VETERANS Be a Force to Reckon With, Shun Politicking

SOURCE:
http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/be-a-force-to-reckon-with-shun-politicking/314770.html

VETERANS Be a Force to Reckon With,

                            Shun Politicking

                                      By

                Lt Gen Bhopinder Singh(retd)

NEHRU was a utopian idealist with a dim view about the role and relevance of the armed forces, "We don't need a defence plan. Our policy is non-violence. We foresee no military threats. You can scrap the Army. The police are good enough to meet our security needs". Seen institutionally, as a legacy of the Empire — Nehru suffered the looming suspicion of a potential coup d'état, a la Pakistan in 1958. The debilitating “secondment” of the armed forces started immediately with the banishment of the post of Commander-in-Chief of the Armed forces — an earlier avatar of a much-bandied CDS (Chief of Defence Staff) today, who was second in the warrant of precedence. 

 An unkind Cut: Never before have veterans had to sit in protest at the Janpath in support of their demands. Ex-Army personnel must join politics across the board to influence decision making. Tribune photo: Manas Ranjan Bhui.

 

Today, the Army Chief has been steadily relegated to 12th in the warrant of precedence — a inexplicable slide that ironically followed every major engagement. For example, the 1962 war (saw the COAS go below the Cabinet Secretary), in the 1965 war (went further below to the Attorney General) and the 1971 war (saw the COAS go below the CAG, besides initiating the OROP disparities vis-à-vis other governmental functionaries). 

The damage was systemically infused, with the leftist-internationalist Nehru, disregarding the “security imperatives”, whilst propounding his strategic framework of the policies, for instance the disastrous “Forward Policy”, enforcing a loyalist VK Menon as the Defence Minister to keep the armed forces in “check” and the fracas with General Thimayya. The military was consistently squeezed for critical equipment and wares, susceptible to political interference and there was the emergence of the “pull" factor in major appointments. The inevitable ensued in 1962. Even the subsequent turn-around with the military glories of 1965 and 1971, did little to change the narrative of a wary political class, milking the armed forces with disdain. Appropriating military success

All political dispensations, without exception, are guilty of appropriating military success for harvesting electoral yield. The "Indira Wave" of 1972 owes its energy to the 1971 victory. Since then, multiple deployments in counter-insurgency, Siachen, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Kargil etc., have only led to condescending motherhood statements attributed to the armed forces. The political-civil-administrative nexus of all the political parties has perpetuated the rot — be it George Fernandes insisting that the then Army Chief SF Rodrigues apologise for calling some countries "bandicoot", to the sacking of the Naval Chief in 1999 by the NDA government or the debilitating lack of investment by the UPA government. Of course, to the now-successful espousal of the concerns of the armed forces in the run-up to the 2014 General Election. However, with the subsequent short-changing and reneging of OROP promises and the inelegant political usurpation of the "surgical strikes", as a demonstration of political brilliance! The agenda of all politicians, irrespective of the theatrics and shenanigans on the hyper-nationalistic debates in the television rooms, has been guilty of politicising the armed forces. This is done while ensuring a parallel run of “secondment” by going back on OROP commitments, and worse, knowingly accepting the deviousness of the Seventh Pay Commission which retains the sliding trend.

Our national policies are bereft of adequate security dimensions and appreciation. Therefore, we need more participation of the military or the veterans in the public domain. Unlike China or the USA, the composition of the national security framework is devoid of the military expertise (the NSA of Pakistan is a military veteran). It does not matter which political party a veteran joins. The more widespread the representation, the better would be the espousal of the institutional cause, perspective and dimension towards political policies. However, the clear usurpation of the military to be an exclusive domain of any one party is a regrettable position and a clear spin in political marketing. The concerns in the official status, emoluments, equipment and investments in the armed forces remains unequivocally unfair. The increased pressure put on the military to pick up the gauntlet for the other failed governmental institutions, has only increased.

The much-required presence of the military men in the television newsroom has unfortunately transgressed from propagating institutional concerns and domain expertise on security matters towards political colouring and a fixation towards certain political parties. For a proudly apolitical profession, which has maintained its operational efficacy —despite the disastrous political interventions and appropriations of the past —care must be taken to ensure the correctness, objectivity and sobriety that is symbolised by the classical image of an "officer and a gentleman". Recently, the optics of shrill mud-slinging, bombastic bravado and thunderous derision are reminiscent of the political crassness and one-upmanship. The armed forces are the only institution that affords the unique dignity of pre-fixing the "rank" to a name. This warrants certain behavioural conduct and restraint, as the words of the veteran willy-nilly tantamount to the institutional position and imagery. 

Dangers of overt politicisation of the armed forces manifest in the political baiting of the armed forces for electoral gratification. Recently, a new low has been touched with the provincial MNS chief using the armed forces as a convenient appendage. The “Rs 5 crore threat” to the pusillanimous and equally condescending Bollywood is an affront of unbelievable proportions to the armed forces and to the nation, as a whole. For a politician whose recent love for the armed forces was preceded by wont illiberalism and hatred for non-state natives, would never understand how a proud "Maratha" officer, who went up to become the Chief of Army Staff, General JJ Singh was actually a Sikh or how, arguably the finest brain to adorn the Indian military uniform was a "Mahar" officer, General K Sundarji, a Tamilian (if demographic-geographical-historical connect of Maharashtra were to be linked to the armed forces).

The country needs more military men in public and political space and not less. However, it is the likes of the rare Jaswant Singh who embellished his political journey with military aplomb, sensibilities and care that brought the much-needed security perspective, élan and institutional concern. Importantly, military men in political fatigues are free to postulate political positions in debates, on matters that are non-military, given their experience and tenure in far-flung areas. On military matters, they owe it to their alma mater and the nation to strip the same of any political colour and denomination. The influx of political flags and appropriation runs the real risk of the ensuing "secondment" getting accelerated with further fragmentation and division in the ranks — all political classes have used and abused the military for posturing muscular and nationalistic credentials. 

Politicians do not send their children to the armed forces, they are content to soak in the blood-soaked glory of armed forces. Never before, have the veterans been humiliated or had to sit on the footpath of Janpath and face the parallel ignominy of ostensible support to the institution. Ex-military men must join political parties to influence the governance, policies and politics of the politicians. They must not end up joining the “shouting-brigade” of the wily politicians, who would merrily lap up the spectre of the veterans joining their rank and conduct. Politicising of the armed forces is in full swing. The onus of seeing through the same and remaining committed to the institution and the nation only, lies on the ex-servicemen only.

The writer is a former Lt Governor of Puducherry & Andaman Islands.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DELIGHTFUL NEWS FOR DRINKERS - SO MANY BENEFITS !

SOURCE: ANONYMOUS

             DELIGHTFUL NEWS FOR DRINKERS
                      - SO MANY BENEFITS !

 

                         NEVER SAY NO TO HEALTH PROMOTING DRINKS!   

                  Alcoholic Drinks That Might Secretly Keep You Healthy

                                

                               BY

               Dr. Sushma Jaiswal,  

M.Sc - Dietician / Nutritionist, B.Sc Home Science

According to the preconceived notion, drinking alcohol is harmful to the body. It is partly true. Drinking alcohol is harmful to the body, but only in huge proportions. In fact, despite popular belief, drinking alcohol is also good for health. Here are 8 alcohols that are secretly keeping you healthy:

*Beer*:

The most common alcoholic drink, beer is loaded with antioxidants called phenols. This protects you against suffering from heart diseases. Beer also lowers the risk of acquiring high blood pressure and helps maintaining it.

*Red Wine*:

Apart from being a classy drink and having the same benefits of beer, the additional brownie points of red wine is that it helps in increasing life span by generating longevity genes. It also increases good cholesterol and reduces bad cholesterol in the body.


*Vodka*:

Vodka helps in clearing bad breath as the high alcohol content kills all bad odour bacteria present. It also helps to reduce stress and disinfect wound. It improves the health of the skin and stimulates hair growth. Toothache is also another issue which Vodka can work wonders on.

*Whisky*:
Whisky helps to numb throat pain when it is gargled in a mixture with warm water. It stimulates weight loss. Whisky also helps in preventing dementia. Other benefits of this drink that it prevents diabetes and cancer. It also helps to keep the heart healthy, increases the level of good cholesterol and terminates blood clots. Whiskey is believed to be one of the healthiest drinks among the alcoholic beverages.

*Tonic*:

The combination of gin and tonic is very useful while treating malarial infection as it contains quinine; which is used for the treatment of malaria.

*Brandy*:

Brandy is one alcoholic drink which is full of healthy antioxidants. It has anti ageing properties; hence is very good for the skin. Brandy also reduces the level of bad cholesterol in the body. It also helps in the treatment of bladder and ovarian cancer as well as sore throats and cough.

*Rum*:

Rum increases life longevity. It is very beneficial for the heart. It also functions as a blood thinner and helps in increasing the level of good cholesterol. Having this wonderful drink occasionally also guards you against osteoporosis and common cold...


*CHEERS*!! ��������

SUBMARINES :Countering China: Even with Nuclear-Powered INS Arihant, India has a big Submarine Crisis!

SOURCE:http://www.msn.com/en-in/news/newsindia/countering-china-even-with-nuclear-powered-ins-arihant-india-has-a-big-submarine-crisis/ar-AAj5uJI?li=AAggbRN&ocid=iehp#image=AA8t4Pw|3




Countering China: Even with Nuclear-Powered INS Arihant, India has a big Submarine Crisis!


PM Modi Has Quietly Commissioned India's Nuclear Sub INS Arihant On Active Deterrent Patrol


[  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEIteU1SeNM  ]

 

 

 

India completes 'nuclear triad' with

 INS Arihant

[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9d86MOFAfBM ]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Indian Navy quietly added the much awaited INS Arihant, India's first indigenously-built nuclear submarine, to its fleet in August. The significance of this addition to India's depleting fleet of submarines cannot be overstated, especially at a time when tensions with Pakistan are running high and China is flexing its muscles in the Indian Ocean.

The INS Arihant is a 6,000-tonne submarine that is capable of launching nuclear weapons from underwater. Arihant is an SSBN, that is a submarine that can carry ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads. SSBNs are equipped with better stealth features and are larger compared to SSNs, which are nuclear-powered attack submarines. SSBNs are also said to be the 'best guarantor' of a second strike capability in a nuclear exchange.

The submarine is propelled by an 83 MW pressurised light-water reactor at its core. In 2013, the nuclear reactor of the submarine went 'critical' and from December 2014 onwards, the sea trials began, which included the test firing of K-series of missiles. The K-15 submarine-launched ballistic missile has a range of 750-km and the K-4 has a range of up to 3,500-km.


But the weapons integration will take some more time, which means that the INS Arihant is not yet fully ready to be deployed for deterrent patrols with nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles in its silos, says a TOI report.


READ: INS Arihant, Indian Navy's first indigenously-made nuclear submarine, commissioned quietly


But even as India gets the INS Arihant and prepares to induct the Scorpene-class INS Kalvari, there are major concerns over its ability to deter and counter the enemy with such a poor number of subs. India has only 13 conventional submarines, and these too are ageing. Indian Navy also has a nuclear-powered submarine, INS Chakra, that is on lease from Russia.


But, the Chakra is not armed with nuclear missiles! In 2015, the government had approved the construction of six nuclear-powered submarines, the SSNs, that is attack submarines that are not equipped with ballistic missiles. Add to that, the fact that there was a major data leak with regards to the stealth capabilities of Indian Navy's upcoming Scorpene-class submarines

This paints a very grim picture of India's submarine strength and its ability to check the enemy in its waters. To put things in global perspective, US has over 70 nuclear submarines and Russia has around 30. China has 5 nuclear submarines are over 51 conventional subs. It is already on course to induct around five SSBNs with missiles that have a range of up to 7,400 km!

PK Ghosh, a retired Indian Navy officer, and Senior Fellow at ORF feels that India's submarine fleet is an issue of grave concern.

"We are lagging behind in a big way when it comes to our submarine fleet. We are positioning ourselves in the current geostrategic environment, talking about the balance of power and guarantee of security. These are big words and we are eyeing an aspirational role, but the submarine fleet is a matter of great concern," Ghosh tells FE Online.

Flagging issues with current and future projects, Ghosh says, "The P-75 Scorpene project has been delayed endlessly and we need to upgrade our submarines, the current fleet is grossly inadequate. The Scorpene data has been exposed and there is no movement on the P-75I project.

One has to understand that the Indian Navy works with a lag, any new platform takes around 4-5 years to build." "China has anywhere between 55 to 65 conventional submarines and Pakistan has 5. India has 13, and if you assume an operational capability of 50%, then this is a serious condition," he adds.

With reference to the INS Arihant too, Ghosh says that India has been waiting for the nuclear submarine for quite some time now! "It is good that we have managed to get it. Not many countries in the world have the capability to build a nuclear submarine. But in my view, we need more teeth," Ghosh says.


"While INS Arihant is an excellent platform, a submarine is only as good as the weapons that it can fire. Currently, INS Arihant has the K-15 missiles. K4 missiles will be introduced later. See, the basic of a submarine like INS Arihant is that you can identify targets from the sea and fire on the land, or you can attack ships in the water. If you don't have the missile capability, then even an excellent platform like Arihant cannot help much."

"So while, we have achieved a major milestone with this 'Made In India' submarine, the platform needs to be fully utilised. For that the K4 missile needs to be operationalised," he rues.

Agrees Captain (Retd) SV Challapati, a defence industry expert, who believes that in the next 10 years, India needs at least 6 nuclear and 25-30 conventional submarines. "We have a grossly inadequate submarine fleet. A submarine is highly deterrent, it is an offensive weapon. And you need to rotate submarines at sea because there is a fatigue factor for the hull, the system and people. For India to be able to flex its muscles in a credible manner, especially with regards to China, we need to greatly enhance the number of submarines that we have," Challapati tells FE Online.

Which is not to say that INS Arihant and the programme involved in building it is any less important or insignificant. As Challapati notes, "The only two ways you can have a nuclear submarine is to either build it or lease it. But not many countries are willing to lease nuclear submarines like Russia has. There is a whole culture of trained manpower that is involved in a submarine programme. Whether it is a ship or a submarine, you need a lot of technical know-how, and capability to repair and operate. There is a whole doctrine around it. This has undoubtedly been a long journey for the Indian Navy and a big learning experience."

Ankur Gupta, Vice President Aerospace & Defence at Ernst Young India, sees the INS Arihant as a critical element of national security as well as an effective-deliverable nuclear deterrent.

"Approximately 17 years ago, the Indian Navy had approved a 30-year submarine capability plan which today seems to be behind schedule.

The private sector has limited experience but sufficient spare capacity and the MoD should leverage the Make in India initiative to overcome the submarine capability shortfall at the earliest through the utilisation of these domestic available assets," advises Ankur Gupta. "A quick decision on the proposed ?Strategic Partnership Model? in which submarines is one of the identified areas will also help boost confidence in the private sector and help the Navy in meeting its pre-set requirements," he tells FE Online.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INDO PAK WAR : WHAT HAPPENS IF INDIA PAKISTAN NUKE EACH OTHER

SOURCE: 
  http://www.msn.com/en-in/news/newsindia/india-pak-war-this-site-simulates-casualties-if-we-nuke-each-other/ar-AAj2yw4?li=AAggbRN&ocid=iehp


                WHAT HAPPENS IF INDIA PAKISTAN                    NUKE EACH OTHER


       India VS Pakistan Nuclear War

       : The End of the World in 30 Minutes 

                 - the terrible effects of War


[ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Tk_-IBIPZQ ]

If Atomic War Starts Between Pakistan & India What Will Happen Fawad Chaudhary Explains

       [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMn3TQ_bPJA ]

How badly Pakistan will suffer if it attacks
                 India with Nuclear Weapons  


     [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btpZAMSBPDc ]

What would happen if Pakistan attacked India with nuclear weapons? | FactoNomics  


     [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtdNt7bBkLA ]

India-Pak War? This Site Simulates Casualties if We Nuke Each Other 

Amidst growing tensions between India and Pakistan, of late, citizens from both sides of the Line of Control can be observed taking pride of their respective nuclear arsenal on social media platforms.

For full coverage of India-Pakistan standoff, click here

With little to zero knowledge, commoners can be easily spotted bragging about the nuclear might of their country on the internet. Also, they mindlessly go ahead in judging which country will even win a nuclear war through their posts, comments and tweets.

So, dear readers (on both sides of the fence), do you have any clue of what will happen if your casual talk on nuclear war becomes a reality?

Of course, you don't have to drop a bomb to calculate this. Alex Wellerstein, a Harvard-educated historian, who specializes on the history of nuclear weapons and government secrecy has a nuclear effects simulator on your website.

The simulator uses the integration of Google Maps and data points collected from thousands of nuclear detonations that have taken place from 1939. The list also includes India's largest Nuclear weapon tested which was a 65 kilo-tons bomb and Pakistan's largest weapons tested at 45 kilotons.
These nuclear weapons are twice the size of 'Fat Man', the bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki during World War 2.

What will happen if India detonates its 65 Kiloton nuclear bomb in Karachi?

© Provided by IBNLive Nuclear bomb, Karachi, India Nuclear arsenal Nuclear impact on Karachi if India detonates its 65 Kt Nuclear Bomb. (Image: nuclearsecrecy)

The simulator calculates, that if the ground zero is Sarafa Bazar in Karachi, the estimated fatalities will be in excess of 6,41,620 people. The estimated figures of people injured will be 15,96,830. Though the simulator says that modelling casualties from a nuclear attack is difficult and these numbers should be seen as evocative, not definitive.

The model also calculates the humanitarian impact of a nuclear blast. The "humanitarian impact" model works by using the Google Places API to search out tagged places near the ground zero location. This is the same algorithm Google Maps uses, whenever you ask how many restaurants are near where you happen to be.

The point of the "humanitarian impact" model is to emphasise some of the collateral impacts of a nuclear explosion, and, to indicate the ways in which support services like hospitals and fire stations would be themselves impacted by a nuclear attack.

With all these variables in place, 12,00,000 (12 lakh) lives lost is still too big if India and Pakistan go nuclear on each other.

What if Pakistan nukes New Delhi?

© Provided by IBNLive New-Delhi-Impact-of-Pakistan's-Nuclear-bomb Nuclear impact on New Delhi if Pakistan detonates its 45 Kt Nuclear Bomb. (Image: nuclearsecrecy)

Similarly, if Pakistan hits New Delhi with its 45 Kiloton nuclear bomb the impact is even more disastrous as portrayed by the simulator.

6,56,070 people will lose their lives if a Pakistani nuke is detonated at Connaught Palace. There will be more than 15,28,490 people who will be injured in this attack. Places like, Jama Masjid, Purana Qila, Parliament house and even Rashtrapati Bhavan will be wiped out.


The simulator also calculates the maximum size of the nuclear fireball after detonation along with radiation radius, air blast radius and thermal radiation radius that cause 3rd-degree burns.
The implications are catastrophic if a nuclear bomb is detonated on either side. So, next time you casually talk about whether India should nuke Pakistan, or vice-versa, just head to this website and you'll be horrified by its implications.


You can also calculate the effects of the blast in your own city on this website. Till now, more than 85.6 million people have detonated a nuclear bomb on this simulator. This is probably the safest and an educative way of detonating a nuclear bomb. Alex Wellerstein the creator of this simulator is an assistant professor of science and technology studies at the Stevens Institute of Technology in New Jersey. He runs Restricted Data: The Nuclear Secrecy Blog and is the creator of the NUKEMAP nuclear effects simulator





© Provided by IBNLive Shell, which is the replica of the biggest detonated Soviet nuclear bomb AN-602 (Tsar-Bomb), is on display in Moscow, Russia, August 31, 2015. The shell is part of an exhibition organized by the state nuclear corporation…
































 

PLA (N ) South China Sea Buildup- Secrets Revealed for Beijing's New Aircraft Carrier

SOURCE :
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/china/2016/china-160805-sputnik01.htm?_m=3n%2e002a%2e1785%2eka0ao00b2h%2e1n2x

        South China Sea Buildup: Secrets

                                   for

                  New Aircraft Carrier

Sputnik News 

In-Depth Coverage

 

05 AUGUST 2016

As the Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy makes significant upgrades to its fleet, a newly emerged photograph shows that the nation's third aircraft carrier will feature a catapult system, instead of the ski-jump method used in earlier models.


With tensions escalating in the South China Sea, Beijing has been steadily upgrading its naval forces. In addition to the construction of new fighter jets, early-warning patrol aircraft, anti-submarine warplanes and helicopters, the PLA Navy is also in the process of adding new aircraft carriers.
While a second carrier is currently under construction, a third is in the planning phase.


A photograph of a mockup of this third vessel reveals new details. While previous designs included a ski-jump section at the ship's bow to provide aircraft with adequate lift, the new design does not include this structure, indicating the likelihood of a catapult launch system.

According to IHS Jane's, satellite photos of Huangdicun Airbase appear to show the construction of two catapult systems. One of these is thought to be steam-powered while the other is an electromagnetic version.

The second aircraft carrier, now nearly complete, features a more sophisticated design than its predecessor, the Liaoning. According to Yin Zhuo, chairman of the consulting committee of the PLA Navy, the vessel will be able to carry more weapons, fighters, and fuel.


In June, photos surfaced of China's new nuclear-powered Type 093 attack submarine. The Shang-class vessel appears to feature vertical-launch shafts that could fire both YJ-18 anti-ship cruise missiles and DF-10 long-range land-attack cruise missiles.


Beijing's naval modernization comes as the United States and its Pacific allies work to escalate tensions in the South China Sea. A highly contested region through which roughly $5 trillion in trade passes annually, most of the waterway is claimed by China, though there are overlapping claims by Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei, and Malaysia.

While the Hague-based Court of Arbitration recently ruled against China's nine-dash territorial claims, Beijing does not recognize the decision as legitimate.

The Pentagon has carried out a number of progressive patrol through the region, including several within the 12-mile territorial limit of Beijing's artificial islands in the Spratly and Paracel archipelagos.

As China works to assert its claims, new ships and equipment could well play a significant role.


               ####################################

Aircraft Carrier Project Phase 2 - New Construction

China is designing and building its second aircraft carrier "completely on its own" in Dalian in northeastern Liaoning Province, a Defense Ministry spokesperson confirmed 31 December 2015. This carrier, with a displacement of 50,000 tonnes, will be a base for J-15 fighters and other types of aircraft, Yang Yujun told a monthly press briefing. Fixed-wing aircraft on the carrier will use a ski-jump to take off, he said. The design and building of this second aircraft carrier has been based on experience, research and training on the first carrier, the Liaoning, he added.

On 30 July 2015, huanqiu.com, the Chinese-language version of local Global Times, published an internal document of the China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation. The report states that the company’s “priority missions” are to build nuclear submarines and an aircraft carrier. It also mentions that progress on these projects has been steady.

“The priority missions of building the aircraft carrier and nuclear-submarines have been carried out smoothly and with outstanding results,” the document states, according to a translation provided by Taiwanese media outlets. The Taiwanese reports said that the document suggested that China’s first homegrown aircraft carrier may be nuclear-powered.

The 2013 Report To Congress Of The U.S.-China Economic And Security Review Commission reported in November 2013 that "China plans to follow the Liaoning with at least two indigenously built aircraft carriers. The first likely will enter service by 2020 and the second by 2025. As China’s aircraft carrier force expands and matures, Beijing will improve its ability to project air power, particularly in the South China Sea, and to perform a range of other missions, such as airborne early warning, antisubmarine warfare, helicopter support to ground forces, humanitarian assistance, search and rescue, and naval presence operations."

Similarly, in January 2014 media reported in China quoted Liaoning party Chief Wang Min as saying that work on China’s second aircraft carrier had begun in the city of Dalian, and Beijing is ultimately expected to build four aircraft carriers. These reports, however, were quickly removed by China’s censors.

The 2015 Report To Congress Of The U.S.-China Economic And Security Review Commission noted that, “China continues to pursue an indigenous aircraft carrier program and could build multiple aircraft carriers over the next 15 years.” The Pentagon report mentioned that China’s home-based carriers “would be capable of improved endurance and of carrying and launching more varied types of aircraft, including electronic warfare, early warning, and anti-submarine, thus increasing the potential striking power of a PLA Navy ‘carrier battle group’ in safeguarding China’s interests in areas outside its immediate periphery”.

In 1970 China conducted a study into the feasibility of building an aircraft carrier. China appeared to have chosen to build a Chinese aircraft carrier, rather than purchasing one off-the-shelf. Although China's long-term goal was to acquire one or more aircraft carriers and it had an active program to develop a design, for many years it remained unclear whether Beijing had reached a firm decision on the kind of carrier it would have, given budget constraints and naval funding priorities.

The PLA Navy would need to overcome several large obstacles before it could field an operational aircraft carrier and associated supporting ships. First, the PLA Navy did not initially have any carrier-capable aircraft. Second, although substantially improved in these areas, it still needed more and better anti-submarine and anti-aircraft capabilities to protect a carrier and its supporting vessels. Finally, to have adequate power projection capabilities from the use of a carrier, it was preferable to have more than one carrier so that a carrier was assuming the mission at sea at all times. Thus, many experts concluded that an operational aircraft carrier would not appear to be in China's near future, even though China was funding research and development and training officers in aircraft carrier operations.

According to the US Department of Defense's Annual Report to Congress on The Military Power of the People's Republic of China for 2010, "The PLA Navy has reportedly decided to initiate a program to train 50 pilots to operate fixed-wing aircraft from an aircraft carrier. The initial program, presumably land-based, would be followed in about four years by ship-borne training involving the ex-VARYAG-a former Soviet Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier-which was purchased by China from Ukraine in 1998 and is being renovated at a shipyard in Dalian, China. ... The PLA Navy's investment in platforms such as nuclear-powered submarines and progress toward its first aircraft carrier (a refurbished ex-Russian Kuznetsov-class carrier) suggest China is seeking to support additional missions beyond a Taiwan contingency.... Such an increased PLA presence including surface, sub-surface, and airborne platforms, and possibly one or more of China's future aircraft carriers, would provide the PLA with an enhanced extended range power projection capability and could alter regional balances, disrupting the delicate status quo established by the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of the Parties in the South China Sea."
On 27 October 2014, the Liaoning returned to its home port in Qingdao after a half year of maintenance. In less than a year, the size of Liaoning's escort group grew from five ships to eight. During the trip China's CCTV revealed an image of the Liaoning battle group, in which the aircraft carrier was sailing with at least eight surface vessels and submarines in formation.


This was the first time that Liaoning appeared in public with its battle force, which experts say is open to changes in future. China deployed its first carrier task group in December 2013, when the Liaoning left its home port of Qingdao in East China's Shandong Province for the South China Sea. It was then escorted by two missile destroyers, two missile frigates, and a supply ship.
Made in China aircraft carrier battle groups require many sophisticated new ships together, regardless of their cost or operational capability, of course, will be substantially improved. However, just building aircraft carrier battle groups but also so that they have the combat capability, is the top priority of China's development of aircraft carriers.


The Type 054B main escort is a new frigate, which is to meet the needs of offshore operations. The Type 054A displacement is further increased the on the basis of the construction of the new generation of large missile frigate, but also to adapt to the Chinese Navy aircraft carrier battle group operations needs and design a types of ships, which will be mainly responsible for the aircraft carrier battle groups in the short-range air defense and anti-submarine missions. Therefore, it will significantly increase payload, precision radar electronic equipment will also undoubtedly substantial upgrade, making it cost to rise exponentially.

Further Reading

CV Phase 2 - New Construction CV NEWCON - Design CV NEWCON - Displacement CV NEWCON - Schedule CV NEWCON - Shipyard CV NEWCON - Specifications CV NEWCON - Ship List CV NEWCON - Schematics CV NEWCON - Pictures   Resources China ready to build aircraft carrier By Andrei Chang Column: Military Might : June 02, 20092018 Chinese aircraft carrier China will build four aircraft carrier battle groups in two stages China may be building first indigenous carrier Sean O'Connor, Indianopolis, Indiana - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly - 27 September 2015

 

SOURCE:
http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/payback-must-for-armed-forces/309132.

             Pay Back Must for Armed Forces 

                                    By

                                                     Dinesh Kumar






At the very core of all anomalies and grievances of the Armed Forces is that they are finding their extant status and parity vis-à-vis their civilian counterparts being systematically downgraded by every successive Central Pay Commission

                                                   LIP SERVICE

Forces deserve the best: Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar inaugurates a defence exhibition at Vashi, Navi Mumbai. PTI



The Seventh Central Pay Commission (CPC) award has been the cause for serious disquiet within the Armed Forces ever since it was submitted to the government last November. The situation recently came to head with the three Service Chiefs unprecedentedly asking the Union government to withhold the implementation of the CPC for the Armed Forces until pending anomalies are resolved. Following Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar's response asking the Service Chiefs to implement the new salary structure while assuring them that their grievances could be looked into later, the Services have backed off and agreed to the implementation of the current pay commission. But going by recent events, there never is a "later". 

Acting in unison

 

Although every pay commission award has evoked discontent within the Armed Forces, the difference this time was that the three Service Chiefs had acted in unison. Such an unprecedented step reflects the extent of resentment and discount within the otherwise apolitical Armed Forces that remains unquestionably subservient to civilian control. This development does not auger well and it is imperative that the government take notice and not leave it unresolved as it has with anomalies pertaining to the Sixth CPC.

In recent years, the Services have become more vocal than usual in expressing their disappointment with issues related to pay, allowances and pensions. Only a few months ago, the three Service Chiefs took the unusual step of writing (in vain) a joint letter to first the Defence Minister and then the Prime Minister expressing dissatisfaction with the Seventh CPC. In March, a tri-Service Pay and Allowances Review Committee delivered a detailed presentation before an Empowered Committee comprising 13 Secretaries. But the effort failed to cut ice even though the Air Force Chief, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, who was present at the meeting, specifically stated that there exists "discontentment among the rank and file". Taking note of the growing disquiet within the Armed Forces, the then Defence Minister AK Antony in June 2012 wrote to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, informing him of the growing discontentment among both serving and retired defence service personnel due to fixation of pay and pensions by the Sixth CPC. "My apprehension is that unless we take some corrective action, the issue may take a bad turn", he is reported to have warned. A Committee of Secretaries formed to look into the six core anomalies arising from the Sixth CPC passed the buck saying that it needed to be resolved by an expert committee which is yet to be instituted. 

Four specific anomalies

 

This time the Armed Forces want four specific anomalies to be corrected. One, that there should be a common pay matrix for the three Services and civilian employees. In contrast to 24 pay levels as per the latest CPC, there are 40 pay levels for the civilians. The implication is that the pay of all Service officers will stagnate after 31 years of service which will result in their earning a pension Rs 20,000 less than their civilian counterparts. Bureaucrats give the excuse that a common pay matrix is not feasible because the Armed Forces have a higher number of ranks. 

The second demand pertains to reciprocity of allowances. While all compensatory field and other allowances applicable to the Armed Forces also apply to the central armed police forces (CAPF), the allowances entitled to the latter have not been extended to the Armed Forces. For example, a soldier deployed for disaster management will not be paid any extra allowance whereas a National Disaster Response Force personnel who be paid Rs 6,000 per deployment and a CAPF constable Rs 17,000. A third demand pertains to payment of other allowances such as, for example, technical allowance while a fourth demand relates to disability pension being made applicable on a percentage basis as it is to civilians. 

At the very core of all these anomalies and grievances of the Armed Forces is that they are finding their extant status and parity vis-à-vis their civilian counterparts being systematically downgraded by every successive CPC. From first figuring below the IAS and then the IPS, the Services now find themselves being equated and in some respects inferior to the CAPF such as the CRPF and BSF on pay and allowances. Despite their large numerical strength, the Armed Forces do not find representation on the Central Pay Commissions. Nor do they find representation on the Committees of Secretaries that get constituted to examine anomalies. Indeed the Services harbour the grudge that they are always treated as the "other". 

Cost to government

 

The Armed Forces consider themselves as constituting "the cheapest gun fodder" since they incur the least lifetime cost to the government; as incurring the "lowest induction cost" since unlike their civilian counterparts they are not paid during their training period; have the "lowest retention cost" as they retire earlier than their civilian counterparts and hence draw salaries less than the latter; have the "lowest advancement cost" since relatively low numbers are promoted to the higher rank in view of the steep pyramid rank structure in the Services (only one per cent officers become Lieutenant Generals); and command the "lowest pension cost" because their pensions are fixed at just 50 per cent of the last pay drawn. 

Theorists of Civil-Military relations argue that in a democracy "civilians have a right to be wrong". But then because they have the right to be wrong, civilians must also bear greater responsibility and accountability. The security of a nation is not the exclusive preserve of the Armed Forces. The civilian government is ultimately responsible. Perhaps the government can take a cue from Kautilya"s Arthashastra, that mentions "not being given due honours" at the very top of its list of 28 calamities that can adversely affect the efficient functioning of an army.  A country that does not look after its Armed Forces - the instrument of last resort - does so at its own peril.