Indo-Pakistani Conflict 2019

[Ananda]

Back to the conflict, India now seems more focused on showing to the American that F-16 is being used in Conflict, as to Pakistan claim on JF-17 and Mirage 3/5 that being used in the conflict.

India effort to shown the wreckage as F-16 one, seems getting pounded from many sources, which saying the wreckage is from Mig 21..which seems strengthen Pakistan claim that they downed two Mig 21 (as the if not mistaken the wrekage of Mig 21 from the capture pilot is in Pakistan side).

So the effort now seems focused on showing AIM-120C wrekage as proved that F-16 in the area, since no other Fighter in PAF inventory that can used AIM-120.

Well, since Pakistan control got source code of their JF-17 (compared to the F-16) can they hacked AIM-120 coding to work with JF-17 ?
How hard is this to make one missile compatible with your avionics and sensors, if you control the source code of your Fighter systems ?

 

[SolarWind]

How hard is this to make one missile compatible with your avionics and sensors, if you control the source code of your Fighter systems ?

I am not an expert in military technology, but I think that expanding use of a missile to another platform involves not only the source code but also communication/command and launch interfaces, which require blueprints and the appropriate level of engineering and manufacturing technology. Also, appropriate sales terms from the original manufacturer, allowing such an expansion of use, would also be needed. Basically they would need the permission and the ability. I doubt they have the permission but do not know about their technical ability. Another approach might be to reverse engineer, although I doubt they would want to violate their contract terms so severely.

 

[old faithful]

I remember reading somewhere, (maybe here) some time ago that the RAAF hacked codes for either or both the F111 and or FA18 fleet and that the US was not impressed.

 

[t68]

Yeah the Hornets, I can just imagine the Americans reaction to this at the time, WTF

"Australia 'cracked top-secret US jet fighter codes'

By Don Woolford


KIM Beazley has told how Australia cracked top-secret American combat aircraft codes while he was defence minister in the 1980s.

"We spied on them and we extracted the codes," Mr Beazley told Parliament during his valedictory speech today.

Mr Beazley, who was defence minister from 1984 to 1990, said that when he took over the job he soon learned that the radar on Australia's Hornets could not identify most potentially hostile aircraft in the region.

In other words, Australia's frontline fighter could not shoot down enemies in the region.

Mr Beazley said he was greatly tempted to "belt" the Liberals with this and lay to rest their claim to be best at managing defence.

"I shut up, I said nothing," Mr Beazley said.

"I went to the US and for five years, up hill and down dale, with one knock-down, drag-out after another, with Cap Weinberger, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, I tried to get the codes of that blasted radar out of them.

"In the end we spied on them and we extracted the codes ourselves and we got another radar that could identify (enemy planes).

Mr Beazley said the Americans were Australia's most important ally.

"But they are a bunch of people you have to have a fight with every now and then to get what you actually need out of them," he said.

Mr Beazley said that the story of getting the Hornet codes was well known within Defence, but not beyond it.

He said the problem was that the old codes related to Warsaw Pact aircraft, rather than ones in Australia's region.

The Americans kept saying they'd provide the codes, but never did.

"So we tried to crack the codes so we could enhance them," Mr Beazley said.

"And we made a lot of progress."

Mr Beazley said the Americans knew what the Australians were doing and were intrigued by the progress they made. "

Australia 'cracked top-secret US jet fighter codes'

 

[John Fedup]

This article discusses the recent conflict wrt what China has learned. No surprises really regarding the limitations of India’s airforce and its difficulties in acquiring new fighters, which if not addressed quickly, will surely embolden Chinese territorial border claims.

What the India-Pakistan Crisis Taught China

 

[weaponwh]

This article discusses the recent conflict wrt what China has learned. No surprises really regarding the limitations of India’s airforce and its difficulties in acquiring new fighters, which if not addressed quickly, will surely embolden Chinese territorial border claims.

What the India-Pakistan Crisis Taught China

I think china priorities are in SCS and Taiwan. Also due to indo-Pacific strategy china don't really want to piss of indians

 

[John Fedup]

Maximizing border territories for long term defensive advantage against their most likely future threat and emerging superpower seems to be a more important priority IMO. Taiwan is a domestic image problem and the SCS isn’t much better. Controlling it does enhance China’s defensive position but the ill- will it is creating amongst its neighbours makes this sovereignty grab rather dubious but that is just my opinion.

 

[PO2GRV]

It would seem there have been cease-fire violations allegedly by Pakistan this weekend on two separate occasions Pakistan BREAKS ceasefire launching ATTACK against India as conflict escalates | World | News | Express.co.uk
Can anyone confirm or have a better source? That article/site seem a bit sensationalized

 

[ngatimozart]

It would seem there have been cease-fire violations allegedly by Pakistan this weekend on two separate occasions Pakistan BREAKS ceasefire launching ATTACK against India as conflict escalates | World | News | Express.co.uk
Can anyone confirm or have a better source? That article/site seem a bit sensationalized

It would not surprise me that both sides have been niggling each other with the odd cross border clash since the first Indian air strikes. There doesn't appear to be any corroboration on Al Jazeera or Reuters, so I'd treat it with some suspicion.

 

[Feanor]

India and Pakistan are back at it with an exchange of fire. It appears that India has struck multiple locations killing 10 and wounding 15 Pakistani service members. India itself has admitted to 3 dead and 3 wounded in casualties. They say this is a response to Pakistani shelling of Kashmir that have killed 3 civilians earlier.

Индия нанесла удары по позициям Пакистана

Новость в духе 2020-го года. Индия нанесла удары по позициям армии Пакистана, убив до 10 пакистанских военных (из них трое бойцов армейского спецназа) и до 15 ранив. Уничтожено нескольков дотов и бункеров. Индия заявила, что пока потеряла в ходе боев 3-х человек убитыми и 3-х ранеными. Как заявляет…

colonelcassad.livejournal.com

 

[Maximuswarrior]

India and Pakistan are back at it with an exchange of fire. It appears that India has struck multiple locations killing 10 and wounding 15 Pakistani service members. India itself has admitted to 3 dead and 3 wounded in casualties. They say this is a response to Pakistani shelling of Kashmir that have killed 3 civilians earlier.

Индия нанесла удары по позициям Пакистана

Новость в духе 2020-го года. Индия нанесла удары по позициям армии Пакистана, убив до 10 пакистанских военных (из них трое бойцов армейского спецназа) и до 15 ранив. Уничтожено нескольков дотов и бункеров. Индия заявила, что пока потеряла в ходе боев 3-х человек убитыми и 3-х ранеными. Как заявляет…

colonelcassad.livejournal.com

Pakistan has absolutely zero reason to shell the other side. Especially since Pakistan claims to morally support the Kashmiri people. Shelling and killing Kashmiris on the other side defeats this purpose. On the contrary, the Kashmiri civilians on the Indian administered side have been locked down in an open prison for the past year. That is a hardly reassuring move by the Indian government. If the Indian government feels the need to prove that Kashmiris are on its side it would immediately lift the mass lockdown and let the Kashmiris be. India won't lift the lockdown because it seeks something else.

India is itching to wage a war against Pakistan, but not China. Especially not, China and Pakistan in a two front war scenario. All these actions in the past year were meant to test Pakistan's readiness and counteractions. Little did India expect China to get involved in the act.

These skirmishes mean nothing in the greater scheme of things. India feels emboldened by the support of its Western allies. It is buying offensive weapons left and right. India enjoys both military and political support from the Western powers. Western powers are longing for India to fulfil the role of containing China. That is largely wishful thinking, but a Western aspiration nonetheless. If I speak blunt, Pakistan is a thorn and a nuisance for Western powers. It is a spoiler that is empowering China regionally. It makes perfect sense for Western powers to support India against Pakistan.

India would ideally want to bog down Pakistan in a conventional war, but that is unlikely to happen. What we will see are skirmishes and once in a while implosion where both sides are breathing down each others neck. The new introduction to this conflict is the blatant Chinese involvement. We will see more cooperation between Pakistan and China against India. Just like we are going to see more cooperation between the US and India against China/Pakistan nexus. The conflict between Pakistan and India is not solely between two adversaries. It is also between two major powers backing their respective ally.

@Maximuswarrior You are making some unsubstantiated claims here. How about posting some reliable verifiable evidence from reputable sources to back them up please.

Ngatimozart

 

[DouglasLees]

Nuclear War Between India and Pakistan Could Kill Twice As Many As WWII

The study quantifies just how catastrophic and wide-reaching a nuclear conflict between the two nations would be.

www.newsweek.com

The above link is interesting because in Europe and North America (probably Australasia as well) we tend to overlook the developing Cold War situation between India and Pakistan as nuclear powers, now accentuated by the rise of Islamism and Hindutva ('Hindu Nationalism'). I have friends of both Indian and Pakistani heritage, including Kashmiris (whose food is marvellous!) and so I don't want to 'take sides', but I would be interested to know what people geographically nearer to the conflict, or personally affected by it, think of the scenario sketched out in the article above. Is it alarmist, or should we be more worried than we currently are because our minds are occupied with other issues?

 

[ngatimozart]

Nuclear War Between India and Pakistan Could Kill Twice As Many As WWII

The study quantifies just how catastrophic and wide-reaching a nuclear conflict between the two nations would be.

www.newsweek.com

The above link is interesting because in Europe and North America (probably Australasia as well) we tend to overlook the developing Cold War situation between India and Pakistan as nuclear powers, now accentuated by the rise of Islamism and Hindutva ('Hindu Nationalism'). I have friends of both Indian and Pakistani heritage, including Kashmiris (whose food is marvellous!) and so I don't want to 'take sides', but I would be interested to know what people geographically nearer to the conflict, or personally affected by it, think of the scenario sketched out in the article above. Is it alarmist, or should we be more worried than we currently are because our minds are occupied with other issues?

I don't think that it's alarmist at all. It's just stating what's known and what could happen. It's just another nuclear friction point that exists in the world. Personally I would be more concerned with the confrontation between India and the PRC which the PRC are pushing at the moment. They are far more dangerous to India than Pakistan because they can overrun India, whereas Pakistan can't.

 

[Maximuswarrior]

Pakistan has absolutely zero reason to shell the other side. Especially since Pakistan claims to morally support the Kashmiri people. Shelling and killing Kashmiris on the other side defeats this purpose. On the contrary, the Kashmiri civilians on the Indian administered side have been locked down in an open prison for the past year. That is a hardly reassuring move by the Indian government. If the Indian government feels the need to prove that Kashmiris are on its side it would immediately lift the mass lockdown and let the Kashmiris be. India won't lift the lockdown because it seeks something else.

India is itching to wage a war against Pakistan, but not China. Especially not, China and Pakistan in a two front war scenario. All these actions in the past year were meant to test Pakistan's readiness and counteractions. Little did India expect China to get involved in the act.

These skirmishes mean nothing in the greater scheme of things. India feels emboldened by the support of its Western allies. It is buying offensive weapons left and right. India enjoys both military and political support from the Western powers. Western powers are longing for India to fulfil the role of containing China. That is largely wishful thinking, but a Western aspiration nonetheless. If I speak blunt, Pakistan is a thorn and a nuisance for Western powers. It is a spoiler that is empowering China regionally. It makes perfect sense for Western powers to support India against Pakistan.

India would ideally want to bog down Pakistan in a conventional war, but that is unlikely to happen. What we will see are skirmishes and once in a while implosion where both sides are breathing down each others neck. The new introduction to this conflict is the blatant Chinese involvement. We will see more cooperation between Pakistan and China against India. Just like we are going to see more cooperation between the US and India against China/Pakistan nexus. The conflict between Pakistan and India is not solely between two adversaries. It is also between two major powers backing their respective ally.

@Maximuswarrior You are making some unsubstantiated claims here. How about posting some reliable verifiable evidence from reputable sources to back them up please.

Ngatimozart

Care to point out the unsubstantiated claims? [Text deleted. A routine Mod request to provide sources will not be met with an attempt to troll. Please read the Forum Rules, before posting again. No more excuses. Further attempts to post counter factual misinformation will be deleted.

No reply to this warning is necessary. If you don't follow the rules then your time on here will be short.]

It is a fact that there are two camps in the world today. I don't think I need a source to prove this much. Clearly, each side has its own allies. In the Pakistan India conflict the US clearly sides with India and China with Pakistan. In fact, recent statements and actions by both US and China demonstrate this very clearly. When India attacked Balakot in Pakistan, US officials at the highest level were seen and heard supporting Indian right to attack Pakistan. [Mod Comment: provide a reputable link on US support on Balakot strike.] This is absolutely no secret. The same applies for Chinese statements in favor of Pakistan. All one has to do is read the news or Google it. I don't understand what is so untrue or unsubstantiated about these claims?

There is zero ambiguity in my mind regarding a future tit for tat between US and China in various conflict zones around the world. Yes, the India Pakistan conflict has already sucked in China and the US. Before you ask, no I don't have a source for this claim, but that is my opinion and instinct. I hope I am allowed to contribute by making certain predictions based on history and facts. What would a discussion be where we have to post evidence for every claim or sentence we post?

 

[ngatimozart]

Care to point out the unsubstantiated claims? It is funny you keep asking me for sources for every sentence that I post. When I ask you for the same it remains silent. I hope you don't mind me saying this.

It is a fact that there are two camps in the world today. I don't think I need a source to prove this much. Clearly, each side has its own allies. In the Pakistan India conflict the US clearly sides with India and China with Pakistan. In fact, recent statements and actions by both US and China demonstrate this very clearly. When India attacked Balakot in Pakistan, US officials at the highest level were seen and heard supporting Indian right to attack Pakistan. This is absolutely no secret. The same applies for Chinese statements in favor of Pakistan. All one has to do is read the news or Google it. I don't understand what is so untrue or unsubstantiated about these claims?

There is zero ambiguity in my mind regarding a future tit for tat between US and China in various conflict zones around the world. Yes, the India Pakistan conflict has already sucked in China and the US. Before you ask, no I don't have a source for this claim, but that is my opinion and instinct. I hope I am allowed to contribute by making certain predictions based on history and facts. What would a discussion be where we have to post evidence for every claim or sentence we post?

Read the rules. In this case rule #14 applies. We are a professionally run defence forum and as such we have standards that are expected of all posters. These standards are outlined in the rules. Don't try and argue semantics with us. If you don't follow the rules then your time on here will be short.

 

[Todjaeger]

Care to point out the unsubstantiated claims? [Text deleted. A routine Mod request to provide sources will not be met with an attempt to troll. Please read the Forum Rules, before posting again. No more excuses. Further attempts to post counter factual misinformation will be deleted.

No reply to this warning is necessary. If you don't follow the rules then your time on here will be short.]

It is a fact that there are two camps in the world today. I don't think I need a source to prove this much. Clearly, each side has its own allies. In the Pakistan India conflict the US clearly sides with India and China with Pakistan. In fact, recent statements and actions by both US and China demonstrate this very clearly. When India attacked Balakot in Pakistan, US officials at the highest level were seen and heard supporting Indian right to attack Pakistan. [Mod Comment: provide a reputable link on US support on Balakot strike.] This is absolutely no secret. The same applies for Chinese statements in favor of Pakistan. All one has to do is read the news or Google it. I don't understand what is so untrue or unsubstantiated about these claims?

There is zero ambiguity in my mind regarding a future tit for tat between US and China in various conflict zones around the world. Yes, the India Pakistan conflict has already sucked in China and the US. Before you ask, no I don't have a source for this claim, but that is my opinion and instinct. I hope I am allowed to contribute by making certain predictions based on history and facts. What would a discussion be where we have to post evidence for every claim or sentence we post?

No, it might be YOUR opinion that there are two "camps" as you put it, in the world today, but that is not the same as it being a fact. In my own personal opinion, the world is now multi-polar, as opposed to the three basic orientations which had existed during most of the Cold War.

With regards to positions outside powers take on the conflicts between India and Pakistan, it leaves the impression that one has made up their mind about who is doing what, and why, and is then looking for information or opinions which support the conclusions reached, while ignoring information which would conflict.

For instance, mainland China shares a long and at times (even very recently I might add) contested border with India. From a strategic standpoint, if the PRC can supply aid and/or war material to Pakistan, then India would need to look more to the west for potential threats from/across the border with Pakistan, rather than having India looking north to China. A stronger Pakistan presents a greater potential threat to India, and/or a potential second front should conflict break out in South Asia, which could be advantageous to China.

OTOH the information I have been coming across tends to disagree with the assertion that the US sides with India. Rather, it seems more likely that the US has been trying to tamp down or suppress conflicts between India and Pakistan. For some specific information for comparison in FY2019 India received ~USD$97 mil. in foreign aide from the US, while Pakistan received ~USD$684 mil. from the US for the same time period. Those numbers, sourced from a US gov't site clearly do not show the US favouring India in terms either total or per capita aide, which then calls into question the accuracy of the assertion that "the US clearly sides with India..."

As a side note, and having been on this forum for some time, if one is stating that something is an opinion one has, and then provides logical arguments which show or support the how and why of the opinion a poster holds, that is one thing. OTOH the Mod team and even members start to get a bit twitchy when someone conflates opinions they have with facts, especially if they then attempt to make assertions which tend to disagree with information readily available.

In the specific case of Pakistan, the US has been involved with and had a presence in Pakistan, for quite literally decades. This presence enabled a logistical pipeline into Afghanistan during the 80's providing funding, weapons and foreign fighters against the Soviets and Soviet-backed gov't. The US presence in Afghanistan starting in the early 2000's also required there to be personnel and travel routes which passed through Pakistan to supply US and allied forces stationed in Afghanistan. AFAIK at least some of these routes are still in use to support US forces still in Afghanistan. The US reliance on and use of logistical routes through Pakistan into Afghanistan to support deployed forces calls into question any assertion that the US has sided with India and therefore against Pakistan. Had that truly happened, then Pakistan could simply close those routes down and US forces in Afghanistan would rapidly be in serious trouble. Again, the impression I have formed, based in part on my reading of US news and reactions on events in South Asia, is that the US is trying to avoid taking a side, and instead trying to keep the two countries from going at each other, if for no reason other than peace between India and Pakistan makes it easier for the US to operate in the region.