Latest news with #WalterLadwig
NDTV
23-05-2025
- Politics
- NDTV
"In The Nuclear Era....:" What UK Analyst Said On Operation Sindoor
New Delhi: The recent military action between India and Pakistan was the first instance of two nuclear weapon states engaging in continuous strikes and counter-strikes, which sparked global tensions, Dr Walter Ladwig, a professor at King's College London, said. Mr Ladwig, who has written an analysis titled 'Calibrated Force: Operation Sindoor and the Future of Indian Deterrence for security think tank Royal United Services Institute, also said India carried out the military action to punish the terrorists behind the Pahalgam terror attack and not provoke a "wider conflict" with Pakistan. The Senior Lecturer in International Relations at King's College was speaking to NDTV when he made the remarks. Mr Ladwig said Operation Sindoor demonstrated a range of abilities the Indian Air Force (IAF) has built over the last decade. "This might also mean that we are in a very undiscovered country when it comes to military operations. In the context of the nuclear era, we do not have an example of two nuclear arms states who have engaged in reciprocal airstrikes like this," he said. "The year 2019 was a little bit of a watershed moment, and that was very calibrated and orchestrated," he said, referring to the Balakot airstrikes that were carried out in response to the Pulwama terror attack. "We don't have this. The Russians and the Chinese fought in the late 1960s, this was on the ground, and in some cases, the combators were worried about escalation. This is a really new space and this is going to be studied in the decades to come." The King's College London professor credited the Indian government's policies for its precision strikes on terror infrastructure in the neighbouring country. "I see it as an evolution in the government's policies. If we go back to 2016, the surgical strikes (in response to the Uri terror attack), these sort of cross border raids have happened in the past but they were never publicised. They were never made so public. The 2019 airstrikes in Balakot were a break from past precedent... And now you have the next level, which is to say multiple targets are being struck in multiple rounds," he said. On the intervening night of May 6 and 7, the IAF conducted a series of precision strikes and destroyed infrastructure in nine terror bases in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK). The act - codenamed Operation Sindoor - was in response to the April 22 in Jammu & Kashmir's Pahalgam that killed 26 tourists. The Resistance Front, a shadow group of the banned Pakistan-based LeT terror group, claimed responsibility. India's actions, however, escalated bilateral tensions as it led to strikes and counter-strikes between the two nations. The Pakistani actions were strongly responded to by the Indian side. On May 10, India and Pakistan reached an agreement to stop all firing and military action on land, air and sea, with effect from 5pm. Operation Sindoor "tried to change the equations that the onus is on the other side", Mr Ladwig said. "...the policy change of not feeling the need to assemble the dossier, connect the dots to say it is incumbent on India to prove in a courtroom sense or beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt that there are these connections... If you fail to deny them (terrorists) the space to operate, then that is enough. We will decide that we may take serious action," he said. However, the analyst added, putting the onus on the other side does not mean India stops making efforts to put forward a credible case in front of the global audience. "The immediate aftermath of the (Pahalgam) terror attack saw solidarity pouring in for India. There were messages of understanding and support. In the present moment based on recent history, I think India has the benefit of the doubt from its partners but they shouldn't take that for granted," he said. The professor also said that India's counter-strikes to Pakistan's attacks on the country, which lasted for three nights after Operation Sindoor, were essential to avoid doubts over its long-term goals. "Operation Sindoor sought to inflict punishment on the terrorists and not provoke a conflict. Beyond that, once the tit for tat cycle began, there was a desire to show and demonstrate abilities to strike, do more than the ability to just hit terror infrastructure, and have the ability to show a degree of escalation. It raises questions otherwise as to why did the government stop when it did (Pakistan retaliated) and it gets back to what was the mission in the first place," he said. He said India's showcase of its ability to retaliate will only lead to a "cat and mouse game". "After the strikes, the smart terrorists will go underground the moment something big happens. They will not be sitting around in known facilities, waiting for retaliation," he said. "The ability to track and monitor and know precisely where the pin points are going to become harder because groups are going to spend a lot more time on concealment and covering their tracks, making it difficult for intelligence officials," he added.
India.com
20-05-2025
- Business
- India.com
China the real winner...? How India-Pakistan conflict turned into a jackpot for Beijing, could be a game-changer for export of...
China the real winner...? How India-Pakistan conflict turned into a jackpot for Beijing, could be a game-changer for export of... The recent four-day military clash between India and Pakistan has caught world's attention. It began on the night of May 6, when India launched 'Operation Sindoor,' targeting terrorist camps inside Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir. In response, Pakistan attempted retaliatory strikes on Indian territory. Tensions escalated rapidly, bringing both nuclear-armed neighbors to the brink of war. However, a ceasefire was agreed upon on May 10, and since then, both sides have made strong claims about their actions and outcomes. While the spotlight has mostly been on India and Pakistan, another country has quietly emerged in the backdrop and one such is China. According to a report by the BBC, China may have gained the most from this conflict, especially when it comes to its defense industry. Experts point out that Pakistan used Chinese-made weapons and fighter jets during the conflict with India. This has unexpectedly boosted China's military export profile. The conflict acted almost like a live demonstration of Chinese arms in action, particularly their fighter aircraft, which could now attract attention from other countries looking to modernize their air forces. China's silent victory During the war-like confrontation, the skies became a battlefield, with both countries deploying drones, missiles, and fighter jets. India relied on aircraft built by France and Russia, while Pakistan took to the skies with Chinese-made J-10 and JF-17 jets. Though both India and Pakistan claimed their fighter jets did not cross each other's borders and only launched missiles from within their own airspace, the use of airpower was central to this conflict. Interestingly, this clash has unexpectedly become a turning point for China's defense industry. Some defense experts are calling it a 'Deepseek moment', a rare opportunity for Chinese weapons to prove their worth in real-world conflict, even though China was not directly involved. Zhou Bo, a Chinese military analyst, told the BBC that the air battle served as a massive advertisement for China's arms industry. Until now, China had little to show in terms of how its weapons perform in actual warfare. But this conflict, through Pakistan's use of Chinese jets, offered the world a glimpse of their strength. One of the most visible effects of the conflict was the spotlight on Pakistan's use of Chinese-made J-10 fighter jets. The attention these aircraft received helped boost the reputation of Chengdu Aircraft Corporation, the Chinese manufacturer behind the J-10. 'Too early to say that Chinese jets had an edge' However, defense experts warn against jumping to conclusions. Professor Walter Ladwig from King's College London stated, 'It's too early to say that Chinese jets had an edge in this conflict.' So far, no concrete evidence suggests Chinese weapons decisively outperformed others. Still, the buzz around Chinese arms, especially on platforms like Chinese social media, paints a different picture. Carlotta Rinaudo, a researcher from the International Team for the Study of Security in Verona, noted that Chinese platforms are flooded with messages celebrating their country's defense technology. 'Even though there's limited information, the narrative being built is that China came out on top,' she said. World's largest arms exporter The US is currently the world's largest arms exporter, with China at fourth place. Until now, Beijing has mainly sold weapons to countries like Pakistan and Myanmar, but this conflict could help open doors to other nations that have traditionally looked to the West for military supplies.
India Gazette
17-05-2025
- Politics
- India Gazette
India-Pakistan conflict not in US interest: Walter Ladwig
By Reena Bhardwaj London [UK], May 16 (ANI): Noting that many countries, including Western governments and Russia, talked about the need to combat terrorism in the wake of Pahalgam terror attack and statements of sympathy with India were genuine, a leading London-based security expert has said the successive US governments have been seeking to cultivate India as an important partner in the Indo-Pacific in part as a counterweight to China and conflict in the region is not in American interest. In an interview with ANI, Dr Walter Ladwig, Senior Lecturer of International Relations at King's College London, said India's growth is soaring, growing at nearly seven per cent a year and the country needs to grow faster to meet all of the development targets. 'When it comes to India, we have successive US administrations going all the way back to George W. Bush that have been seeking to cultivate India as an important partner in the Indo-Pacific, in part as a counterweight to China... It's not in the American interest for there to be a conflict between India and Pakistan insofar as that distracts india's attention away from bigger picture issues in Asia,' he said. 'India's growth is soaring, growing at an impressive just under seven per cent a year, but needs to grow faster to meet all of the development targets. All of those things will be put at risk by a protracted conflict or stalemate with Pakistan, so that's clearly not in America's interest,' he added. He said India and Pakistan had reached an understanding for stopping military action and firing and it was 'a lot about the desires of the two parties involved' and wasn't 'brought about by pressure or mediation' in the way US President Donald Trump has described. India carried out precision strikes through Operation Sindoor early on May 7 on terror infrastructure in Pakistan and PoJK in response to the Pahalgam terror attack. India also effectively responded to subsequent Pakistani aggression and pounded its airbases. India carried out surgical strikes in 2016 on terror launch pads across LoC and an aerial attack on a terror camp in Pakistan in 2019 in response to ghastly terror attacks. Pahalgam terror attack last month, in which 26 people were killed, drew global condemnation. 'I think many Western governments, Russia, and even China, in the aftermath of the attack in Kashmir, all talked about the need to combat terrorism. The statements of sympathy with India, I think were genuine. You didn't have Indian diplomats running around trying to get governments to say these things. I think the US position in particular was slightly different from the first Trump administration when in 2019 they very clearly gave a green light to New Delhi to do sort of what it needed to do after the Pulwama attack,' Dr Ladwig said. 'I wouldn't necessarily see it as a tilt towards Pakistan or sympathy towards Pakistan, I think rather most countries kind of defaulting to their standard set of responses when there is a South Asia crisis, he said. Dr Ladwig said that India's growth story getting impacted is not in the US interest. 'When it comes to India, we have successive US administrations going all the way back to George W. Bush that have been seeking to cultivate India as an important partner in the Indo-Pacific, in part as a counterweight to China... It's not in the American interest for there to be a conflict between India and Pakistan insofar as that distracts india's attention away from bigger picture issues in Asia,' he said. 'India's growth is soaring, growing at an impressive just under seven per cent a year, but needs to grow faster to meet all of the development targets. All of those things will be put at risk by a protracted conflict or stalemate with Pakistan, so that's clearly not in America's interest,' he added. Dr Ladwig said that the evidence of Indian Air Force's ability to precisely strike a range of targets more or less precisely was quite impressive. 'I think what stood out for me the most was first the shift in Indian government policy in terms of responding to terrorist attacks within India that it believes are linked to groups that operate in Pakistan. And whereas in the past we saw governments feel the need to sort of seek to assemble a dossier or provide evidence of linkages... Now, there's a move to a policy stance of saying that a failure to prevent groups from having safe haven in your territory is enough to bring about a military response when it comes to terrorist activities,' he said. 'And then once the Indian Air Force operated according to standard military procedures and doctrines, the evidence that their ability to really precisely strike a range of targets more or less precisely, I think it was quite impressive,' he added. Answering another query, Dr Ladwig said, India was successful in striking a much wider range of targets and executing more successful missions than Pakistan in the aggression by Islamabad following Operation Sindoor. '...I think India was successful in striking a much wider range of targets and executing more successful missions than the Pakistan side was which sort of explains why there's so much more information, images and so forth in the open domain that would appear to corroborate the majority of the Indians claims versus Pakistanis,' he said. He was asked about India presenting high-resolution evidence to support its assertions in the conflict, while Pakistan's evidence appears more limited and how he assesses this asymmetry in evidence presentation. India and Pakistan have agreed to stop military action and firing following a call made by Pakistan's DGMO to his Indian counterpart on May 10. (ANI)
India Gazette
17-05-2025
- Politics
- India Gazette
"Op Sindoor India's new baseline for countering terrorism linked to Pakistan": Security expert Walter Ladwig
London [UK], May 17 (ANI): Walter Ladwig, a senior lecturer in International Relations at King's College London and a leading London-based security expert, on Friday said that Operation Sindoor represents a significant shift in India's counter-terrorism strategy and emphasised that the operation sets a new baseline for how India is likely to respond to future terror attacks, particularly those with credible links to Pakistan. He further noted that India is no longer relying on diplomacy. 'I think it's shown that it is willing to be and can be successfully assertive in its immediate neighbourhood,' said Ladwig, referring to India's approach following Operation Sindoor. 'I think we should assume that Operation Sindoor is the new baseline in terms of how India will respond in the future to terrorist attacks that are reasonably credibly linked to Pakistan or perhaps any of its neighbours,' he said. 'This is not a country that is going to turn the other cheek or simply rely on diplomatic measures,' he added. Ladwig further said that the most striking aspect of the current India-Pakistan crisis is the clear shift in India's policy on terrorism. He said that, unlike in the past, when India focused on collecting evidence, is now taking military action. 'I think what stood out for me the most was, first, the shift in Indian government policy in terms of responding to terrorist attacks within India that it believes are linked to groups that operate in Pakistan. And whereas in the past we saw governments feel the need to sort of seek to assemble a dossier or provide evidence of linkages... Now, there's a move to a policy stance of saying that a failure to prevent groups from having a safe haven in your territory is enough to bring about a military response when it comes to terrorist activities,' Ladwig said. He further said that the Indian Air Force's ability to carry out strikes in line with standard military procedures and doctrines was impressive. 'And then once the Indian Air Force operated according to standard military procedures and doctrines, the evidence that their ability to really precisely strike a range of targets more or less precisely, I think it was quite impressive,' Walter Ladwig said. When asked about the difference in the kind of evidence shared by both sides, India presenting high-resolution evidence to support its claims, while Pakistan's evidence appears more limited, Ladwig said, 'I think India was successful in striking a much wider range of targets and executing more successful missions than the Pakistan side was, which sort of explains why there's so much more information, images and so forth in the open domain that would appear to corroborate the majority of the Indians claims versus Pakistanis.' India launched precise strikes on terror infrastructure in Pakistan early on May 7 through Operation Sindoor in response to the Pahalgam terror attack in which 26 people were killed. India also effectively repelled the subsequent Pakistani aggression and pounded its airports. The two countries have agreed to stop military action and firing following a call made by Pakistan's DGMO to his Indian counterpart. (ANI)
Economic Times
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Economic Times
India-Pakistan conflict not in US interest as it distracts India's attention from China: Security expert Walter Ladwig
Noting that many countries, including Western governments and Russia, talked about the need to combat terrorism in the wake of Pahalgam terror attack and statements of sympathy with India were genuine, a leading London-based security expert has said the successive US governments have been seeking to cultivate India as an important partner in the Indo-Pacific in part as a counterweight to China and conflict in the region is not in American interest. In an interview with ANI, Dr Walter Ladwig, Senior Lecturer of International Relations at King's College London, said India's growth is soaring, growing at nearly seven per cent a year and the country needs to grow faster to meet all of the development targets. "When it comes to India, we have successive US administrations going all the way back to George W. Bush that have been seeking to cultivate India as an important partner in the Indo-Pacific, in part as a counterweight to China... It's not in the American interest for there to be a conflict between India and Pakistan insofar as that distracts india's attention away from bigger picture issues in Asia," he said. "India's growth is soaring, growing at an impressive just under seven per cent a year, but needs to grow faster to meet all of the development targets. All of those things will be put at risk by a protracted conflict or stalemate with Pakistan, so that's clearly not in America's interest," he added. He said India and Pakistan had reached an understanding for stopping military action and firing and it was "a lot about the desires of the two parties involved" and wasn't "brought about by pressure or mediation" in the way US President Donald Trump has described. India carried out precision strikes through Operation Sindoor early on May 7 on terror infrastructure in Pakistan and PoJK in response to the Pahalgam terror attack. India also effectively responded to subsequent Pakistaggression and pounded its airbases. India carried out surgical strikes in 2016 on terror launch pads across LoC and an aerial attack on a terror camp in Pakistan in 2019 in response to ghastly terror attacks. Pahalgam terror attack last month, in which 26 people were killed, drew global condemnation. "I think many Western governments, Russia, and even China, in the aftermath of the attack in Kashmir, all talked about the need to combat terrorism. The statements of sympathy with India, I think were genuine. You didn't have Indian diplomats running around trying to get governments to say these things. I think the US position in particular was slightly different from the first Trump administration when in 2019 they very clearly gave a green light to New Delhi to do sort of what it needed to do after the Pulwama attack," Dr Ladwig said. "I wouldn't necessarily see it as a tilt towards Pakistan or sympathy towards Pakistan, I think rather most countries kind of defaulting to their standard set of responses when there is a South Asia crisis, he said. Dr Ladwig said that India's growth story getting impacted is not in the US interest. "When it comes to India, we have successive US administrations going all the way back to George W. Bush that have been seeking to cultivate India as an important partner in the Indo-Pacific, in part as a counterweight to China... It's not in the American interest for there to be a conflict between India and Pakistan insofar as that distracts india's attention away from bigger picture issues in Asia," he said. "India's growth is soaring, growing at an impressive just under seven per cent a year, but needs to grow faster to meet all of the development targets. All of those things will be put at risk by a protracted conflict or stalemate with Pakistan, so that's clearly not in America's interest," he added. Dr Ladwig said that the evidence of Indian Air Force's ability to precisely strike a range of targets more or less precisely was quite impressive."I think what stood out for me the most was first the shift in Indian government policy in terms of responding to terrorist attacks within India that it believes are linked to groups that operate in Pakistan. And whereas in the past we saw governments feel the need to sort of seek to assemble a dossier or provide evidence of linkages... Now, there's a move to a policy stance of saying that a failure to prevent groups from having safe haven in your territory is enough to bring about a military response when it comes to terrorist activities," he said. "And then once the Indian Air Force operated according to standard military procedures and doctrines, the evidence that their ability to really precisely strike a range of targets more or less precisely, I think it was quite impressive," he another query, Dr Ladwig said, India was successful in striking a much wider range of targets and executing more successful missions than Pakistan in the aggression by Islamabad following Operation Sindoor."...I think India was successful in striking a much wider range of targets and executing more successful missions than the Pakistan side was which sort of explains why there's so much more information, images and so forth in the open domain that would appear to corroborate the majority of the Indians claims versus Pakistanis," he said. He was asked about India presenting high-resolution evidence to support its assertions in the conflict, while Pakistan's evidence appears more limited and how he assesses this asymmetry in evidence presentation. India and Pakistan have agreed to stop military action and firing following a call made by Pakistan's DGMO to his Indian counterpart on May 10. (ANI)
