Connect with us

Defense

Pakistan, China kick off joint military exercise

Published

on

Pakistan and China have showcased their all-weather friendship with the launch of one of the biggest joint military exercises in decades. According to the Inter-Services Public Relations, the war games that began on April 11 near Jhelum followed speculation over whether China will step in to fill the economic, military and diplomatic void if Pakistan’s relationship with the US further deteriorated.

This exercise is the fourth in a series in which Special Forces from both sides will participate. The two-week-long exercises are aimed at “mutual exchange of experience and information through a comprehensive training programme in real time”.

The exercise which will enhance bilateral relationship and capability of the air forces of the two friendly neighbours, saw participation of three different types of frontline fighter aircraft belonging to various PAF squadrons for the first time, said Air Commodore Syed Muhammad Ali, official spokesperson for Pakistan Air Force. PAF has been a regular participant in a number of international air exercises with various air forces, including the US Air Force (USAF), Italian Air Force, Turkish Air Force and other allied countries. The spokesman said Pakistan and China enjoy very close relationship spanning over six decades.

Pakistan and China began on April 14 their fifth joint air exercise, Shaheen-V, at an operational base in Pakistan. A contingent of People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) comprising combat pilots, air defence controllers and technical ground crew and a Pakistan Air Force (PAF) contingent are participating in the exercises. The last such exercise between Pakistan and China – Shaheen-IV was conducted in Beijing in October 2015.

The strategic partnership has been further strengthened through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, infrastructure development and routine joint military exercises. The Pakarmy termed the exercise a “true manifestation of a famous Chinese phrase that Pakistan-China friendship is higher than the mountains and deeper than the oceans.”

This is the first time that brigade-level war games are being staged by Pakistan and China and it reflected long-term engagement between the two countries.

It was the fourth joint military exercise between the two countries since 2004. The exercises come amid sharp digs at Pakistan from US Republican presidential hopefuls during a debate held. A leading US Presidential candidate described Pakistan as nearly a failed state while another suggested Washington cut foreign aid to Pakistan to zero. However, both Islamabad and Beijing have dismissed suggestions that their war games are aimed against any country.

General (retd) Talat Masood went as far as to suggest that he was hopeful that “one day Pakistan and India would conduct similar war games together.” An American diplomat, contacted to give his view on the matter, played down the development saying the US had no concerns over the growing friendship between Pakistan and China.

China–Pakistan relations began in 1950 when Pakistan was among the first countries to end official diplomatic relations with the Republic of China on Taiwan and recognize the PRC. Since then, both countries have placed considerable importance on the maintenance of an extremely close and supportive relationship and the two countries have regularly exchanged high-level visits resulting in a variety of agreements. The PRC has provided economic, military and technical assistance to Pakistan and each considers the other a close strategic ally.

Bilateral relations have evolved from an initial Chinese policy of neutrality to a partnership with a smaller but militarily powerful Pakistan. Diplomatic relations were established in 1950, military assistance began in 1966, a strategic alliance was formed in 1972 and economic co-operation began in 1979. China has become Pakistan’s largest supplier of arms and its third-largest trading partner. Recently, both nations have decided to cooperate in improving Pakistan’s civil nuclear power sector.

According to Pew Research Center in 2014, Pakistanis have the most favorable view of China after China itself. Maintaining close relations with China is a central part of Pakistan’s foreign policy. China supported Pakistan’s opposition to the Soviet Union’s intervention in Afghanistan and is perceived by Pakistan as a regional counterweight to NATO and the United States.] In addition, Pakistan was one of only two countries, alongside Cuba, to offer crucial support for the PRC in after the Tiananmen protests of 1989. China and Pakistan also share close military relations, with China supplying a range of modern armaments to the Pakistani defense forces. China supports Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir while Pakistan supports China on the issues of Xinjiang, Tibet, and Taiwan. Military cooperation has deepened with joint projects producing armaments ranging from fighter jets to guided missile frigates.

Chinese cooperation with Pakistan has reached economic high points, with substantial Chinese investment in Pakistani infrastructural expansion including the Pakistani deep-water port at Gwadar. Both countries have an ongoing free trade agreement. Pakistan has served as China’s main bridge between Muslim countries. Pakistan also played an important role in bridging the communication gap between China and the West by facilitating the 1972 Nixon visit to China. The relations between Pakistan and China have been described by Pakistan’s ambassador to China as higher than the mountains, deeper than the oceans, stronger than steel, dearer than eyesight, sweeter than honey, and so on. According to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Pakistan is China’s biggest arms buyer, counting for nearly 47% of Chinese arms exports. According to a 2014 BBC World Service Poll, 75% of Pakistanis view China’s influence positively with only 15% expressing a negative view. In the Asia Pacific region, Chinese people hold third most positive opinions of Pakistan’s influence in the world, behind Indonesia and Pakistan itself.

While initially ambivalent towards the idea of a Communist country on its borders, Pakistan hoped that China would serve as a counterweight to Indian influence. India had recognized China a year before, and Indian Prime Minister Nehru also hoped for closer relations with the Chinese. However, with escalating border tensions leading to the 1962 Sino-Indian war, China and Pakistan aligned with each other in a joint effort to counter Indian encroachment. One year after China’s border war with India, Pakistan ceded the Trans-Karakoram Tract to China to end border disputes and improve diplomatic relations.

Since then, an informal alliance that initially consisted of joint Indian opposition has grown into a lasting relationship that has benefited both nations on the diplomatic, economic and military frontiers. Along with diplomatic support, Pakistan served as a conduit for China to open up to the West. China has in turn provided extensive economic aid and political support to Pakistan. Since the two sides established their “all-weather diplomatic relations”, there have been frequent exchanges between the two countries’ leadership and peoples.

Since Sept 11 hoax, Pakistan has increased the scope of Chinese influence and support by agreeing to a number of military projects, combined with extensive economic support and investment from the Chinese. The strong military ties primarily aim to counter regional Indian and American influence, and was also to repel Soviet influence in the area. In recent years this relationship has strengthened through ongoing military projects and agreements between Pakistan and China.

Since 1962, China has been a steady source of military equipment to the Pakistani Army, helping establish munition factories, providing technological assistance and modernizing existing facilities.

On 20 April 2015, Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Pakistan as his first foreign visit of the year, also the first by a Chinese president in 9 years. Pakistan’s military initially depended almost entirely on American armaments and aid, which was increased during the covert U.S. support of Islamic militants in the Soviet war in Afghanistan. America under US President Richard Nixon supported Pakistan in the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. However, the period following the Soviet withdrawal and the dissolution of the Soviet Union led indirectly to the increasing realignment of America with the previously pro-Soviet India. With the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan, there is a general sentiment in Pakistan to adopt a foreign policy which favors China over the United States. Washington has been accused deserting Pakistan in favor of a policy that favors stronger relations with India, while Pakistan sees China as a more reliable ally over the long term.

China is the largest investor in Pakistan’s Gwadar Deep Sea Port, which is strategically located at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz. It is viewed warily by both America and India as a possible launchpad for the Chinese Navy, giving them the ability to launch submarines and warships in the Indian Ocean. China has recently pledged to invest nearly US 43 billion dollars. China and Pakistan are involved in several projects to enhance military and weaponry systems, which include the joint development of the JF-17 Thunder fighter aircraft, K-8 Karakorum advance training aircraft, etc.

Currently, sixty percent of China’s oil must be transported by ship from the Persian Gulf to the only commercial port in China, Shanghai, a distance of more than 16,000 kilometres. The journey takes two to three months, during which time the ships are vulnerable to pirates, bad weather, political rivals and other risks. Using Gwadar port instead would reduce the distance and possibly the cost.

The relationship has recently been the subject of renewed attention due to the publication of a new book, The China-Pakistan Axis: Asia’s New Geopolitics, which is the first extensive treatment of the relationship since the 1970s.

Meanwhile, the Pakistan Foreign Office said on April 14 that more RAW agents had been arrested and further details about them will be shared soon.

There have been attempts by USA and India to create a wedge in China-Pakistan ties, particularly in military sphere but the bilateral relations, known as all-weather ones, have been steadily developing, in fact in a big way. In fact one of the objectives of Asia pivot of USA is to contain china and its relationships with a number of countries, like Pakistan and coerce India to support US interests in the region. India is doing the job well but not to the full satisfaction of Washington which, after selling terror goods to Islamabad, also coerces New Delhi to hurriedly purchase the latest weaponry and other terror items that Pakistan already has in its arsenal.

Governments are wasting national resources on terror goods by terrorizing the humanity first.

Continue Reading
Comments

Defense

Induction of Pakistan A-100 MLRS and Deterrence Equation of South Asia

Published

on

Pakistan inducted A-100 rocket in Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) into its arsenals, boosting the strength of Artillery Crop on January 4, 2019. The missile system was indigenously developed by Pakistani scientists and engineers. MLRS which comprise of two main elements: rocket munitions and a self-propelled platform to carry and launch those rockets, designed to disrupt enemy’s mobilization. MLRS is unguided rocket against enemy position in artillery minded sense.

Media wing of the armed forces, the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) said that this rocket is a highly effective and potent for interdiction that can effectively disrupt enemy’s mobilization and assembly. Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) General Qamar Javed Bajwa, presided over the induction ceremony, paid rich tributes to scientists and engineers for indigenously develop A-100 rocket which shall augment the existing conventional fire power capabilities of Pakistan Army.

While addressing at the ceremony, he emphasized Pakistan Army’s resolve to strengthen conventional forces to meet challenges of full spectrum threat. Pakistani defence industry had maintained steady progress in the recent times and had contributed to defence of Pakistan. This missile system is another addition in the deterrence equation of South Asian region.

In South Asia context, mutual hostility and unresolved disputes between India and Pakistan create instability and insecurity. The induction of nuclear weapons into the national defense structures of both states in 1998 has brought an era of dynamics of nuclear politics. Nuclearisation brought the concept of deterrence in the region. The deterrence equilibrium in South Asia is viewed as an assurance for peace and stability in the region. The strategic significance of nuclear weapons in the South Asian security equation is undeniable because these weapons reduce the chances of limited conflict between the two hostile states. Pakistan as a responsible nuclear weapon state has never been in competition with India in terms of size, scope and efficiency of is conventional or strategic capabilities. Hence, equilibrium of nuclear deterrence between India and Pakistan is the underpinning of South Asian strategic stability.

Recently, India’s doctrinal policy shift and its objectives ultimately forcing an arms race in the region. Pakistan is obliged to rely on the employment of nuclear weapons owing to conventional military asymmetry. India’s aggressive limited war ‘Cold Start’ (CSD) left no choice for Pakistan but to introduce Short Range Ballistic Missile ‘Nasr’ (TNW).

Indian Offensive Military Doctrine which is specifically designed to undermine Pakistan’s conventional capability and occupy its small territory which could be used as a significant tool in post conflict negotiation by initiating surprise attack from eight different fronts by the Integrated Battle Groups (IBGs).

Pakistan developed TNWs to deter India’s conventional military superiority. It is well known that conventional asymmetry between India and Pakistan is continuously widening with the passage of time. India also allocated huge budget for its military which defiantly have ramifications for Pakistan. Pakistan cannot afford arms race with India for the purpose of conventional military parity, consequently Pakistan developed such a capabilities (TNWs) which could deter India’s conventional military superiority. Pakistan views SRBM as a stabilizing addition to the prevailing deterrence equation. Pakistan considers the nuclear weapons as last resort weapons which are only meant for deterrence and their use can only be contemplated as a last resort.

Recent Indian weapons modernization and force posturing is viewed as a threat to the strategic stability of South Asian region. India’s air defence system the latest addition of S-400 system also has the ability to disturb the regional strategic stability. S-400 is a long range surface to air missile system and has the ability to access aerial targets up to 400 km away. It has the potential to counter threats from ballistic missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, and aircraft.

To counter Indian doctrinal change, military modernization and proactive military strategy of launching limited conflict and capture some territory of Pakistan adopted Minimum Credible Deterrence with Full Spectrum Deterrence. Now this A-100 missile rocket is also made foe conventional deterrence.

Although, initiation of conventional war, for certain extant will remain a conventional conflict but beyond certain level no one can say that it will remain limited conventional war. It can lead to a nuclear holocaust. It will have series of implications. If India is insisting for operationalizing its Cold Start Doctrine against Pakistan than India will also have to pay for the severe implications at conventional as well as strategic level. No one knows the adversary redlines.

Pakistan in recent years has been trying to modernize its forces as per demands of the contemporary security challenges. Induction of A-100 MLRS into Pakistan army will give it the utmost superiority to overcome conventional threats coming from Indian side. It allows Pakistan artillery corps to keep an eye on enemy’s mobilization and prepare them for any Indian military adventure. Induction of A-100 system also affects the surprise element of Cold Start Doctrine. This system makes Pakistan capable to meet the needs of deterrence against the conventional and unorthodox threats. Interestingly, MLRS computerized fire control system enables a reduced crew, or even a single soldier to load and unload the launcher. Furthermore, The MLRS offers a devastating physical and psychological effect on the enemy, covered with high explosion, anti-personnel or chemical warheads as needed.

Lastly, sophisticated technology and long-range ballistic missile development has not only made Pakistan more determined to acquire similar capabilities to counter Indian threat but also to ensure credibility of its nuclear deterrence. Long history of military confrontation, the growing asymmetry and disparity in South Asia has accelerated the process of mastering the latest sophisticated conventional and nuclear technologies. Therefore, both South Asian nuclear states have developed enough nuclear capable warheads, bombers and ballistic and cruise missiles.

So far Pakistan has been doing great overall three domains, Air, Sea, and land, in terms of meeting the needs of deterrence against the conventional challenges.

Continue Reading

Defense

Rising geopolitical and geo-economic tensions are the most urgent risk in 2019

MD Staff

Published

on

The world’s ability to foster collective action in the face of urgent major crises has reached crisis levels, with worsening international relations hindering action across a growing array of serious challenges. Meanwhile, a darkening economic outlook, in part caused by geopolitical tensions, looks set to further reduce the potential for international cooperation in 2019. These are the findings of the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2019, which is published today.

The Global Risks Report, which incorporates the results of the annual Global Risks Perception Survey of approximately 1,000 experts and decision-makers, points to a deterioration in economic and geopolitical conditions. Trade disputes worsened rapidly in 2018 and the report warns that growth in 2019 will be held back by continuing geo-economic tensions, with 88% of respondents expecting further erosion of multilateral trading rules and agreements.

If economic headwinds pose a threat to international cooperation, efforts will be further disrupted in 2019 by rising geopolitical tensions among major powers, according to the report. Eighty-five percent of respondents to this year’s survey said they expect 2019 to involve increased risks of “political confrontations between major powers”. The report discusses the risks associated with what we describe as a “multiconceptual” world order – one in which geopolitical instabilities reflect not only changing power balances but also the increasing salience of differences on fundamental values.

“With global trade and economic growth at risk in 2019, there is a more urgent need than ever to renew the architecture of international cooperation. We simply do not have the gunpowder to deal with the kind of slowdown that current dynamics might lead us towards. What we need now is coordinated, concerted action to sustain growth and to tackle the grave threats facing our world today,” said Børge Brende, President of the World Economic Forum.

In the survey’s 10-year outlook, cyber risks sustained the jump in prominence they registered in 2018, but environmental risks continue to dominate respondents’ concerns beyond the short term. All five of the environmental risks the report tracks are again in the high-impact, high-likelihood category: biodiversity loss; extreme weather events; failure of climate-change mitigation and adaptation; man-made disasters; and natural disasters.

Alison Martin, Group Chief Risk Officer, Zurich Insurance Group, said: “2018 was sadly a year of historic wildfires, continued heavy flooding and increasing greenhouse gas emissions. It is no surprise that in 2019, environmental risks once again dominate the list of major concerns. So, too, does the growing likelihood of environmental policy failure or a lack of timely policy implementation. To effectively respond to climate change requires a significant increase in infrastructure to adapt to this new environment and transition to a low-carbon economy. By 2040, the investment gap in global infrastructure is forecast to reach $18 trillion against a projected requirement of $97 trillion. Against this backdrop, we strongly recommend that businesses develop a climate resilience adaptation strategy and act on it now.”

Environmental risks also pose problems for urban infrastructure and its development. With sea levels rising, many cities face hugely expensive solutions to problems that range from clean groundwater extraction to superstorm barriers. Shortfalls of investment in critical infrastructure such as transport can lead to system-wide breakdowns as well as exacerbate associated social, environmental and health-related risks.

John Drzik, President of Global Risk and Digital, Marsh, said: “Persistent underfunding of critical infrastructure worldwide is hampering economic progress, leaving businesses and communities more vulnerable both to cyberattacks and natural catastrophes, and failing to make the most of technological innovation. Allocating resources to infrastructure investment, in part through new incentives for public-private partnerships, is vital for building and strengthening the physical foundations and digital networks that will enable societies to grow and thrive.”

At an individual level, declining psychological and emotional well-being is both a cause and consequence within the wider global risks landscape, impacting, for example, social cohesion and political cooperation. The Global Risks Report 2019 focuses explicitly on this human side of global risks, looking in particular at the role played by complex global transformations that are under way: societal, technological and work-related. A common theme is that psychological stress relates to a feeling of lack of control in the face of uncertainty.

This year’s report revives the Future Shocks series, which recognizes that the growing complexity and interconnectedness of global systems can lead to feedback loops, threshold effects and cascading disruptions. These “what if” scenarios are food for thought as world leaders assess potential shocks that might rapidly and radically disrupt the world. This year’s sudden and dramatic breakdowns include vignettes on the use of weather manipulation to stoke geopolitical tensions, quantum and affective computing, and space debris.

The Global Risks Report 2019 has been developed with the invaluable support throughout the past year of the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Advisory Board. It also benefits from ongoing collaboration with its Strategic Partners Marsh & McLennan Companies and Zurich Insurance Group, and its academic advisers at the Oxford Martin School (University of Oxford), the National University of Singapore and the Wharton Risk Management and Decision Processes Center (University of Pennsylvania).

Continue Reading

Defense

NATO generals do not believe in good relations with Russia

Published

on

In December NATO allies agreed the civil and military budgets for 2019. At a meeting of the North Atlantic Council allies agreed a civil budget of €250.5 million and a military budget of €1.395 billion for 2019.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg welcomed the agreement of the budgets, saying: “The world is changing, and NATO is adapting. Allies are investing in NATO to address the challenges of our time, including cyber and hybrid threats, a more assertive Russia, and instability across the Middle East and North Africa.

Thus, according to the NATO Secretary General, Russia remains one of the main threats the Alliance will face in 2019. The message that NATO is eager to negotiate with Russia is not always proved by the Alliance’s actions. The more so NATO high-ranking officials even contradict such message by their statements. It has become obvious that NATO as well as Russia is not always aboveboard.

General Philip Breedlove, former supreme allied commander Europe, and Ambassador Alexander Vershbow, former NATO deputy secretary general made a report “Permanent Deterrence: Enhancements to the US Military Presence in North Central Europe” that assesses the adequacy of current US deployments, with a focus on North Central Europe. A full report will be completed in January 2019. But there is a short summary of the task force’s conclusions and recommendations.

All recommendations are made in order to bolster NATO deterrence and political cohesion. The authors say that “military build-up in Russia’s Western Military District and Kaliningrad, and its “hybrid” warfare against Western societies have heightened instability in the region, and have made collective defense and deterrence an urgent mission for the United States and NATO. ”

They innumerate significant steps taken by the United States and NATO to enhance their force posture and respond to provocative Russian behavior.

The Alliance adopted the Readiness Action Plan, which called for the creation of a Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) and expansion of the NATO Response Force (NRF) to increase the Alliance’s capacity to reinforce any ally under threat.

At the 2016 Warsaw Summit, the Alliance took the next step in building deterrence by agreeing to deploy four multinational NATO battle groups of about 1,200 troops in each of the Baltic states and Poland.

The NATO Readiness Initiative, the so-called “Four 30s” plan, would designate thirty ground battalions, thirty air squadrons, and thirty major naval combatants to be ready to deploy and engage an adversary within thirty days.

Other steps were taken to bolster the NATO Command Structure and reduce mobility problems through Europe. Among others the main report’s recommendation are:

enhance the United States’ and NATO’s deterrent posture for the broader region, not just for the nation hosting the US deployment, including strengthening readiness and capacity for reinforcement; reinforce NATO cohesion;include increased naval and air deployments in the region, alongside additional ground forces and enablers; promote training and operational readiness of US deployed forces and interoperability with host-nation and other allied forces; ensure maximum operational flexibility to employ US deployed forces to other regions of the Alliance and globally; expand opportunities for allied burden-sharing, including multilateral deployments in the region and beyond; and ensure adequate host-nation support for US deployments. All these steps do not look like a diplomatic compromise or an intention to decrese the tension between NATO and Russia.

In its turn Russia flexes its military muscle. Moscow is to hold 4,000 military exercises in 2019. Russian defense minister said that Russia will increase combat capabilities in response to the U.S. intention to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty.

The two super powers increase their military capabilities and put Europe at risk of war. The only way out is to negotiate, to show goodwill to change the situation, to stop plotting war hiding behind mutual accusations.

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2018 Modern Diplomacy