Tuesday, November 20, 2018

NUCLEAR TRIAD A Peek into India's Top Secret and Costliest Defence Project, Nuclear Submarines

SOURCE:
https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/the-big-story/story/20171218-india-ballistic-missile-submarine-k-6-submarine-launched-drdo-1102085-2017-12-10





      A Peek into India's Top Secret  

                            and 

            Costliest Defence Project,

                 Nuclear Submarines

                         



                         BY



               Sandeep Unnithan



ISSUE DATE
:
December 18, 2017
UPDATED: November 5, 2018 



India's indigenous nuclear submarine project hums in top gear with the launch of its second ballistic missile submarine. But other projects face huge technical challenges.









India's top secret nuclear submarine project reached another decadal milestone last month with the launch of a second ballistic missile submarine, the Arighat . On November 19, Union defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman cracked the auspicious coconut on the fin of the submarine in the drydock of the Ship Building Centre (SBC) in Visakhapatnam in a low-key ceremony. Following this, the SBC's drydock was flooded and the submarine quietly floated out. It will be at least another three years before the navy commissions the Arighat.


The event skipped the high-profile public ceremony of the Arihant's launch in 2009 even as the four-decade Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) project to field a series of ballistic missile firing nuclear submarines is now moving at a furious assembly-line pace.



Two new units, the S4 and S4 'star', displacing over 1,000 tonnes more than the Arihant class will move into the SBC drydock vacated by the two Arihant class submarines. These submarines, fitted with eight ballistic missiles or twice the Arihant's missile load, will be launched by 2020 and 2022. An official says the Arighat launch has more to do with creating more work space within the cramped SBC for assembling the S4 and S4*. The ATV project is India's costliest defence project. The programme to build four SSBNs (hull classification symbol for a nuclear-powered, ballistic missile-carrying submarine) is India's largest defence programme, estimated at Rs 90,000 crore. Each of these nuclear-powered sharks costs upwards of Rs 4,000 crore, not counting the infrastructure created by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) to build their nuclear powered reactors and the Defence Research and Development Organisation's (DRDO) submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs).



The project's pan-India spread-headquartered in New Delhi, hull fabrication facility in Gujarat, missile development in Hyderabad, nuclear reactor in Tamil Nadu and final assembly in Visakhapatnam-is the biggest Make in India industrial ecosystem-nearly 60 per cent of the submarine's components are indigenous. It is also the cornerstone of Indo-Russian strategic cooperation; top officials admit the project would not have been possible without extensive Russian design and technical assistance. Ahead of the submarine arm's golden jubilee on December 8, the ATV programme has nearly doubled in size with a Rs 60,000 crore project to build six indigenous nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs).



"It has kicked off, " navy chief Admiral Sunil Lanba told the media about the SSN project on December 1. "It is a classified project? the process has started." Design work for the indigenous SSNs displacing around 6,000 tonnes is under way at a newly constructed submarine design centre in Gurgaon. SSNs are armed with conventional cruise missiles and torpedoes but powered by nuclear reactors which give it excellent underwater speed and endurance.



The navy has opened up talks for the lease of another Akula-class submarine from Russia for over $2 billion, to replace the existing INS Chakra when it is returned in 2022 after the end of its lease. (The Chakra is currently non-operational after an incident last August). Meanwhile, final design work is under way on a new series of 13,500-tonne ballistic missile submarines. Called the 'S-5', it will be twice the weight of the Arihant class SSBNs and armed with 12 nuclear-tipped missiles. Earlier this year, the DRDO flagged off its K-6 SLBM project, a missile with an ICBM-like range of 6,000 km. The first phase of Project Varsha, a nuclear submarine base, will be completed by 2022. The base will house India's SSBN fleet in concrete pens blasted out of the hills at Rambilli 50 km south of Visakhapatnam, reportedly at a cost of Rs 30,000 .


THE THIRD LEG OF THE TRIAD :


A nuclear engine allows a submarine to travel almost indefinitely underwater. They don't have to surface to recharge their batteries like conventional diesel-electric submarines (SSKs) and they move faster underwater because they avoid surface wave resistance.



The Arighat, like the Arihant, is a ballistic missile submarine or a boomer because it carries nuclear-tipped missiles and forms the third leg of a triad of air, land and sea-based nuclear weapon carrying platforms, enunciated in India's draft nuclear doctrine after the May 1998 Pokharan-2 nuclear tests. When India observes the 20th anniversary of the tests five months from now, it will have a modest sea-based deterrent with one SSBN in service and a second soon to join it.



"The triad becomes effective when you have a submarine operational at all times. In our case, a triad is operational only part of the time-when the Arihant sails out to sea," says strategic analyst Bharat Karnad. When an Indian SSBN sails out of Visakhapatnam and into the Bay of Bengal, it can virtually disappear for months, remaining underwater, its endurance limited only by the endurance of its crew, communicating only through extremely low frequency (ELF) antennae which it trails in the water. While bombers, mobile missile launchers, missile trains and ground-based launchers can be tracked, nuclear submarines are virtually undetectable. This is what makes them the most precious asset of the nuclear triad.



Submarines thus become an important component of India's 'no first use' policy for nuclear weapons because they act as guarantors of 'assured retaliation' or a second-strike, preventing any surprise first-strike by a nuclear-armed adversary. They are vital at a time when China's PLA Rocket Forces can target any point on the Indian mainland with nuclear tipped missiles and India has fewer retaliatory options.




The Arihant has so far been equipped with 12 B-05 SLBMs which have a range of 750 km-which means a distant transit to an adversary's shores. A 3,500-km range missile, the 'K-4' is still in trials-the DRDO is to conduct a fourth test of the missile sometime in December, from a specially designed submersible pontoon launcher in the Bay of Bengal. Final tests of the K-4 from the Arihant are due in the Bay of Bengal in the near future. These are to be followed by tests of a K-5 missile, a 5,000-km SLBM, a project started in 2015. The 'K series' missiles are all named after former president A.P.J. Abdul Kalam. The K-4 and K-5, each of which can carry a two-tonne warhead will give the triad a longer, more robust leg.

Information about the ATV project is meagre. It operates directly under the supervision of national security advisor Ajit Doval and is now wrapped in deep levels of secrecy. A navy proposal for a high-profile launch of the Arighat where the PM and cabinet ministers would be present was overruled by the PMO. Security around the project is the heaviest for any publicly known military facility (the navy recently cited security concerns to acquire a public road passing near the SBC in Visakhapatnam).

Naval top brass are chary of even discussing the project either in public or in private. "That (the ATV) is a classified project... I'm not going to take any questions on that," navy chief Admiral Sunil Lanba told the media a press conference on December 1, a marked departure from a predecessor who claimed, rather disingenously in 2010, of the INS Arihant undertaking 'a deterrent patrol by 2012'. The Arihant was inducted into service in August last year after weapon trials but continues to undertake extensive trials but without a prolonged sea deployment. An actual deterrent patrol-where a nuclear-missile armed submarine goes into its operational area armed with nuclear warheads-is thought to be further away.



The launch of the Arighat comes amidst fast-changing geopolitical developments. The Chinese navy has deployed and initiated the fastest submarine expansion of any navy since the end of the Cold War with an operational undersea force of 63 vessels-5 SSNs, 4 SSBNs and 54 SSKs.


China recently sold a class of eight conventionally powered diesel-electric submarines to Pakistan, at least some of which are likely to be fitted with nuclear-tipped missiles. 



"Sea-based deterrents are going to become more important as time passes, especially for a country with a no-first use policy," says strategic analyst Rear Admiral Raja Menon (retired). "The location of your nuclear weapons becomes known and even a half per cent knowledge of your existing weapon sites each year could add up to something substantial over the years, thus degrading your deterrent."




THE HUNTER-KILLERS :



A solitary two-month patrol by a Chinese submarine in late 2013 came as a rude wake-up call for India's security establishment. Chinas most advanced SSN, a Shang class, sailed out from its bastion in Hainan island on December 13, 2013 and returned after a two-month 'anti-piracy' patrol in the Indian Ocean, on February 12, 2014. R&AW assessments termed the deployment 'seriously aggravated India's security concerns'. The ATV headquarters soon dusted out plans for building a series of six indigenous SSNs, shelved by the government over a decade ago due to budgetary constraints. Plans called for a series of submarines capable of speeds of over 25 knots and diving to 500 metres.



SSNs are like multi-role fighter jets, ferocious underwater predators. The navy's INS Chakra, for instance, can run underwater at speeds of close to 30 knots, more than twice the speed of conventional diesel-electric submarines, stalk and hunt warships and attack shore targets.



But like fighter jets, their performance lies in their propulsion plant, in this case a high output nuclear reactor which can cope with the tremendous bursts of sustained speed without degrading reactor output. And this is where the Indian Navy and BARC are said to be staring at a technological abyss. An 83 MW SSBN reactor like that of the Arihant, is essentially meant for slow, steady operation, using it onboard an SSN would call for more frequent refuelling cycles.



One solution believed to be under contemplation is for BARC to design a twin-reactor configuration for the SSN to meet its increased power demands. Another solution currently being explored would be to get foreign design assistance and leapfrog from India's second generation reactor technology to fourth gen.




DREAMS OF A BEHEMOTH :




The ATV headquarters building in New Delhi's cantonment area has a rather unusual name: 'Akanksha' or desire. Since its start in the 1970s, the nuclear submarine project has been a dream-never constrained by finance, only by technology.




prototype 83 MW light water reactor at Kalpakkam, the S-1, used to train nuclear submariners.





There's a reason for the modest size of the Arihant class submarines and why they are called 'baby boomers'. When the Pokharan-2 nuclear tests announced India's entry as a nuclear weapons power, the Arihant class were meant to be SSNs. Post the tests, they were converted into SSBNs-DRDO inserted a plug with four short-ranged ballistic missiles. The design got another tweak a decade ago after an intervention from then finance minister P. Chidambaram who was on the political committee which monitors the classified programme. The minister questioned the billions being spent on a boat launching just four nuclear tipped missiles. 


The ATV project team came back with an 'Arihant-stretch'-an additional 10-metre-long plug for four K-4 SLBMs to be integrated into the S-4, then on the design board. The plug would increase the weight of the submarine by nearly 1,000 tonnes without significantly altering its performance. An additional unit, the S-4* was sanctioned in 2012 when it became clear that the S-5 would take a longer development cycle and would result in the ATV line being idle. 



Plans for building a new series of strategic nuclear submarines had begun over a decade ago when the missile payload and reactor capacity constraints of the Arihant class submarines became evident.



In 2006, a high-level committee under Dr R. Chidambaram, principal scientific advisor to the government of India, assessed India's ability to design and construct a class of three new SSBNs the 'S5', to be fielded beginning in 2021. It budgeted Rs 10,000 crore, to be divided among BARC, DRDO and the ATV project headquarters, to begin the project by 2015. The project continued in the development stage and an indication of a possible long lead construction time began when the government sanctioned a fourth unit around five years ago (squeezed between the two projects as the 4*) to keep the nuclear submarine line employed. (S-1 being the shore-based pressurised water reactor at the DAE facility in Kalpakkam, iterations of which are on the Arihant class.)



The S-5 is the true-blue SSBN on par with those fielded by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council.


Plans drawn up over a decade ago called for an SSBN of 13,500 tonnes, a behemoth displacing nearly the weight of India's first aircraft carrier the INS Vikrant and armed with 12 SLBMs with ranges of 6,000 km and with multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV) capability.



In February this year, the DRDO's Hyderabad-based Advanced Naval Systems began a fourth separate SLBM project-the K-6 missile. This three-stage solid-fuel missile with a 6,000 km range is said to be completely different from the K-4 and K-5. It will carry MIRVs and will be ready for induction in less than a decade. These new missiles, over 12 metres tall and over 2 metres in diameter, will carry a three-tonne warhead. The K-6 will ensure that the future Indian SSBN's bastion area will be within the Bay of Bengal, from where it can target all its potential adversaries. A former head of India's Strategic Forces Command hinted at this in a 2014 think tank event in Washington when he said that India's sea-based deterrent would eventually "be secured in havens, waters we are pretty sure of, by virtue of the range of the missiles. We will be operating in a pool in our own maritime backyard." From the safety of its depths, Indian SSBNs would be able to target all its potential adversaries with its 6,000-km range ballistic missiles (SLBMs).



The SSBN fleet is based on the east coast for reasons of geography-the Indian continental shelf dips sharply into the abyssal Bengal fan. A submarine can dive and be concealed just 2 nautical miles from harbor (a submarine on the west coast can dive only after sailing out for 80 nautical miles).



The S-5 is on the drawing board but the project team has already started ordering its ancillary equipment. A new dockyard is being created at the SBC and sources say the project will have an indigenous component of over 80 per cent when they are built a decade from now.



Yet, as is the case with the indigenous SSN, the main challenge in building the S-5 lies in its propulsion plant-a 190-MW nuclear plant- says an official familiar with the project. Development work has started on this new plant will have thrice the output of the Arihant's 83 MW reactor which uses Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU). A former BARC official and part of the Reactor Projects Division which built the Arihant's reactor is confident the 83 MW can be scaled up. "One of the biggest challenges in a naval reactor is compacting it to fit a confined space. Since the new platform (S-5) will have a bigger volume and displacement, upscaling the present reactor should be no problem."- Without a breakthrough in propulsion technology, India's sea-based deterrent will continue to be a modest one.




Monday, November 12, 2018

KRA CANAL : The Real Threat to Malacca-S'pore Strait : Construction of Thai's Kra Canal financed by China (r)

SOURCE:
http://www.theindependent.sg/the-real-threat-to-spore-construction-of-thais-kra-canal-financed-by-china/





         The Real Threat to 

      Malacca - S'pore Strait 

: Construction of Thai's Kra   Canal financed by China




October 2, 2016
updated 12 Nov 2018




The Kra Canal or the Thai Canal refers to a proposal for a canal to cut through the southern isthmus of Thailand, connecting the Gulf of Thailand with the Andaman Sea. It would provide an alternative to transit through the Strait of Malacca and shorten transit for shipments of oil to East Asian countries like Japan and China by 1,200 km, saving much time. China refers to it as part of its 21st century maritime Silk Road.
China is keen on the Kra Canal project partly for strategic reasons. Presently, 80% of China’s oil from the Middle East and Africa passes through the Straits of Malacca. China has long recognized that in a potential conflict with other rivals, particularly with the US, the Strait of Malacca could easily be blockaded, cutting-off its oil lifeline. Former Chinese President Hu Jintao even coined a term for this, calling it China’s “Malacca Dilemma”.


History of Kra Canal

The idea to shorten shipping time and distance through the proposed Kra Canal is not new. It was proposed as early as in 1677 when Thai King Narai asked the French engineer de Lamar to survey the possibility of building a waterway to connect Songkhla with Marid (now Myanmar), but the idea was discarded as impractical with the technology of that time.


In 1793, the idea resurfaced. The younger brother of King Chakri suggested it would make it easier to protect the west coast with military ships. In the early 19th century, the British East India Company became interested in a canal. After Burma became a British colony in 1863, an exploration was undertaken with Victoria Point (Kawthaung) opposite the Kra estuary as its southernmost point, again with negative result. In 1882, the constructor of the Suez canal, Ferdinand de Lesseps, visited the area, but the Thai king did not allow him to investigate in detail.

In 1897, Thailand and the British empire agreed not to build a canal so as to maintain the importance of Singapore as a shipping hub, since by that time, Singapore was already prospering as an international hub with great importance to the British.

In the 20th century the idea resurfaced with various proposals to build the canal but did not go far due to various constraints including technology and cost constraints as well as indecisive political leadership of Thailand.

China shows Thailand the Money
In the last decade, China has now become the potential game changer who can possibly turn Kra Canal proposal into reality in the 21st century. It has the money, technology and strong political leadership and will to support the project if it wants to.

Last year, news emerged that China and Thailand have signed an MOU to advance the Kra Canal project. On 15 May 2015, the MOU was signed by the China-Thailand Kra Infrastructure Investment and Development company (中泰克拉基礎設施投資開發有限公司) and Asia Union Group in Guangzhou. According to the news reports, the Kra Canal project will take a decade to complete and incur a cost of US$28 billion.

But 4 days later on 19 May, it was reported that both Chinese and Thai governments denied there was any official agreement between the 2 governments to build the canal.

statement by the Chinese embassy in Thailand said that China has not taken part in any study or cooperation on the matter. It later clarified that the organisations who signed the MOU have no links to the Chinese government. Separately, Xinhua news agency traced the announcement of the canal project to another Chinese firm Longhao, which declined comment when contacted.

Dr Zhao Hong, an expert on China-Asean relations from the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, told the media that China would not embark on such a project lightly, given the political and bilateral implications.

“China will have to consider the feedback from countries such as Singapore, which it has friendly ties with, given the impact that the Kra canal might have,” he said at the time when news of the MOU emerged. But Dr Zhao added that China might be open to private companies studying the feasibility of such a project, but will not directly back it for now.
It was said that the the chairman of Asia Union Group, the Thai party which signed the MOU, is former Thai premier Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, a long-time supporter of the Kra Canal.

Thai PM: Kra Canal project should be looked into by future democratic governments

In Jan this year, the Thai PM reiterated again that the Kra Canal project is not on his government agenda. His announcement came after a member of the King’s Privy Council, Thanin Kraivichien, wrote an open letter to the government advocating for the canal’s construction.Thanin was the 14th PM of Thailand between October 1976 and October 1977. His call is part of a growing chorus of Kra Canal proponents in Thailand’s political and business communities that started talking openly last year after several Chinese firms expressed interest in funding and constructing the canal.
Responding to Thanin’s call for the project, the Thai PM said the Kra Canal project should be looked into by democratic governments in the future, meaning to say Thailand has not ruled out the construction of Kra Canal completely. And in the case of Thailand, changes to its government occur frequently like the changing of clothes.

China getting Angry with Singapore
In the last couple of months, China is increasingly angered by PM Lee’s move to side with the US over the South China Seas issue, even though Singapore has no claims over any of the territories there.


It all started 2 months ago when PM Lee was invited to the White House and was hosted to a rare White House state dinner on  2 Aug(http://theindependent.sg/pm-lees-speech-at-white-house-state-dinner-angers-china). During his toast, PM Lee welcomed the US to adopt a strategy to “rebalance” the Asia Pacific and went on to call President Obama as the “America’s first Pacific President”.

China immediately responded through their Global Times. “Lee Hsien Loong addressed Obama as the American ‘first Pacific President’. Such flattery (‘戴高帽’) given to Obama directly does not concern us (‘倒也没啥’),” the Global Times’ article said.

“The key is he praised the American strategy to ‘re-balance Asia-Pacific’ and publicised that all Southeast Asian countries welcome such American ‘balancing’. Because the ‘rebalance Asia-Pacific’ strategy is pointed at China to a large extent, Lee Hsien Loong is clearly taking side already.”


“If Singapore completely becomes an American ‘pawn’ (‘马前卒’) and loses any of its resilience to move between US and China, its influence will be considerably reduced. Its value to the US will also be greatly discounted,” it added.
The article went on to say that China has its limit in tolerance. It said, “Singapore should not push it (‘新加坡不能太过分’). It cannot play the role of taking the initiative to help US and South East Asian countries to go against China over South China Sea matters. It cannot help American ‘rebalancing Asia-Pacific’ strategy, which is directed at China’s internal affairs, by ‘adding oil and vinegar’ (‘添油加醋’), thereby enabling US to provide an excuse to suppress China’s strategic space as well as providing support to US.”


“Singapore can go and please the Americans, but it needs to do their utmost to avoid harming China’s interests. It needs to be clear and open about its latter attitude,” it cautioned. Singapore’s balancing act should be to help China and US to avoid confrontation as its main objective, and not taking side so as to increase the mistrust between China and US, it said..

The article gave the example of Singapore allowing US to deploy its P-8 reconnaissance aircraft to Singapore, which from the view of the Chinese, increases the tension in South China Sea, and thereby, increasing the mistrust between the 2 big countries.

“Singapore needs more wisdom (‘新加坡需要更多的智慧’),” the article concluded.

PLA General: We must strike back 
at Singapore

And yesterday, SCMP reported that a PLA General had called for Beijing to impose sanctions and to retaliate against Singapore so as to “pay the price for seriously damaging China’s interests” (http://theindependent.sg/pla-general-we-must-strike-back-at-singapore).

The General’s remarks came after a recent spat between Global Times and Singapore Ambassador Loh. On 21 Sep, Global Times carried an article saying that Singapore had raised the issue of the disputed South China Sea at the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Summit held in Venezuela on 18 Sep. It added that Singapore had “insisted” to include an international tribunal’s ruling on the waterway, which was in favour of the Philippines, in the summit’s final document.

Singapore’s ambassador to China, Stanley Loh, rejected this and wrote an open letter stating that the news report was “false and unfounded”. Mr Loh said the move to include the international ruling in NAM’s final document was a collective act by the members of the ASEAN. But the editor-in-chief of Global Times came out to stand by his paper’s report.

Then, the Chinese government also came out in support of Global Times, not buying Ambassador Loh’s arguments. When a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman was asked about the tiff between Global Times and Singapore, he blamed an unspecified “individual nation” for insisting on including South China Sea issues in the NAM document.

Xu Liping, senior researcher on Southeast Asia studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said China expected Singapore to be a neutral mediator between China and the countries of Asean, and did not want to see disputes over the South China Sea raised in a multilateral platform like the NAM Summit. And that was why China was so angry over Singapore’s active moves in broaching such a sensitive topic, he said.
“If Singapore does not adjust its policies, I am afraid the bilateral relations will deteriorate,” Xu added. “Singapore should think twice about its security cooperation especially with the United States, and strike a better balance between China and US.”

“2-Headed Snake”

On Thursday, the overseas edition of People’s Daily also published an online commentary, saying Singapore “has obviously taken sides over South China Sea issues, while emphasising it does not”. In other words, China is accusing the Singapore government of saying one thing but doing another – a hypocrite.
Online, the Chinese netizens condemned Singapore as a “2-headed snake”. One of them wrote:


(Translation: China should quickly embark on the Kra Canal project and turn Singapore back into a third world country. This is the best present to give to a “2-headed snake”.)

If the Kra Canal truly becomes a 
reality, ships would certainly 
consider by-passing the Strait of 
Malacca and Singapore altogether, 
making the Singapore’s all-
important geographical location 
redundant. We may truly become a 
third world country after all.



Kra Canal is dead says Thai Ambassador to Kuala Lumpur


REF TO:

http://www.theindependent.sg/kra-canal-is-dead-says-thai-ambassador-to-kuala-lumpur/



















Saturday, November 10, 2018

JAMMU & KASHMIR STATISTICS : Jammu and Kashmir Data Sheets (Updated till September 23, 2018)

SOURCE:
http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/jandk/data_sheets/index.html






Jammu and Kashmir Data Sheets
(Updated till September 23, 2018)


CLICK or GOOGLE TO VIEW THE DATA

Fatalities in Terrorist Violence 1988-2018
Fatalities in Jammu and Kashmir: 1990-2017- (MHA Data)
Fatalities in Terrorist Violence 1988-2016 in Graph
Major incidents of terrorist violence: 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012-1990
Suicide attacks : 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 , 2009 , 2010 , 2013 , 2014 , 2015 , 2016 , 2017 , 2018
Explosions: 2001 , 2002 , 2003 , 2004 , 2005 , 2006 , 2007 , 2008 , 2009 , 2010 , 2011 , 2012 , 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018
CFA Violations: 2009-2018: SATP
CFA Violations: 2004-2018: Official Data
Trends of Violence since 2001
Estimated Infiltration since 2001
Major Terrorist attacks on Security Forces and other high security targets in the Post-Kargil Period since 1999
Nature of terrorist attacks since 1990
Incident Details since 2005
Casualties during militancy since 1990
Casualties in violence by terrorist since 1990
Monthly break-up of casualties in terrorist violence - 1998-2001
Cumulative data on Violence by Terrorists, 2001
Cumulative data on Violence by Terrorists, 2000
Fatalities: (January-July) since 2002
Ramadan Cease-fire: Casualties
Major massacres by terrorists since 1996
Major terrorist attacks on Hindus since 1997
Terrorist Attacks on Christian Missionary Institutions since 1989
Terrorist Atrocities on Women and Children in J&Ksince 1990
Political Activists killed by Terrorists since 1989
Atrocities on Foreign Nationals since 1991
Religious identity of civilians casualties since 1988
Local and Foreign Terrorists Killed since 1990
Pakistani terrorists killed by Security Forces since 1998
Terrorist leaders killed during encounters with security forces since 2003
Group Clashes since 1990
Foreign mercenaries arrested and killed since 1991
Terrorist arrested, surrendered & killed since 1990
Abductions by terrorist since 1990
Amount looted by terrorist since 1998
Profile of abducted victims since 1990
Infiltration detected since 1997
Recovery and seizures of weapons, ammunition, explosives and equipment since 1990:
Weapons
Explosive Materials
Communication Equipment
Accessories
District-wise recruitment of Special Police Officers (SPOs), 1996-2001
Voter Turnout since 2002




 
Copyright © 2001 SATP. All rights reserved.