U.S. technology also has been critical to enabling China to develop MIRVs. To increase their effectiveness against a larger number of targets, most modern ICBMs are equipped with these MIRV warheads. MIRV delivery requires an advanced warhead "bus" that is able to point and release warheads with precision. Although it does not appear that any stolen or purchased U.S. technology has helped China to develop such a warhead bus, commercial interaction with a U.S. satellite maker did provide China the impetus to build a Smart Dispenser that allows a single space launch vehicle to place multiple satellites in orbit. The technology required for the satellite Smart Dispenser is virtually identical to that needed for a MIRV bus. To date, Motorola has launched 12 of its Iridium communication satellites from China's Long March LM-2C/SD rockets that use the Smart Dispenser bus. According to the Chinese engineer mentioned earlier, the Smart Dispenser project was moribund until it was revived by commercial funding from U.S. firms. The Report of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concludes that commercial interaction with a U.S. company had a "pulling effect" on China's satellite Smart Dispenser program.
Because of its progress in building small, accurate nuclear warheads and its development of a satellite Smart Dispenser that can be converted to a MIRV bus, China now has the option to retrofit its existing 8,000-mile-range DF-5 ICBMs to carry multiple warheads. In fact, the Long March LM-2C/SD used to launch the communication satellites is only a slightly modified DF-5 ICBM. Outfitting China's estimated 26 DF-5s with an 8-warhead MIRV bus would increase the number of nuclear weapons carried by the DF-5s from 26 to 208.
Monday, 31 December 2007
Canadian engines turn up in Chinese attack helicopter
The U.S. State Department said it was investigating how engines made by a Pratt & Whitney subsidiary in Canada turned up in a Chinese attack helicopter.
Pratt & Whitney Canada said last week that 10 engines were sent to China in 2001 and 2002 under a Canadian government export license for use in civilian copters. But the engines, the company said, ended up in prototypes of the Z-10, China's first domestically developed attack copter, designed to carry guided antitank missiles.
While the Canadian government plans no action against Pratt & Whitney over the military diversion, a State Department spokesman, Karl Duckworth, said the U.S. government was continuing an investigation into the company's actions. He declined to provide details, though U.S. export controls prohibit providing certain technology for military use.
It is unclear under what conditions the controls would apply to Pratt & Whitney. Some foreign-made technology uses American components and designs, and Pratt & Whitney is owned by a U.S. company, United Technologies of Hartford, Connecticut.
In an e-mailed statement, Jean-Daniel Hamelin, a spokesman for Pratt & Whitney Canada, said the company was selected by a Chinese aircraft maker in 2000 to provide engines for the civilian variation of a helicopter that was simultaneously being developed for the military. When the company, based near Montreal, applied for an export license, it understood that the Chinese would develop their own engine for the military model, Hamelin wrote.
But, Hamelin added, "the Chinese engine encountered delays, and our engines were used during the development of the common platform." Shipments to China by the company's Canadian unit stopped in 2002. It is unclear why sales were halted.
The Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, which issued the export license, said Friday that it had no concerns about the way the engine sale was handled or the effectiveness of its export control program for technologies with potential military applications.
Pratt & Whitney Canada said last week that 10 engines were sent to China in 2001 and 2002 under a Canadian government export license for use in civilian copters. But the engines, the company said, ended up in prototypes of the Z-10, China's first domestically developed attack copter, designed to carry guided antitank missiles.
While the Canadian government plans no action against Pratt & Whitney over the military diversion, a State Department spokesman, Karl Duckworth, said the U.S. government was continuing an investigation into the company's actions. He declined to provide details, though U.S. export controls prohibit providing certain technology for military use.
It is unclear under what conditions the controls would apply to Pratt & Whitney. Some foreign-made technology uses American components and designs, and Pratt & Whitney is owned by a U.S. company, United Technologies of Hartford, Connecticut.
In an e-mailed statement, Jean-Daniel Hamelin, a spokesman for Pratt & Whitney Canada, said the company was selected by a Chinese aircraft maker in 2000 to provide engines for the civilian variation of a helicopter that was simultaneously being developed for the military. When the company, based near Montreal, applied for an export license, it understood that the Chinese would develop their own engine for the military model, Hamelin wrote.
But, Hamelin added, "the Chinese engine encountered delays, and our engines were used during the development of the common platform." Shipments to China by the company's Canadian unit stopped in 2002. It is unclear why sales were halted.
The Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, which issued the export license, said Friday that it had no concerns about the way the engine sale was handled or the effectiveness of its export control program for technologies with potential military applications.
Tuesday, 25 December 2007
China not ruffled by missile interception
CHINA reacted mildly today to a Japanese naval destroyer's shooting down of a dummy ballistic missile over the Pacific, saying only that it hoped its Asian neighbour would not cause instability in the region.
Japan has been working with the US on missile defence and today shot down the missile in space, becoming the first US ally to accomplish such a feat from a ship at sea.The US and Japan alliance tworries China because of any implications it may have for Taiwan, the self-governed island Beijing claims as its own.
China fears that Japan could help the US defend Taiwan should China use force to try to bring the island under mainland rule.The US switched diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979, recognising "one China", but is obliged by the Taiwan Relations Act to help the island defend itself.
"We have taken note that Japan has reiterated many times it will follow the path of peaceful development," Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said."We also hope that the relevant actions of the Japanese side will be conducive to safeguarding peace and stability in the region," he said.
Asked about reports linking the missile interception to the Taiwan issue, Qin said he could not comment directly."The Taiwan question is China's internal affair," he said.
"China opposes any country meddling in the Taiwan question in any form."The muted response could be due to a pending visit by Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda, who is expected in China in coming weeks for his first visit to the country as leader.
Ties between the two countries, who compete for diplomatic and economic influence in Asia, have improved since an "ice-breaking" visit by Fukuda's predecessor, Shinzo Abe, last year, and a reciprocal trip by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao in April.
But relations remain sensitive to Japan's past militarism and wartime invasion of China, and the two have a long-running dispute over territorial boundaries and natural resources in the East China Sea.
Japan has been working with the US on missile defence and today shot down the missile in space, becoming the first US ally to accomplish such a feat from a ship at sea.The US and Japan alliance tworries China because of any implications it may have for Taiwan, the self-governed island Beijing claims as its own.
China fears that Japan could help the US defend Taiwan should China use force to try to bring the island under mainland rule.The US switched diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979, recognising "one China", but is obliged by the Taiwan Relations Act to help the island defend itself.
"We have taken note that Japan has reiterated many times it will follow the path of peaceful development," Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said."We also hope that the relevant actions of the Japanese side will be conducive to safeguarding peace and stability in the region," he said.
Asked about reports linking the missile interception to the Taiwan issue, Qin said he could not comment directly."The Taiwan question is China's internal affair," he said.
"China opposes any country meddling in the Taiwan question in any form."The muted response could be due to a pending visit by Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda, who is expected in China in coming weeks for his first visit to the country as leader.
Ties between the two countries, who compete for diplomatic and economic influence in Asia, have improved since an "ice-breaking" visit by Fukuda's predecessor, Shinzo Abe, last year, and a reciprocal trip by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao in April.
But relations remain sensitive to Japan's past militarism and wartime invasion of China, and the two have a long-running dispute over territorial boundaries and natural resources in the East China Sea.
China Lake UAV airfield opens
NAWCWD�s Unmanned Systems (US) Technical Project Office (TPO) inaugurated its new unmanned air systems (UAS) operations airstrip when two Raytheon Cobra unmanned air systems lifted off and flew missions at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake on Dec. 13.
�The importance of unmanned systems in the future of warfighting is increasing and China Lake provides an ideal atmosphere to develop and test emerging technologies,� said Michael Keeter, chief engineer in the US TPO. �These first flights with Cobra represent the first fruits of an enduring commitment by NAWCWD to support the weaponization and systems development of small UAS. What we do here in the future will lead to advancements in warfighting capabilities.�
The US TPO is working to weaponize UAS already in existence, and to standardize the concepts, techniques, and integration of weapons, sensors, and targeting technologies that are related to weaponization of future unmanned systems. China Lake offers a great location for collaborating with a variety of companies as well as other government organizations whose goal is to connect weapons with smaller platforms, Keeter said. The US TPO currently has a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement in place with Raytheon.
According to Raytheon officials, the Cobra UAS is just the first step in an evolutionary process.
�Cobra is a test-platform for developing future UAS solutions that support future naval capabilities,� said Don Newman, Raytheon Missile Systems UAS program director. �It has a rugged and reliable airframe that allows us to integrate and test a variety of components to determine whether they advance the capability of new unmanned aircraft systems, such as the Killer Bee. For Raytheon, inaugurating the new airstrip at China Lake is a highly symbolic act that recognizes the importance of continuing to develop and test advanced new unmanned systems for the U.S. Navy.�
The 2,200-by-50-foot asphalt airstrip located at Armitage Field is just one piece of the infrastructure at China Lake created to support the development of unmanned systems. The US TPO also has a state-of-the-art weaponization lab close to the ramp and has recently taken delivery of a mobile command and control lab that will be used to support both operations at the airstrip and remote operations.
�We have a long legacy of skilled engineers at China Lake with vast amounts of experience in weapons related work across the kill chain,� said Andy Corzine, US TPO lead. �We�re taking that knowledge and the advancements in technology and applying it to small weapons on small platforms. Our geographical location and our unique range assets make China Lake a very UAS-friendly location. We�re going to take advantage of that and make some significant contributions to needed warfighting capabilities.�
Monday, 24 December 2007
CHINESE DOCTRINE TOWARDS INDIA'S THREATS
China Doctrine;On a visit on December 2 to the Sino-Indian border, Union defence minister A.K. Antony gave voice to a concern that has been getting reiterated for long by his country's military. "It's an eye-opener," said a shocked Antony, as he toured forward posts in Nathu La. "There is no comparison between the two sides. Infrastructure on the Chinese side is far superior. They have gone far in developing their infrastructure," he told journalists who had flown in with him on the trip.
Even as Antony was expressing his shock and dismay, the Indian army was putting the finishing touches to a new operational doctrine, also known as the conventional war-fighting doctrine, which has made a dramatic new assessment of Chinese capabilities Prepared by the military along with the Integrated Defence Headquarters in consultation with various institutes of the Indian army, the document gives a fair idea of how military India's posture needs to be shaped to take on the new Chinese challenges.
A significant
departure from earlier assessments has been made vis-a-vis China's military capabilities and its ability to mobilise troops. So far, Indian military planners were of the view that it would take the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) at least "two seasons" (three to four months) to fully mobilise for a war against India. While this would mean a "high-intensity conflict" that could involve strategic weapons, the conventional wisdom was that India had the edge in terms of manpower on the border.
But moving away from the "two seasons" build-up theory, the new doctrine concludes that the Chinese could mobilise in just thirty days.This capability is the result of decades of meticulous planning and strategic perception of the Chinese leadership. It built roads and a strategic railway across the Tibetan plateau. The 1,140-km Qinghai-Tibet line, considered the highest railway in the world at 16,640 ft, A depleted eastern command is one of India's worries. Also, most fighting units are stationed in Kashmir.
has come as a wake-up call for military planners in Delhi. The Qinghai-Tibet link with its capacity to carry over 900 troops—that's a battalion strength—in each train has reshaped the way the Indian military looks at Chinese capabilities.
India's planners have always based their estimate of the mobilisation time required by China on the Taiwan factor. China has all along concentrated the bulk of its forces against Taiwan and kept itself in readiness for any "superpower intervention"—that is by the US. Should there be any large-scale operation against India, it would have to divert its troops from Taiwan. The improved infrastructure—roads and the railway line—have rendered earlier Indian estimates outdated. The Chinese can deploy its troops faster than ever before.
Says Brigadier Arun Sahgal (retd), a long-time China-watcher and presently deputy director of research at Delhi's United Services Institution: "As per our estimates, the PLA has over 40 divisions, out of which seven are armoured divisions. Of these, we expect China will be in a position to deploy 20 to 22 divisions against India in quick time." In addition, China has been building up its rapid reaction forces along with its airborne corps. "The greater strategic mobility capability of the Chinese in terms of rapid reaction forces as well as build-up of special forces is what we have to look at very closely," says Sahgal.
The Chinese military has traditionally divided its military into seven designated military regions (MRs), of which two are of concern for India. The Chengdu MR, which primarily faces Arunachal Pradesh, the sensitive Siliguri corridor, Nepal and Bhutan, has nearly 1,80,000 troops on the borders. In the west, the Lanzhou MR faces India's Jammu and Kashmir, and controls Aksai Chin, under Chinese occupation since 1962.
This region has nearly 2,20,000 troops. Both MRs have been strengthened by the modernisation drive of the Chinese military and have added rapid reaction forces as well as specialised units known as the Quantou and Kuaisu units which can launch deep attacks into enemy territory.
Points out Srikant Kondapalli, a professor of China studies at jnu's School of International Studies: "So far India has managed to retain a conventional troop superiority that ranges from 5:1 in certain sectors to as high as a 10:1 ratio." He is quick to point out that this "conventional superiority" is mostly on paper and can be quickly nullified by quick troop mobilisation and with China's missile strength. "The Chinese artillery has a considerable strategic as well as tactical arsenal. However, China does have a "No First Use' policy, and in the event of hostilities, it is likely to replace its nuclear warheads with conventional warheads. Either way, this could prove to be to our disadvantage," he feels.
However, with the coming of the new doctrine, Kondapalli feels that the Indian military has taken a significant step. "A decade ago, the Indian military's doctrine was built around deterring Pakistan and merely dissuading China. With the new doctrine, it has taken a significant step towards deterring China. The success of the Agni-III missile programme has added to this new posture significantly and the sooner we operationalise the missile, the better," he says.
But while the Indian army has conventional superiority on paper, there are other worrying factors. Under the Calcutta-based Eastern Command, the army has three corps which are severely depleted of troops. Most fighting units have been moved to the Kashmir sector over the last 15 years. "In 1990," an army official told Outlook, "we had finalised the Dual Task and Relocation Plan for our fighting formations and decided that it would be relevant for only ten years. But it has been there for nearly two decades. This needs to change." This means that the Kalimpong-based 33 Corps, Tezpur-based 4 Corps and the Dimapur-based 3 Corps will have to increase their troop strengths.
At present, most of 3 Corps is tied up in counter-insurgency operations, while the 27th Division is just returning to the 33 Corps. This division was moved out for Operation Parakram and has been in Jammu and Kashmir ever since. Similarly, the 8 Mountain Division that was moved out in early 1990 continues to be in Kargil as a part of the Leh-based 14 Corps.
While these deployments have to be reconsidered, the new doctrine is a critical update on where the army must position its firepower and its troops. On the whole, it is now left to the ministry of defence to operationalise the doctrine and ensure that India's borders with China are adequately fortified.
Even as Antony was expressing his shock and dismay, the Indian army was putting the finishing touches to a new operational doctrine, also known as the conventional war-fighting doctrine, which has made a dramatic new assessment of Chinese capabilities Prepared by the military along with the Integrated Defence Headquarters in consultation with various institutes of the Indian army, the document gives a fair idea of how military India's posture needs to be shaped to take on the new Chinese challenges.
A significant
departure from earlier assessments has been made vis-a-vis China's military capabilities and its ability to mobilise troops. So far, Indian military planners were of the view that it would take the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) at least "two seasons" (three to four months) to fully mobilise for a war against India. While this would mean a "high-intensity conflict" that could involve strategic weapons, the conventional wisdom was that India had the edge in terms of manpower on the border.
But moving away from the "two seasons" build-up theory, the new doctrine concludes that the Chinese could mobilise in just thirty days.This capability is the result of decades of meticulous planning and strategic perception of the Chinese leadership. It built roads and a strategic railway across the Tibetan plateau. The 1,140-km Qinghai-Tibet line, considered the highest railway in the world at 16,640 ft, A depleted eastern command is one of India's worries. Also, most fighting units are stationed in Kashmir.
has come as a wake-up call for military planners in Delhi. The Qinghai-Tibet link with its capacity to carry over 900 troops—that's a battalion strength—in each train has reshaped the way the Indian military looks at Chinese capabilities.
India's planners have always based their estimate of the mobilisation time required by China on the Taiwan factor. China has all along concentrated the bulk of its forces against Taiwan and kept itself in readiness for any "superpower intervention"—that is by the US. Should there be any large-scale operation against India, it would have to divert its troops from Taiwan. The improved infrastructure—roads and the railway line—have rendered earlier Indian estimates outdated. The Chinese can deploy its troops faster than ever before.
Says Brigadier Arun Sahgal (retd), a long-time China-watcher and presently deputy director of research at Delhi's United Services Institution: "As per our estimates, the PLA has over 40 divisions, out of which seven are armoured divisions. Of these, we expect China will be in a position to deploy 20 to 22 divisions against India in quick time." In addition, China has been building up its rapid reaction forces along with its airborne corps. "The greater strategic mobility capability of the Chinese in terms of rapid reaction forces as well as build-up of special forces is what we have to look at very closely," says Sahgal.
The Chinese military has traditionally divided its military into seven designated military regions (MRs), of which two are of concern for India. The Chengdu MR, which primarily faces Arunachal Pradesh, the sensitive Siliguri corridor, Nepal and Bhutan, has nearly 1,80,000 troops on the borders. In the west, the Lanzhou MR faces India's Jammu and Kashmir, and controls Aksai Chin, under Chinese occupation since 1962.
This region has nearly 2,20,000 troops. Both MRs have been strengthened by the modernisation drive of the Chinese military and have added rapid reaction forces as well as specialised units known as the Quantou and Kuaisu units which can launch deep attacks into enemy territory.
Points out Srikant Kondapalli, a professor of China studies at jnu's School of International Studies: "So far India has managed to retain a conventional troop superiority that ranges from 5:1 in certain sectors to as high as a 10:1 ratio." He is quick to point out that this "conventional superiority" is mostly on paper and can be quickly nullified by quick troop mobilisation and with China's missile strength. "The Chinese artillery has a considerable strategic as well as tactical arsenal. However, China does have a "No First Use' policy, and in the event of hostilities, it is likely to replace its nuclear warheads with conventional warheads. Either way, this could prove to be to our disadvantage," he feels.
However, with the coming of the new doctrine, Kondapalli feels that the Indian military has taken a significant step. "A decade ago, the Indian military's doctrine was built around deterring Pakistan and merely dissuading China. With the new doctrine, it has taken a significant step towards deterring China. The success of the Agni-III missile programme has added to this new posture significantly and the sooner we operationalise the missile, the better," he says.
But while the Indian army has conventional superiority on paper, there are other worrying factors. Under the Calcutta-based Eastern Command, the army has three corps which are severely depleted of troops. Most fighting units have been moved to the Kashmir sector over the last 15 years. "In 1990," an army official told Outlook, "we had finalised the Dual Task and Relocation Plan for our fighting formations and decided that it would be relevant for only ten years. But it has been there for nearly two decades. This needs to change." This means that the Kalimpong-based 33 Corps, Tezpur-based 4 Corps and the Dimapur-based 3 Corps will have to increase their troop strengths.
At present, most of 3 Corps is tied up in counter-insurgency operations, while the 27th Division is just returning to the 33 Corps. This division was moved out for Operation Parakram and has been in Jammu and Kashmir ever since. Similarly, the 8 Mountain Division that was moved out in early 1990 continues to be in Kargil as a part of the Leh-based 14 Corps.
While these deployments have to be reconsidered, the new doctrine is a critical update on where the army must position its firepower and its troops. On the whole, it is now left to the ministry of defence to operationalise the doctrine and ensure that India's borders with China are adequately fortified.
Nuclear war between iran and israel
a doomsday scenario that we all fear deeply. A new study compiled by the US Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), headed by former Pentagon analyst Anthony H. Cordesman, explored just such a nightmare scenario, noting that it could lead to the death of between 16- 28 million Iranian civilians, and 200-800 thousand Israelis.
This hypothetical, research-oriented study also explored other contingencies for unconventional warfare in our region, noting the tactics that various countries could potentially employ in such instances.
As pertains to nuclear warfare, the study found that an Israeli nuclear scrimmage with Iran would most likely last for about three weeks. Aside from the aforementioned direct casualties, the study could not determine how many additional long-term casualties would arise from fallout and radiation in the weeks and months following such an attack.
One essential requirement for nuclear confrontation in our region, according to the study, is allowing Iran’s nuclear program to develop, unhindered by a pre-emptive strike by either Israel or the United States. If US or Israeli preemption does not occur, the study found, Iran could very well have 30 nuclear warheads available for warfare between 2010-2020. Israel, by comparison, currently has 200 nuclear war heads with both air and sea launch capabilities, according to the study.
Israeli missiles have greater strike range
The bottom line, according to this study, is that Israel quite simply has more potent and effective bombs. Israel currently has a 1megaton (mt) nuclear bomb, whereas Iran does not yet have the ability to develop a bomb with more than 100 kilotons of power. What this means, in essence, is that the Israeli bomb can lead to three times as many casualties as its Iranian counterpart (chiefly due to third-degree burns), and has an “area of extreme lethality” (the range within which a nuclear bomb is fatal) ten-times as great.
Which Israeli cities are most likely to be targeted by Iran? Tel-Aviv and central Israel (all the way down to Ashdod) are the most likely targets, as is Haifa. Israel, conversely, has more than 10 Iranian cities on its “hit list” including Tehran, Tabriz, Isfahan, Qazvin, Shiraz, Yazd, Kerman, Qom, Ahvaz, and Kermanshah.
Cordseman also noted that Iran would have lower fission yields, and less accurate force into cluster targeting on Israel’s two largest urban complexes, and that the Iranian side would also most likely be thwarted by Israel’s missile defense systems. Notable among these is the “Arrow 2” anti-ballistic missile which could most potentially shoot down most nuclear missiles launched by Iran.
Furthermore, Israel could strike Iran with far grater accuracy and precision, hitting its cities with deadly aim utilizing both its own satellites, as well as those of the Unitedstates.
Friday, 14 December 2007
chinese war strategy towards India
china war startegy
china army form tibet and burma side,
china airore on startegic bases of india,
china subs form bangldesh and arabia ,
terroist from kashimr and bangladesh,
ma form nepal and interior india.
This is the latest war strategy of China towards India.As far as I think Indian defence is not at all week to repeat 1962.But the problem is lying with poltical side.If the present govt still takes in cool manner telling "HINDU CHINY BHAI BHAI",def 1962 will repeat.I request them to take serious action so that China should not even think to invade India or try to grab its intrests.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)