Interviews with Admiral Arun Prakash

Shiv Aroor has published a series of insightful interviews with Admiral Arun Prakash, who he rightly refers to as “one of the most articulate and admired military chiefs of our time” on his blog:

Admiral Arun Prakash on the China Threat:

“Our dilemma vis-à-vis China is two-fold. On the one hand, we need to moderate the school of thought within the political establishment (encouraged no doubt by exhortations from the Left), which focuses exclusively on China's declarations about her “peaceful rise”. Indulging in a great deal of naive self-delusion, this school points to the ongoing dialogue and the dramatic increase in bilateral Sino-Indian trade, which is pushing the US$20 billion mark, as proof of China's good intentions.

On the other hand, our strategic establishment has to make a hard headed assessment and find answers to three straight questions before we decide on the future course of Sino-Indian relations: What is the rationale behind China's "string of pearls" strategy through which she has assiduously and neatly encircled India with states which are either her clients or beholden to her for economic and weapons related assistance?”

Admiral Arun Prakash On The New Indo-US Strategic Partnership:

“In international relations you cannot go wrong if you proceed on the basis of two premises: It is not altruism but self-interest that invariably motivates nations. There are no free lunches, and a price will one day have to be paid for everything. And, when you negotiate in the big league, you should be prepared to play hard ball.”

Admiral Arun Prakash on What Platforms The Future Indian Navy Needs:

“Navies have, for centuries, been accepted and used as instruments of diplomacy and state policy. Therefore, unlike the other Services, they derive their raison d’etre not merely from a nation’s maritime security, but from its larger economic interests and geo-political aspirations.”

Admiral Arun Prakash on DRDO, Obsolesence and Self-Reliance:

“We were fortunate that the seeds of a self-reliant blue water Navy were sown by our farsighted predecessors when they embarked on the brave venture of undertaking warship construction in India four decades ago. Since then, our shipyards have done very well to have delivered more than 85 ships and submarines, many of Indian design, to the IN.”

Admiral Arun Prakash on the Need For Nuclear Submarines:

“I must convey with all the emphasis at my command that in India’s case nuclear weapons are NOT meant for war-fighting. In fact they must not even be thought of as “weapons”, but as “political instruments” of state policy to be used to deter an enemy from contemplating a nuclear attack, and if required for persuasion, coercion, or compellence.”

For the full interviews, head over to LiveFist - this material is solid gold.

Pakistan’s JF-17 Thunder – An Analysis

On March 23 2007, two JF-17 “Thunder” fighters took to the skies for the first time in Pakistan as a part of the Pakistan Day celebrations. Touted to be Pakistan's first home made fighter, the JF-17 is expected to be the Pakistan Air Force's frontline fighter well into the future. With this article, I’ve made an attempt to examine the JF-17 in the Indo-Pak context. But first, some background information on the program.

The program began in 1986 as the Super-7, when China signed a $550 million deal with Grumman to modernise its fleet of J-7 (MiG-21s manufactured in China under license) fighters. The United States ceased technical assistance following the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989, and the project almost ground to a halt. However, Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation (CAC) managed to keep the program alive with its own resources, as the FC-1. The project got a new lease of life in 1999, when Pakistan and China signed an agreement to “jointly” develop and produce the FC-1 with both countries contributing 50% of the funds. Russia’s Mikoyan Aero-Science Production Group provided technical assistance. The FC-1 (Designated JF-17 “Thunder” by Pakistan) was supposed to be a lightweight all-weather multi-role fighter, which would replace Pakistan’s fleet of Mirage-III, F-7, and A-5 aircraft, whose safety record is going downhill by the day. The Pakistani version would sport a Western avionics suite, which included the Italian Galileo Avionica Grifo S7 radar, a variant of which is already in service with the Pakistan Air Force on its F-7 fighters. It would be powered by one Russian Klimov RD-93 turbofan. The “Aviation Week & Space Technology” magazine reported in November 2006 that “Pakistani officials expect the first contract for 16 aircraft (split equally with China) to be awarded next year, with deliveries as early as 2007. A full-rate production contract would follow around 2009. Initially, Pakistan will provide 58% of the parts, but that is supposed to increase gradually to 100%.” The overall Pakistani requirement is expected to be around 150 fighters.

Although the Pakistanis tried to demonstrate with the Pakistan Day flypast that everything was tickety-boo, this is far from the truth. The Western avionics are nowhere to be seen, and supplier decisions do not appear to have been made. Radar integration, a challenging job under the best of circumstances, seems to have run into problems. The task is complicated in no small part by the lack of space available in the JF-17’s radome. It is now widely claimed that the first batch of Pakistani JF-17s will be equipped with Chinese avionics and radar. The weapons package is yet to be finalised. While China is expected to push its PL-9 dogfight missile and the yet untested SD-10 beyond visual range air to air missile, the South Africans have reportedly offered their A-Darter and T-Darter missiles. In January 2007, the head of the Russian Defence Ministry's International Cooperation Department, Colonel-General Anatoly Mazurkevich, announced that Russia had “denied China the right to supply its JF-17 fighter aircraft powered by Russian RD-93 engines to third countries, asking it to sign an end-user certificate for the engines”. In Indian circles, this was taken to be a total Russian denial. Sinodefence.com, a Chinese military website reports that while five RD-93s have been purchased to power the prototypes, an agreement on the further purchase and re-export of the engine is still pending. To make things worse, the Chinese have yet to make any firm commitments, and appear to have lost interest in inducting the FC-1, preferring the more capable J-10 instead.

Given development time-frame and mission profile, comparisons between the JF-17 and India’s “Tejas” light combat aircraft are inevitable. But similarities, if any, are merely superficial. The Tejas, meant to replace India’s massive fleet of MiG-21s, is a wholly different project as far as technology is concerned. Its airframe, made of advanced carbon fibre composites, is light years ahead of the Thunder’s all-metal airframe. The ADA, HAL, and NAL invested considerable time, effort, and resources in its development, and came up with what is arguably one of the finest airframes in the world. The same goes for the Tejas’ aerodynamics which, because of the compound delta-wing, extensive wing-body blending, and low wing loading are superior to those of the Thunder, which has a more conventional layout along the lines of the MiG-21, the F-16, and a rejected Soviet light fighter design. As far as flight dynamics and control go, the Tejas, with its relaxed static stability and quadruplex, full authority fly-by-wire digital flight control system, is far more advanced than the Thunder, which still features conventional controls (fly-by-wire exists only for pitch control). The Tejas then, is a state of the art combat aircraft which will be India’s first step towards self-reliance. Program wise, it is more comparable to the Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Rafale, considering not just the technology involved, but also the scope of the project. In the light of this argument, its longer timeline is hardly surprising. But the Thunder, despite Pakistan’s best efforts to package it as “indigenous”, is anything but. Pakistan’s contribution to the design and development of the project is close to nothing. Even today, the plane does not sport any Pakistani systems. It is at best a cheap and low/medium-tech Chinese aircraft that Pakistan can mass produce. As Siva, a contributor on Bharat Rakshak points out, the JF-17 is more comparable to the HJT-36 Sitara intermediate jet trainer – since both have an all-metal airframe, conventional controls, and an externally sourced engine. And the Sitara was developed even faster than the Thunder.

This is not to say that the JF-17 is a bad aircraft. It will serve a very important purpose by giving Pakistan valuable experience in fighter aircraft manufacturing. It will help Pakistan rid itself of dependence on American weapons. It will give the flagging Pakistan Air Force a shot in the arm by beefing up numbers and providing it with decent beyond visual range combat capability. Dismissing it as “worthless” would be nothing short of stupid. My friend and aviation enthusiast Kartik sums it up beautifully: “If the Pakistanis integrate even a medium performance radar and use the SD-10 with it, it is a big threat to the Indian Air Force – just look at the MiG-21 Bison to see what an underestimated fighter can turn out to be. The Sukhoi Su-30K was also found to be a poor aircraft when the IAF first evaluated it, and then after all sweat and toil put into getting its avionics in place and the thrust vector controls, the Su-30MKI is a completely different beast! I somehow fear that the JF-17 shouldn’t prove to be a fighter that makes the Fulcrums, Mirages, Bisons almost on-par or just a little superior. Which is why the IAF needs a true fourth generation fighter to stay ahead – both airframe wise as well as avionics wise.”

Shiv Aroor has also posted this article on his blog.

Enter the Republican Guard

The pictures of the 10^th Parachute Regiment jogging down Rajpath while chanting some slogan on Republic Day left me stunned. Till date, such hoo-haa drills were the sole preserve of the Pakistanis and other Middle Eastern riff-raff. Why, oh why, have we decided to emulate the cartoon-like antics of the crappiest of chest-thumping Armies? Armies that have an impeccable combat record only against innocent women and children? Armies that have been taken to the cleaners time and again by real soldiers?

The Indian armed forces always always spoke softly and carried a big stick. It was in keeping with this trend that the ridiculous goose-stepping at Wagah was done away with. So what in God’s good name were the concerned authorities trying to achieve with this jumping-jack tamasha?

2006: The Year Russia Schooled The West

I found the following article on “The eXile”, which is a Moscow based... uhh... "newspaper" (for want of a better word). The views expressed do not necessarily coincide with my own. But the staff at The eXile has done a helluva job! A must read, this article is!

This past year was a watershed both for Russia and for Russia's detractors alike. As they used to say after 9/11, "everything's changed." Although not exactly how the West imagined it.

For the first time since Mikhail Gorbachev launched his doomed Perestroika reforms, Russia returned to its rightful place as the White World's Bogeyman, annoying the living shit out of every self-righteous, sexually-frustrated Western missionary with its mixture of menace and mo'. Playing up its new role as something like a cross between Bugs Bunny, the Tasmanian Devil, and P Diddy, Russia is now officially "confident," the biggest sin a country could possibly commit if said country attained its confidence while mooning the West.

In this end-of-the-year issue of The eXile, we look back at 2006: The Year Russia Schooled The West. And looking back at each major event as if it was a university course, we issue Russia its bestest, and most-annoyingest, report card ever.

Below is Russia's report card in each subject in which it competed with The West. We at the eXile hope that by reprinting this report card in an open and transparent manner, that the lessons learned will assist all of us in the New Year.

Read further...

The "Failure" That is DRDO

It’s official. The DRDO is a DODO. The Arjun tank is a no-show. The Tejas Light Combat Aircraft still is nowhere near completion in spite of being in development since 1983. The Prithvi missile is already obsolete. The Agni-III fell into the sea during its very first test. The air-force wouldn’t touch the Akash with a ten foot pole. India would certainly be better off without the DRDO, which has done nothing except consume ridiculous amounts of money with no positive output. At least this is what the Indian English-language media would have you believe. I am, of course, referring to the Indian Express’ eight-part exposé on the DRDO, which is one of the most stunning examples of journalistic crap I’ve seen coming from the Indian media in a long time. As if obfuscation and baseless comparisons weren’t enough, the Express has resorted to printing outright lies under the garb of investigative journalism. Because of lack of time and space, I’ve trashed only three of these articles in this post.

1) 6,000 cr wasted, 10-yr delay & they want 150,000 cr more

Quite unsurprisingly, the first article of the series is the standard anti-DRDO rant. It seems to me that the Indian Express has a bone to pick with the DRDO. They have apparently missed the plethora of projects that the DRDO has successfully delivered. The Agni Missiles, the Akash SAM's 3D Central Acquisition Radar, the Rajendra Radar (shown right), the Battlefield Surveillance Radar, the MiG-27 and Jaguar upgrades and the Samyukta and Sangraha Electronic Warfare systems are just a few examples of the DRDO's successful endeavours. This article only focuses on the negative aspects of the LCA and the Arjun.

Moeover, the way Amitav Ranjan and Shiv Aroor have compared the DRDO to its Chinese counterparts just goes to show how little they know about defence research in India. It is not the DRDO’s fault that the government doesn’t pour millions of dollars into defence research, as the Chinese do. It is not the DRDO’s fault that the Air Force and Army want world-class products that are also inexpensive and able to keep up with their whimsical requirements.

2) Armed Forces wait as showpiece missiles are unguided, way off mark

Ranjan and Aroor claim that “former deputy director of the Prithvi project and now DRDO’s chief controller of missiles and strategic systems Dr. V. K. Saraswat’s report RCI/PGT/PGM/1 admits: “Accuracy of missiles like Prithvi is acceptable in surface-to-surface theatre role, but precision strike without collateral damage is not possible with this system.”” I simply cannot bring myself to believe that someone of Dr. Saraswat’s stature could make such a childish statement. Ballistic missiles aren’t designed for precision strike. Their precision is measured in terms of the Circular Error Probable (CEP), which is defined as the radius of a circle into which a missile will land at least half the time. And the CEP of the Prithvi-I (10-75 metres) and Prithvi-II are comparable to similar missiles. The job of precision strike is better left to the precision guided munitions fielded by the Air Force and cruise missiles.

Also notice the way they imply that the Agni-III is a failure, because it “plunged into the sea after just five minutes of flight in July”. What they don’t mention is that such high-tech missiles do fail on their first test flights, as the American MX-774, or Russia’s latest Bulava SLBM did. That is certainly not a reason to just give up on their development, because, last I knew, no country was ready to violate the Missile Technology Control Regime to provide India with a long-range ballistic missile capable of carrying nuclear weapons.

Another ridiculous claim by the two journalists is about how “an exasperated IAF, which calls Phase-I user trials (of the Akash SAM) unsatisfactory, has decided to buy Israeli Spyder missile systems instead”. This, when it is known that the short-ranged Spyder is supposed to make up for the lack of the Trishul.

But this one takes the cake: “Saraswat’s report calls for integrating Nag’s seeker with Prithvi to make the latter a precision-guided munition (PGM) but that hasn’t worked either”. Anyone with basic knowledge of missile guidance would know that simply bolting an IIR seeker of an anti-tank missile onto a hulking big ballistic missile which flies many times faster and wishing it would turn it into a fantabulously cool PGM is nothing short of stupid.

3) Arjun, Main Battle Tanked

This article is a perfect example of how, through selective reporting and obfuscation, one can trash a perfectly fine product, and make it look inferior to what can be bought in the Chor Bazaar for half the price. The two “journalists”, while glibly proclaiming how “the T-90, a far superior tank, can kill the Arjun” don’t elaborate on exactly how they arrived at this conclusion. I suppose they have access to the results of Arjun v/s T-90 tests in different scenarios, because, as a professional journalist, I would have balked at making such apparently baseless statements without solid proof. But then again, this is the Indian media we are talking about. They claim that the Arjun weighs much more than the T-90 without attempting to explain where all the extra weight comes from. My logic tells me that the Arjun has heavier and superior armour. So do many reputed publications. Maybe the American M1A1, the German Leopard-II, and the British Challenger-II are horrible tanks too. In fact, they are even heavier than the Arjun! But the Pakistani Al-Khalid, being the lighter tank, is obviously superior! Going by that logic, the answer to our troubles lies in (hold your breath) the venerable Maruti-800! It has everything the DDM claims the Arjun lacks. It is cheap, mobile, light, air-conditioned, and nimbler than the vaunted T-90. Plus, with our present railway infrastructure we can easily carry it to border areas. Sure, the Arjun trounces the Maruti-800 (and the T-90) when it comes to sheer firepower, armour, crew protection, crew comfort, and electronics. But since when have these things been important?

The Express also makes a big fuss about how the temperature inside the Arjun reaches an “abnormal” 55 degrees. But it fails to mention the reason why this happens. After all, the DRDO had offered an air-conditioned Arjun to the Army, but the latter rejected the idea. So, is the temperature problem the fault of the Army or the DRDO? And the T-90 has faced problems with high interior temperatures too - its thermal imagers packed up in the blistering heat of the Thar. It was unable to fire the Reflecks missile until quite recently. The engine had its own problems. So why was it accepted with such alacrity? Why was it not subject to rigorous testing the way the Arjun was? Why was the Arjun supposed to be a tank that was heavily armoured, comfortable, fast, small, light, and cheap at the same time? Why was it subjected to continuously changing goalposts? Why does everyone seem to suffer from memory loss when one mentions how the initial requirements, which called for a relatively simple 40-ton tank to replace the Vijayanta, were changed when Pakistan decided to acquire the formidable M1A1 Abrams? Maybe Ranjan and Aroor, in their infinite wisdom, would like to tell us how the DRDO (or anyone else for that matter) can design such a tank in a short span of time.

Generally speaking, the writers seem to have spent all their time coming up with creative titles for each part of the series, rather than doing what they are paid to do – report the facts as they are. Adding insult to injury is the fact the Indian Express has spoken of DRDO's apparently non-existent accountablity, while they themselves are accountable to no one. The DRDO will not sue them for libel. The goverment will make a few noises about how things have to be improved. The educated public, which knows squat about defence, will feel proud of our “free” and “empowered” media, which in reality, thrives on lies, half-truths, and sensationalism. All of which reminds me of the Michael Jackson number, “Tabloid Junkie”

It’s slander
You say it's not a sword
But with your pen you torture men
You'd crucify the Lord

Recommended reading material on the DRDO:

• The DRDO Webpage
• DRDO on Wikipedia - This page contains a list of most (if not all) successful DRDO projects.
• India developing new missiles Towards destroying hostile missiles
• An excellent three part series on the DRDO by rediff
• The Army and the Arjun Experiment - Lt. Gen Niranjan Malik, PVSM (Retd.)
  

Book Review: The Writing on the Wall - India Checkmates America 2017

I'm currently reading "The Writing on the Wall - India Checkmates America 2017" by General Padmanabhan (Retd). It would be an understatement to call this book a disappointment. The grammar couldn't be worse, tenses are all wrong in half the paragraphs, spelling mistakes make their presence felt from time to time, there are too many "Given the right chance, Indians are second to none" cliches, and conversations (even the informal ones) between the characters are too dry and full of diplomat-ese to make them seem believable. Some parts of this book come across as political essays rather than chapters of a novel, and completely mess up the flow of the story. As if all this were not bad enough, the portrayal of politicians as resolute patriots who put the country before the party, the absence of inter-departmental rivalries, the development of a super-duper missile-defence shield by India which defends the country against a salvo of Tomahawk missiles launched by the USA, and the way in which things just fall into place for India make this book as believable as one of Karan Johar's movies. The shrill anti-American rhetoric only serves to make things worse.

But then again, there are some parts of the book that are so insightful and well-crafted, that they could only be penned by the hands of a seasoned soldier like General Padmanabhan. He illustrates very well what a determined India with a resolute and focused leadership and workforce is capable of achieving. His description of a "National Agenda" and a "National Defence Plan", research under military science & technology establishments free of corruption and bureaucratic hassles, the handling of internal unrest which results in peace in Nagaland, Manipur and Assam, and the Indian retaliation against Pakistani attacks hold many lessons for the country. But these scenarios are few and far in between, and given the current state of our politics, hardly realistic.

All in all, this is the kind of book one would expect Tarun Tejpal (of Bunker 13 "fame") to write. Coming from an ex Army Chief, and a very good Chief, I must say, this book is a huge let-down.

Disgusting!

I am utterly disgusted at the way everyone, including the government and the media, has gone overboard labelling the terrorists responsible for the Mumbai blasts as “cowardly”. I really wonder as to how entering a hostile foreign country, planting bombs in the lifeline of the economic capital, murdering close to two hundred people, and escaping without hardly a trace is a cowardly act. Rather, it is the Government of India that has set new standards in cowardice by using the standard weak-kneed response of “condemning the blasts”, “appealing for calm”, and “not letting this incident derail the peace process”. All this becomes doubly frustrating when one reads about a tiny country like Israel going on an all-out offensive against Hamas to rescue one of its kidnapped soldiers.

Also appalling is the all-round praise of the common Mumbaikar’s “spirit”, and “resilience” in getting life back on line, which in reality is a manifestation of our notorious “don’t care attitude”. While the alacrity with which the citizens of Mumbai came out to help the injured deserves nothing but the highest level of tribute, the reaction of these very citizens to the killings is hardly anything to be proud of. After the 9/11 attacks, New Yorkers stood united and demanded retribution. I wonder when Mumbaikars will do the same.

Women in the Armed Forces - Random Thoughts

Lt. Sushmita Chakraborty’s tragic suicide a few days ago has raised many questions about the status and treatment of women in the Indian Army. Add to that the Army Vice Chief Lt General Pattabhiraman’s remark which was totally taken out of context and blown out of proportion by the Desi Dork Media, and one has all the ingredients of a full-blown controversy just waiting to explode. My thoughts on the issue:

1. The Indian Army has been a male-only institution for a long time. There are bound to be problems with the integration of women, more so in combat units. These problems are not insurmountable, but they won't go away immediately. The US Navy, especially Naval Aviation, had similar problems with women. There was dissent and opposition, which ultimately culminated into the infamous “Tailhook Incident”. If the US – a country where women are treated at par with men in almost all walks of life – has faced such problems, India is bound to face more.
2. Being Army officers, women are expected to be tough. They are supposed to be given training equivalent to what the men receive, because once the bullets start flying, the enemy won't give a hoot about the gender of a soldier before killing him or her. Being brought up in an environment where they are taught to be “weak”, many of these women obviously face a tough time in the Army and burn out. Insufficient training doesn’t exactly help matters. At the Officer’s Training Academy, Chennai the training duration for women is 24 weeks while for the men it is 44 weeks. During other training activities such as cross-country runs, route marches etc., women cover less than half the distance with half the weight as compared to men.
3. The enemy we face is hardly gentlemanly when it comes to combat and treatment of POWs. For them, the Rules of War and the Geneva Conventions are mere pieces of toilet paper. Therefore the top brass believes, and rightly so, that women serving in combat units is a bad idea. The enemy mutilated the bodies of six Indian soldiers in Kargil. I shudder to think what would have happened to these soldiers had they been women.
4. Imagine that a woman soldier has been held hostage by a terrorist group. What kind of political/media pressure would be exerted on the government/Army to get her out? Wouldn't it severely limit their options for negotiations? Would there be a big hullabaloo if she were killed or tortured? The shit would really hit the fan then, wouldn't it?

That said, I firmly believe that given the given the right chance, Indian women will no doubt prove their worth in the armed forces. One cannot forget the exemplary courage shown by Flying Officer Gunjan Saxena, who had flown her Cheetah helicopter in extremely hostile terrain to retrieve injured soldiers in the Kargil War. But the country's outlook towards women as a whole has to change too to enable better participation and performance of women in the armed forces. Moreover, one should remember that one suicide by a lady officer cannot be the basis on which the Army’s attitude towards women can be judged. There could be several reasons that led to the suicide – reasons that could be personal or professional. That does not give anyone the right to make armchair judgements about either the Army, or Lt. Chakraborty. Comments by self-serving politicians and mediawallahs are highly unwelcome.

21st Century... No Fox!

On May1, 2006, the Indian Air Force bid farewell to one of its most coveted and hush-hush assets – the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25RB “Foxbat”, known in the Air Force as “Garuda”. With the departure of the Foxbat, the Indian Air Force will not only lose its fastest aircraft, but also its premier spyplane – an aircraft that served it very well for over twenty-five years. Indeed, it would be very difficult to find an Air Force officer who disagrees with Wing Commander Sanjeev Taliyan, who once commanded the MiG-25 squadron, when he says, “No aircraft has ever been able to achieve for us what the Foxbat has. We will miss flying them.” Shiv Aroor of the Indian Express has written an excellent article on the topic.

In the 1950s, the United States began development of the North American XB-70 “Valkyrie” high-altitude bomber with a top speed of Mach 3. The Valkyrie never saw service, but the fighter that was intended to intercept it did. The Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25 “Foxbat” first flew in 1964, and entered service with the Voenno-Vozdushniye Sily (Soviet Air Force) in 1969. With a top speed of Mach 3, a ceiling of more than 90,000ft, and an astonishing climb rate (According to think tank globalsecurity.org, a MiG-25 can take off and climb to an altitude of 114,000ft in a little over four minutes), the VVS had an interceptor the West simply couldn’t match. To put these figures into perspective, let me state that some of the best fighter aircraft of its era, like the F-4 Phantom II, the MiG-23 "Flogger" and even later aircraft like the F-16 Fighting Falcon, the Mirage-2000, and the MiG-29 "Fulcrum" struggle to reach Mach 2.5 and cannot fly above 60,000 feet. It remained an enigmatic and much-feared aircraft in the West, until a Soviet pilot, Lt. Viktor Balenko defected with one to Japan in 1976. The detailed examination it was subjected to dispelled much of the aura of invincibility surrounding the Foxbat. It was found that in spite of the speed and altitude at which it flew, the MiG-25 was mostly constructed out of steel, with titanium and aircraft aluminium being used only in some heat-critical areas. Welding was done by hand, and rivet heads were exposed in places they did not affect aerodynamic drag. Most of the on-board electronics, including the radar, consisted of vacuum tubes. The radar itself was not as sophisticated as Western radars and lacked the “look-down shoot-down” capability essential for tracking and shooting down low-flying targets. Though a speed of Mach 3.2 was achievable, the engines would burn up and require replacement if pushed beyond Mach 2.8.

However, the MiG-25 also had some clear virtues from the outset. It was quintessentially a Soviet aircraft, being relatively inexpensive, rugged, reliable, easy to maintain, and straightforward to operate. It was representative of MiG’s philosophy of building world-class fighter aircraft using decade-old technology. The RP-25 “Smerch” 500kW radar could burn through heavy jamming, and had a detection range of 100 kilometres. In fact, pilots were not allowed to engage it on the ground, and it is said that this radar was powerful enough to kill rabbits near the runway. Also, many engineers claim that the much-ridiculed vacuum tube electronics are perfectly practical and cost-effective for high-power microwave applications, and are less susceptible to radiation in case of a nuclear attack.

India acquired twelve MiG-25 aircraft from the USSR in 1980 for “strategic reconnaissance” over Pakistan, China, and some other very interesting countries. At that time, India did not have the capability to penetrate deep into Pakistani and Chinese airspace and take pictures of their military installations. Of these twelve Foxbats, ten were reconnaissance/bomber versions, (MiG-25RB), while two were conversion trainers with two separate cockpits (MiG-25U). These aircraft formed the No. 102 “Trisonics” squadron, based at Bareilly. However, more recently, only four of these have remained in service, with No. 35 “Rapiers” squadron. According to the Indian Air Force website, “the aircraft is equipped with a number of electromagnetic-spectrum sensors along with a larger and more capable Side-Looking Airborne Radar (SLAR) than the older MiG-25”. It also comes with “two left-to-right rotating cameras with a focal length of 650mm and/or 1300mm, which can be fitted in the three interchangeable camera bays located in the nose cone of the aircraft. The two cameras shoot through two port and two starboard windows, and a vertical camera with a shorter focal length is located under the cockpit to take horizon-to-horizon shots.” While interceptor versions of the MiG-25 carried four air-to-air missiles, the MiG-25R has no defensive armament of its own, nor is it equipped with advanced countermeasures against air-to-air or surface-to-air missiles. Instead, it relies on its high cruising altitude and blinding speed to escape enemy air-defences. Indeed, there are few things in the world that can bring down a Foxbat doing Mach 2.8 at an altitude of 90,000 feet.

After entering service, the Foxbats have been said to routinely intrude into hostile airspace to spy on enemy facilities. They were used in Operation Pawan (Sri Lanka), Operation Brass Tacks (Rajasthan desert – 1987), and Operation Safed Sagar (Kargil – 1999). During Brass Tacks, the Air Chief Marshal, Dennis La Fontaine, proposed that the Foxbat be used to spy on Pakistani armoured movements – an idea shot down by Rajeev Gandhi. During the Kargil War, MiG-25s were extensively used for aerial reconnaissance after a relatively low-flying Canberra suffered damage after being hit by a hand-held surface-to-air missile while photographing Pakistani positions. And while most of the Foxbat’s exploits remain shrouded in secrecy, one incident did manage to make headlines. In 1997, an Indian Air Force MiG-25 broke the sound barrier over Islamabad while returning from a reconnaissance mission, causing a huge sonic boom. Resembling a series of explosions, the sound caused the residents of Islamabad to panic, and alerted Pakistani air defences into action. A few F-16s were scrambled from Sargodha, but they could do little to intercept an aeroplane flying well above 65,000 feet at a speed greater than Mach 2. The Pakistani foreign minister stated that the Pakistani Air Force did not have anything in their inventory to intercept aircraft flying at that height. Some in the PAF also said that their F-16s had an operational ceiling of 55,000 feet, which was insufficient to intercept the Foxbat. Many in the Pakistani establishment considered the breaking of the sound barrier to be deliberate – to prove that the PAF did not have the capability to intercept the Foxbat.

However, there is a limit to which an airframe can be flogged, and as Wing Commander Ashok Chauhan of the Rapiers Squadron puts it, “we can push our Foxbats for another 2-3 years, but after three life extensions, it’s prudent to retire them now”. There is little doubt that the retirement of the MiG-25RB has left a gaping hole in India’s capability to spy on Pakistan and China with impunity. There are many who claim that Indian intelligence needs are being catered to by spy satellites like the Technology Experiment Satellite (with one metre resolution), which is why the acquisition of high-altitude spy planes is not on the top of the list of priorities for the Defence Ministry. However, spy satellites have certain limitations – limitations which can be overcome only by spy planes like the MiG-25RB or the SR-71 “Blackbird”. Spy satellites follow a predictable path which permits limited deviation, and there is only a small window of time to gather data. This makes them easy to "fool", something India managed to do to US satellites while preparing for its nuclear tests in Pokhran. The US, clearly the top dog when it comes to such satellites, was found groping in the dark when India finally detonated the devices. Moreover, the utility of satellite photographs is affected by the time of the day – photographs taken at noon are preferred to those taken late in the evening, when long shadows might hide important details. Spy planes, on the other hand, can overfly enemy territory whenever and wherever required, making it difficult for the enemy to hide stuff from them. Also, spy planes can collect air samples from the test sites of nuclear and other weapons - something satellites may never be able to do. There are reports that Russia had offered the MiG-31 “Foxhound” (shown right), a heavily modernised MiG-25 to India in a buy back offer. With better engines, an insanely powerful look-down shoot-down radar, better reliability, and vastly improved low altitude performance, the MiG-31 seems to be just what the doctor ordered for the Air Force. Fitted with state-of-the-art surveillance equipment and sensors, the yet non-existent reconnaissance version of the MiG-31 is sure to meet India’s strategic reconnaissance needs for at least the next twenty years. While purchase and maintenance costs will be very high, the information obtained would surely justify the expenses. Moreover, with India’s economy going great guns, acquisition of these birds won’t put a major strain on our resources, the Multi Role Combat Aircraft, Scorpene, and Gorshkov deals notwithstanding.

The Laughing Stock of the World

On December 8, the 2005 meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Conference came to an end. The purpose of the summit was purportedly to reject extremism, condemn terrorism, extol the virtues of tolerance and stress the importance of the protection of human rights. Frankly, I find this laughable. Let us see why I find the OIC to be such a big joke:

First, let us start with the name of the organisation itself. Organisation of Islamic Conference? What the hell does that mean? Organisation of Islamic Countries, I can understand, but this? It either makes no sense, or my English sucks, although I have a sneaking suspicion that it is the former.

Then, there is the venue – the city of Makkah in Saudi Arabia. As we all know, Makkah is the holiest Muslim city, and non-Muslims are not allowed to enter it. Also, Saudi Arabia itself is the hallmark of intolerance in today’s world. If a man is caught practising a religion other than Islam in Saudi Arabia, he faces certain death. I find it ironic that the organisation that held a summit in a country where there is no religious freedom, and in a city non-Muslims are not allowed to enter, preached tolerance to the world.

Third, the member countries themselves aren’t exactly role models to be followed when it comes to human rights, tolerance, and condemning extremism and terrorism. Here are some of the leading lights:

• The Islamic Republic of Pakistan: Also referred to as the Terrorist State of Pakistan (TSP), this country started off by committing genocide in East Pakistan (now known as Bangladesh) in 1971, where the murderous General Tikka Khan massacred anywhere between 1 and 3 million Banglas. It actively sponsors terrorism in Kashmir (terrorists were “freedom fighters” until 9/11 made it almost impossible to call them that any longer), while it is vigorously settling Punjabis inside PoK. Minorities (Shias, Christians, Hindus, etc.) are not safe in Pakistan as has been proved by the anti-Shia riots, and persecution of Christians.

• The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Despite the veneer of civilisation it displays, Saudi Arabia is probably the most barbaric country in the world. Their laws are positively medieval, relying on a very strict interpretation of the Shariah; as are the methods used to implement them. Punishments like amputation of limbs for stealing, and flogging for “lesser crimes” are common. Here is a must-read report by Amnesty International on the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia. Recently, a Shariah court has ruled that one eye of an Indian salesman from Kerala be gouged out and donated to a Saudi national. The reason? He got into an altercation with a local resident, who lost an eye in the fight - an eye which was already damaged, according to him. Women, of course, have no rights at all. They have to cover their bodies with the Burkha, they cannot drive cars, or even socialise with men. If these “laws” are broken, the punishment may be death. I was amazed to see Saudi Arabia speaking about human rights at the OIC summit.

• The Islamic State of Afghanistan: It used to be the most barbaric country in the world under the Taliban rule. It was a member of the OIC even then. Need I say more?
  

• The Republic of Iraq: Saddam Hussein's Iraq set world standards in torture. Saddam and his sons lived a lavish life in their grand palaces, while the rest of the country starved. Kurds were gassed and mercilessly murdered, so were the Shias who dared to rise against Saddam.

• Palestine: It is not even an independent country, but enjoys membership of the OIC. It's most respected leader, Yasser Arafat, was a terrorist himself until he saw that terrorism against the Israelis wasn't exactly producing desired results. He was the leader of the “Fatah” faction of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), which recruited terrorists for raids inside Israel. Among the offshoots of Fatah was the infamous “Black September” who murdered Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. Also, Hamas, which enjoys a lot of support from the Palestinian people, specialises in suicide bombings in Israel, which have killed many innocent Israeli civilians.

• Malaysia: A decent country overall, but this remark by ex-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammed showed how “moderate” he was.

It is no wonder that the OIC has lost all relevance today has become the laughing stock of the world.