India and Pakistan clash over Kashmir

[Gaius Baltar]

I am reading reports that the Indian Mig-21 was shot down by a Pakistani JF-17.
https://theaviationist.com/2019/02/2...air-force-jet/

There is also some unsubstantiated reports that a Pakistani F-16 was shot down during this encounter.

Looking at sources now.

Overall not surprised that a Mig-21 was lost it is far past obsolete. Not sure about the JF-17 in combat, but would be really surprised if the F-16 loss is confirmed.

[athanaric]

Also, to anyone trying to say West has nothing to do with this, everyone knows the British Raj was released from British custody without any planning whatsoever. Bangladesh, India and Pakistani borders were invented and are not democratic, adjustment through dumb wars and ethnic cleansing notwithstanding.

That's not "the West", that's only Britain. More precisely, Britain seventy years ago. Which is a world apart from now. Might as well blame Iran and Mongolia and everyone between them because the invasions led by their ancestors contributed to the current situation.

[Cyclops]

....
Also, to anyone trying to say West has nothing to do with this, everyone knows the British Raj was released from British custody without any planning whatsoever...

My own view is the British were planning to stay, or at least hold on for as long as possible: even in the 1930's the Raj was attempting to hammer out a comprehensive instrument for Indian rule. The final partition was drawn up (believe it or not) through negotiation with the most powerful factions within the former Raj, and Pakistan as a term and as a political project was developed by Muslims in British India.

Subsequent events including the many massacres perpetrated against minorities in both states illustrate how unlikely it was that a united and peaceful India could succeed British rule.

...... Bangladesh, India and Pakistani borders were invented and are not democratic, ...

Indeed, there is no tradition of democracy in India at all, besides that introduced by Europeans obliquely (for example Gandhi learned a great deal about combating Imperial rule through his work in South Africa, he was supposed to be a good little functionary but that didn't work out at all). Hostility between Hindu and Muslim communities or political projects did not appear as a result of Lord Mountbatten drawing some lines on a map. He may well have exacerbated tensions, but the competing visions of Jinnah and Nehru and the host of parties and movements involved were incompatible with one another and would have resulted in blood no matter what.

In particular the vacillating of the Muslim ruler of Kashmir, and the heavy handed way India and Pakistan approached the issue have resulted in the current mess there. The partition process however flawed could not succeed without good faith from both sides and on many places the good faith was lacking, from the top (where leaders manoeuvred for gain) down to the ordinary rural folk who slaughtered one another in unimaginable communal violence.

..... adjustment through dumb wars and ethnic cleansing notwithstanding.

The wars and communal violence seem very necessary to those in India and Pakistan perpetrating them. You can attribute to Britain magic powers to foment violence but I believe people of all castes creeds and colours are quite capable of behaving like saints and like savage animals, not just the British.

John Company and the Raj ruled India for profit. They were callous and cruel and greedy, to the point they let provinces starve (or even actively starved them) and left a mess. Its good they left, people in the sub continent can be ruled by corrupt selfish rulers from their own community instead of from Europe. At least the wealth extracted from the hard working decent people there stay mostly in India now instead of paying for RN Dreadnoughts and European wars.

However the mess in India was there before the British arrived: it was a divided subcontinent with deeply unjust systems of rule, entrenched caste injustice (although made worse by British codification i am told) and bigotry on a grand scale.

Modern India and Pakistan have taken some good from the Europeans who used to rule them (which hardly offsets he centuries of grand theft and oppression) but mostly through their own efforts have built functioning persistent states in the teeth of harsh rule by an alien power (and the betrayal of the numerous princes who sold out to the British and had to be annexed), but they are only human. They've had plenty of opportunity to improve (and have improved a lot) and made plenty of mistakes too.

It would be condescending to suggest India and Pakistan are behaving badly now because of something a white chap did 70 years ago, as if they aren't free themselves of colonial rule even now. I think they have moved well beyond British control, and quite altered the reality left them by the weak remnants o he once powerful British rul.

[conon394]

Well hopefully both sides read this

https://www.ippnw.org/pdf/nuclear-fa...-risk-2013.pdf

And thus realize they will be taking a lot not interested people down with them if they do go to the mat.

On balance I blame Pakistan they have supported asymmetric terrorism for a long time to draw blood over the dispute. No doubt their intelligence service is just waiting for Trump to bail on A-stan so their friends can run the show again and they have deniability for attacks on India. Also really India a Mig 21? Can't India afford something better for contested airspace in 2019? Yes the US still flies B-52s but not anywhere it expects fighters or air defense

[Papay]

China used atomic bombs out of fear of US nuclear weapons. India used atomic bombs out of fear of chinese nuclear weapons. Pakistan used atomic bombs out of fear of Indian nuclear weapons etc etc

[Sar1n]

China used atomic bombs out of fear of US nuclear weapons. India used atomic bombs out of fear of chinese nuclear weapons. Pakistan used atomic bombs out of fear of Indian nuclear weapons etc etc

Please learn the difference between build and use. Had those weapons been used, I think that none of us would be writing anything...

[Papay]

Please learn the difference between build and use. Had those weapons been used, I think that none of us would be writing anything...

Used in tests

[Pontifex Maximus]

Didn't Pakistan harbor and give sanctuary to Osama Bin Laden for...years? I guess I know where I stand.

[anant]

Also really India a Mig 21? Can't India afford something better for contested airspace in 2019? Yes the US still flies B-52s but not anywhere it expects fighters or air defense

Yeah, our air force is caught up in a storm of political arguments about sourcing equipment, and our own fighter industry isn't yet capable of meeting the IAFs demands. That being said, the mig21 has been used extensively and creatively by the IAF for decades and is in upgraded form constructed in India itself (by HAL). It might be worth noting that the IAF claims that the mig21 shot down a two seater, jordanian bought pakistani F16 before being shot down itself, and some pics have emerged, apparently from Pakistani social media accounts of pakistani soldiers posing with debris that looks to be from an f16. Apparently these soldiers thought it was Indian wreckage. There have been unconfirmed rumours on Pak media about a pilot having died in hospital. None of this is yet confirmable by me. It is also worth noting that alongside these mig21s, India had a large number of other planes in the area, including su30s, AWACS, IAI Heron drones etc. and these mig21s might have been vectored in as they were the closest to respond. If an f16 has been shot down (i tend to believe it has, but then, i AM Indian. Please forgive my national bias and pride in my air force), it would be fascinating to think that a dated platform like the mig21 could still be earning it's keep effectively. The AK47 of fighter jets, anyone?

[anant]

Also, it is important to understand the dynamics of the incident that took place to understand why the the planes crashed in Pakistani Kashmir. Earlier, India had bombed non-military, terrorist targets using Mirage 2000s and GPS guided 2000lb bombs (sourced from Israel). The bombs fell in Pakistan proper (not Pak Kashmir), and the Indian planes were above Pakistani Kashmir (which India claims) when they released the munitions. In effect, notwithstanding the disputed status of Kashmir, Indian planes had launched bombs at targets in Pakistan from Indian territory, whatever the de-facto status of that territory might be. In retaliation the Pakistanis attempted their own raid, where they attempted to bomb Indian Kashmir (which they claim), not India proper. This raid supposedly consisted of Jf17s, some old Mirages (probably the mirage III), and allegedly by the IAF, some f16s providing fighter cover. Pakistan is contractually obligated to not use it's american made f16s against India except in a full fledged war, which is why it has bought f16s made by other countries in the past. Pakistan denied using f16s, but the Indian air force has shared radar signatures and data logs with the americans. So to clarify, the Pakistanis were now claiming to be bombing Indian military "incursions" into lands they claim, from land they control but which India claims! This raid was intercepted by the IAF, and according to it's claims the resulting dogfight, which took place over pakistani Kashmir (which India claims, remember, so if push comes to shove, it has the right to conduct military operations over;ditto the Pakistani's for Indian Kashmir!), resulted in the loss of an f16 for the pakistanis and of a mig21 for the Indians. Given the dynamics of military conflict in south Asia, don't hold your breath for a clearer picture than this. Thankfully, things seem to be winding down now, but both governments need to be careful and stop using their soldier's lives for their ing geopolitical chessgame.

[sumskilz]

Didn't Pakistan harbor and give sanctuary to Osama Bin Laden for...years? I guess I know where I stand.

Well, their general disdain for us is broader than that. In 2012, 74% of Pakistanis considered the US to be an enemy compared to 8% that saw the US as a partner. Evidently, the roughly $2 billion in economic and military aid we had been giving them annually wasn't really appreciated.

As of 2017, the last fully reported year, US annual aid to Pakistan was still $837 million, about one third of which is military. It's considered in our interests to buy their cooperation on some issues, but I don't think that's an indication of close ties between the countries.

On that note:

The United States has intervened diplomatically in past crises. In 1999, a meeting between then-President Bill Clinton and Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif ended months of tense escalations that U.S. intelligence reports suggested might end in the unthinkable.

But in the current dispute, “I think U.S. leverage with Pakistan is waning and is seen as having moved towards India,” said Tanvi Madan, director of the India Project at the Brookings Institute. “I think the U.S. does have a role to play, but I think it will have less influence than it used to traditionally.”

Under Trump, the United States has taken a harsher line on Pakistan. U.S. officials have all-but-publicly backed India in the conflict. National Security Advisor John Bolton said after the Feb. 14 attack that the United States supported “India’s right to self-defense.” The administration last year suspended $300 million in security assistance to Pakistan pending more “decisive action” against terrorist groups whose presence in Pakistan is widely believed to be tolerated, and in some cases supported, by Islamabad. The United States has no ambassador to Pakistan and no assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian Affairs.

“The U.S. position this time seems to be, ‘you know what, you start these things every few years, it always starts with a terror strike by Pakistan and it always ends with escalation and American has to defuse it. This time, you guys figure it out yourselves,’” former Pakistani ambassador to the U.S. Husain Haqqani told NPR’s Steve Inskeep on Thursday.

Asad Majeed Khan, Pakistan’s U.S. ambassador, on Wednesday called for more “active involvement” from the United States to help defuse the crisis and argued that the failure of the U.S. government to condemn the Feb. 25 Indian airstrikes “has been construed and understood as an endorsement of the Indian position and that is what emboldened them.”

President Donald Trump told reporters in Hanoi that the United States has “been involved in trying to have them stop.”

“We’ve been in the middle trying to help both out to see if we can get some organization and peace, and I think probably that’s going to be happening,” Trump said. The Pentagon said in a statement that Acting Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan was focused on “de-escalating tensions and urging both of the nations to avoid further military action,” while Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urged both nations in a statement to “prioritize direct communication.” Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford spoke to Pakistan Chief of Defense Gen. Zubair Mahmood Hayat, while Pompeo has spoken to his counterparts in both India and Pakistan.

Complicating the situation for the United States are the ongoing peace talks with the Taliban over the war in Afghanistan. After the Feb. 14 attack, the Pakistani ambassador to Afghanistan issued what onlookers saw as a veiled threat to the United States: any retaliation by India on Pakistan would “affect the stability of the entire region and impact the momentum” of the Afghan peace effort, he said.

[athanaric]

In effect, notwithstanding the disputed status of Kashmir, Indian planes had launched bombs at targets in Pakistan from Indian territory, whatever the de-facto status of that territory might be.

I understand that that was an egregious violation of Pakistan's sovereignity, but really, what could they expect if they habitually shelter, train, and arm terrorists who attack civilian targets in India (and other parts of the world. And at least during the Bombay attacks, they also murdered plenty of non-Indians)? I can't find any evidence of India doing the same to other countries, and it's certainly not normal behaviour.

[conon394]

Yeah, our air force is caught up in a storm of political arguments about sourcing equipment, and our own fighter industry isn't yet capable of meeting the IAFs demands. That being said, the mig21 has been used extensively and creatively by the IAF for decades and is in upgraded form constructed in India itself (by HAL). It might be worth noting that the IAF claims that the mig21 shot down a two seater, jordanian bought pakistani F16 before being shot down itself, and some pics have emerged, apparently from Pakistani social media accounts of pakistani soldiers posing with debris that looks to be from an f16. Apparently these soldiers thought it was Indian wreckage. There have been unconfirmed rumours on Pak media about a pilot having died in hospital. None of this is yet confirmable by me. It is also worth noting that alongside these mig21s, India had a large number of other planes in the area, including su30s, AWACS, IAI Heron drones etc. and these mig21s might have been vectored in as they were the closest to respond. If an f16 has been shot down (i tend to believe it has, but then, i AM Indian. Please forgive my national bias and pride in my air force), it would be fascinating to think that a dated platform like the mig21 could still be earning it's keep effectively. The AK47 of fighter jets, anyone?

(i tend to believe it has, but then, i AM Indian. Please forgive my national bias and pride in my air force)

In general as long as somebody is not saying I have pride in the efficiency of our death squads everyone has the right to patriotism...

I was doing a little research after I posted and came across this.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...-fighter-45752

Did not mean to knock India in a personal way. But still India does not seem to bringing coherence to air force acquisitions and dragging its feet as well. I would think a bulk purchase Gripen would be an easy and significant upgrade over mirage 2000s and old migs. Given Saab has a electronic warfare version and carrier version in the works, India could seriously streamline its air force and not be using such an odd mix of everyone else's kit. But at the same time the nuclear situation sort of precludes a major war with either China or Pakistan unless somebody really blunders. After that I can't see Pakistan or China having the ability to invade and compel India much so I can imagine that havinge the best shiny new stuff for the air force in large quantities might not be a budget priority. Even the US military gets a bit queasy at the cost of training. For a bulk upgrade of the IAF would no doubt involve a lot of man hours.

[The Wandering Storyteller]

Generally nuclear bombs won't be used as the media is exaggerating it to be. Both sides are fully aware of this. Most likely India is fed up of its neighbour, and its no longer going to stand for any nonsense.

Quite literally, Pakistan's GDP is less than the GDP of than the state of Mahahastra. Indian Businesses and Indian Companies can literally buy out Pakistan's shares quite easily.

The real war is not being fought with the army/navy - that's already been done. The real war is economics and water. India's diplomatic circle is far stronger thanks to Modi building it for five years, and India is to gain from this conflict - certainly, by imposing 200% MFN status, water supply diversion - India has $350 million reserves, Pakistan doesn't even have a substantial amount.

And why condemn India for it? China threatened to stop the flow of the Bhramaputra River, and sent troops to intervene in Kashmir. When Xi Jingping visited in 2014, Chinese troops were walking into Indian border. Then in 2017 you saw a great escalation between India and China.

So as far as I am concerned, this is a very new India compared to 2011.

My opinion only. I do not use sources because this conflict is already covered up with sources.

No, they’re not. The Pakistani Air Force is constantly ranked in the top 5 worst air forces in their world. They have inferior training and inferior equipment. India is ranked in top 10.

What's amazing is how the pilot with an old outdated MIG managed to take down an F16.

I remember an American commenter amazed at this irony.

This could escalate badly.

It won’t. China is the more serious threat to India.

[caratacus]

India claiming that wreckage from a Amraam missile proves Pakistan used F-16s

IAF Shows Amraam Missile Remains as a Proof of PAF F-16 Attack
https://www.news18.com/photogallery/...k-2052193.html

[Yayattasa]

It would be condescending to suggest India and Pakistan are behaving badly now because of something a white chap did 70 years ago, as if they aren't free themselves of colonial rule even now. I think they have moved well beyond British control, and quite altered the reality left them by the weak remnants o he once powerful British rul.

I'm not implying the British are completely responsible for this and I have no idea where you got this from. Denying British colonialism has anything to do with, though, is naïve. They aren't completely responsible, but of course it has something to do with it.

Well, their general disdain for us is broader than that. In 2012, 74% of Pakistanis considered the US to be an enemy compared to 8% that saw the US as a partner. Evidently, the roughly $2 billion in economic and military aid we had been giving them annually wasn't really appreciated.

As of 2017, the last fully reported year, US annual aid to Pakistan was still $837 million, about one third of which is military. It's considered in our interests to buy their cooperation on some issues, but I don't think that's an indication of close ties between the countries.

Pakistan is one of the countries that bled most and fought most for the American self-defeating War on Terror. And for what?

[athanaric]

I'm not implying the British are completely responsible for this and I have no idea where you got this from. Denying British colonialism has anything to do with, though, is naïve. They aren't completely responsible, but of course it has something to do with it.

The problem is that most of the time, it sounds like someone is blaming everything on "European colonialism" (which of course is a real historical phenomenon) which does happen a lot IRL, and denying the agency of the locals and the pre-colonial roots of such conflicts.

Pakistan is one of the countries that bled most and fought most for the American self-defeating War on Terror. And for what?

Maybe they shouldn't have fought on both sides, then.

[The Gurkhan]

Well done PM Khan,you've played a blinder sir! Pakistanis should be pleased with their strong Indo-Aryan leader. He managed to outmaneuver a much larger foe led by a bloodthirsty provincial yokel. As well as annoyed countless whingers the world over.

While both sides were under immense pressure to calm tensions, Mr Khan reached out and offered to release the pilot. Former Indian diplomat and strategic affairs expert KC Singh remarked that hawks in Mr Modi's BJP and the Indian establishment "will be stranded by Imran Khan's diplomatic reverse swing". (A reverse swing in cricket is the art of swinging the ball when it turns in towards the batsman rather than moving away from him. Mr Khan was one of the world's finest cricketers in his sporting days.)

Only to a domestic Indian audience manipulated by a compliant media can Mr Modi not look to have been totally bested here.

Large parts of the press at home have spun the freeing of the Indian pilot as Mr Modi's victory. Very few people are asking questions about the massive intelligence failure that led to the attack in Pulwama, and how Pakistan could penetrate air defences in broad daylight.

India's military has not even achieved its strategic aim to establish a new normal in which it would deter Pakistan-backed terrorism in India with the threat of automatic military strikes, says Ajai Shukla, a leading defence analyst.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-47414490

[Love Mountain]

Imran Khan did do the correct thing here and successfully allowed both sides to claim victory. Pakistan has managed to shoot down a couple of jets, and then immediately de-escalated by releasing the captured pilot. It was well-done and it'll allow Imran Khan to parade this "victory" to help with his agenda. The ball is now in Modi's court, he can take the offering given by Pakistan and avoid a possible defeat. The release of the pilot lets India save face, and while I doubt that a "victory" is unanimously perceived by Indians, it's enough to cool the clamor for more action.

If I were Modi I'd allow it to end here. Quite frankly, it's probably better to covertly assault Pakistan's terrorist factories. The primary game here is to cause the opponent to overstep and make a mistake.

[athanaric]

Well done PM Khan,you've played a blinder sir! Pakistanis should be pleased with their strong Indo-Aryan leader.

By "strong Indo-Aryan Leader" you mean the guy with an Arabic and Mongol name? Kind of symptomatic for the predicament of Pakistan as a whole. At least the "provincial yokel" is not a wannabe Arab. And he somehow managed to become PM of India, despite not being a member of the Gandhi clan. But maybe you have a separate definition of "provincial yokel".

As well as annoyed countless whingers the world over.

Yes, I'm sure "countless whingers" in the rest of the world were simply thrilled at the prospect of a nuclear war. Name one person in this thread who disapproved of Khan's move.