, foreigners were evacuated by their respective Governments in India

And anyone who has fantasies of "conquering" a sovereign nation of the stature of India is living in some unfathomable alternate reality.

Pakistan has neither the resources nor the will to conquer a behemoth like India. It's like saying Canada will conquer the US or Georgia will conquer Russia. I don't know how you can come up with such a crazy theory like this. Heck, even the US cannot mobilize the resources to conquer a country like India. What's wrong with you with coming up a ridiculous theory such as that.

Wasted or not it is but 1.78% of GDP- well below the amount India spends on infrastructure, healthcare, education etc.

Good

I do not believe this to be the case, you are painting Pakistan as a nation of fanatics and if is the case you will remain in the dirt.

Pakistani's on average are more worried about putting food on their tables and making sure their kids get a good education. India is the last thing on their minds.

The same could be said for your nation in reverse. Your assertion actually does not hold much water as India's conventional superiority over Pakistan's military is vast so it is Pakistan that is being shielded thanks to their nuclear umbrella- not so much vice versa.

Conventional Superiority is there, but not to the degree that India will dominate the battlefield. This is not WW2 that Massed Forces will be fighting against each other, more like Armoured Formations in smaller numbers will be duelling each other. For now and in a short conflict, PA's Armoured Formations can go head to head against IA's Armoured Formations, there is nothing that India has in its Combined Armed Formations that can dominate the day for India. India lacks the hammer to defeat either PA outright in the battlefield. India certainly had that hammer and a very impressive one. Smerch was a complete game changer in my opinion, it allowed the IA to smash any PA's Armoured Formations from stand off ranges without the risk of counter batteries. This threat has been nullified as PA now fields A-100, which exposes the Smerch to counter fire. It is only attrition that will defeat Pakistan, not a battle.

 

[Psychic]

Adnan Sami Khan type

Or Asima Jehangir type....The one who paid homage to Shiv Sena and claimed to be a secular at the same time (hypocrisy at it's best). He seems to ignore the outrageous Pakistan-centric policies of India and continuous Indian support to terrorists/seperatists in Pakistan since 1971. The likes of him want to see Pakistan as a client state of India or US but what they don't realize is that Pakistan is not answerable to India and that Pakistan reserves the right to protect it's national interests one way or the other. Had his kind ever had the power in Pakistan, they would have pimped out the country.
And the more surprising bit is the abuse of rating system by an Indian professional.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

When this thought of yours prevails with many officials in Pakistan establishment

Why would deluded conspiracy theories and unsubstantiated allegations 'prevail with Pakistani officials'? Just because some Pakistan basher regurgitates the usual noxious claims?

then Good times ahead for Pakistan for sure and prosperity and dignity of ur people. Am saying it for very long time on here for many years now. All time am confronted with likes of Agnostic Muslim and others.

The direction the country is going in is positive, but it has nothing to do with the rubbish spouted by your latest Pakistan bashing hero ala Hussain Haqqani/Adnan Sami Khan.

Sometimes I feel that Peace is no where near in Pakistan Radar at all. Moves are been made so eneimity with India exist so people so blindly fall in line with out questioning Top brace who failed terribly at every level.

You need to pay attention to the hate-mongering statements out of your own government and media, especially of late. The discourse in Pakistan can't hold a candle to the hate and hysteria coming out of the media and politicians in India. The country in the way of 'peace' isn't Pakistan currently, it's India.

Hope Kashmir is resolved peacefully. Pakistan should come forward and hand over P O K to India as per 1947 agreement. And focus on becoming a economic super power rather than fragile state with loose nuclear weapons. One small mistakes may change a nation's history.

There was no agreement in 1947 for 'Pakistan to hand over Kashmir' - successive UNSC Resolutions and the commissions they set up make clear that demilitarization of Kashmir would take place as part of a process whose details would be worked out between India, Pakistan and UN appointed representatives. India rejected almost every single proposal that those commissions developed, even though Pakistan would have been at a quantitative disadvantage under those proposals. So the main culprit blocking the resolution of Kashmir under the UNSC Resolutions is India as well.

 

[Spectre]

I have some time on my hand right now, so lets tangle and dismiss the myths you're trying to propagate.



Time frame is contingent on the type of warfare that India wants to impose. Whether she will throw in full force or hold some back as Reserves and cover its Chinese flank. 72 hours is not enough for IAF to implement Air Supremacy, you might be confusing IAF with the USAF. in this scenario. IAF lacks the effective punch and hammer to knock out PAF in a 72 hours timeframe, PAF has enough Assets in its disposal to go head to head against the IAF for at least 2 weeks. A realistic timeframe would be 2-3 weeks to seriously degrade PAF's fighting capabilities, but than again that is a red line for Pakistan.



A very valid argument in my opinion from @MastanKhan . For a blockade to be be effective, IN needs to effectively implement a blockade for at least a month to cause serious consequences for Pakistan. Pakistan has more than enough reserves to withstand 2 to 3 days of blockade. But overall, i doubt it if IN can effectively implement a blockade against Pakistan because it will need lots of ships and spread them out thinly to implement a blockade, and will be under constant threat of harassment from PN's ASM which are very effective. Second, does India has the will to board and seize a Chinese or American Flagged Merchant Vessel. I highly doubt it.

Second, i fail to see how IN will effectively neutralize PN in 2 to 3 days. You would have a point if both the Navies slug it out in the Open Seas in which case the IN will clobber PN within a matter of hours. But within its own waters, PN has very impressive Area Deniability Capabilities. A tactic largely mimicking PLAN's strategy of dealing with USN in the South China Sea. IN will loose far more ships in this quest than it will sink.



These NFU Policies go right out the door once blood starts flowing. We are not worried about any rogue elements getting their hands on a nuke as our Security System is top notch. Pakistan will initiate a nuke strike if one of its Red Lines are crossed, and they have been listed many times here on this forum.



I think what he meant was, an escalation across the LOC will result in loss of Investment for both sides. During the 2001-2002 stand off, foreigners were evacuated by their respective Governments in India



Pakistan has neither the resources nor the will to conquer a behemoth like India. It's like saying Canada will conquer the US or Georgia will conquer Russia. I don't know how you can come up with such a crazy theory like this. Heck, even the US cannot mobilize the resources to conquer a country like India. What's wrong with you with coming up a ridiculous theory such as that.



Good



Pakistani's on average are more worried about putting food on their tables and making sure their kids get a good education. India is the last thing on their minds.



Conventional Superiority is there, but not to the degree that India will dominate the battlefield. This is not WW2 that Massed Forces will be fighting against each other, more like Armoured Formations in smaller numbers will be duelling each other. For now and in a short conflict, PA's Armoured Formations can go head to head against IA's Armoured Formations, there is nothing that India has in its Combined Armed Formations that can dominate the day for India. India lacks the hammer to defeat either PA outright in the battlefield. India certainly had that hammer and a very impressive one. Smerch was a complete game changer in my opinion, it allowed the IA to smash any PA's Armoured Formations from stand off ranges without the risk of counter batteries. This threat has been nullified as PA now fields A-100, which exposes the Smerch to counter fire. It is only attrition that will defeat Pakistan, not a battle.

Excellent analysis of the situation.

There is no chance of any conventional/non conventional was between India and Pakistan due to

a. Narendra Modi - No Mumbai style attacks on India in the term of Mr. Modi because Pakistan is well aware that in such a scenario Modi would be compelled to respond using the Military option and that has potential to escalate matters. In such a scenario Pakistan would keep a tight leash on non state actors whom they would have turned a blind eye towards in the time UPA Govt. The extreme bravado shown by Modi holds him hostage, he has to act irrespective of the cost - both humane and economical.

Now I am not saying there would be no infiltration and low key acts of terrorism as it is impossible to fully control each and every such budding terrorist but the kind of support, planning and logistics Mumbai like attack requires usually attracts attention and due to the aforementioned high probability of escalation they are unlikely to be sanctioned.

b. Internal Factors in Pakistan - Pakistan I believe has learnt it's lesson and is in the process of weeding out those in the establishment who were advocate for strategy of breeding terrorists for strategic gain. The cost such a strategy extracts has been too high and Pakistan is unlikely to let the cancer take root again. In addition Pakistan is moving towards greater economic stability through CPEC and it is unlikely to jeopardize all that for zero actual gains on the ground - which is exactly what Mumbai style act would achieve.

c. External Factors- Pakistan has seen that any acts of terrorism in India instead of attracting attention to Kashmir issue, end up promoting the Indian narrative against Pakistan and there is a strong back-lash against Pakistan. Improved Indian influence in US and the west can even lead to sanctions if any proof is there that makes it clear that Pakistani deep state establishment was indeed responsible.

My core assumptions are

1. Pakistan is a rational actor and would not take steps which they know would be detrimental to them.
2. In absence of any Provocation, India being a rational actor would have no reason to attack Pakistan

 

[Joe Shearer]

Why would deluded conspiracy theories and unsubstantiated allegations 'prevail with Pakistani officials'? Just because some Pakistan basher regurgitates the usual noxious claims?

The direction the country is going in is positive, but it has nothing to do with the rubbish spouted by your latest Pakistan bashing hero ala Hussain Haqqani/Adnan Sami Khan.

You need to pay attention to the hate-mongering statements out of your own government and media, especially of late. The discourse in Pakistan can't hold a candle to the hate and hysteria coming out of the media and politicians in India. The country in the way of 'peace' isn't Pakistan currently, it's India.

There was no agreement in 1947 for 'Pakistan to hand over Kashmir' - successive UNSC Resolutions and the commissions they set up make clear that demilitarization of Kashmir would take place as part of a process whose details would be worked out between India, Pakistan and UN appointed representatives. India rejected almost every single proposal that those commissions developed, even though Pakistan would have been at a quantitative disadvantage under those proposals. So the main culprit blocking the resolution of Kashmir under the UNSC Resolutions is India as well.

I am sorry, that is wrong.

I am hesitant to use stronger words because of my enormous personal respect for you. For that reason, too, I shall limit myself to just these three sentences.

 

[Jat Boy]

Not convinced Pakistan can SUSTAIN a FULL CONVENTIONAL conflict for more than one week.

I have seen retired Pak generals indicate this on your talk shows
recentlky in LOC firing Pakistanis could not respond to indian LOC firing at the same rate after 24 hours. Ajit Doval noted how quickly pakistan ran out of shells.

IT COMES down to resources this includes money outside import of ammo and fuel and infrastucture and cost to your economy.

THE BIGGEST DISADVANTAGE for Pakistan is its lack of strategic depth your major cities lahore the capital and rawlpindi are so close the indian border RELATIVE to indian major cities Delhi Chennai Mumbai Hydrabhad calcullta bangalore.

indian major infrastucture both military and commercial/industrial is spread over a vast continent. AND impossible to hit repeatdly destroy. them.

In contrast india has much shorter distances to hit fewer bases fewer targets and hit hard

if india put their relative huge resources behind them they have the money , the suppliers and the means to build up enough military to really destroy pakistan cities power lines airports via conventional means.

BUT not in their current readiness ( rafales required more subs required more mobile artillary required)
AND not without suffering very large lossess to equipment and loss of FDI and effect on their growth rate
RISK OF A NUCLEAR RETAILTION ATTACK if pakistan feels humbled especially if gwadar is desroyed or a nuclear power station is destroyed by IAF or brahmos missles .

The indians are the bigger power they have more to throw at pakistan and far fewer targets to aim at. its logically they will damage you more

 

[Humble Analyst]

I don't think so. Bad geopolitics, perhaps, bad realpolitik, perhaps.[

I don't think so. Bad geopolitics, perhaps, bad realpolitik, perhaps.

Sir this is enticing and provoking post against a sect which is Sunni and Sunnis are not violence provocateurs. If for some reason in Iraq and Syria the people involved in questionable activities are sunnis, it is not because what the sect inspires but the regional policies towards the minority in the region which is sunnis. So talking about wiping out all Sunnis is similar to ethnic genocide. So how do you say it is only bad politics Sir?

 

[Zaneesh852]

1)No corruption
2) No cross border terror support by India and Afghanistan
3) Capable and honest leadership
4) Unity, faith and discipline
5) Army to be part of National Security council of Pakistan
6) More budget for clean cities and drinking water
7) Navy & Air Force budget to increase.

Well how would these happen with only 200K people paying their taxes?

@Replies: Subcontinent main bohat farigh log bethay huay hain

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sir this is enticing and provoking post against a sect which is Sunni and Sunnis are not violence provocateurs. If for some reason in Iraq and Syria the people involved in questionable activities are sunnis, it is not because what the sect inspires but the regional policies towards the minority in the region which is sunnis. So talking about wiping out all Sunnis is similar to ethnic genocide. So how do you say it is only bad politics Sir?

I just expressed my opinion. Consider it withdrawn if you have strong feelings about it. It isn't something worth fighting about.