Why air power was not used in 1962

PRAVEEN DAVAR

Source Link

The war was more a victory of India’s policy of non-alignment than a humiliating defeat at the hands of China.

The Indian Air Force (IAF) recently celebrated its 84th anniversary with the usual fanfare. In a film made for the occasion, the IAF’s achievements in all the wars and rescue missions since World War II were highlighted. Its remarkable performance in the wars against Pakistan in 1947-48, 1965 and, above all, the decisive victory of 1971, was well emphasised. Regarding 1962, the narrator regretted that the IAF was not used in the Sino-Indian conflict — an intervention many military historians and retired officers claim could have altered the final outcome to a great extent. It was only the helicopter and transport crew of the IAF that were deployed to service forward pickets in the then North East Frontier Agency (NEFA) and Ladakh.

What was the reluctance of India’s political and military leadership to use its offensive air power assets to stop the advance of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army in NEFA and Ladakh? Let us first examine the strength of the air force of both the countries in 1962.

*** How Does China's First Combat Ready Aircraft Carrier Stack Up?

By CSIS China Power

November 16, 2016

Source Link

The entry of China’s first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, into service with the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) attracted considerable attention from both the Chinese press and military observers around the world. For some, the Liaoningwas a symbol of China’s global power; for others, it represented a significant first step toward a more muscular and assertive Chinese navy.

Originally built as a “heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser” for the Soviet Navy, the ship was laid down as the Riga and renamed the Varyag in 1990. A Chinese travel agency purchased the unfinished hull in 1998, and three years later the ship was towed from the Ukraine to China, where it underwent extensive modernization of its hull, radar, and electronics systems. After years of refits, the Liaoning was commissioned into the PLAN in September 2012 as a training ship unassigned to any of the Navy’s three major fleets. Two months after the ship was commissioned, the PLAN conducted its first carrier-based takeoff and landings. Although it might be several years before a carrier air regiment is fully integrated into the PLAN, it was reported inNovember 2016 that the Liaoning is now combat ready.

The Chinese have made significant progress in developing their carrier program, raising significant questions about theLiaoning’s capabilities and what these capabilities mean for the rise of China as a global power.

A 3D LOOK AT THE LIAONING

How is the Liaoning different than other countries’ carriers?

The Liaoning differs from the aircraft carriers of other countries in both size and capability. Although its overall capability is hindered by its comparatively inefficient power plant and underpowered aircraft-launching system, the Liaoningrepresents an important step in advancing China’s ability to project naval power.

*** CSIS Commission Issues Report Calling for a New Comprehensive Strategy to Counter Violent Extremism

November 15, 2016

WASHINGTON, November 15, 2016: The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) issued today a groundbreaking report from its Commission on Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) calling for a new comprehensive strategy to address “the global scourge of violent extremism” in the United States and abroad.

Cochaired by Leon Panetta and Tony Blair, the Commission argues “that violent extremism, inspired by twisted interpretations of Islam, constitutes an acute and growing global threat, with profound implications for our security, societal cohesion, and international norms and values.”

The Commission concludes that while military and law enforcement operations are essential to taking terrorists off the battlefield and disrupting plots, they are insufficient for extinguishing the underlying ideologies and grievances that motivate scores of recruits to join violent extremist groups.

The chairmen stated that, “What is needed is a new paradigm—one that recognizes violent extremism as the global, generational challenge that it is and leverages all tools available to defeat it.”

The goal of the Commission was to clearly articulate what the next U.S. administration, in close collaboration with governmental and nongovernmental partners, must do to diminish the appeal of extremist ideologies and narratives.

The report makes the following eight key recommendations:

***The Mighty Dragon: A Symbol of China's Maturing Air Force

NOVEMBER 14, 2016

https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/mighty-dragon-symbol-chinas-maturing-air-force 

The J-20 "Mighty Dragon" stealth fighter flies above Zhuhai, China, on Nov. 1. (Alert5/Wikimedia Commons)

Forecast 

China's new stealth fighter, the J-20A Mighty Dragon, showcases the Chinese air force's remarkable progress over the past two decades. 

Nevertheless, significant deficits in equipment and training will continue to hamper further advances.

China will focus its efforts on resolving bottlenecks, including lags in engine development and insufficient combined-arms drills, as it seeks to build up its air force in the coming years. 

Analysis

Two sleek Chinese stealth fighters streaked across the skies over Zhuhai on Nov. 1, marking the official debut of Beijing's brand new J-20 Mighty Dragon jet. One of the only fifth-generation stealth fighters ever built, the aircraft's unveiling is a symbol of the impressive progress China's air force has made over the past two decades. The stealth fighter's design, however, also contains several important weaknesses, a reminder of the limitations in military aviation China is still struggling to overcome.

Building a bigger and better military is paramount to Beijing's ambitions abroad. As China has emerged as a prominent actor on the global stage, its interests and activities have stretched far beyond its shores, bringing it in direct contact — and competition — with some of the world's most advanced militaries. Aware that it must adapt its own force structure accordingly, China has worked to develop and invest in its navy and air force.

Better, but Imperfect

***America’s gift to the world: exports of the best armed drones

25 October 2016.

https://fabiusmaximus.com/2016/10/28/america-exports-armed-drones/ 

Summary: America has played a special role in the post-WWII era, repeatedly unleashing horrors on the world. We started the nuclear arms race by bombing Japan, staged the first cyberattack on Iran (we now live in fear of the next being on us), and now we’re flooding the world with armed drones. Here Stratfor explains the likely consequences.

The Unstoppable Spread of Armed Drones

Forecast 

The United States will continue to lead in the development of armed drone technology, but China has taken the lead in drone exports and therefore has a bigger influence on the application of armed systems. 

Only the United States and China have exported armed drones, but other countries are expected to join the lucrative market, causing a surge in globally available systems. 

Because exporting states do not perceive a threat from armed drones, there is little willpower to establish a legal framework to curb their proliferation. 

Analysis

The presence of armed drones is a reality of the modern battlefield, but only a limited group of countries has the technological ability to produce them or the military capacity to operate them. The United States once held the edge in drone development and use, but as more countries gain access to the technology, armed drones have entered a new stage of proliferation. From the perspective of the United States and others, this proliferation is dangerous. Attempts to curb the spread of armed drones are becoming more difficult now that the United States is no longer their sole developer. China, in particular, has grown as a global exporter of unmanned combat systems, and other countries are planning to follow suit.

** Advancing Beyond the Beach: Amphibious Operations in an Era of Precision Weapons

Bryan Clark, Jesse Sloman

November 15, 2016 

The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps have been the world's most formidable amphibious force for more than seven decades. They have maintained more than 10 ships and 6,000 Marines continuously deployed since World War II, and conducted dozens of operations against contested beaches, islands, and cities in that time. The competition between amphibious forces and defenders ashore, however, is entering a new, more deadly, phase. Enemy surface-to-air missiles and anti-ship cruise missiles have gained the reach and lethality to protect long areas of coastline and significantly constrain America's options for an amphibious assault. To continue exploiting the maneuver space of the sea for operations ashore, U.S. naval forces require new operating concepts and capabilities to protect ships and aircraft, distribute amphibious forces to dilute enemy attacks, gain access to contested areas and deny it to the enemy.

Bryan Clark and Jesse Sloman’s study examines the changing environment for amphibious operations, new operating concepts needed to be effective in the emerging environment, and implications for ships, surface and vertical connectors, naval aviation, unmanned systems, sensors, communications and weapons.

DOWNLOAD SLIDES: PPT

Download the “Advancing Beyond the Beach: Amphibious Operations in an Era of Precision Weapons” briefing slides.

DOWNLOAD SLIDES: PPT

**The Lessons of Henry Kissinger

JEFFREY GOLDBERG

DECEMBER 2016

The legendary and controversial statesman criticizes the Obama Doctrine, talks about the main challenges for the next president, and explains how to avoid war with China.

Author’s note (November 10, 2016): Over the past several months, I’ve interviewed Henry Kissinger, the former secretary of state, numerous times on the subject of America’s role in the world. Our conversations took place before this week’s election, but were informed by the foreign-policy differences between the candidates. The December 2016 issue of The Atlantic includes my article on these conversations, which you will find published below. In addition, a full rendering of our several interviews, on subjects including the future of Russia, the rise of China, and the chaos of the Middle East, can be found here.

On Wednesday, the day the country, and the world, were just beginning to absorb the shock of Donald Trump’s victory, I spoke with Kissinger by telephone to get his postelection thoughts. He told me that he was expecting other nations, particularly the great powers, to enter a period of intense study, in order to understand how they should respond to a Trump presidency. He also said he expected the Islamic State, or other similarly minded jihadist organizations, to test Trump early by launching attacks, in order to provoke a reaction (or, he suggested, an overreaction).

“Nonstate groups may make the assessment that Trump will react to a terror attack in a way that suits their purposes,” Kissinger said.

Here is the transcript of our short conversation, followed by the full article.

When Modi Met Abe: Asia's Strongest Democracies Are Joining Forces

Jeff M. Smith

November 16, 2016

Source Link

Like every news event that shared last week with the U.S. presidential elections, Indian prime minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Japan was swallowed up by American electoral headlines. What attention his summit with Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe did attract centered on the consummation of a long-pending nuclear cooperation deal. For a host of reasons covered extensively elsewhere, the deal is symbolically and practically significant for both countries.

This article is more concerned with what the Modi-Abe summit tells us about the increasingly robust strategic and defense partnership being forged by Asia’s democratic heavyweights, and how the summit advanced that partnership in several key areas.

Trade and Investment

Beyond the nuclear deal, the big-ticket takeaway from Modi’s visit was a deal to finance and construct a $15 billion Mumbai-Ahmedabad high speed rail project. Japan, which funded the lion’s share of the famed Delhi Metro, will finance 80 percent of the project with a soft loan at interest rates below 1 percent.

Japan has long been one of India’s largest aid donors and sources of foreign direct investment (FDI). Japanese FDI in India topped $17.5 billion between 2000 and 2014, with over 1,200 Japanese firms operating in India. “No nation has contributed so much to India's modernization and progress like Japan . . . And, no partner is likely to play as big a role in India's transformation as Japan,” Modi declared last year.

Bilateral trade, on the other hand, continues to underperform. In 2015–16 it reached a modest $14.51 billion, as compared with over $70 billion in India-China trade and $350 billion in Japan-China trade. As Pallavi Aiyar notes, Japan and India account for less than 2 percent of each other’s external trade, and “over the past three years Japanese firms have invested more in countries like Vietnam and Indonesia rather than India.”

Strategic Economic Cooperation

Defence Reforms: A Priority and Challenge for The Government

By Brig Narender Kumar (Retd.)

17 Nov , 2016

Source Link

Defence Minister Mr Manohar Parrikar has hinted that defence reforms are on the card and government is likely to take a decision in the next few months. It is a positive sign to link strategic planning with development of capabilities. Not withstanding the above, there seems to be a little ambiguity in the statement made by the Defence Minster about defence reforms. He has indicated restructuring of defence forces but remained quiet on restructuring of the Higher Defence Organisation (HDO) and integration of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) with the service headquarters. Whereas defence reforms in a holistic manner, would require putting a HDO in place, reform and integration of MOD with service headquarters, defence acquisition reforms and finally restructuring of defence forces, focus only on restructuring of defence forces will only be a cosmetic surgery and a job half done.

In defence reforms global trends suggest shrinking bureaucratic overheads, right-sizing the DoD with integration of military and civil bureaucracy, implementing consistent use of performance-based logistics, involving defence forces in decision making process, focused and planned capability development and bringing professionals in managing the department of defence. A reform agenda should be aimed at cutting bureaucratic delay in functioning, making available resources and adding both capacity and capabilities to address some of the Armed Forces’ most serious strategic shortfalls.[1]

It is a global phenomenon that excessive bureaucracy slows down the capacity of the services to respond to security challenges, building capabilities, modernisation of armed forces and decision matrix. Because interconnected and asymmetric threats warrant rapid reaction and response, speed is absolutely critical in decision-making in future wars. Time has come for the MoD to evaluate the basic minimum requirement to cut out excess flab in a systematic manner that minimizes use of civilian work force to enhance operational performance.

Successful Maiden Flight of Rustom – II

By IDR News Network

16 Nov , 2016

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/successful-maiden-flight-of-rustom-ii/

Heralding a new era in the indigenous development of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), DRDO today successfully carried out the maiden flight of TAPAS 201 (RUSTOM – II), a Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) UAV. The test flight took place from Aeronautical Test Range (ATR), Chitradurga, 250 km from Bangalore which is a newly developed flight test range for the testing of UAVs and manned aircraft. 

The flight accomplished the main objectives of proving the flying platform, such as take-off, bank, level flight and landing etc. 

TAPAS 201, the MALE UAV has been designed and developed by Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE), the Bangalore-based premier lab of DRDO with HAL-BEL as the production partners. The UAV weighing two tonnes was put into air by a dedicated team of young scientists of DRDO. It was piloted (external and internal) by the pilots from the Armed Forces. It is also the first R&D prototype UAV which has undergone certification and qualification for the first flight from the Center for Military Airworthiness & Certification (CEMILAC) and Directorate General of Aeronautical Quality Assurance (DGAQA).

TAPAS 201, a multi-mission UAV is being developed to carry out the Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) roles for the three Armed Forces with an endurance of 24 hours. It is capable to carry different combinations of payloads like Medium Range Electro Optic (MREO), Long Range Electro Optic (LREO), Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), Electronic Intelligence (ELINT), Communication Intelligence (COMINT) and Situational Awareness Payloads (SAP) to perform missions during day and night.

Challenges to Indo-Israel Defence Relations

Nov 16, 2016 

Source Link

Challenges to Indo-Israel Defence Relations

Despite the robustness of Indo-Israeli defence cooperation, some constraints for closer relations exist. Some of these include India’s domestic political environment where a strong lobby resisting Israeli entry in defence sales to India exists, competition and balancing relations with the Gulf States and Iran. Of late allegations of corruption in Indo-Israeli arms trade has also been very sensitive issue which has challenged the relations With more number of players including the United States entering defence market there is competition as well as conflict of interest as in some technologies Israel and the US have bilateral agreements.

There are major political challenges internal as well as global for Indo-Israel defence cooperation. There is a large anti-Israel lobby in India mainly of Left parties and Islamic organisations who have been raising concerns over Israel’s role in suppression of aspirations of the Palestine people. India has so far successfully evaded these challenges. Support to the Palestinian cause thus remains a major factor in India’s foreign policy. Thus every visit by a dignitary from India to Israel is also followed or preceded by a visit to Palestine to express solidarity with the cause of the Palestinians, though India seeks resolution of the Palestinian issue politically.

The entry of diverse foreign suppliers in the Indian market has also added to the competition that was being faced by Israel which was limited only to Russia in the 1990’s. The Arrow anti-missile defence systems is one example which was blocked by the US in 2003. American necessity to maintain a balance between India and Pakistan in the South Asian context has also led to restricting Israel from supplying some technology to India from time to time.

A Lesson for India in a Fog So Thick It Could Kill a Cow

By SABRINA TAVERNISE

NOV. 10, 2016

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/11/health/india-air-pollution-health.html

A thick fog shrouded Trafalgar Square in London on Dec. 7, 1952. This heavy smog episode — from coal-burning fireplaces and cooking ranges — left as many as 12,000 dead.CreditBettmann Archive/Getty Images

In December 1873, London was blanketed for a week in a yellow fog so thick that people could not see their feet. “Ladies & gentlemen,” Mark Twain saidin a public lecture at the time, “I hear you, & so know that you are here — & I am here, too, notwithstanding I am not visible.”

Some 780 people died and 50 prize cattle on display at the Smithfield Club panted, wheezed and eventually died of asphyxia. Still, it took 83 more years of noxious air before the country passed the Clean Air Act in 1956.

This history, described in “London Fog: The Biography,” is a lesson in just how difficult it is for governments to put public health first when it comes into conflict with economic development, the political power of industry and even the polluting habits of their people.

The government of India is up against all of those things. The capital, New Delhi, a sprawling city of 20 million, just lived through an extraordinary episode of air pollution that closed schools for three days. India is one of a number of middle-income countries, including China, grappling with pollution problems that have ballooned along with economic growth and rapidly expanding cities.

A decade ago, the scope of the problem was poorly understood because the numbers on air pollution levels and deaths were spotty. But that has changed. Satellites have given scientists far more detailed pictures, allowing them to perform ever more precise calculations.

Economic corridor - CPEC could turn Pakistan into China's 'client state'

Source Link

Pakistani Prime Minister Sharif has hailed the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) as a harbinger of change for the region. But analyst Siegfried O. Wolf tells DW the project comes with a big price for Islamabad.

On Sunday, November 13, Pakistan's top civilian and military leaders inaugurated a new international route which connects the country's renovated southwestern Gwadar port to the Chinese city of Kashgar as part of a joint multi-billion-dollar project, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).

The first convoy of Chinese trucks carrying goods for sale abroad arrived in the South Asian country on Saturday, and the Pakistani authorities saw them off on Sunday.

Last year, China announced CPEC worth $46 billion (41 billion euros). With the project, Beijing aims to expand its influence in Pakistan and across Central and South Asia in order to counter US and Indian influence. CPEC also includes plans to create road, rail and oil pipeline links to improve connectivity between China and the Middle East.

Pakistan is grappling with an acute economic crisis. Experts say that CPEC can certainly stir the much-needed economic activity in the country.

In his speech on Sunday, Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said that CPEC would benefit some three billion people in the region.

"The participants of the pilot convoy, who have made it to Gwadar, are the harbingers of development and progress, that this region is to see soon," Sharif told audience at the ceremony that included his country's powerful army chief Raheel Sharif and senior Chinese officials.

What CPEC means for South Asia: It fundamentally alters Pakistan’s alignment, sundering its link to the subcontinent

Ashok Malik

November 16, 2016

Source Link

Why is the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor such a challenge to India? Conventional wisdom has it that India is worried about CPEC at its two ends: Gwadar, where the Chinese are building a maritime presence, and Pakistan-occupied segments of the former kingdom of Jammu & Kashmir, where Pakistani and Chinese territorial and military frontiers are merging.

However, there is a deeper issue, one that has hitherto underpinned India’s long-term Pakistan strategy. The very fundamentals of that strategy are now under question. Indeed, CPEC is rewriting the economic geography and regional integrity of the subcontinent in a manner that will require more than a tactical, episodic response.

Historically and across the world, trade routes have tended to flow from north to south. There have been exceptions, such as when Britain/northern Europe became an economic power and a significant consumer of commodities, and trade routes moved south to north. Yet, for the most part that trajectory has been maintained.

This is no coincidence. Most of the world’s people live in the northern hemisphere and trade has tended to seek a route to the sea (to the south) to explore new markets. So it has been in the Indian subcontinent too, for centuries and millennia. Trade routes came down from Central Asia to modern Pakistan, into contemporary northern India, before finding their way to peninsular India.

Military Budgets in India and Pakistan: Trajectories, Priorities, and Risks

CLICK HERE TO READ THE REPORT

The strategic competition between India and Pakistan is evolving, with India outpacing Pakistan in conventional capabilities while Pakistan seeks to compete with nuclear capabilities. India’s economy is eight times larger than Pakistan’s, and may be 15 times larger in 2030. Absent reconciliation between India and Pakistan, how each state converts economic power into military strength will reflect longstanding grievances. India’s advantages are diminished by an ad hoc approach to defense budget management and other constraints, but long term trends point to Indian ascendance. Pakistan cannot match India conventionally in the long term, and any attempt to do so will exhaust its economy. Responding to adverse defense spending trends with increased reliance on nuclear weapons, especially short-range weapons, may be a cost effective approach, but it is likely to diminish Pakistan’s national security.

Can the India-Pakistan Ceasefire Survive?

By Sudha Ramachandran

November 11, 2016

http://thediplomat.com/2016/11/can-the-india-pakistan-ceasefire-survive/

An Indian army soldier keeps guard from a bunker near the border with Pakistan in Abdullian, southwest of Jammu (September 30, 2016).

The 2003 agreement is falling apart amid a sharp decline in India-Pakistan relations. 

Thirteen years after it came into effect, the India-Pakistan ceasefire agreement is in serious trouble. Shelling and firing across the Line of Control (LoC) and the International Border (IB) in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) has increased sharply over the past 40 days and is showing no signs of abating.

This is “the most intense” ceasefire violation over the past 13 years, a senior Border Security Force (BSF) official based at the headquarters in New Delhi told The Diplomat, adding that only along the Actual Ground Position Line (AGPL) (the India-Pakistan frontier in the Siachen Glacier region) are “the guns silent now.” Elsewhere, the 2003 ceasefire agreement appears to be “in tatters.”

The ongoing ceasefire violations have come amidst a significant deterioration in India-Pakistan relations, with the immediate trigger for the latest downturn being the September 18 attack on an Indian army camp at Uri in J&K. The attack, which was carried out by the Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based terrorist group with close ties to Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), was the deadliest on an Indian military facility in over a decade. It resulted in the death of around 18 Indian soldiers, prompting India to carry out a military assault on terrorist “launch pads” in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) on the night of September 28-29.

Following the Uri attack, India stepped up its diplomatic efforts to isolate Pakistan at the regional and global level for Islamabad’s support of anti-India terrorist groups. Delhi was successful in getting other South Asian countries to boycott a South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit that Islamabad was to host. More recently, India and Pakistan have been locked in a tit-for-tat contest to identify and expel each other’s High Commission staffers for alleged involvement in espionage activities.

An Alliance Between Islamic State and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi in Pakistan Was Inevitable

By Kunwar Khuldune Shahid

November 15, 2016

Source Link

Anti-Shia ideology and mutual interest bind the two terrorist groups together. 

A 14-year-old Islamic State (ISIS)-linked bomber attacked a Sufi shrine in Pakistan’s volatile Balochistan province on Saturday, killing at least 52 devotees and injuring over 100. This was the second attack claimed by ISIS in Balochistan in less than three weeks, after gunmen raided a police training center in Quetta, the provincial capital in October.

The Quetta Police College attack was simultaneously claimed by the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi’s (LeJ) Al-Alami (global) faction. While LeJ Al-Alami did not claim direct involvement in the Shah Noorani shrine attack, it highlighted that the group is working in tandem with ISIS in the immediate aftermath of the bombing.

Al-Alami spokesman Ali bin Sufyan told Reuters that “wherever there are attacks taking place [in Pakistan] Lashkar-e-Jhangvi Al Alami is cooperating with [ISIS] either directly or indirectly.”

LeJ, an anti-Shia militant group, evolved into a multi-faceted jihadist organisation after splintering into multiple groups. Despite the group’s primary target being the Shia community, it has been responsible for outrageous attacks elsewhere as well, including killing four US oil company workers in 1997, Daniel Pearl’s kidnapping and execution in 2002, the Marriott hotel bombing in 2008, the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in 2009, and the raid on Pakistan Army GHQ in the same year.

LeJ worked in tandem with the likes of Taliban and al-Qaeda for many of these attacks. Meanwhile, the Al-Alami faction announced its place in the South Asian jihadist network after collaborating with al-Qaeda to target a Shia pilgrimage in Kabul in 2011.

U.S. panel urges probe on whether China weakening U.S. militarily

By David Brunnstrom 
Nov 16, 2016 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-report-security-idUSKBN13B1W3

A paramilitary policeman watches a flag-raising ceremony at Tiananmen Square ahead of the opening session of the National People's Congress (NPC) in Beijing, China, March 5, 2016. 

A U.S. advisory commission warned on Wednesday that China's growing military might may make it more likely to use force to pursue its interests and called for a government probe into how far outsourcing to China has weakened the U.S. defense industry.

The annual report of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission pointed to a growing threat to U.S. national security from Chinese spying, including infiltration of U.S. organizations, and called on Congress to bar Chinese state enterprises from acquiring control of U.S. firms.

The release of the report to Congress comes a week after Donald Trump won the U.S. presidential election. Trump, an outspoken Republican who has vowed to take a tougher line in trade and security dealings with China than President Barack Obama, will take office on Jan. 20.

The panel is a bipartisan body set up in 2000 to monitor the national security implications of the U.S. trade and economic relationship with China and to make recommendations to Congress for legislative and administrative action.

Its report also called on Congress to back more frequent U.S. Navy freedom-of-navigation operations in the South China Sea, one of the world's busiest trade routes where China's building of artificial islands with military facilities has raised concerns about future freedom of movement. Beijing and its neighbors have conflicting territorial claims there.

It pays to be tough with China

By Claude Arpi

17 Nov , 2016

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/spotlights/it-pays-to-be-tough-with-china/

The change in Chinese maps began with the objective to protect a new road linking Tibet to Xinjiang in Aksai Chin area in the mid-1950s.

Interesting news has been coming in from the high plateau of Ladakh. For three days, the Indian Army and the Indo-Tibetan Border Police had an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation with the People’s Liberation Army on the Line of Actual Control in the border village of Demchok. While this village of Nyoma block in Leh district is small (with 74 inhabitants, the last census said), its location on the Indus river is strategic. It’s been a part of Ladakh and thus Indian territory for centuries.

In fact, no Chinese was ever seen in this rather desolate area before the 1950s. Today, however, Beijing claims Demchok as Chinese. It’s not that China is Alzheimerish; it’s simply convenient to rewrite history for its strategic purpose. Before India’s independence nobody ever contested the fact that Demchok was the last village on the road to western Tibet on the Kailash Mansarovar pilgrimage. It was agreed to by all.

Take Rai Bahadur Dr Kanshi Ram, the British trade agent in western Tibet. Starting from Simla on May 20, 1937, he reached Srinagar seven days later; and from there was joined by Wazir Wazarat, commissioner of Ladakh, on his onward journey to the Tibetan border. Both officers were to meet the garpon (governor) of western Tibet for a tripartite inquiry into an alleged murder, in Ladakh a few years earlier, of a Tibetan, Champa Skaldan, by Zaildar, a Ladakhi of Rupchu. After a week’s halt in Leh, they reached Demchok on July 17, 1939, where they were to meet the senior and junior garpons; and the inquiry started three days later.

Xi Jinping “the Core” of CPC

By V.B.N. Ram

16 Nov , 2016

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news/xi-jinping-the-core-of-cpc/

One of dictionary meanings of the word “core“- is the tough central part of a fruit. Ideally, this is exactly how China’s General Secretary of the Communist Party (CPC)- President Xi Jinping would like himself be defined, more particularly since his style of functioning, over the last couple of months has come under severe attack by his critics. As the “core” he would like the fruit to provide its nutritional value and sweetness to the entire People’s Republic of China.

Oct 27, 2016 heralded a new beginning for Xi Jinping –the momentous occasion being the sixth plenum of the 18th Communist Party of China Congress-when Xi was declared to be a “core leader“

Xi’s real power flows from his position as Party’s General Secretary and Head of its Military Commission-which controls the People’s Liberation Army.

The term “ core leader “ was conceived a few decades back and has been given to four leaders i.e. Mao Zedong; Den Xiaoping; Jinag G Zemin- and just a few days back to Xi Jinping. Mao, never used the term to describe himself. The history following the Mao cult- including later the national uprising of 1989, when party elders made Jiang the Communist Party General Secretary, after Zhao Ziyang was purged politically, for policies such as showing sympathy for the 1989 street protesters- made Deng to strengthen Jiang by calling him the uncontested core leader.

Xi’s real power flows from his position as Party’s General Secretary and Head of its Military Commission-which controls the People’s Liberation Army. He assumed both posts in Nov 2012 –four months before he became President.

The US–China Cybersecurity Disconnect

By Robert Potter

November 16, 2016

The relationship between China and cybersecurity is difficult to unpack, mainly because it does not fit traditional interpretations of how a state regulates operations in other, non-cyber domains. Beijing is the subject of significant criticism about cyber threats that originate within China. The United States government has struggled to respond to China’s cybersecurity posture, but the disconnect between the United States and China is exacerbated by two significant differences.

Reason one: Scale is difficult to define.

Taking an accurate accounting of the scale of cyber threats is made difficult by a number of factors. First, companies and governments are often “cyber immature.” This in turn leads to organizations failing to correctly align their postures against the threat environment. In some cases, they may be reluctant to disclose attacks, while in others, the lack of maturity means that threats simply go undetected. This can lead to a false sense of security as silence could be mistaken for inactivity. As such, the problem is difficult to discuss, as few stakeholders appreciate the full context of the cybersecurity landscape. Information is siloed, often within classified documents or within corporate structures. Combine this with patchy communications within organizations about the threat, and setting a correct and proportionate response to cyber threats becomes even more difficult.

Reason two: China sees cybersecurity differently.

Unlike more traditional warfare domains, cyber is not exclusively a government enterprise. Like governments, private companies and other organizations find themselves targets and need to defend against cyber threats. For the average company within the United States, cybersecurity is a business risk and is often treated simply as an extension of traditional physical security. Assets are protected, especially intellectual property and finances.

What Trump Should Do on Nonproliferation

Emily B. LandauShimon Stein

November 15, 2016

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/what-trump-should-do-nonproliferation-18413?page=show

When we set out to draft this article on arms control priorities for the next U.S. administration, it was just before the elections, and we – like many – were operating under the assumption that it would likely be a Clinton administration. As such, the piece was geared to an assessment of current trends, highlighting where we thought the new emphases should be placed by another Democratic administration. Now that we know it will be a Trump administration, there are greater unknowns regarding the president-elect’s foreign policy direction in general, and certainly regarding arms control and nonproliferation. We have nevertheless kept the article as it was, only making some adjustments that relate specifically to themes that were raised by Donald Trump during the campaign.

Arms control, disarmament and nonproliferation efforts that have been pursued over the past fifty years have ranged from efforts focused on weapons of mass destruction themselves and the need to eliminate them across-the-board, to initiatives that recognize the presence of these weapons and attempt instead to focus in the first place on reducing tensions and enhancing stability among states that possess them. In considering these two arms control “ideal types” – namely, focus on the weapons or on the states that possess them – current global developments seem to dictate an arms control approach that favors greater emphasis on states and their relationships. This is due in the main to new and potentially destabilizing U.S.-Russian tensions that have developed over the past decade, and that are already having a negative impact on their bilateral arms control efforts. Continued superpower tensions and conflicting global interests will also impact their ability to effectively confront proliferation challenges in the Middle East in the post-Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) period.

The Losers of Deglobalization

By Pierpaolo Barbieri

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2016-11-13/losers-deglobalization?cid=soc-fb-rdr

Why States Should Fear the Closing of an Open World

The overuse of analogies from the past is the bane of reasonable historians, and perhaps no parallels are more clichéd than ones comparing current events to those of the 1930s. The problem with such analogies, of course, is that history does not repeat itself: not every troubling event should bring to mind the ascent of Adolf Hitler and the path to world war.

Yet the quick succession of the United Kingdom’s vote to leave the European Unionand the election of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency invites comparison to a phenomenon that defined the early 1930s: deglobalization. Hitler aside, the similarities are worth worrying about, since they suggest that when hegemonic states unilaterally scrap their commitments to an open economic order, the consequences extend far beyond their borders, eroding the economic prospects of the world’s poorest countries and global security. 

GLOBALIZATION'S FIRST WAVE

The globalizing trends of the last few decades are far from unprecedented. As the economic historian Harold James has noted, an analogous reprocess took place between the 1880s and the early 1930s, boosting international trade, encouraging the development of emerging markets, and cementing the industrializing United States as one of the world’s key economies.

Greater Balochistan; A Quiet Frontier set to Explode

by Alexander Murray

15-Nov-2016

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/node/2087

As infrastructure projects in Greater Balochistan come to be, governments across South and Central Asia should prepare for what will most likely turn into the region’s next hotbed of violence. Baloch across the region must be included in regional governments’ decision making processes or investors should prepare for the rural ethnic Baloch to thrust their projects into the dustbins of history.

Until they are afforded influential autonomous positions within national, provincial, and local political institutions; until ethnic Baloch can confidently see themselves as equal partners in directing regional development initiatives; until they are tangibly integrated within all growing goods/service distribution networks, direct foreign investment will continues to be a very dangerous undertaking.

Historical Context

Greater Balochistan - southwestern Afghanistan, southeastern Iran, and western Pakistan - has recently encountered a windfall of infrastructure development. As China assists their Pakistani counterparts in constructing and operating the deep-water port of Gwadar, less than 200 kilometers away India and Afghanistan have begun constructing their Iranian equivalent at Chabahar. Both of these projects, and the infrastructure networks emanating from them, are laying the groundwork for a movement of peoples yet unseen in the region.

Though home to a diverse number of ethnicities, this region is populated most heavily by ethnic Baloch, who harbor near no representation in any of the three governments aforementioned. Having waged a rebellion in Pakistan for decades, usually beyond the view of international news media, ethnic Baloch in Afghanistan and Iran have retreated as refugees to foreign lands or faced bleak economic prospects that is their desolate corner of the world.

Battle For Mosul: Prospects For The Immediate Future – Analysis

By Ranjit Gupta*

NOVEMBER 16, 2016

Source Link

A U.S. Army M109A6 Paladin howitzer conducts a fire mission at Qayyarah West Airfield, Iraq, in support of the Iraqi forces’ push toward Mosul, Oct. 17, 2016. The support provided by the Paladin teams denies safe havens to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant while providing Iraqi forces with vital artillery capabilities during their advance. Army photo by Spc. Christopher Brecht

On 17 October 2016, Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Abadi announced the commencement of the battle for Mosul. He also said that except for the Iraqi army, police and security forces, “no others will be allowed to enter Mosul;” Iraqi troops have agreed to stay out of Kurdish territory and the Peshmerga have promised they will not enter Mosul. However, the Iraqi government has little political clout or military capability to enforce this eminently desirable restraining measure in respect of non-state groups. Unexpectedly, rapid advances have been made despite Islamic State (IS) fighters putting up fierce resistance. The IS being defeated and Mosul and Nineveh Provinces being recaptured is now a certainty. Though this would mark the welcome end of a savagery infused and blood soaked episode, it is distinctly possible that another, and longer term, unhappy episode in this northern Iraqi region could begin.

The assault on Mosul is led by the Iraqi army, police and special forces, supported by the Kurdish Peshmerga and backed by US coalition led air strikes and special forces. Additionally, Sunni militias, many trained by/proxies of Turkey, and the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) or Hashd al-Shaabi, composed of approximately 40 predominantly Shia militia groups many of which have close ties to Iran, are also involved, but outside Mosul. Once the common enemy – the IS – is removed from the scene, the centrifugal and competing forces of sectarianism and separatism will inevitably come to the fore. In fact, this may well start happening while the fight against the IS is still underway, even potentially risking an abortion of a successful outcome of the battle.

WILL TURKEY PRESENT TRUMP WITH A FAIT ACCOMPLI IN SYRIA?

AARON STEIN

NOVEMBER 17, 2016

http://warontherocks.com/2016/11/will-turkey-present-trump-with-a-fait-accompli-in-syria/

Just days after the U.S. presidential election, newspapers allied with the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) published stories alleging that elements of the U.S. government would conspire to prevent Donald Trump from governing. Trump, the consensus in the pro-government media held, was a better choice for Turkey: As a billionaire who is outside of the Washington mainstream, he is above influence from members of the Gulen Movement, some of whom gave money to Hillary Clinton’s super-PAC.

The AKP’s de-facto leader, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, was among the first to congratulate President-elect Trump, reportedly inviting him to Turkey to “reset” a relationship filled with tension over Turkish authoritarianism and disagreements over Syria. Trump has signaled that the incoming administration will make considerable changesto the current American strategy in Syria. In preparation, the AKP is busy creating “facts on the ground” for the incoming administration. Turkey is using military force to achieve two interlinked objectives: slow the offensive for Raqqa and take the city of Al-Bab, in order to prevent the linking up of Kurdish-held territory.

These twin efforts have prompted considerable diplomatic outreach to Turkey, both to gauge Ankara’s ultimate intent and to ensure that Turkey and its allies don’t clash too heavily with the Syrian Kurds, an outcome that could spark an expansion of the Syrian civil conflict and harm the U.S.-led air war. These diplomatic efforts, however, only manage a problem that continues to fester. The incoming Trump administration will inherit an air and ground war against the Islamic State that is going well, but a Syrian civil conflict that has grown more complex, partly as a result of Islamic State losing territory.

President-Elect Trump and Turkey’s Presence in Syria

How Will Trump Handle America's Multiple Wars?

GREG MYRE

November 16, 2016

Source Link

President-elect Donald Trump speaks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Charlotte, N.C., on July 26. Trump has no military experience, but will become commander in chief at a time when the U.S. is bombing targets in four separate wars.Evan Vucci/AP

When Donald Trump enters the Oval Office, his presidency will begin with a national security challenge that has no precedent — four separate wars where the U.S. military is bombing Islamist extremists.

Presidential transitions in wartime aren't new, and some earlier conflicts were on a much larger scale. President Obama confronted two major wars on his first day in 2009. President Nixon came into office as the Vietnam War raged. President Truman assumed office when Franklin D. Roosevelt died in the final months of World War II.

But Trump, who has no military or foreign policy experience, will be juggling four distinct conflicts on Day 1 — Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Libya.

The president-elect has made a sweeping pledge to destroy the Islamic State, the main U.S. focus in three of these countries, and a presence in the fourth (Afghanistan). Yet Trump has not offered specifics and his limited statements have been riddled with contradictions.

"We have some great generals. We have great generals," Trump said in his first big post-election interview, with CBS' 60 Minutes, which aired Sunday night.

The next question addressed his campaign claim that he knows more about ISIS than the generals, and Trump promptly undercut the same U.S. officers.

"Well, I'll be honest with you, I probably do, because look at the job they've done. OK, look at the job they've done. They haven't done the job," Trump said. "Now, maybe it's leadership, maybe it's something else. Who knows? All I can tell you is we're going to get rid of ISIS."