Latest news with #AnilChopra
Hindustan Times
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Visible weapons, invisible enemy: A new era of war
The four-day conflict between India and Pakistan revealed warfare's dual revolutions: advanced strike systems and sophisticated information operations that aided both sides to target the other deep behind enemy lines without crossing physical borders. Both militaries deployed drones, standoff weapons and automated air defences, while simultaneously waging battles over perception and reality on the digital battlefield. The conflict— the first between the nuclear-armed neighbours since 1999 — marked the combat debut of multiple advanced systems that circumvented conventional confrontations. Pakistan used Turkish-origin armed drones to target 36 locations simultaneously across a 900-kilometer frontier and deployed Chinese-made PL-15 beyond visual range air-to-air missiles fired from JF-17 fighter jets against India for the first time. India countered with its own firsts aided by an years-long effort by the government to enhance the nation's air defence capabilities. S-400 air defence systems, Akash surface-to-air missiles, Barak 8 defences, and anti-drone technologies ringfenced Indian territory and repelled the Pakistan's air offensive. In offensive capabilities, Rafale fighter jets launching Scalp cruise missiles and Hammer smart weapons, and loitering munitions—essentially sensor-equipped kamikaze drones—added to the effectiveness of India's strikes on enemy targets. When Indian Air Force targeted eight Pakistani military sites on Friday and Saturday —including airbases, radar units and ammunition dumps—the attacks came from standoff ranges within Indian territory. 'Operation Sindoor has demonstrated that the dynamics of India's response to cross-border terrorism too have changed,' said a person familiar with the operation, asking not to be named. 'We have shown that we are capable of striking terrorist infrastructure and military installations deep within Pakistan, and that there will be a high cost for cross-border terrorism.' The new inductions, especially the Rafale- S 400 combination, have given India a direct edge over the adversary, strategic affairs expert Air Marshal Anil Chopra (retd) said had said earlier. 'The weapons and systems in our arsenal are a nightmare for Pakistan. We have not only boosted our military capability but are also on track to induct newer weapons and technologies with an eye on the future.' While physical weapons struck tangible targets, an equally consequential battle raged in the information domain. Officials highlighted Pakistan's 'extensive disinformation campaign' designed to 'cover its failures and deceive the international community and its own population.' Pakistan's false claims included assertions about destroying Indian S-400 systems at Adampur, damaging airfields at Suratgarh, Sirsa, Srinagar, Jammu, Pathankot, Bhuj and Naliya, neutralising a BrahMos base at Nagrota, and eliminating an ammunition dump in Chandigarh. 'India unequivocally rejects these false narratives being spread by Pakistan,' an official declared at an Operation Sindoor briefing. Foreign secretary Vikram Misri further debunked Pakistan's claims about destroying military installations, critical infrastructure, and power and cyber systems. These weren't merely propaganda efforts but strategic attempts to shape military and diplomatic responses. Pakistan also falsely accused Indian forces of targeting mosques. 'Let us make this very clear here that India is a secular nation and the Indian armed forces reflect our constitutional values,' Wing Commander Vyomika Singh stated after the ceasefire announcement. The conflict also saw unprecedented digital incursions targeting both nations. Pakistan's ministry of economic affairs' X account was compromised during peak tensions, with hackers posting appeals for 'international loans after heavy losses inflected by enemy' and references to 'escalating war and stocks crash.' Pakistani officials quickly issued a 'FAKE TWEET ALERT' and worked to disable the account, but not before the false economic distress signals briefly impacted market confidence. The source of the hack remains unidentified. The conflict also featured deepfake videos. An AI-generated video showed Indian external affairs minister S Jaishankar 'apologising' circulated widely before India's PIB Fact Check Unit debunked it. A more sophisticated synthetic video targeted Pakistan's military spokesperson, ISPR director general Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry and appeared to show him 'admitting' to losing two fighter jets. These sophisticated fabrications—origin unknown—were the first time deepfakes were used in information operations in the subcontinent during an active conflict.
IOL News
07-05-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
The treaty that kept India and Pakistan in check is gone. Now what?
Paramilitary soldiers inspect the damaged building of the Government Health and Educational Complex after Indian strikes in Muridke, about 30 kilometers from Lahore, on May 7, 2025. India and Pakistan exchanged heavy artillery along their contested frontier on May 7, after New Delhi launched missile strikes on its arch-rival in a major escalation between the nuclear-armed neighbours. Air Marshal Anil Chopra India launched 'Operation Sindoor' on the night of May 7, targeting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan in retaliation for a deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgram, Kashmir last month. New Delhi stated that it hit at least nine targets. 'Our actions have been focused, measured, and non-escalatory in nature. No Pakistani military facilities have been targeted. India has demonstrated considerable restraint in the selection of targets and method of execution,' the Indian government said in a statement. Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif descried the strikes as a 'cowardly' attack and said Islamabad "has every right to respond forcefully to this act of war imposed by India, and a forceful response is being given." Tensions between India and Pakistan escalated to military actions following the killing of 26 innocent vacationers in Pahalgam, Kashmir by Pakistan-backed terrorists in a Hamas-style terror attack. Pakistan Army and Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) links were established by India's National Investigation Agency days after the mass killing. The public was angry, and sought appropriate revenge. A wide range of diplomatic and economic measures were announced by both nations following the attack. Remarkably, India has put the 1960 Indus Water Treaty (IWT) in abeyance for the first time since the pact was inked by the two neighbors. Rejecting India's move to suspend the IWT, Pakistan warned that any diversion of water will be treated as an 'Act of War.' Islamabad also said that it would hold 'in abeyance' its participation in all bilateral agreements with India, including the landmark 1972 Simla Agreement. Pakistan pledged a full-spectrum national power response to any threat against its sovereignty, put its armed forces on high alert, and began selective mobilisation. Most measures were quite expected. But by suspending the Shimla Agreement, Pakistan unwittingly handed over big advantage to India. What is the Shimla Agreement? The Shimla agreement between India and Pakistan was signed on July 2, 1972 at Barnes Court (Raj Bhavan) in the town of Shimla in the Indian state of Himachal Pradesh, between then-Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and her Pakistani counterpart Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. It was ratified on July 15, 1972 (by Pakistan), and August 3, 1972 (by India), and became effective the next day. The agreement had come in the wake of Pakistan's comprehensive defeat in the 1971 war that split the country and created independent Bangladesh. The agreement stated:'The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan are resolved that the two countries put an end to the conflict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their relations and work for the promotion of a friendly arid harmonious relationship and the establishment of durable peace in the sub-continent, so that both countries may henceforth devote their resources and energies to the pressing task of advancing the welfare of their peoples.' The document was meant to lay the foundation of a peaceful and stable relationship between the two nations. It was decided that the two countries are resolved 'to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.' The treaty mandated that the two countries resolve issues bilaterally, and superseded the United Nation's resolution on Kashmir. Perhaps more importantly, under the agreement, India and Pakistan established the Line of Control (LoC), previously called the Ceasefire Line, making it a quasi-border between the two nations. New Delhi succeeded in persuading Islamabad to change the name of the ceasefire line to the Line of Control (LoC), thus delinking it from the UN-imposed 1949 ceasefire line and highlighting that Kashmir was now a purely bilateral matter between India and Pakistan. The treaty clearly stated that Indian and Pakistani forces must be withdrawn to their respective sides of the 'international border.' That in Jammu and Kashmir, the LoC resulting from the cease-fire of December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice toward the recognised position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. India returned around 13,000 square kilometers of land taken in battle on the western border but retained some strategic areas, including Turtuk, Dhothang, Tyakshi, and Chalunka in Chorbat Valley, covering more than 883 square kilometers, so as to facilitate lasting peace. Both sides further agreed to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of the LoC. The fact that there has only been one limited war since the agreement was signed reflects its effectiveness. Some Indian bureaucrats later argued that a tacit agreement to convert this LoC into a international border, was reached during a one-on-one meeting between the two heads of government. Pakistani bureaucrats have denied any such thing. Nor was that acceptable to Indian public. The Shimla agreement called on both sides to resolve all issues bilaterally. But Pakistan never respected this part of the treaty, and has taken matters to an international level, especially by doing chest-beating over Kashmir at the UN. The latest example of this attitude is Pakistan's outcry over the Abolition of Article 370 by the Narendra Modi-led government in 2019. One critical clause was that 'both shall prevent the organisation, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peaceful and harmonious relations.' Pakistan has been engaging in cross-border terrorism as a foreign policy tool to bleed India and to foster separatism in Kashmir, as well as to keep the Indian Armed Forces pinned down. Some of the major Pakistan-sponsored Islamist attacks against India have included a terrorist attack on the Parliament of India in New Delhi on December 13, 2001, the attack on the Akshardham temple in Gandhinagar in 2002; the Mumbai train blasts in 2003; twin blasts at Gateway of India and Zaveri Bazaar in Mumbai in 2005, Delhi bombings and 2006 Mumbai train bombings, train blasts in Jaipur in 2008, and the tragic Mumbai attacks in November 2008. The latest large-scale attacks occurred in Kashmir: a deadly terrorist attack on the Army camp in Uri killed 17 Indian soldiers and an attack on the military convoy in Pulwama resulted in the death of 40 personnel.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
05-05-2025
- Politics
- First Post
Tension after Pahalgam: India's air defence leapfrogs Pakistan's China-fed teeth
Amid rising tensions, India is building a next-generation air defence architecture that surpasses Pakistan's China-dependent systems in range, resilience and indigenous innovation read more Following the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22 and relentless military drills and small arms exchanges for 10 consecutive nights along the Line of Control (LoC), tensions have heightened significantly between India and Pakistan. This has fuelled speculation over whether a full-scale war is on the horizon between the two nuclear-armed neighbours. There is still no clarity on what form such a conflict might take — whether it would involve ground troops, artillery, mechanised infantry, naval forces, airpower or a combination of all. Regardless of the scope, air defence remains a vital component of any military strategy, essential for protecting both human and material assets. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Amid these evolving geopolitical challenges, India's air defence strategy is undergoing a significant transformation. With adversaries like China and Pakistan advancing their offensive capabilities, India is reassessing how to safeguard its airspace best. While there was once considerable interest in Israel's Iron Dome — widely regarded as a highly effective air defence system — its recent vulnerabilities in Israel's simultaneous conflicts with the Houthis, Hamas, and Hezbollah have raised concerns about its applicability to India's threat environment. Previously considered nearly impenetrable, the Iron Dome came under renewed scrutiny after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack, during which approximately 5,000 rockets were launched in just 20 minutes, overwhelming the system and exposing its limitations, according to Newsweek. Looking at the Iron Dome: Interest and rejection India's interest in the Iron Dome dates back to 2010, according to Pieter Wezeman, a senior researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), who shared with Newsweek that India was among several countries evaluating the system. However, the interest never materialised into a purchase. Other countries like Romania, Cyprus and Azerbaijan also considered buying the Iron Dome, but actual deliveries were either unconfirmed or never occurred. One key reason for India's hesitation was its already ongoing development of indigenous systems like the Prithvi Air Defence (PAD), Advanced Air Defence (AAD) and Akash missile systems. As The Eurasian Times noted, India was inclined towards self-reliant solutions that could address the country's distinct threat landscape—a sentiment echoed by Indian defence officials who emphasised the mismatch between Israel's needs and India's. Air Marshal (Retd) Anil Chopra, head of the Centre for Air Power Studies, told The Print that while he had once supported acquiring an Iron Dome-like system, it no longer made sense with India inducting the S-400 missile system and evaluating the US-made NASAMS-II for the protection of critical infrastructure like the national capital. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Building the indigenous shield India's multi-layered air defence doctrine now rests on a blend of indigenous and imported technologies, aiming to address a wide spectrum of aerial threats—from low-flying drones to ballistic missiles. The PAD and AAD systems are among the foundational elements which provide interception at high and low altitudes, respectively. The Akash system, a medium-range surface-to-air missile platform, is another key component, capable of engaging multiple targets at various altitudes. In parallel, India has made strategic imports like the S-400 Triumf system from Russia. Signed in October 2018, the deal faced resistance from the United States, but India proceeded regardless. As reported by The Eurasian Times, the S-400 significantly boosts India's interception capabilities with a tracking range of 600 kilometres and the ability to engage 80 targets simultaneously, including ballistic and cruise missiles, drones and fighter jets up to 400 kilometres away. Additionally, India has also expressed interest in acquiring the US-made NASAMS-II (National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System), although no formal procurement has occurred yet. Enter Project Kusha The most ambitious component of India's air defence future is Project Kusha—a DRDO-led initiative to develop a long-range air defence system with capabilities mirroring and even surpassing the Iron Dome. This system will be capable of intercepting stealth aircraft, drones, cruise missiles and precision-guided munitions at ranges up to 350 kilometres. Project Kusha aims to incorporate multiple layers of interception through different missile types designed to hit targets at 150, 250 and 350 kilometres respectively. It will also include long-range surveillance and fire control radars and offer high kill probabilities: not less than 80 per cent for single launches and 90% for salvo launches. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The system is designed to target high-speed threats with low radar cross-sections and can engage fighter-sized targets at 250 kilometres and larger aircraft like AWACS at 350 kilometres. With funding of Rs 21,700 crore already approved, this project marks a significant step in India's pursuit of an 'Aatmanirbhar Bharat' or self-reliant defence industry. According to DRDO sources quoted in Firstpost, the Project Kusha system will fill a critical capability gap by providing strategic and tactical cover to vulnerable zones, especially important given the missile deployments observed across the Indo-Tibetan border by China. The Pakistan factor No analysis of India's air defence environment is complete without understanding the systems fielded by Pakistan. According to the Indian Defence Research Wing, although Pakistan has made strides in modernising its air defences, its systems still lag behind India's in terms of technological sophistication, integration and reach. The backbone of Pakistan's high-altitude defence is the Chinese-supplied HQ-9P and HQ-9BE systems with ranges of 100 to 200 kilometres and interception capabilities up to Mach 14. As detailed in the Pakistan Army's SAM Systems brief, these systems primarily protect strategic zones like Karachi and Rawalpindi and are believed to use HT-233 phased-array radars. Pakistan's medium-range capabilities are built around the LY-80 and LY-80E systems, which offer coverage between 40 and 70 kilometres and target speeds of up to Mach 2.5. These systems, although effective against subsonic threats, are reportedly inadequate against India's supersonic BrahMos missile, which travels at Mach 3+. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD For short-range threats, Pakistan relies on a mix of Chinese and older Western systems like the FM-90 (15 km), French Crotale and MANPADS such as the Anza series and RBS-70 NG. However, these systems have limited radar coverage, outdated command guidance and lack the multi-target engagement capability of systems like India's Barak-8. While Pakistan's air defence architecture is improving, especially with the induction of HQ-9P and LY-80EV variants, it remains heavily reliant on Chinese technology and lacks the indigenous depth that India is now investing in through DRDO and Project Kusha. Strategic lessons from Iron Dome for India Despite its limitations, Israel's Iron Dome has proven effective in intercepting thousands of incoming threats and it still maintains a claimed 90 per cent effectiveness rate under normal operational conditions, as reported by The Eurasian Times. The system comprises three to four launchers and a radar, protecting areas of up to 60 square miles. However, its high cost—with each Tamir interceptor costing approximately $20,000 to destroy much cheaper rockets—has been a point of criticism. India has taken valuable cues from these operational lessons. Unlike Israel, which operates in a smaller geographical area with largely asymmetrical threats, India must deal with a wide array of conventional and strategic challenges across a massive territory. This has led to a preference for scalable, multi-tiered solutions with a focus on both cost-effectiveness and technological sophistication. In this context, DRDO's push to develop multiple types of interceptors for varying threat levels coupled with the integration of indigenous radars and sensors reflects a lesson well learned from Israel's Iron Dome experience. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Building a self-reliant, multi-layered shield India is crafting a uniquely tailored air defence architecture that draws inspiration from global systems like the Iron Dome but is firmly rooted in its own strategic imperatives. Through programmes like Project Kusha, integration of the S-400 and a robust portfolio of indigenous missile systems, India is creating a defence ecosystem that can meet the challenges posed by both conventional military threats and emerging asymmetric warfare. India's focus on multi-layered, high-performance and indigenously developed systems reflects a forward-looking approach to national security. The era of Iron Dome-inspired thinking is here, but in India, it comes with a distinct identity and strategic vision.
