Global Geopolitics and Military: News and Discussions

DerBronzeLord

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
684
Likes
2,601
Country flag
FYI SEVASTOPOL GIVES WHOLE CONTROL OF BLACK SEA
Istanbul, Bartin and countless other naval bases disagree. The Russian Black Sea Fleet is shit, and it is quite possible that even the Turks could overrun the Russians. Sevastopol is a single naval base which doesn't do shit.
 

DerBronzeLord

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
684
Likes
2,601
Country flag
WELL RUSKY ARE DOING THAT AS CRIMEA HAS SEVASTAPOL(NAVAL BASE ) AND HUGE AMT OF NATURAL GAS

CHINKS ARE DOING THIS TO PHILIPPINES AS THAT AREA HAS HUGE AMT OF PETROLEUM
TO LADAKH AS OF BRI(CPEC) AND IT IS ALSO CLOSE TO Xinjiang
The Russians don't give a damn about Sevastopol or the Natural gas. The natural gas the Russians have in the Caucasus would put Crimea to shame. The Russians aren't running out of natural gas anytime soon, nor would they want to invoke massive sanctions and isolation for a naval base, which never mattered to them. A more likely reason, which has been discussed among Russian think-tanks, is the water from the Dnieper river.
 

FalconSlayers

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
6,121
Likes
20,811
Country flag
The historic (over 70,000 tons combined commissioned in PLA-N on a single day)
1619278656815.jpeg



Type 055 Destroyer Dalian (105)
1619278674236.png


The Type 055 Destroyer commissioned yesterday is named Dalian (pennant number 105). It is the third ship of the class and the second one commissioned this year (The 2nd Type 055joined the PLAN in March 2021).


The Type 055 destroyers are the largest surface combatant currently being built in the world with a length of 180 meters, a beam of 20 meters and a draft of 6.6 meters for a full load displacement of about 13,000t (compared to the US Navy’s Ticonderoga-class cruiser and the Flight III Arleigh Burke-class destroyer both at 9,800 tons or the Royal Navy Type 45 at about 8,500 tons). Their official PLAN designation is “10,000-ton class destroyer.” while the US Department of Defense have been calling them “cruisers” since 2017.


First ship of the class, ‘Nanchang’ was launched on June 28, 2017 at the Jiangnan Changxing Shipyard in Shanghai and the second one was launched in April 2018 at the same shipyard. Two more Type 055 were launched in 2018, two more in 2019 and and additional twoin 2020 bringing the total of hulls currently in the water to eight. The first ship-in-class, Nanchang (101) was commissioned on 12 January 2020.


The current Type 055’s weapons fit includes:

  • A 130 mm H/PJ-38 main gun
  • 112 VLS silos
  • A H/PJ-11 CIWS with a fire rate of 10,000 rd/min
  • A HQ-10 short-range missiles
  • Decoy launchers
  • Torpedoes.

The silos are split in two areas: 64x cells forward and 48x cells aft, just in front of the ship’s double hangar. They are of the same model as those used on Type 052D, compatible with both hot and cold launch missiles thanks to the Concentric Canister Launcher (CCL) concept. The PLAN is set to fit its first few Type 055 with HQ-9B anti-aircraft missiles with a range of 200 km, YJ-18A anti-ship missiles, a new type of medium range anti-aircraft missile and land attack cruise missiles based on the YJ-18 family, ie, practically the same as those already found on Type 052D destroyers. It is also likely that the new anti-submarine missile Yu-8A is among the ship’s weapons fit.

Type 075 LHD Hainan (31)
1619278897901.png


Type 075 LHD Hainan (31). Note the many Changhe Z-18 helicopters on deck.

The Type 075 Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) commissioned yesterday is named Hainan (pennant number 31). It is the lead ship of the class. The vessel was launched in September 2019 and started sea trials in August 2020 . The Hudong Zhonghua Shipyard in Shanghai already built two more vessels in the class. The second one was launched in April 2020 and started its sea trials in December 2020. The third one was launched in January this year. This represents an impressive rate of one LHD launched every 6 months.


The Chinese Navy officially started development work on the Type 075 in 2011. The project called for a helicopter carrier displacing more than 30,000 tonnes. Its aim is likely to increase the “vertical” amphibious assault capability with the very mountainous East Coast of Taiwan in mind.


As for its specifications, rumors speak of “36,000 tons of displacement”, “capacity of 28 helicopters”, “diesel engine with the 12,000 kW 16PC2-6B” and “four CIWS including two HQ-10 and two H/PJ-11”.


The first Type 075 was constructed in record time (this has become the norm nowadays, for Chinese shipbuilding: extremely fast construction pace that no one can match). A total of eight LHDs are said to be on order for the PLAN while a larger version is rumored to be planned (sometimes referred as Type 076).


Type 094 SSBN Long March 18
1619278718641.png


The third (and not the least important) vessel to be commissioned during the historic event was a Type 094 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN). The Changzheng (Long March ) 18 is likely the 6th (or 7th?) Type 094 (also known as Type 09-IV) submarine of the class for the PLAN. It received pennant number 421. The lead boat of the class was commissioned in 2007.


The Type 094 is armed with 12 JL-2 SLBMs, each with an estimated range of 7,400 km (4,600 mi). Submarines of this class have a length of 135 meters.

 

FalconSlayers

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
6,121
Likes
20,811
Country flag
The historic (over 70,000 tons combined commissioned in PLA-N on a single day)
View attachment 86631


Type 055 Destroyer Dalian (105)
View attachment 86632

The Type 055 Destroyer commissioned yesterday is named Dalian (pennant number 105). It is the third ship of the class and the second one commissioned this year (The 2nd Type 055joined the PLAN in March 2021).


The Type 055 destroyers are the largest surface combatant currently being built in the world with a length of 180 meters, a beam of 20 meters and a draft of 6.6 meters for a full load displacement of about 13,000t (compared to the US Navy’s Ticonderoga-class cruiser and the Flight III Arleigh Burke-class destroyer both at 9,800 tons or the Royal Navy Type 45 at about 8,500 tons). Their official PLAN designation is “10,000-ton class destroyer.” while the US Department of Defense have been calling them “cruisers” since 2017.


First ship of the class, ‘Nanchang’ was launched on June 28, 2017 at the Jiangnan Changxing Shipyard in Shanghai and the second one was launched in April 2018 at the same shipyard. Two more Type 055 were launched in 2018, two more in 2019 and and additional twoin 2020 bringing the total of hulls currently in the water to eight. The first ship-in-class, Nanchang (101) was commissioned on 12 January 2020.


The current Type 055’s weapons fit includes:

  • A 130 mm H/PJ-38 main gun
  • 112 VLS silos
  • A H/PJ-11 CIWS with a fire rate of 10,000 rd/min
  • A HQ-10 short-range missiles
  • Decoy launchers
  • Torpedoes.

The silos are split in two areas: 64x cells forward and 48x cells aft, just in front of the ship’s double hangar. They are of the same model as those used on Type 052D, compatible with both hot and cold launch missiles thanks to the Concentric Canister Launcher (CCL) concept. The PLAN is set to fit its first few Type 055 with HQ-9B anti-aircraft missiles with a range of 200 km, YJ-18A anti-ship missiles, a new type of medium range anti-aircraft missile and land attack cruise missiles based on the YJ-18 family, ie, practically the same as those already found on Type 052D destroyers. It is also likely that the new anti-submarine missile Yu-8A is among the ship’s weapons fit.

Type 075 LHD Hainan (31)
View attachment 86636

Type 075 LHD Hainan (31). Note the many Changhe Z-18 helicopters on deck.

The Type 075 Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) commissioned yesterday is named Hainan (pennant number 31). It is the lead ship of the class. The vessel was launched in September 2019 and started sea trials in August 2020 . The Hudong Zhonghua Shipyard in Shanghai already built two more vessels in the class. The second one was launched in April 2020 and started its sea trials in December 2020. The third one was launched in January this year. This represents an impressive rate of one LHD launched every 6 months.


The Chinese Navy officially started development work on the Type 075 in 2011. The project called for a helicopter carrier displacing more than 30,000 tonnes. Its aim is likely to increase the “vertical” amphibious assault capability with the very mountainous East Coast of Taiwan in mind.


As for its specifications, rumors speak of “36,000 tons of displacement”, “capacity of 28 helicopters”, “diesel engine with the 12,000 kW 16PC2-6B” and “four CIWS including two HQ-10 and two H/PJ-11”.


The first Type 075 was constructed in record time (this has become the norm nowadays, for Chinese shipbuilding: extremely fast construction pace that no one can match). A total of eight LHDs are said to be on order for the PLAN while a larger version is rumored to be planned (sometimes referred as Type 076).


Type 094 SSBN Long March 18
View attachment 86634

The third (and not the least important) vessel to be commissioned during the historic event was a Type 094 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN). The Changzheng (Long March ) 18 is likely the 6th (or 7th?) Type 094 (also known as Type 09-IV) submarine of the class for the PLAN. It received pennant number 421. The lead boat of the class was commissioned in 2007.


The Type 094 is armed with 12 JL-2 SLBMs, each with an estimated range of 7,400 km (4,600 mi). Submarines of this class have a length of 135 meters.

 

FalconSlayers

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
6,121
Likes
20,811
Country flag
INDIAN AND FRENCH NAVIES BEGIN THREE-DAY WARGAME IN ARABIAN SEA
MONDAY, APRIL 26, 2021 BY INDIAN DEFENCE NEWS




French Navy's nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle

The Indian and French navies on Sunday kicked off a three-day mega wargame in the Arabian Sea in the backdrop of rising concern over China's growing maritime presence in the Indian Ocean region.


The French Navy has deployed its nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, and its entire carrier strike group in the exercise, reflecting the seriousness of the drill.

The French Embassy said the 19th edition of the Varuna exercise underscores the shared interests and commitment of both nations in promoting maritime security in the Indo-Pacific and bears testimony to the vitality of the bilateral strategic partnership.

"The joint exercise comprises various drills across the spectrum of maritime operations, with the goal of fostering interoperability and mutual learning between the two navies and reinforcing their capability for joint action in a strategic area," it said in a statement.

The Indian Navy has deployed guided missile stealth destroyer Kolkata, guided missile frigates Tarkash and Talwar, fleet support ship Deepak, a Kalvari class submarine and a sleet of P-8I long range maritime patrol aircraft, officials said.

Besides Charles de Gaulle, the French naval assets at the exercise included multi-mission frigate Provence, air defence destroyer Chevalier Paul, and command and supply ship Var.

The Charles de Gaulle with a displacement of 42,500 tons (four times the weight of the Eiffel tower), carries a crew of 1200, 15.4 per cent of whom are women, and an air wing consisting of 20 Rafale marine jets, two E-2C Hawkeye aircraft and several helicopters.

Its 75-meter deck with catapult launching enables the launch of Rafale marine jets in less than three seconds every 30 seconds.

Indian Navy Spokesperson Commander Vivek Madhwal said both the navies will endeavour to enhance and hone their war-fighting skills to demonstrate their ability as an integrated force to promote peace, security and stability in the maritime domain.

The embassy said Varuna exercise is part of the French carrier strike group's 'CLEMENCEAU 21' deployment, which the French Navy is conducting from February to June 2021 in the eastern Mediterranean, the Gulf and the Indian Ocean.

"Its goal is to contribute to the stabilisation of these strategic zones and strengthening cooperation with the navies of partner countries, in particular India for the Indian Ocean component," it said.

As part of this deployment, the carrier strike group is also taking part in anti-ISIS operations," the embassy said.

Initiated in 1983, Indo-French naval cooperation plays a key role in the two countries' joint vision for a free, open and inclusive Indo-Pacific, it said.

"It has intensified in recent years with increasingly ambitious joint exercises that have raised the degree of the two navies' interoperability to a new level," the embassy said.

"In early April, the Indian Navy took part for the first time in the France-led naval exercise 'La Perouse' with the navies of the United States, Australia and Japan," it added.

The Indian side at the exercise is being led by Rear Admiral Ajay Kochhar, Flag Officer Commanding Western Fleet, while the French side is headed by Rear Admiral Marc Aussedat, Commander Task Force 473.

"The three-day exercise will see high tempo-naval operations at sea, including advanced air defence and anti-submarine exercises, intense fixed and rotary wing flying operations, tactical manoeuvres, surface and anti-air weapon firings and other maritime security operations," Commander Madhwal said.

Source>>
 

FalconSlayers

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
6,121
Likes
20,811
Country flag
US CHINA SEA WAR COULD SPREAD TO JAPAN, AUSTRALIA, INDIA
MONDAY, APRIL 26, 2021 BY INDIAN DEFENCE NEWS





Taiwan is the most likely flashpoint, but combat could stretch out as far as the Indian Ocean


In the mid-1970s, I set sail as a young ensign, my first deployment after graduating from the U.S. Naval Academy. We sailed west from San Diego on a brand-new Spruance-class destroyer. As a Cold War sailor, I was deeply disappointed that the ship was not headed into northern Atlantic waters to challenge the vaunted Soviet fleet. Instead, our six-month cruise was focused on the waters of the western Pacific, those around northern Australia, Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan.

The furthest thing from our minds was a serious threat from Communist China (as we called it then). It had a somewhat capable coastal navy in those days, but the ships and aircraft of the oddly named People’s Liberation Army Navy simply were not a significant competitor.

Things have changed remarkably. Over the course of my naval career, I watched China slowly, meticulously and cleverly improve every aspect of its naval capabilities. That trend has accelerated significantly over the past decade, as China has expanded the number of its sophisticated warships, deployed them aggressively throughout the region, and built artificial islands to be used as military bases in the South China Sea. It is now a peer competitor of the U.S. in those waters, and this has real risks.

I see four distinct maritime “flashpoint” zones, where the Chinese navy may potentially take military against the U.S. and its allies, partners and friends. They are the Taiwan Strait; Japan and the East China Sea; the South China Sea; and more distant waters around China’s other neighbours, including Indonesia, Singapore, Australia and India.

Taiwan And The Taiwan Strait

The highest regional priority for the Chinese military is ensuring it can exercise sea control and power projection in the waters around Taiwan. President Xi Jinping and the Chinese leadership have sworn to bring the “renegade province” to heel. While they still hope to do so through patience — and by strangling Taipei’s international support — they will be willing to use military force if necessary. In recent congressional testimony, Admiral Phil Davidson, head of the Pentagon’s Indo-Pacific Command, said that he saw the possibility of military action “within six years.”

The Taiwanese are carefully watching as China violates the agreement negotiated with the British in 1997 to follow a “one country, two systems” system with Hong Kong. They recognize their future within greater China would include a loss of democracy and human rights.

With Taiwan over 8,000 miles from Hawaii but just 250 miles from the Chinese mainland, the challenges for the U.S. Navy are profound. U.S. support for Taiwan’s security is bipartisan — but the longstanding U.S. policy of “strategic ambiguity,” supporting Taiwan militarily without a formal commitment to defending it, is dangerously fuzzy. It could lead to a miscalculation by the Chinese (or the Taiwanese) and set off a larger conflict.

Were China to try to end the question of Taiwanese independence militarily, its prime objective would be to make the U.S. incapable of defending the island. This strategy would centre on anti-access/area-denial — using defensive measures to keep the already extended U.S. Navy at a distance. (The Pentagon has made Congress well aware of this in its latest report on Chinese military capabilities.)

The Chinese plan would involve numerous surface warships (cruisers, destroyers and frigates, all with significant surface-to-surface missile capability); land- and sea-based cruise and ballistic missiles, including an increasing number that are hypersonic (capable of traveling many times the speed of sound, and for which the U.S. currently lacks reliable defences); cyberwarfare directed against U.S. command, control, navigation and GPS systems; and increasingly sophisticated anti-satellite weapons to reduce U.S. intelligence and early warning. The Chinese are unlikely to mount an amphibious invasion of the beaches — a tremendously difficult operation. Rather, the plan would probably be a lightning strike that involves establishing sea control around Taiwan, then using lighter-footprint operations. This might be done by inserting Special Forces, connecting them to “sleeper cells” of commandos already on the island, gaining control of airfields, and airlifting in a powerful military force. Simultaneously, they would use the surface-to-surface missiles and air power to decimate Taiwan’s air-defence systems. The Taiwanese could hold their own for a period of time, but eventually be overwhelmed.

If the U.S. chose to respond with direct military force — a big if — it would move first at sea, targeting Chinese vessels and reducing their surface-to-surface strike capability. It would look to shield Taiwan with ballistic missile ships; move quickly to reinforce forward bases in Guam, South Korea and Japan; and ensure continued connectivity in what is certain to be highly contested space and cyber domains. The U.S. might also hit China’s bases in the South China Sea with Navy Seals and Marine Raiders, forcing the Chinese to divert military assets and attention away from Taiwan.

Who would prevail? At this moment, my money would still narrowly be on the U.S. military, but the trends are not moving in the right direction. The Pentagon will have to put more money and training toward cyberwarfare, employment of Special Forces at sea, unmanned vehicles, subsurface capabilities (both manned submarines and undersea drones); and air defences against hypersonic cruise and ballistic missiles.

Working with allies (especially Japan) will be critical. The degree to which the U.S. is willing to make explicit defence guarantees to Taiwan will have an impact on the calculus in Beijing. So will the quality of weapons systems provided to Taipei — especially better air defences and next-generation fighter aircraft — the level of joint training and exercises, and the number of high-level visits to Taiwan by senior military and diplomatic figures.

Of the four potential maritime flashpoints in East Asia, Taiwan is the most dangerous — and the most likely to explode.

Japan And The East China Sea

Japan and China have a long and difficult history, including two significant military confrontations in the modern era. In the first Sino-Japanese War, begun in 1894 largely over control of Korea, a newly dynamic Japanese war machine easily defeated the fading Qing Dynasty of China. A second Sino-Japanese War began in 1937 and lasted until the end of World War II. The Japanese killed, wounded, raped and imprisoned millions. The bitterness between the two nations is palpable today.

In my Navy years, I returned again and again to Japan, often spending weeks on ships in the large base of the Seventh Fleet in Yokosuka, near Tokyo. The Japanese Maritime Self-Defence Force is formidable. It includes destroyers equipped with the U.S. Navy’s Aegis guided-missile system, excellent diesel submarines, long-range patrol aircraft, and seamless command and control knitting it all together. In my conversations with senior Japanese officers — including while lecturing at their naval war college a few years ago — their overriding concern was China’s growing influence throughout the western Pacific.

China and Japan both claim a group of islands in the East China Sea known as the Senkaku in Japanese and the Diaoyu in Chinese. Located close to Taiwan, these five uninhabited islands are important because ownership provides a 200-nautical-mile exclusion zone and buttresses competing claims around them. They are part of the chain descending south from the Japanese main islands, and form a gateway to the South China Sea. Ownership would also provide fishing rights, access to exploit hydrocarbons, and the possibility of deep-seabed mining.

China is gradually increasing the numbers and capability of air and sea patrols around and over the islands. Warships and long-range patrol aircraft are making frequent appearances, leading to similar steps by the Japanese. The chances of miscalculation between pilots or ship captains of the rival nations is far from negligible.

The U.S. recognizes the islands as part of Japan, thus a Chinese move to occupy them would activate the U.S.-Japan mutual defence treaty, something successive American presidential administrations have made clear. How would the U.S. respond militarily if China were to move on the islands? Given the Seventh Fleet in Tokyo Bay and the III Marine Expeditionary Force in Sasebo, there is strong capability in Japan. Long-range bombers from Guam, roughly 1,500 miles to the southeast, and other regional bases would also be available.

All U.S. forces would of course operate in alliance with Japanese ships and aircraft. Unlike Taiwan, the Senkakus have no civilian populace, and all combat would be conducted at sea unless the Chinese actually landed forces ashore, much as the Argentines did in the Falklands in the 1980s. This is a fight that the U.S. would prefer not to have, especially as it faces off with China on other contentious issues, from trade sanctions to the fate of Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang. But Washington is bound by a formal treaty, and these tiny, uninhabited rocks will continue to be an oversized focus of U.S. military planners at the headquarters of the Indo-Pacific Command in Honolulu.

The South China Sea

The South China Sea is huge, nearly half the size of the continental U.S. As you approach the coasts of the many nations that ring it, you’ll see huge clusters of coastal fishermen; oil and natural gas platforms; small tankers and breakbulk cargo vessels; and massive super tankers. It is a busy waterway; by some estimates it carries nearly 40% of the world’s shipping.

Alongside all those maritime silhouettes, you will also see the warships of many nations — China and the U.S., to be sure, but also local combatants from Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore. Other Asia-Pacific nations, including Australia, New Zealand, Japan, India and South Korea, maintain a military presence. And warships from other side of the world — France, Germany, the U.K. — routinely deploy there as well.

China stakes a territorial claim over essentially the entire body of water. Relying on voyages of the admiral Zheng He from the 1600s, China in the 1940s delineated what it calls the “Nine-Dash Line,” a maritime boundary within which it maintains the fiction of sovereignty. This is disputed by virtually every other nation in the region (many of whom have overlapping and competing claims with not only China, but each other as well). An international court largely dismissed the overarching Chinese claim in 2016.

As China plays the long game to consolidate control, it is building artificial islands. These are mostly in areas with promising oil and gas fields in the sea’s southern reaches and around the Spratly Islands, which are themselves disputed between several of the nations. There are seven completed islands, all militarized and some with airfields, but nobody thinks Beijing will stop there. For the U.S., the paramount value to defend in these waters is freedom of the high seas. The Chinese firmly believe that over time, the U.S. will acquiesce rather than fight. The U.S. demonstrates its intent though increasing numbers of “freedom of navigation” patrols; China objects, and sometimes sends its own ships in challenge. So far, calmer heads have prevailed, and there have been no major incidents.

Both nations have well-rehearsed war plans in the event of actual combat across the South China Sea. The Chinese would flood the region with their capable surface ships (destroyers, frigates, corvettes); launch land-based hypersonic cruise and ballistic missiles at U.S. flotillas; employ diesel and electric submarines; and try to disable American space assets and maritime command and control structures with cyberattacks.

As with a conflict over Taiwan or the East China Sea, the U.S. would respond with long-range airpower operating from Guam, Japan and South Korea, armed with cruise missiles and precision-guided bombs. Principal targets would be Chinese warships and their artificial island bases. After these aircraft have degraded Chinese offensive capabilities, U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups would gingerly enter the South China Sea, using as much sea space as possible to remain outside the range of Chinese land-based air and missile systems.

Both sides would try to maintain control of the ladder of escalation, because an attack that ends up destroying bases and infrastructure on the mainland of China would provoke a furious response. That could even cause China to retaliate against the U.S. mainland. I explored this scenario in a new novel, “2034: A Novel of the Next World War,” which has many twists and turns — as such a war surely would.

India And the Indian Ocean

I entered the waters of the Indian Ocean for the first time in the late 1970s, as the Cold War was raging and India was a leader of the “non-aligned” nations. I was a junior officer on a destroyer, and on the long night watches, I would see the coast of India on the radar, and would wonder what the Indian Navy was capable of doing.

After all, India’s coastline is among the 20 longest in the world, on the globe’s third-largest body of water. In those days, the Indian navy did not venture out much, and had a modest collection of older warships inherited from the Soviet Union.

Today, India is cornerstone of an emerging Indo-Pacific geopolitical alignment, known as colloquially as the Quad, along with Australia, Japan and the U.S. One of Biden’s first actions after taking office was a video summit with the other three nations’ leaders.

It has not developed into the “Asian NATO” that some strategists envisioned. As is often the case in Asian geopolitics, it’s complicated. China is among the largest trading partners of three of the members, and there are very real differences in outlook and approach to Beijing among the group. But the Quad is increasingly touted as part of the strategic response to Chinese military activity.

India, the U.S. and Japan (with Australia and Singapore occasionally joining) have been conducting war games, the Malabar Naval Exercises, in the Indian Ocean for the better part of a decade; the most recent, in late 2020, was largely conducted in the Bay of Bengal. While not comparable in scale to the massive RIMPAC exercises led by the U.S. in the central Pacific each year, Malabar included a wide variety of tactical operations and provided a high degree of symbolic cooperation among the navies engaged.

The Quad alignment is strategically interesting because it foreshadows the potential for broader maritime conflict throughout East Asia and the Indian Ocean. Picture a scenario in which China attacks Taiwan, with the U.S. coming to the assistance of the Taiwanese. Given that Australia and Japan are part of a mutual defence treaty with the U.S. (along with Asian nations South Korea, New Zealand, the Philippines and Thailand), this could easily broaden from a conflict localized around the Strait of Taiwan to one spreading across the South China Sea. With Australia in the conflict, the Indian Ocean might easily become another zone in the battle.

If so, how would India respond? While not treaty allies, Washington and New Delhi are drawing closer together. India’s relations with China are deteriorating, with recent clashes over disputed Himalayan borders. If India were to join with the other Quad nations, it would mean war at sea in the Indian Ocean.

While this is the least likely of the four flashpoint scenarios looked at here, it’s not a negligible risk. China is expanding naval operations as part of its vast infrastructure project, One Belt, One Road — which has “one problem”: India. India sits across the Chinese southern trade and raw material routes, and its military operates with short logistic lines throughout the northern Indian Ocean. While India’s navy is far smaller than China’s, when married with those of the other Quad members, it could prove a significant factor. China, on the other hand, would be operating at a long logistics chain and has few allies or bases in the region (Chinese ships could perhaps access ports of Iran and Pakistan, although neither nation would be enthusiastic about diving into a U.S.-China conflict). The Chinese are building a naval base on the Horn of Africa, and have significant influence on the island of Sri Lanka as well; but overall, the Chinese navy would be at a significant disadvantage.

Meanwhile, bases in India could provide the other Quad members with fuel, provisions and long-range air patrol bases (particularly important against submarines). The U.S. would also depend on its basing rights in Singapore, which hosts portions of the Seventh Fleet, and access to northern Australia and to Thailand. China would need to commit forces to ensure its oil supply flowing through the northern Indian Ocean.

How great are the chances of such a multi-ocean military conflict between the two superpowers and their allies? Far, far lower than the likelihood of a flare-up in the Taiwan Strait or East China Sea. But much as Europe stumbled into World War I because of extensive networks of alliances, it is entirely possible a war in the western Pacific could bring conflict to Indian waters.

It would have been hard for young Ensign Stavridis to imagine any of this while sailing across the Pacific in the 1970s — but alliances have significantly shifted, even if geography has not.

Source>>
 

Karthi

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
1,935
Likes
13,860
Country flag
When will they test fire Astra

Soon.

IMG_20210428_142259.jpg
IMG_20210428_142318.jpg
PIC(5)RBT1.jpeg
IMG_20210428_142316.jpg
IMG_20210428_142321.jpg
IMG_20210428_142308.jpg



The 19th edition oftheIndian and French Navy bilateral exercise ‘VARUNA-2021’ concluded on 27th April 2021.

Exercise VARUNA has been a key enabler in building interoperability and strengthening the coordination between the two navies. This exercise has matured over the years with increase in scope, complexity of operations and level of participation. Conducted from 25-27 Apr 2021 in the Arabian Sea, the exercise witnessed high tempo-naval operations at sea, including advanced air defence and anti-submarine exercises, intense fixed and rotary wing flying operations including cross deck helicopter landings, tactical manoeuvres, surface and anti-air weapon firings, underway replenishment and other maritime security operations. Units of both navies honed and enhanced their war-fighting skills to demonstrate their ability as an integrated force to promote peace, security and stability in the maritime domain.

The common understanding of the two navies in executing maritime operations was evident right from the start of the exercise wherein the entire planning was carried out through virtual meeting and the exercises were conducted completely in the non-contact format.

The seamless coordination, precise execution of manoeuvres, and accuracy in complex exercises characterized the conduct of Varuna-2021 and has helped further strengthen mutual confidence, inter-operability and sharing of best practices between both Navies.

Indian Navy’s guided missile frigate Tarkash will continue to exercise with the French Navy’s Carrier Strike Group (CSG) from 28th April to 1st May 2021 participating in advanced surface, anti-submarine and air-defence operations with the French CSG.

IMG_20210428_142318.jpg
 

FalconSlayers

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
6,121
Likes
20,811
Country flag
The peace process with Pakistan will never work because of one simple reason. Pakistan's identity crisis.

A nation state has a unique identity that determines all actions taken by the state. This identity comes from their history and especially the highest point in their history through which they view their future as a Nation.

For example Indians regard highest point in our history our Vedic age, where we influenced half the known world with our culture, knowledge and religion. We see future from the prism of our golden age and we are striving to replicate the same in future.

Pakistan being part of ancient vedic India has a similar history but because of their foundation of nation based purely on rejection of Dharma, they disregarded their true Sanatani past. They find their ancesty and history in Arabs, Central Asians, Persians, Afghans, Turks and even sometimes Mongolians who share little to no similarity with them. This creates major identity and history crisis.

So what is Pakistan's history? What is their high point? What was their mark on world?

Pakistan's history began in 1947 which is also their shining time as they devided a major civilization state and changed geography of subcontinent. This is their mark on the world.

So how do they see their future?

Pakistan sees future with prism of 1947 and want to replicate their golden achivement once again by dividing India again. Hence Kashmir is their national obsession. Kashmir isn't about territory as if it were the case loss of major east Pakistan in 1971, would have them rethink their ways but they haven't. They have accepted Bangladesh as an independent nation and even opened their embassy there. Meanwhile they can't even acknowledge Indian administered Kashmir. Why? Simply1947 prism and their itch to divide India again to revalidate their existence.

They don't have any fixed timeline. They are waiting for some major power to somehow wrestle a piece of land from India and donate to Pakistan just like UK did in 1947. In the meantime they will spread the violence against India to show the world and India that if their demand isn't met there won't be any peace.

So what about this peace initiative?

One word: Time

They need time to survive to witness their glory day. Rightnow Pakistan is in major economical, political and regional crisis. This has put doubts on the very survival of the Pakistani state. So they need some breathing room and thus the ruse of peace. This isn't new though, they play same hand of peace whenever they face any major internal crisis.

Conclusion

Pakistan will never change as doing it will go aginst their national identity. Being anti India is Pakistan's identity and therefore India will never get true peace with its western neighbour in foreseeable future.
Wtf? I created the thread an how is it showing you created it? Lmao.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top