The Nuclear Noose Around Pakistan’s Neck

Tahmed #209

{{The only other ``argument`` I have heard is that it is none of my business to be commenting on Indian government actions.}}

Sahib, I fear you misunderstand. Comment on Indian actions all you want. It is your birthright. You are never at a loss for opinions anyway, however misinformed. All I meant was that, not being an Indian citizen, you had no vote in the matter.

In any case, here is more Indian naval news for you to comment on:

The work on the major Indian Arabian Sea naval base at Karwar (Project Seabird) – will lead to a much-needed decongestion of Bombay.

The new Delhi class guided missile destroyers (last of the three – INS Mumbai – commissioned Jan 2003). Three new stealthy destroyers of the Bangalore class to come.

3 new frigates of the Talwar (Krivak III) class.

3 stealth frigates of the Nilgiri class to be commissioned by 2008; 12 planned.

The Brahmos supersonic cruise missile being jointly developed with Russia.

{{The other argument i have heard is that this is meant against the Chinese, and that argument doesnt make any sense either.}}

Why have the Chinese been carrying out hydrographic studies in the Bay of Bengal?

{{That reminds me that it obviously doesnt make sense to the Chinese, since if it did rest assured they would be rushing to establish their own deep sea navy.}}

Sahib … there are plenty of signs that China’s long-term goal is to build one or more aircraft carriers. They keep buying decommissioned carriers and studying how they were put together. They are limited by inexperience and lack of know-how, not desire. I said all this in a previous post. You just don`t pay any attention.

fountainheader: Two things.

First, on a question of FORM:

1. it becomes very difficult to have a discussion when you dont question what I actually wrote but make up something absurd and attribute it to me. Thus you actually put quote marks and attribute to me the following absurdity: ````If China chooses not to have a blue sea navy, why is India doing so? The chinese are always wise, hence the Indians must be unwise.`` I never said that, and it is very misleading on your part to make it appear that i said that. I would never deliberately misquote anyone like this on post, and if i inadvertantly misrepresented what someone said i would apologize for it.

2. You also say that i did not address all of aleph null`s points, but do not provide me the courtesy of indicating exactly which point or points i missed. What am i supposed to do? Read your mind on where you found my deficient.

Sorry for the rather nasty tone above, but seems like i have touched upon some raw emotions when I questioned these actions of the indian government.

Second, on the SUBSTANCE:

a. You say that the chinese are not building a deep sea fleet like the indians because the US will not let anyone sell things to china. Is this a guess on your part, or is there a reliable source for this information? Common sense tells me that if the Chinese are able to send a man into space, they should be able (if they wanted) to send men into the high seas as well.

b. You say that india is a status quo power. Fair enough. How does an aircraft carrier group contribute to this goal? Seems to me it represents a half-baked challenge to no one in particular - the US could shoot it out of the water, the chinese fleet remains a coastal fleet.

c. I am glad you accept pakistan`s legitimate right to self-defense, like india. Let us hope that both nations will demililitarize over time, the way the europeans have done.

mahesh #224 That is what i am saying. Let me explain why:

a. India put a million men on our borders and year ago, threatening to overrun Pakistan. China has done no such thing, and your last war was over 40 years ago. Indeed, if you adjust for the relative populations of india and pakistan, what india did an year ago would be equivalent to 7-8 million Chinese troops on your borders.

b. India blasted 5 nukes next to our borders 5 years ago. China does its blasting in Lop Nor in the Gobi desert, on the opposite side of the indian border.

c. Indian blasts were followed with direct verbal threats to Pakistan by Advani - the number two man in India. China did no such thing.

d. Both for a. and b. above, jingoism took a nose-dive in india when pakistan responded in kind.

e. The father of the indian nukes was promoted to president in india. China did no such thing. Even in pakistan qadeer khan was never given any political office, only an advisory role. And btw, india did not invent the atomic bomb either - although that is what one would think reading aleph null`s posts e.g.

h. I have already discussed the matter of the gorshkov. I have received plenty of emotional responses from indian posters, and not one explanation of what mission it is expected to serve. Just saying that indian is a democratic country and the whole thing was discussed in public is not enough - nor is it enough to say that india can afford to toss around a billion dollars here and a billion dollars there. So i dont think it is unreasonable for me to assume that the underlying reason is a desire to be the regional toughie.

I would be much obliged if you could rebut the above specific points, and could thus explain to me why it seems absurd to think that india is a threat to pakistan while china is not a threat to india.

fountainheader: #223 i have not read it yet, but will do so later (perhaps a day or two from now). Need to attend to some real life things.

I see some posts for other chowkies addressed to me: thanks for writing (even if it was written in annoyance), and will get back to you as well.

re:#205 by Maharana
Thanks for your post.
Sridhar

re:#209 by tahmed32
Tahmed Sahib,
Consider that China has already a base in Coco islands, not far from Indian mainland and can evesdrop on every naval acitivity on Indian shores. Consider that it is busy building a naval base in Gwadar for Pak, from where it hopes to project its force into the Indian ocean. Do you think India should just sit and watch the fun or do something about it?

Indian and US intersts seem to be the same here: keep China out of the Indian Ocean area. India`s tentative steps in building a blue-water navy should be seen in that context. Few western nations have made a noise about the purchase of this battleship from Russia. China, as always, has pragmatically kept quiet. Why are the Pakis complaining, i wonder?
Sridhar

re:#213 by tahmed32
Agree with your post entirely.
Talking of BJP, it dawned on me that BJP is going thr` a kind of metamorphosis that few have noticed recently. Come General Elections in India and BJP will be wooing its voters on the promise of greater economic prosperity and peace with Paksitan. This in itself is remarkable considering that BJP fought the last electoin on the agenda of bringing greater security to India and promising to make India a nuclear state!
BJP is not a Nazi organization. Just like everything in life is not all black and white and there are gray areas, BJP too has its good men. ABV, Shourie, Sinha etc are good men. Modi is a scum. BJP camp is divided into these 2 tranis of thoughts: Modi`s brand of hindutva and ABV`s brand of moderation and pragmatism. This election will decide which camp wins. If ABV wins by a decisive margin, Indo-Pak relations will continue to improve and Modi et al will be buried in political obscurity.
Sridhar

At best, the IN can claim an ``assist`` on the Ghazi.

Yup, I agree. However the fact remains that it was the major lure of sinking the Vikrant that caused them to hang around Vizag, otherwise wouldn`t they be advised to go closer to Dhaka? The Vikrant was used as a decoy effectively.

Now if the Vikrant was so useless and such a big white elephant as tahmed claims, why would the PN falsely claim to have destroyed it in the 65 war, and then specifically target it in 1971? If your enemy has a white elephant that eats up its funds, you wouldnt be the altruistic one to destroy it, would you?

#226:I find that incredibly curious as well. Here is Pakistan going though such introspection, ambasting all because the fellow ummah members like Libya and Iran ratted them out. Meanwhile, they sacrifice themselves for teh People`s republic... integrity, valor or stupidity?

Fuzair: Morelikely, we don`t really want the US or the Russians to hang around the Bay of Bengal. We reconciled to Diego Garcia only after 25 years of ineffectual protests.

Re: PNS Ghazi

At best, the IN can claim an ``assist`` on the Ghazi. The best evidence, the eyewitness testimony of the IN diver who actually located the wreck and brought up the logbook, etc, is that the hull looked as if it was ruptured by an internal explosion. That is, the Ghazi was sunk when, most probably, a mine it was laying exploded inside it. There seems to be evidence that the Ghazi was detected near the surface by an IN destroyer and ``crash`` dived to escape depth charges. thought the Ghazi was laying mines and that caused it to blow up. The Indians claim to have sunk it but their own evidence suggests that it was probably not the case.

This is from the BR writeup on the Ghazi. The story that I had heard from my PN friends was basically the same. The Ghazi was hunting for the Vikrant which was not to be found. It was then ordered to lay mines and go to a different patrol area. During the minelaying procedure, something went wrong and the boat exploded. The PN claims, judging by the panicked IN signal intercepts, that the IN was in a complete flap that the Ghazi had been so close to them! The first they knew of it was when it blew up.

Probably there is a certain amount of truth in both stories.

In any case, 82 brave men went down with it. For some reason, the Indians have apparently turned down both US and Russian offers to raise the Ghazi. Maybe they are afraid that evidence of internal explosions will emerge. Maybe they don`t want to disturb the sailors` grave.

While various savants are opining ad nauseam on the fundamentally benign, non-aggressive, non-expansionist nature of Chinese power, a further significant bit of information has arrived. It seems the Xeroxed blueprint of a nuclear weapon design that Xerox Khan sold to the Libyans is of a device that China tested in the late 60s – and passed on to Pakistan, as India has maintained all along. China has not gotten the attention in deserved as the silent spider in the center of this web of proliferation. Naturally this is not going to change the opinions of the China-benign school one iota.

tahmed

i have yet to receive a sensible argument against my contention that indian ambitions of having a deep sea navy is an indication that decisions in the indian government are made not on a realistic assessment of india`s defense needs, but upon unrealistic and egotistical ambitions of becoming the Great Power it can never be in this day and age.

I was going to write a comment in response to this, but I don`t think I can do much better than Alephnull in 178 & 179. I don`t think you have sufficiently addressed or rebutted all his points in your #197.

Your contention is based on ``If China chooses not to have a blue sea navy, why is India doing so? The chinese are always wise, hence the Indians must be unwise.`` In doing this you neglect that China has no choice in this matter. USA will not let anyone sell China any aircraft carriers, nor will it allow the Chinese much breathing space in the South China Sea. USA is more interested in protecting Taiwan. However China is doing all it can to expand its naval prowess in regions where the Americans won`t mind. The proposed ports in Myanmar and Pakistan(Gwadar) are ample indication of the same.

China does not have the technological knowhow yet to build ships the size of the Goroshkov. If it did, they surely would.

Thank you for unintentionally providing evidence to support my contention that Pakistanis should not let their guard down with India until the Indian government becomes more mature and stops trying to be what it can never be - a latter day Great Power in the 19th century mold.

You think India is the aggressive and Pkistan is the defensive power in South Asia? India is a status-quoist power, and would jump at the chance to convert the LOC into the border, no matter how much rhetoric flows from Nagpur. However, yes, as I said, countries` intentions can change. I do not grudge Pakistan a defence, for that is its sovereign right. In fact i have no qualms with pakistan having nuclear weapons as well. It is your right, is it not?

CHINA`S PLANS FOR AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER

A little bit of cursory googling confirmed my suspicions. China has tried to acquire aircraft carriers. It is just that the USA has said ``Oh No, You Dont!!!!`` on every occasion.

PLA`s Aircraft Carrier Project

Some excerpts -

In 1992 China opened discussions with Ukraine to purchase of the Varyag, a 67,500-ton Kiev-class attack aircraft carrier about two-thirds complete and docked at the Black Sea shipyard of Nikolayev. In mid-1992 China`s Science Academy sent 15 naval specialists to Ukraine for two months to conduct a feasibility study on the matter. After hearing their report, the Central Military Commission decided to go ahead with the plan and buy a carrier, aircraft and electronic equipment by 1994. These negotiations were ultimately fruitless, after Japan and the United States put pressure on Ukraine to pull out of the deal. In 1993 China began negotiations with Russia for the purchase of two 40,000-ton carriers, though again with no results.

+++

Helicopters from a carrier could provide support to potential amphibious operations; fixed-wing aircraft operating from a carrier could provide greater air defense over a potential beachhead. If China were to build or purchase an aircraft carrier, such an asset would enable it to provide increased air defense and support for amphibious operations. The proposed Chinese aircraft carrier could be a vessel of 40,000-50,000 tons of displacement, one similar to the French ``De Gaulle-Class`` nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. Given the complexities of developing a new naval reactor considerably larger than the type used on PRC nuclear submarines and that a very long range is not required, conventional steam boilers would be adequate for a Chinese aircraft carrier

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

INS VIKRANT

tahmed32 asked in #197
what exactly has India achieved with Vikrant other than waste money? Did anyone ask that question before spending $1.5 billion to buy the new aircraft carrier?

A couple of links

End of an era: INS Vikrant`s final farewell

The Sinking of the Ghazi

and a few excerpts

Vikrant`s hour of glory finally arrived in 1971. This time the navy received sufficient notice of war and Vikrant was ready for her part. Although the ship was suffering from boiler trouble, this did not prevent her from taking full and active part in the war.

Taking into account the threats and the strategic requirements, the Vikrant was assigned to the eastern theater in the Bay of Bengal in 1971. She joined the newly created Eastern Fleet with Rear Admiral S H Sharma flying his flag on the ship.

The Indian navy did its part to fool the enemy, transmitting confusing radio signals. Though Vikrant was anchored in the Andamans, an Indian destroyer off Visakhaptnam sent signals that there was a ship in the area carrying 200 tonnes of meat, which only an aircraft carrier could store.

The Pakistani submarine Ghazi blew up on December 4, after a depth charge attack by INS Rajput off the harbour entrance. Then followed the Vikrant`s finest hour. The then East Pakistan was cordoned off and every port -- Cox`s Bazar, Chittagong, and Khulna -- was pounded by the carrier-based aircraft.

Such was the impact of the air attack from Vikrant-based aeroplanes, that the Pakistani naval commander in the then East Pakistan remarked: ``Indian naval aircrafts were hitting us day and night. We could not run.``

On one occasion, with aircraft airborne and no wind conditions, the ship had to take a chance with her cracked boilers to land the returning flights. This was easily the carrier`s best of the finest hour.

Such was the performance of the ship in the liberation of Bangladesh that it earned two Mahavir Chakras and 12 Vir Chakras.


I think being instrumental in sinking an American-built submarine, and attacking a port would qualify as sufficient returns on investment for INS Vikrant. What say you?