Pak NAVY’S contributions in orchestrating response against piracy

Lieutenant Commander Amjad Ali Dogar PN, Deputy Director (Maritime Affairs) Naval Headquarters Islamabad
The World Maritime Day is an annual event celebrated by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and its 169 member states during the last week of September. The marking of the day is used to focus attention on safe, secure and efficient shipping on clean oceans. The theme for this year’s maritime day is “Piracy: Orchestrating the Response”, which includes a 6-point action plan aimed at establishing a coordinated response against maritime piracy. The theme and action plan were launched in London on February 3, 2011, and encompass six overall aims:
Increase pressure at the political level to secure the release of all hostages being held by pirates.
Review and improve the IMO guidelines for administrations and seafarers, and promote compliance with industry’s best management practices and recommended preventive, evasive and defensive measures.
Promote greater levels of support from, and in coordination with, navies.
Promote anti-piracy coordination and co-operation procedures between and among states, regions, organizations and industry.
Assist states to build capacity to deter, interdict and bring to justice those who commit acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships.
Provide care, during the post-traumatic period, for those attacked or hijacked by pirates and for their families.
Piracy is an old crime, possibly the oldest concerning commercial shipping. There have been persistent outbreaks of sufficient magnitude throughout the history of piracy which is traced back to Ancient Greece some 2000 years ago. Some notable Pirates seen through the prism of history were Cilician (1st century), Illyrian & Gothic (3rd century), Timoji (7th century), Mediterranean (9th century), Woku (13th century), Maratha (18th century), Vikings & Barbary Corsair (19th century) and Somali (21st century) all threatening the commercial seafarers in one form or the other. The time between 1519 and 1780 was known as the Golden Age of Piracy. Piracy was strong in the Pacific and Indian Oceans too since 20th century. More recently, Piracy off the coast of Somalia has been a threat to international shipping since the second phase of the Somali Civil War in the early 21st century. Since 2005, many international organizations including the IMO have expressed concern over the surge in acts of piracy as it has impeded the delivery of shipments and increased shipping expenses. A veritable industry of profiteers has also risen around the piracy. Insurance companies, in particular, have profited from the pirate attacks, as insurance premiums have increased significantly.
It is believed that piracy off the coast of Somalia is caused partly due to illegal fishing and dumping of toxic waste in Somali waters by foreign vessels. The so called pirates considered that they are National Coast Guards and protecting their fishing grounds to exact justice & compensation for the stolen marine resources. Piracy has become substantially more lucrative in recent years and financial gain is now the primary motive for Somali pirates. Pattern of piracy attacks around the world clearly highlights that the Gulf of Aden (GoA) and Somali Coast are piracy hotspots besides Malacca Strait, South China Sea and Western Africa. Somalia remains a hotbed of pirates and accounts for 92% of all ships being seized off the Somali coast. In 2008, pirates shifted their focus to GoA and against 119 attacks off the coast of Somalia, 92 were recorded in GoA. In 2009, GoA again remained the piracy hot spot and according to International Maritime Bureau (IMB) Piracy Reporting Centre (PRC), the total number of pirate attacks in the Gulf of Aden and off east-coast of Somalia in 2009 overtook the figure of 2008. In 2009, there were 49 successful hijackings from 214 attempted attacks. This indicates that the number of attacks almost doubled in 2009, however, rate of success shows considerable decline due to awareness on part of merchant vessels and passive measure being adopted by them as well as to some extent presence of counter piracy forces. In 2010, the number of ships attacked by Somali pirates was 47 and from Jan 2011 till to date the figures goes on to 188. In addition, Somali pirates are currently holding 301 hostages and 11 vessels. As of mid September 2011, 35 piracy attempts have already taken place around the GoA, Somali Basin and Indian Ocean. According to IMB, pirates murdered eight seafarers and seized a record 1181 hostages as well as 53 ships in 2010. The number of hostages and vessels captured last year was the highest recorded by IMB since it started monitoring piracy attacks in 1991.
Click Here To Read More:http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Regional/Karachi/29-Sep-2011/Pak-NAVYS-contributions-in-orchestrating-response-against-piracy

Australia to Buy Navantia Landing Craft

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced that the Government had given Second Pass Approval for two important capability projects: the purchase of 12 new watercraft for the two Canberra Class Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) ships and the enhancement of information and technology infrastructure at Headquarters Joint Operations Command (HQJOC).
Purchase of watercraft for LHD (Joint Project 2048 Phase 3)
The Government has agreed to the purchase from Navantia of 12 medium-sized fast landing craft (the LCM-1E) for the LHD through Joint Project 2048 Phase 3.
This follows a decision in February 2009 to direct source the purchase of the watercraft to Navantia.
Navantia are building the hulls for the two LHDs and the watercraft will be purpose-built for these ships.
The watercraft will enable transport of troops and equipment from the LHDs to the shore including where there are no fixed port facilities.
The delivery of the first batch of four watercraft will be co-ordinated with the delivery of the first LHD, expected in 2014.
Construction of the LHDs is underway in Spain and Australia.
The LHDs are bigger than Australia’s last aircraft carrier.
Each is 230 metres long and can carry a combined armed battlegroup of more than 1000 personnel, 100 armoured vehicles and 12 helicopters. Each also includes a 40-bed hospital.
Maintenance and support for the watercraft will be provided by Australian industry.
The total cost of Joint Project 2048 Phase 3 is cost capped between $300 million to $500 million in the Public Defence Capability Plan.
The final cost is subject to the satisfactory negotiation of a contract with acceptable terms and conditions.
Australian Defence Force Command and Control (Joint Project 2030 Phase
The Government has also approved enhancements to information and communications technology infrastructure at Headquarters Joint Operations Command (Bungendore) as well as software upgrades to better support military planning.
The enhanced command and control system will also allow better communication between operations staff and troops, particularly commanders and Special Forces.
Defence will purchase commercial off-the-shelf hardware and software products which will then be integrated to meet requirements.
It is expected that the capital expenditure for these enhancements will generate around 75 jobs and support around 25 on-going jobs inAustralia.
Additional hardware and software upgrades to support better military planning will be considered by Government in future elements of Joint Project 2030 Phase 8.

Read more: http://www.defencetalk.com/australia-to-buy-navantia-landing-craft-37289/#ixzz1ZGfzpIHT

South Korea to build naval base near disputed island Read more: http://www.defencetalk.com/south-korea-to-build-naval-base-near-disputed-island-37294/#ixzz1ZGfmfvX8

South Korea will build a naval base near an island claimed by both Seoul and Tokyo so that its warships can deploy faster than Japan's in case of disputes, a lawmaker said Wednesday.
Chung Mi-Kyung of the ruling Grand National Party said the government would build a $300 million naval base on Ulleung island by 2015.
Ulleung is the closest South Korean territory to the Seoul-controlled islets in the Sea of Japan (East Sea) which are known as Dokdo in Korean and Takeshima in Japan.
Chung cited data from the transport ministry which would partly finance the project, saying construction would begin in 2012. The ministry confirmed the report.
The new base will feature a 300-metre (990-feet) pier big enough to accommodate Aegis destroyers and the 14,000-tonne amphibious landing ship named Dokdo, Chung said.
"It will help strengthen our territorial rights on Dokdo as our naval ships can reach the islands quickly in times of disputes with Japan," she said in a statement.
Once the base is complete, Seoul would be able to send its ship to Dokdo in an hour and a half compared to the current four hours, she said. Japan's ships would take about three hours.
South Korea has for decades deployed a small marine police force on the rocky islets.
The dispute over them flared up again in June when Korean Air mounted a test flight of its new aircraft over Dokdo. Tokyo in response ordered its public servants to boycott Korean Air for a month.
Three conservative Tokyo lawmakers who intended to visit Ulleung to reassert their country's claim to Dokdo were refused permission to enter South Korea in early August.

Read more: http://www.defencetalk.com/south-korea-to-build-naval-base-near-disputed-island-37294/#ixzz1ZGfrBuxc

Pakistan military voices concern over US allegations

A top Pakistani general on Sunday expressed concern over US allegations of links to insurgents, stressing that peace in the region would only be possible through mutual trust and cooperation.
General Khalid Shameem Wyne, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, conveyed his reaction to General James Mattis, commander of the US Central Command, the military said in a statement.
Their meeting followed scathing criticism by top US military officer Admiral Mike Mullen that Pakistan was "exporting" terror to neighbouring Afghanistan.
"Both leaders discussed various matters of mutual interests and emerging geo-strategic situation in the region," the statement said.
General Wyne "expressed his concern about the negative statements emanating from the US," it said, adding that "he stressed upon addressing the irritants in the relationship which are a result of an extremely complex situation."
"Pakistan armed forces are committed to achieving enduring peace in the region which will only be possible through mutual trust and cooperation," the statement said.
Separately the US embassy said Mattis visited Islamabad to meet with army chief General Ashfaq Kayani and Wyne.
"The generals had candid discussions about the current challenges in the US-Pakistan relationship.
"However, General Mattis also emphasised the vital role the Pakistan military plays in international security efforts to protect the Pakistani and Afghan people and the need for persistent engagement among the militaries of the US, Pakistan and other states in the region," the embassy said in a statement.
Mattis held security talks with Kayani on Saturday when Pakistani officials said the meeting would help defuse the mounting tensions.
As ties suffered a blow over the US accusations, Kayani Sunday convened a special meeting of top military commanders to discuss the security situation, officials said, without giving details.
The two countries are key allies in the war against Islamist militants in Afghanistan, but their relationship is often troubled and plumbed new depths after the killing of Osama bin Laden in a covert US raid in Pakistan in May.
The latest row, with Washington accusing elements of the Pakistani state of supporting the Al-Qaeda-linked Haqqani network it blames for the September 13 attack on its embassy in Kabul, has raised the tensions to an unprecedented level.
Kayani termed Mullen's statement as "very unfortunate and not based on facts."
Mullen on Thursday bluntly accused Pakistan of "exporting" violent extremism to Afghanistan through proxies and warned of possible action to protect US troops.
Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said Saturday the US allegations would only benefit the militants, and that they "betray a confusion and policy disarray within the US establishment on the way forward in Afghanistan".
"Blame game is self-defeating... It will only benefit the enemies of peace. Only terrorists and militants will gain from any fissures and divisions."
The White House demanded Friday that Pakistan "break any link they have" with the Haqqanis, a Taliban faction founded by a CIA asset turned Al-Qaeda ally.

Read more: http://www.defencetalk.com/pakistan-military-voices-concern-over-us-allegations-37232/#ixzz1ZGfWyOIe

New attack on Pakistan navy kills five

A bomb ripped through a Pakistani bus in Karachi on Thursday, killing four naval personnel and a passing motorcyclist in the third attack on navy transport this week in the country's biggest city.
A dozen people were wounded in the attack claimed by the Taliban in Pakistan's politically tense economic capital and southern port, where NATO ships supplies to the 130,000 US-led troops fighting in Afghanistan.
Two other navy buses were bombed on Tuesday, dealing a blow to the military just days after Pakistan's army chief General Ashfaq Kayani claimed his forces had "broken the back" of Taliban and Al-Qaeda-linked militants.
"Now a total of four of our employees -- all sailors -- have been martyred in the attack on our bus, while seven others are injured," spokesman Commander Salman Ali told AFP. Four other navy personnel died on Tuesday.
The navy said the bomb was planted in a manhole. The explosives tore through sign boards, a fuel station and parked cars, and rescue workers were afterwards seen covering bodies with white sheets.
Five navy personnel and seven other people were also wounded, said provincial government official Sharfuddin Memon.
Passer-by Asghar Ali, being treated for injuries in hospital, said: "I was trying to cross the road a few feet away from the bus when I heard an explosion and saw the bus was hit and people inside and around crying."
The bomb exploded close to the scene of Pakistan's deadliest attack, which killed 139 people at the 2007 homecoming of the former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, who was subsequently killed in a separate bombing two months later.
Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani condemned the attack and called for an immediate investigation "so that further course of action can be taken".
Provincial chief minister Qaim Ali Shah said the blast appeared to be the work of the same group that was behind Tuesday's bombings, which wounded nearly 60 people and were the worst attacks on military officials in Karachi in years.
Shah said that authorities had tried to change the navy's routes after Tuesday's blasts but refused to point the finger of blame at any particular organisation.
Ehsanullah Ehsan, a spokesman for Pakistan's main Taliban faction, claimed responsibility for all the attacks on navy buses in Karachi.
"Whether it is the navy, army or air force, they are all our enemies. We want to make it clear to the military to prepare for similar attacks in the future," he told AFP by telephone from an undisclosed location.
Authorities on Tuesday had blamed extremist Islamist groups linked to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, such as Lashkar-i-Jhangvi, which was involved in the Karachi kidnap and beheading of US journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002.
Analysts said the navy was a soft target and that attacks in Karachi, where government security officials had previously been relatively immune from bombings further north, scored propaganda hits for the militants.
"It is utter intelligence failure," said defence analyst Talat Masood.
Home to Pakistan's stock exchange and a lifeline for a depressed economy wilting under inflation and stagnating foreign investment, until this week there had been no attacks on the military in Karachi for years.
Most of the Islamist bombings dogging Pakistan, in which more than 4,240 people have died in four years, have been concentrated further north.
"By attacking the forces in Karachi, the militants prove their point that they can strike anywhere in Pakistan," said Masood.
"In Karachi it is easier for them to attack less secured buses and installations of the navy, a force which has least security available.
"It is much harder for authorities to prevent such attacks in the sprawling and most disorganised city of the country," he said.
The United States considers Pakistan's northwestern border areas with Afghanistan the global headquarters of Al-Qaeda.

Read more: http://www.defencetalk.com/new-attack-on-pakistan-navy-kills-five-33782/#ixzz1ZGf4k9t5

Militants attack naval base in Pakistan

KARACHI, Pakistan — Islamist militants stormed a naval base in the Pakistani city of Karachi late Sunday, rocking the facility with fiery explosions and battling commandos dispatched to subdue them in one of the most brazen attacks in years, security officials said.
At least two navy officers were injured and an airplane was damaged, navy spokesman Salman Ali said, but the total number of casualties was unclear. Many ambulances were being held back because of the fighting inside the base that was still going on more than 2½ hours after the attack began on Pakistani Naval Station Mehran.
The coordinated strike, reportedly involving up to 15 attackers, came three weeks after the death of Osama bin Laden in an American raid on in the northwest city of Abbottabad, an event al-Qaida allied extremists here have vowed to avenge.
The unilateral American raid triggered a strong backlash against Washington, which is trying to support Pakistan in its fight against militants, as well as rare domestic criticism against the armed forces for failing to detect or prevent the operation.
Pakistan’s army, which has received billions of dollars in U.S. aid since 2001, has launched several operations against militants in their heartland close to the border with Afghanistan over the last three years. The militants have struck back against police and army targets around the country.
Sunday’s raid appeared to be most serious against the military since October 2009, when militants attacked the army headquarters close to the capital, Islamabad. They held dozens hostage in a 22-hour standoff that left 23 people dead, including nine militants.
It began with at least three loud explosions, which were heard by people who live around the naval base, one of the largest military facilities in the country. It was unclear what caused the explosions, but they set off raging fires that could be seen from far in the distance.
An Associated Press reporting team outside the base heard at least six other explosions.
Authorities sent in several dozen navy and police commandos to battle the attackers, who responded with gunfire and grenades, said a senior security official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. At least one airplane — a P-3C Orion, a maritime surveillance aircraft — was destroyed, another official said.
At least one media report said a team of American technicians were working on the aircraft at the time of the strike, but U.S. Embassy spokesman Alberto Rodriguez said no Americans were on the base.
No group claimed responsibility for the attack. But the Pakistani Taliban, an al-Qaida allied network which has previously launched attacks in Karachi, has pledged to retaliate for the death of bin Laden, and has claimed responsibility for several bloody attacks since then.
Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani condemned the attack, saying such a “cowardly act of terror could not deter the commitment of the government and people of Pakistan to fight terrorism.”
Karachi, the country’s largest city and its commercial hub, has not been spared the violence sweeping the country, despite being in the south far from the northwest where militancy is at its strongest. In April, militants bombed three buses taking navy employees to work, killing at least nine people.
Click Here To  Read More:http://www.navytimes.com/news/2011/05/ap-pakistan-naval-base-militants-052211/

Twin suicide blasts kill 23 people in Pakistan

QUETTA, Pakistan — A pair of suicide bombers attacked a top army officer in Pakistan’s southwestern city of Quetta on Wednesday, missing him but killing his wife. At least 22 others died, including several guards, a senior officer and two children, officials said.
Police said they were investigating whether the strike was in revenge for the recent arrests in Quetta of three top al-Qaida suspects, an operation that was assisted by the CIA.
But within hours, the Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack and a spokesman for the group said Brig. Khurram Shahzad, the deputy head of the region’s Frontier Corps, was targeted because of an incident several months ago that left five people dead at a checkpoint in the city.
In Wednesday’s blasts, the first attacker detonated his vehicle next to a group of Frontier Corps officers close to Shahzad’s house. Hurling grenades, the second attacker than stormed the house and blew himself up inside it, police officer Naseer Ahmed Kurd said.
Police officer Hamid Shakil said at least 23 people were killed and more than 60 were injured.
Two of the dead were children traveling in a rickshaw. A colonel in the corps was also killed, he said.
Shakil said one of the suicide bomber was carrying an identity card showing him to be a 21-year-old Afghan refugee.
The bombing comes just days after Monday’s disclosure of the arrests of the three al-Qaida suspects in the city. The Pakistan army statement announcing it had stressed the level of CIA involvement — a possible sign of an upswing in cooperation between two uneasy anti-terror allies after the rancor surrounding Osama bin Laden’s killing.
American officials praised the operation, saying the detention of the most senior militant — Younis al-Mauritani — was a significant achievement. The Frontier Corps took part in the operation.
“This attack was maybe in reaction to the recent arrests, but we are investigating,” police officer Hamid Shakil said of the Wednesday blasts.
Islamist militants are seeking to topple Pakistan’s Western-allied leaders and take over the country.
Allied to the insurgents fighting U.S. forces across the border in Afghanistan, they have attacked hundreds of government, police, army and civilian targets since 2007, when the violence began in earnest. Many thousands have been killed, and Pakistani authorities have struggled to counter the threat.
Quetta is a dangerous city, and is thought to be home to al-Qaida and Taliban leaders. It lies close to the border with southern Afghanistan, the heart of the insurgency in that country. It is also wracked by separatist violence, but those rebels have tended not to deploy suicide bombers.
Pakistan didn’t say when al-Mauritani and the two other al-Qaida operatives were arrested but a U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters, has said the arrest took place in the past two weeks.
The unusual announcement about the cooperation between the CIA and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency appeared aimed at reversing the widespread perception that ties had been badly damaged by bin Laden’s death.
The Pakistanis accused the Americans of violating their sovereignty with the bin Laden raid, while Washington was angry the terror leader had been found in a house in a military garrison town in Pakistan.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Tuesday praised Pakistan for al-Mauritani’s arrest.
For read More Click Here:http://www.navytimes.com/news/2011/09/ap-twin-suicide-blasts-kill-23-people-pakistan-090711/

Anti-polio vaccination elements to face legal action

PESHAWAR – In a drastic measure to make an upcoming polio eradication drive a success, district authorities September 7 decided to arrest religious extremist elements who spread propaganda against polio vaccines. The decision will also apply to parents who refuse vaccinations for their children.

“We shall be arresting all those elements, even parents, under 16/3 Maintenance of Public Order who will obstruct or refuse polio vaccinations to the children,” District Co-ordination Officer of Peshawar Siraj Ahmed told Central Asia Online. Peshawar health and administrative authorities, during a joint meeting in Peshawar September 7, said no one who opposes the vaccination programme will be spared from sanctions.

“We had been convincing these religious elements to support the vaccination and would continue doing so, but those opposing still will have to face the music,” Siraj said.

Some militant and conservative religious leaders have claimed that polio inoculation is an attempt by foreigners to make Pakistani women infertile – or kill them. Similar opposition in Nigeria yielded only when a vaccine made in Indonesia, the world's most populous Islamic country, was used.

He said the punishment is necessary because polio has been detected in 32 rural union councils of Peshawar, and the main cause has been misleading propaganda by extremists that has persuaded parents to refuse to inoculate their children.

Siraj called the situation in Peshawar unsatisfactory, as 32 of the 92 union councils are at high risk of polio. The crackdown on vaccine oppositionists is part of an effort to make an upcoming three-day polio drive, which will begin September 19, a success.

Siraj Ahmad, district co-ordination officer of Peshawar, told Central Asia Online September 7 that authorities will take legal action against opponents of the polio vaccination campaign. [Zahir Shah]

“Some non-Pakistani sermon leaders in the rural belt are the main troublemakers and are unleashing a misleading propaganda on loudspeakers, but we have decided to register cases against them under 14 Foreign Act and expel them if any violation is found this time,” Siraj said.

He said the government has sought the help of ulema and religious scholars to advocate during Friday prayers for vaccination, and he called their response convincing.

“The real problem lies in religious extremist elements and the people with a militant mind-set who are propagating against the vaccination campaign, but they are not doing any service to the future generation,” said Dr. Fazl e Rabbi, In-Charge Expanded Programme on Immunisation (EPI) in Peshawar.

More than 35,000 refusals, 4-5% of the children, have been registered, he said.

“The religious extremist elements are the main hurdle,” Fazl said. “(They) are instigating the innocent parents against the campaign, co-relating it with different myths and anti-West animosity toward Muslims.”

He said the message from the September 7 meeting was clear: “An advocacy and awareness drive will continue, but the extremist elements opposing the polio vaccination will be taken to task,” Fazl told Central Asia Online.

He said a special Short Interval Additional Dose (SIAD) campaign has begun in the 32 high-risk union councils of Peshawar and another will be conducted September 25-27. That will complement the larger Sub-National Immunisation Dose (SNID) that starts September 19.

Afghan refugees will be targeted in the campaign.
“The latest cases are mostly among the Afghan refugees population, and we are monitoring it minutely this time. We have communicated to the Afghan Refugee Commissionerate that the Afghan families refusing polio drops to their children must be deported,” he said. “If we want to put an end to this mess, we have to go harsh; there is no other way.”

A recently published “Global Polio Eradication Initiative” in the Pakistan Polio Journal disclosed that polio cases in Pakistan have been increasing at an alarming rate in 2011. Eighty cases have been registered as of July 2011, compared to 144 in all of 2010.
Click Here To Read Mora;http://centralasiaonline.com/cocoon/caii/xhtml/en_GB/pakistan-features/caii/features/pakistan/main/2011/09/07/feature-02

Al-Qaeda news

SLAMABAD – Recent arrests and killings of top al-Qaeda members have fractured the terrorist organisation and will ultimately weaken its capabilities to plan and launch attacks inside and outside Pakistan, defence and security analysts said.

“The arrest of Younas Al Mauritani and two other affiliates after the death of the al-Qaeda second-in-command, Atiya Abdel Rahman (in an aerial strike) is a major setback for al-Qaeda,” senior security analyst and author Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa told Central Asia Online.

Al Mauritani was considered al-Qaeda’s foreign minister. His capture and Rahman’s death on the heels of Osama bin Laden’s death May 2 have splintered al-Qaeda, she said.

The Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, in co-ordination with the Balochistan Frontier Corps, captured Al Mauritani, who was mainly responsible for planning and conducting international operations in Quetta, in August but announced the capture September 5. Authorities also captured his colleagues Abdul Ghaffar Al Shami and Messara Al Shami.
“Through this critical arrest, yet another fatal blow has been delivered to al-Qaeda,” Inter-Services Public Relations said September 5, regarding Al Mauritani’s capture.

Arrests have weakened al-Qaeda

Former secretary of defence production and senior defence analyst Lt. Gen. (ret.) Talat Masood agreed that recent events have weakened al-Qaeda’s capabilities.

“In some ways organisationally it is getting weaker because the leadership has been hit,” he said.

Senior security analyst and author Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa said, “The arrest of Younas Al Mauritani and ... the death of the al-Qaeda second-in-command, Atiya Abdel Rahman ... is a major setback for al-Qaeda." [Yasir Rehman]

Al Mauritani’s arrest signals a crushing blow to al-Qaeda’s efforts to rebuild, Masood said. With his arrest, al-Qaeda appears to have lost a figure who was key to its new approach, as he was assigned to plan international terror attacks after bin Laden died.

Recent events show that al-Qaeda is on the run, not only in Pakistan and Afghanistan but elsewhere, Masood said.

Al-Qaeda has sub-contracted its operations to other groups, indicating that it is more of a network than an organisation, Siddiqa said.

That diversification could help the militancy, she said. Since Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Jaish-e-Mohammad and other groups have links to al-Qaeda, Siddiqa said, “To assume that the main Arab al-Qaeda philosophy, the ideology, the network is dead … I think it is a farfetched assumption.”

A weaker al-Qaeda could affect TTP

Al-Qaeda leaders in Pakistan have worked with Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) members, Masood said, giving leverage to the TTP.

“Al-Qaeda doesn’t have much manpower in Pakistan, so it likes to promote its ideas and programmes quite possibly in conjunction with the TTP,” Masood said. “But the experience in Afghanistan shows that the Taliban in Afghanistan may be taking a different viewpoint even if they shelter (al-Qaeda members).”

Senior analyst and Pak Institute of Peace Studies (PIPS) Director Aamir Rana sees a decline in the number of terror attacks in Pakistan with the capture and killing of al-Qaeda leaders.
Click Here To Read More:http://centralasiaonline.com/cocoon/caii/xhtml/en_GB/pakistan-features/caii/features/pakistan/main/2011/09/09/feature-01

India Pakistan Military Comparison

Conventional Force Comparison
The conventional military balance is tilted far in India's favor. India has achieved numerical and qualitative superiority in many military categories, particularly in mechanized ground forces and in attack aircraft. It has a two-to-one advantage in tanks and a three-to-one advantage in modern tanks. India also has true infantry fighting vehicles, giving its mechanized infantry much more firepower and mobility than the Pakistani infantry. The two-to-one overall advantage in aircraft grows to almost a six-to-one advantage when one compares just the most modern and capable aircraft - a category in which Pakistan lost its earlier edge after over a decade of U.S.-led international sanctions.[2] This disadvantage is very significant because Pakistan has little strategic depth; that is, many of its strategic assets are close to its border with India.

Both India and Pakistan have offensively oriented conventional military doctrines. India has developed an offensive-defensive military doctrine that calls for aggressive offensive action to pre-empt or counter-attack the enemy. Currently, India is exploring the concept of limited conventional war based on the notion of strategic space between low-intensity conflicts and full-scale conventional war. This concept is fueled by political and public pressure within India to launch conventional military strikes against Pakistan in retaliation for Pakistan's alleged support of terrorism.[3] The Pakistani army also relies on an offensive-defensive strategy, which is characterized by retaining adequate reserves at successive force levels, surprise, and aggressive leadership. This strategy calls for the Pakistan army to detect the initial enemy thrust, take effective counter measures to limit penetration, and simultaneously attack the adversary to capture or threaten a strategic objective.[4]

Strategic Nuclear Balance
Each country possesses a stockpile of nuclear weapons components and could assemble and deploy several nuclear weapons within a few days to a week.[5] The size, composition, and operational status of each nuclear arsenal are closely guarded secrets, but sufficient public information exists to make general assumptions about the strategic balance in South Asia.[6]

Assuming that the Cirus and Dhruva research reactors produce 25-40 kg of bomb-grade plutonium annually, by the end of 2002 India could have stockpiled between 280-600 kg of weapon-grade plutonium.[7] Although India also has a program to produce highly enriched uranium (HEU), it is not known if the program has managed to produce weapon-grade HEU. Experts assess that India could require as little as 5 kg and as much as 7 kg of plutonium per weapon. Considering the worst- and best-case assumptions about Indian weapon design, it could possess enough fissile material for between 40 and 120 weapons, with 70 as the median estimate.

Unlike India, which relies on plutonium for its weapons, Pakistan's nuclear program is based on HEU. If Pakistan's Kahuta enrichment plant is able to produce 80-140 kg of weapon-grade uranium per year, Pakistan today could have 815-1230 kg available for weapons production. The amount required for a bomb is believed to be 12-25 kg, depending on the weapon design Pakistan employs. In addition, an unsafeguarded heavy-water research reactor recently constructed at Khushab produces plutonium that could be reprocessed to make a few nuclear weapons annually. Adding together its possible plutonium and HEU inventories, Pakistan could have enough fissile material to produce between 35 and 95 weapons, with 60 as the median estimate.



Each state has various aircraft and ballistic missiles that could be used to deliver nuclear weapons. In 2001, DOD assessed that India would most likely employ fighter-bomber aircraft for delivery because its ballistic missiles probably were not yet ready. The air force has several aircraft that could be employed for this mission, but the best suited would be the Jaguar, Mirage-2000, MiG-27, or Su-30. India has deployed short-range Prithvi 1 missiles that are capable of carrying a 1000 kg warhead (the presumed maximum size of a nuclear device), but because of Prithvi's restricted range, India will probably turn to its new solid-propellant Agni 1 missile, which has a 700-900 km range and was rushed into development after the 1999 Kargil conflict. The Agni 1 and the 2000-3000 km-range Agni 2 missile are likely to become India's preferred missile platforms when they become operational.

Pakistan has placed a high priority on acquiring ballistic missiles to offset India's conventional military advantages and to ensure reliable delivery of nuclear weapons. Although the Pakistan Air Force F-16 and Mirage 5 aircraft probably are capable of nuclear delivery, the liquid-fuel Ghauri 1 and 2 missiles developed with North Korean assistance, and the solid-fuel Shaheen 1 and 2 missiles developed with Chinese help, are more likely choices.[8]



India's draft nuclear doctrine, published in August 1999, is based on a retaliatory, no-first-use policy.[9] The doctrine casts Indian nuclear forces principally as a deterrent against a nuclear attack on India. Pakistan has not publicly announced an official nuclear doctrine, but it is concerned with deterring India from taking advantage of its conventional superiority. Pakistan appears to have adopted a nuclear first-use policy to deter India from using its conventional military superiority.[10]

Survivability at Risk
Large-scale conventional warfare between India and Pakistan has the potential to threaten the survival of Pakistan's strategic nuclear forces. However, limited Indian attacks, such as a retaliatory strike on the ground or through the air, would not serve as a real threat to Pakistan's strategic weapon systems.

The asymmetries of strategic depth and offensive military capability give India an operational advantage, and may create a situation in which India's conventional ground or air forces come into contact with Pakistan's strategic nuclear forces. Pakistan's shorter-range Hatf 3/M-11 ballistic missiles must be stationed fairly far forward to reach strategic targets in India, perhaps leaving them vulnerable to both air and ground attack. The same is true of Pakistan's forward airbases, which are within easy striking distance of the border. This is a very troubling scenario because Pakistan places great emphasis on its strategic nuclear forces to deter a large-scale conventional attack by India. The survival of Pakistan's strategic forces is critical to Pakistan, and a threat to them could place pressure on Pakistan to launch a nuclear attack while the strategic forces are still intact and capable of making a credible impression upon India.

India's greater strategic depth allows it to disperse its strategic nuclear forces to areas beyond the normal range of enemy ground and air operations. Longer-range platforms, such as the SU-30 aircraft and the Agni 2 missiles, further decrease Indian vulnerability. When combined with India's presumed retaliatory-only nuclear doctrine, this would seem to minimize the possibility of Pakistan degrading India's strategic deterrent capability so severely that India is pushed into a "use them or lose them" situation.

Command and Control Threatened
Large-scale conventional warfare between India and Pakistan also could threaten vital strategic command and control functions. This is particularly true for Pakistan since India has made a major investment in intelligence gathering and precision-strike capability.[11] There also may be a significant overlap between Pakistan's normal conventional operational command and control structures that would be subject to attack in a large-scale war and its strategic command and control structure. If Pakistan lost command and control of its strategic forces, would national command authorities consider ordering the use of remaining strategic nuclear forces while they could still affect some degree of deterrence?

Pakistan's presumed inability to identify and attack India's C4I probably precludes any appreciable loss of command and control over India's strategic force during a conventional war. This is reinforced by a several factors, including India's reliance on negative control features, and its greater strategic depth. A conventional attack on India's command and control structures probably would cause only a delay in retaliatory nuclear strikes, and not lead to the inadvertent use of nuclear weapons.

There are no indications that India has pre-delegated nuclear release authority. However, New Delhi might find that its strategic command and control functions are unable to cope with the effects of a full-scale conventional war. Under such circumstances India's senior leadership may have to cobble together a system while under pressure. There are no indications that Pakistan has pre-delegated nuclear release authority. However, it too may find that its strategic command and control functions are unable to cope with the effects of a full-scale war. Pakistan would be under tremendous pressure to create a workable system if its strategic command and control system is at risk. Pakistan's reliance on nuclear deterrence could force it to adopt pre-delegation of nuclear release authority if there were no other method to ensure delivery.

Fear of Pre-emption
Large-scale conventional warfare between India and Pakistan almost certainly would include air and ballistic missile attacks. Attacks by these inherently dual-use systems have the potential to be interpreted as pre-emptive attacks to destroy or neutralize the adversary's nuclear capability. This is especially true for Pakistan since India has invested heavily in improving its intelligence gathering and precision-strike capability. India also has made a major investment in defensive measures, including a limited ballistic missile defense.[12] Pakistan may believe that India is trying to gain the ability to launch a pre-emptive attack and deny Pakistan the ability to counter with an effective second-strike with a reduced force. Could this concern lead Pakistan to adopt a launch-on-warning or launch-under-attack posture where any Indian air- or ballistic missile attack could be interpreted as a pre-emptive strike and cause Pakistan to launch its nuclear weapons?

Pakistan's limited ability to identify and attack India's strategic nuclear assets probably precludes any appreciable loss of India's retaliatory capability even if Pakistan launched a pre-emptive attack. This condition is reinforced by India's greater strategic depth, and its superior air and ballistic missile defenses. An air- or ballistic missile attack on India probably would elicit a strong response, but probably not a nuclear response.
Click Here To Read More:http://www.defence.pk/forums/strategic-geopolitical-issues/18264-india-pakistan-military-comparison.html