Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Pakistan Army related discussion: Jan ~ Dec 2011

399 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

Some interesting information on Pakistan Army's Netcentric validation during the recent Ex. Azm-e-nau III by Brig Tughril Yamin:

One idea that was tested during the exercise was the applicability of the network-centric approach in the joint Army and Air force operations. The network-centric as opposed to platform-centric operation aims to connect all sensors to with the shooter thus reducing his OODA (Orient, Observe, Decide, and Act) loop. Network-centricity provides a Common Operating Picture (COP) to all stakeholders and facilitates its decision making process. If indeed the Indians are planning to animate a Cold Start type scenario, a net-enabled force would be able to react in a timely manner by launching appropriate responses to reduce or eliminate any advantages that might be sought through reducing the time of operations. All three services of the Armed Forces are rapidly transforming into a network enabled force. Ex Azm-e-Nau III was the battle lab to test a number of ideas and concepts to counter the so called Cold Start offensive doctrine. Network centric operation was one concept, which emerged as a doable enterprise. It reduced the fog of war by allowing all tiers of the command from the highest to lowest field commander to look into the evolving battle picture through across the board connectivity using all means of Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) assets i.e. UAVs, aerial imagery and early warning (EW). The real time availability of information not only reduced the chance of surprise through any proactive maneuvers, it also enhanced the decision making capability of commanders at all levels. 'Cold Start' has met it nemesis!

do u have the full article somewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

Airbus thanks for the link. If thats the burraq at 0.55 then it's not the prettiest vehicle out there but as long as it gets the job done.

Once while passing by HIT i saw 3-4 vehicles outside the cantt(probably being readied to be transported) in desert camo (the one in blue color). The other one looks like a copy of an Israeli vehicle. I am fine with it as long as it gets the job done.

http://defense-update.com/products/w/wildcat.htm

Edited by M Zulfiqar Asad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

With the defence cuts hitting Europe hard the Dutch are retiring 17 Cougars. Does anyone know their airworthiness of these helos? On another note finally Turkey is going to announce the winner of their own utility helo competition on the 12th April (Article below). This contract would be huge for the either Sirkosky or AW but the biggest winners would be the Turks given the level of off sets on offer the boost to their own local aviation industry.

Netherlands to Cut 12,000 Defense Posts

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Published: 8 Apr 2011 17:50

Print Email

Bookmark and Share

THE HAGUE - The Dutch government said April 8 it planned to cut 12,000 of a total 69,000 defense ministry jobs over the next four years but vowed it could maintain its international military commitments.

A NATO member, the Netherlands, has contributed forces to international operations in Afghanistan and the current mission in Libya, among other missions.

Related Topics

* Europe

"Of the 12,000 job cuts, there should be 6,000 dismissals," Defence Minister Hans Hillen told journalists after a cabinet meeting.

About 30 percent of the military's general staff was to disappear, he said, as well as about 100 Dutch posts in the NATO command structure.

The defense ministry has been tasked with cutting up to one billion euros ($1.4 billion) from its budget by the end of 2014 under the centre-right Dutch government's cost-cutting scheme.

Hillen said the ministry would also cut the use of equipment including 60 Leopard tanks, two patrol boats, 17 Cougar helicopters, a DC-10 transport plane and 19 F-16 fighter jets.

Prime Minister Mark Rutte said the country's ambition of participating in international missions "remains intact" despite the planned cuts.

"The Netherlands will continue to make an important contribution," he said at a press conference, though he added that future missions will probably have "shorter durations than in the past."

Rutte said the cuts were aimed not only at cutting costs but also at reorganizing the military to make it "more efficient"

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=6189265&c=EUR&s=TOP

Turk Utility Helo Winner To Be Announced April 12

By BURAK EGE BEKDIL and UMIT ENGINSOY

Published: 7 Apr 2011 14:53

Print Email

Bookmark and Share

ANKARA - Turkey's top government and military authorities will get together April 12 to select and announce the winner of a $4 billion contract for the co-production of utility helicopters, a senior procurement official said April 7.

Turkey's top decision-making body for procurement, the Defense Industry Executive Committee, chaired by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, will convene to choose between offers from U.S.-based Sikorsky Aircraft and Italy's AgustaWestland.

Related Topics

* Europe

* Americas

* Air Warfare

Sikorsky is offering its T-70, the Turkish version of its S-70 Black Hawk International, which is flown by militaries in dozens of countries, including Turkey.

AgustaWestland is competing with its TUHP 149, the Turkish version of its newly developed A-149.

"The meeting will have only one agenda item: selection of Turkey's new utility helicopter type," the procurement official said.

The first batch will total 109 helicopters, but with follow-on orders, more than 300 aircraft are expected to be built with a price tag of more than $10 billion, according to defense analysts.

Advertisement

Defense News Media Group

Armed Forces Journal Armed Forces Journal is the leading joint service monthly magazine for officers and leaders in the United States military community.

C4ISR Journal Logo C4ISR Journal, published 10 times per year, is a professional journal dedicated to the rapidly advancing, high-tech realm of military intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

Training & Simulation Journal Training & Simulation Journal, often referred to as TSJ, is a bimonthly journal that provides information on the latest trends in products and opportunities in the global military training and simulation market.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=6176733&c=EUR&s=AIR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Usma Rehamns post in bold below - taken from the army news thread:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=284429

Pakistan poised to dispatch army to Saudi Arabia

Move seen as effort to assure Sunni Islam dominance

Posted: April 07, 2011

© 2011 WorldNetDaily

Pakistan is prepared to move two army divisions into Saudi Arabia to protect the kingdom in the event of any outbreak of trouble, such as what has happened in Bahrain, Yemen, Egypt, Libya and other Middle East and North African nations, informed sources say in a report from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

It also is ready to help recruit ex-Pakistani military personnel for Bahrain's national guard, the sources report.

The sources said the decision was reached reluctantly, but it puts Sunni Islam-majority Pakistan alongside other Sunni Muslim partners, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, in a move that apparently is intended to assure that Sunni Islam remains dominant in the Arab world.

The perception is that the influence of Shiite Islam-dominated Iran is on the rise.

Read more: Pakistan poised to dispatch army to Saudi Arabia: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=284429#ixzz1J90kQ7Z5

any truth to this article?

ndad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Ndad I suspect that if there is truth to the article then its just aother hollow promise from Islamabad that we will try to get out of. It is not in Islamabad's interest to see MENA and more specifically GCC fall to political shi'ite forces as its not in the western powers interest. Like the whole fiasco in GW1 Islamabad knows that the West will deploy militarily if the GCC were to fall so no need for Islamabad to follow through with their promise. Then there are doubts about whether we can deploy two full divisions and sustain their operations in a foreign country. We lack the lift capacity whether it is by air or sea which makes me even more sceptical as to whether what the article says is possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

We lack the lift capacity whether it is by air or sea which makes me even more sceptical as to whether what the article says is possible.

If indeed PA was going to do this, can the air lift capacity of the GCC not be used? During recent years they (GCC) have ordered a lot of planes for the air lift role. I'm not sure how much of that has arrived, but still it is a possibility considering their ressources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Ndad I suspect that if there is truth to the article then its just aother hollow promise from Islamabad that we will try to get out of. It is not in Islamabad's interest to see MENA and more specifically GCC fall to political shi'ite forces as its not in the western powers interest. Like the whole fiasco in GW1 Islamabad knows that the West will deploy militarily if the GCC were to fall so no need for Islamabad to follow through with their promise. Then there are doubts about whether we can deploy two full divisions and sustain their operations in a foreign country. We lack the lift capacity whether it is by air or sea which makes me even more sceptical as to whether what the article says is possible.

Sultan,

It has been done before. We did have a divison in Saudi Arabia in the 80s. The division was integrated into the local defence establishment and had very little dependence on supplies from Pakistan. Its not like the US deploying a division in Afghanistan where every thing has to be brought in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Boota

That deployment was done in peace time so the PA had the luxury of time. That won't be the case when forces need to deployed in a crisis situation. Even if lead elements were deployed from Pakistan as part of a QRF it would be pointless if the rest of the expeditionary force couldn't deploy in time. Then integrating Pak forces to the GCC military structure has its issues. Do we really want pak troops taking orders from a Saudi General?

A Khan GCC logistical assets have been acquired to support GCC forces and not external forces. Plus if we want to bring in heavy equipment thats going to have to be done by sea and neither the GCC nor we have the assets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Thats right for about 15-20 years , Pakistan had a semi-permanent set-up there. It wasn't airlifted in some emergency, but was part of a long-term pact.

I will have to look at something more reliable before believing that Pakistan is about to do this again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Thats right for about 15-20 years , Pakistan had a semi-permanent set-up there. It wasn't airlifted in some emergency, but was part of a long-term pact.

I will have to look at something more reliable before believing that Pakistan is about to do this again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

My concern is slightly different (away from logistics), its more about the sectarian angle - its clear that Saudi fears a shi-ite uprising - i dont want pak to be caught up in what is an internal dispute, although there is iranian involvement - my thinking is that such a dispute, based purely on ethnic lines could inflame/worsen the situation in pakistan.

ndad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Boota

That deployment was done in peace time so the PA had the luxury of time. That won't be the case when forces need to deployed in a crisis situation. Even if lead elements were deployed from Pakistan as part of a QRF it would be pointless if the rest of the expeditionary force couldn't deploy in time. Then integrating Pak forces to the GCC military structure has its issues. Do we really want pak troops taking orders from a Saudi General?

A Khan GCC logistical assets have been acquired to support GCC forces and not external forces. Plus if we want to bring in heavy equipment thats going to have to be done by sea and neither the GCC nor we have the assets.

Sultan,

The whole concept of a Quick Reaction Force or expeditionary force is not valid here. We are not going in to take over the country or fight a foreign threat. To understand first let's discuss the reasons for the force in the first place. After what has happened in Egypt, Libya, Tunis and other Arab countries, the Saudis and GCC poodles are scared of not only from an internal revolt but also one influenced by Iran as we saw in Bahrain. The rulers of these countries don't have the manpower or trust in their own military to protect them. They also don't trust the West i.e. the Americans and infact calling in Americans to help will create more problems then solve them. Also there is no gaurantee that they will come and even if they do at what price. There is hardly any other country which can provide the sort of protection to the rulers of these countries which Pakistan can. We have the manpower, the skill, the technology and a common belief system for what it is worth. There is a certain level of trust and understanding as well as a working relationship between Pakistan Army, the Saudis some of the other GCC countries. As far as intergation into the local security apparatus it will most likly be through ministry of defence or National Guards i.e. through someone very close to the ruler or the ruler himself. It will be kept outside of the normal chain of command otherwise the purpose is defeated. These countries are not boiling over like Libya or Oman so they have some time i.e. enough to move couple of division with their equipment to Saudia or for Bahrain National Guards to hire a few thousand Pakistanis.

And there is some truth to all this. Kayani attended a very hush hush meeting of GCC security chiefs at a resort in Oman recently. Saudi head of national security, other GCC foreign ministers and other officials have made a bee line to Pakistan in recent weeks. So I think something is brewing. Don't expect a major annoucement though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

My concern is slightly different (away from logistics), its more about the sectarian angle - its clear that Saudi fears a shi-ite uprising - i dont want pak to be caught up in what is an internal dispute, although there is iranian involvement - my thinking is that such a dispute, based purely on ethnic lines could inflame/worsen the situation in pakistan.

ndad

Bahrain is the only GCC country with an ethnic issue, although Saudi Arabia has a significant shia minority on its Gulf Seaboard. Any Iranian push into this region or a threat to the Saudi regime will have implications bigger than rise in ethnic tension within Pakistan. Infact it will be least of our problem. We cannot afford to stay neutral in these situations. In such a situation the countries demographics will decide the direction rather than the government.

Edited by Boota

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Even in Bahrain the Shia angle is played up unnecessarily; most Bahraini shias have no desire to see an Iranian style theocracy imposed on them, nor do they have much love for Iranian hegemony. Not to mention that perhaps the majority of Shias in Bahrain are akhbaris as opposed to usulis in Iran and the theological differences between the two are too significant for the former to come under the latter's control. The trouble in Bahrain is by and large that a large majority is being rather ineptly controlled and governed by a smallish minority. If the Bahraini ruling house was smart, they could've easily diffused the situation ten years ago by giving a few very reasonable concessions rather than trying to use the stick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

Boota

Thats all fine and well but the question remains how are we going deploy 2 divisions with all its man power and more importantly their equipment to the Gulf? Do we even have the capability to do so and if so what is it? Secondly when are we going to deploy the 2 divisions and how long are the deployments going to be? Thirdly, with the ongoing police action on our western front and the commitments on our eastern border can we afford to release 2 divisions to the GCC and how will the security situation at home affect Islamabad's ability to maintain force deployments in the GCC. Fourthly, even if our forces operated with a command structure outside that of the GCC or any national command structure of its respective member states will our forces really be able to operate according to our rules of engagement given the fluidity of the ground situation in the likelihood of an uprising - remember General Zia's foray in Jordan? Finally, the big question being what is our exit strategy?

In priniciple I am not against the idea and would far rather see Pakistani troops on the streets of Riyadh than Nato troops but there are a lot of questions that need answering to ensure that we don't get bogged down in a quagmire. The threat to regimes is real and not from just a bunch of camel herders hence the need for two entire divisions. Hence all the more imperative that this is not silenced by the powers to be in the name of national security but is debated and analysed by all stakeholders in the GoP to ensure that when it does come down to the crunch we deliver on our promise and not have a repeat of the fiasco in '91.

Edited by Sultan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

Boota

Thats all fine and well but the question remains how are we going deploy 2 divisions with all its man power and more importantly their equipment to the Gulf? Do we even have the capability to do so and if so what is it? Secondly when are we going to deploy the 2 divisions and how long are the deployments going to be? Thirdly, with the ongoing police action on our western front and the commitments on our eastern border can we afford to release 2 divisions to the GCC and how will the security situation at home affect Islamabad's ability to maintain force deployments in the GCC. Fourthly, even if our forces operated with a command structure outside that of the GCC or any national command structure of its respective member states will our forces really be able to operate according to our rules of engagement given the fluidity of the ground situation in the likelihood of an uprising - remember General Zia's foray in Jordan? Finally, the big question being what is our exit strategy?

In priniciple I am not against the idea and would far rather see Pakistani troops on the streets of Riyadh than Nato troops but there are a lot of questions that need answering to ensure that we don't get bogged down in a quagmire. The threat to regimes is real and not from just a bunch of camel herders hence the need for two entire divisions. Hence all the more imperative that this is not silenced by the powers to be in the name of national security but is debated and analysed by all stakeholders in the GoP to ensure that when it does come down to the crunch we deliver on our promise and not have a repeat of the fiasco in '91.

All valid points. If resources are available, it is not difficult to raise more divisions. With the economic situation there is no shortage of men lining up to join the military. Even with all the commitments you list, we still have thousands of men with the UN. Do keep in mind that most of these countries have substantial longstanding Pakistani communities so these forces will not operate in isolation. Read up on the history of Mamlukes. This situation is more akin to that rather than a Western style expeditionary force. What we are seeing in middle east is of historical propotion and it is very difficult to predict the outcome let alone be on the right side of history. Even if it wants Pakistan will not be a silent spectator to this change. What is being discussed has no comparsion to to Zia's little excursion in Jordan or the wrong turning in Moghadishu.

Edited by Boota

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

If indeed PA was going to do this, can the air lift capacity of the GCC not be used? During recent years they (GCC) have ordered a lot of planes for the air lift role. I'm not sure how much of that has arrived, but still it is a possibility considering their ressources.

Since this is not an enterprise being undertaken during combat situations, the Infantry divisions can be airlifted via commercial air travel (chartered flights). Essential equipment would go through air ways (own or KSA/GCC ones) and heavier equipment through shipping. We have significant experience in doing so because of all the UN assignments. There are a dozen or more commercial airways flying troops all over the globe and moving logistics (Saudi Airways and PIA could also be put to use if the need was urgent).

My own concern with this possibility is that typically PA have never fired upon civilians in Pakistan and the last things we would want to see is Pakistani troops being seen to put down popular dissent with the governments in GCC. I hope it does not come to that and these turn out to be premature discussions. It would be hypocritical for us to have the Army support democracy at home and help the Monarchs somewhere else put it down. If anything, no less than Gen. Kiyani should be telling his counterpart in KSA that they should accommodate the dissenting voices rather than using strong arm tactics.

What Zia did against PLO in the 70s was acceptable for those days, in this day of the Internet, the use of Pakistani troops in any sort of police action/crowd control is bound to backfire. Given the tense relations between the Saudis and Zardari government, I would not be too amazed if the civilian government is fully on-board with these plans to curry favour.

In priniciple I am not against the idea and would far rather see Pakistani troops on the streets of Riyadh than Nato troops but there are a lot of questions that need answering to ensure that we don't get bogged down in a quagmire.

Sultan, this is something that we do not want. This is not Pakistani troops being called to help defend Riyadh against an external threat. I hope and pray it never comes to pass as we need all the peace in Saudi Arabia as is possible, however if this turns messy it will be Saudi on Saudi and the last thing I, as a Pakistani, would want is our troops patrolling the streets of another country which is in the process of sorting its own internal mess out. Its no place for NATO or Pakistan Army.

Edited by SSAAD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Boota

That deployment was done in peace time so the PA had the luxury of time. That won't be the case when forces need to deployed in a crisis situation. Even if lead elements were deployed from Pakistan as part of a QRF it would be pointless if the rest of the expeditionary force couldn't deploy in time. Then integrating Pak forces to the GCC military structure has its issues. Do we really want pak troops taking orders from a Saudi General?

A Khan GCC logistical assets have been acquired to support GCC forces and not external forces. Plus if we want to bring in heavy equipment thats going to have to be done by sea and neither the GCC nor we have the assets.

What urgent times line are the Pakistani troops being deployed against? I really hope nobody repeats the shenanigans of Brigadier Zia-ul-Haq (in Jordan) this time around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

both Saudi Arabia and Iran are extremist ideologies, distasteful stuff taking sides here but now that we must, whats in it for us anyway, not like they do more than the bare minimum for us.

The implications might be Iran getting even tighter with india and more instability at home.

we should be demanding that they be just as forthright about our security and prosperity. I know the saudis help us in times of disasters but what investments do they have here.? they even buy their military hardware from the west. Al Khalid tank anyone.

Edited by Fahad H

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

I agree. We are probably one of the few Muslim countries where large Sunni and Shia populations have been living in relative peace since 1947. Most sectarian violence is instigated outside the borders to destabilise the internal dynamics of the nation. We have an independent voice on the matter and it should remain independent. If we play 'little brother' to KSA/Gulf States, we will lose credibility.

Just because Iran has not been propped up by the West militarily unlike the Gulf states, it should not be taken lightly, we should remain neutral. Keeping our region stable is the first priority.

Personally I did not expect any maturity by the Arab leadership in dealing with their local unrest, and that has proven the case. Pakistani society, civil and military is much more advanced, educated, and rich in culture than many of these Arab states. Hence, we should not play the mercenary role because we are better than that.

Edited by Usman A.
Grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

In Pakistan there is no such issue of Shia Sunni both are living together even the founder of Pakistan M.A Jinnah was a Ismali Shia no such issue here. This issue is much more adverse in Iran where Iranian mullahs have declared Sunnis as minority they don't have the same privileges as Shia Muslims where as there is no such thing in Pakistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

with ops in SWA, other areas of KP and in future perhaps NWA and the eastern border will have two divisions to spare?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

with ops in SWA, other areas of KP and in future perhaps NWA and the eastern border will have two divisions to spare?

Yes we could if we had to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0