The Express Tribune, on July 24, published a report titled “Defence Deal: Pakistan to buy eight submarines from China”, believed to be “the largest-ever defence deal China has agreed to with any country”. Two sources are quoted in the report, the UK-based Financial Times, which cites a retired senior official claiming that the contract could be worth $4 billion to $5 billion, and Pakistan’s finance ministry that has stated that payments to China will be made in four installments, with the submarines being delivered to Pakistan in the coming years.
Pakistan Navy’s 10 per cent share in this year’s defence budget of Rs700.2 billion is a reflection of the country’s geography which is primarily not maritime, explaining the continued low percentage allocated for the navy in the defence budget over the years. Pakistan shares and defends 6,774kms of land borders with its neighbours, whereas it has only 1,064km of coastline to safeguard and protect. In contrast, India has to defend 7,515km of coastline. This highlights the kind of military threat there is, which in the case of Pakistan, has always been considered to be ‘landscape and not seascape specific’. Why, then, is there a need for purchasing these ‘submerged offensive war machines’ when our military fights and is most likely to continue to fight, both with regular and irregular forces, mainly on land?
Currently, India has one nuclear-powered submarine, Chakra-Akulla 2 (under 10 years lease from Russia since 2012) and 14 diesel electric submarines, one of which exploded and sank on August 14, 2013. Pakistan boasts of eight submarines — none of which are nuclear-capable in their naval services (French-supplied PNS Hashmat, Hurmat, Khalid, Saad and Hamza, as well as three midget submarines for shallow water attacks). Reportedly, India in an attempt to upgrade its navy, is expected to acquire six more submarines by the end of this decade. So is the likely Pakistani submarine purchase from China an attempt to balance naval power with India? And is this something that we need to do?
Ideally, Pakistan should also be seeking a nuclear-powered submarine on lease from China, on the same lines as India has acquired from Russia. The imbalance of naval power against our archrival is not in the fewer number of submarines that we have in service, but having none that are nuclear-capable.
With the American pivot towards Asia-Pacific, the Indian and Pacific Oceans in the coming days and years are likely to be cluttered with over- and sub-surface military machines. China plans to expand its submarine fleet to 78 by the year 2020, which will bring it on a par with the existing submarine fleet size of the United States. By 2050, China also plans to add nine aircraft carriers to its naval fleet. Do we need to enhance our naval offensive capability when the Indian Navy is apparently trying to maintain a military balance with China? We also give China the status of our ‘ultimate protector’ at sea, which maintains a two-ocean navy (Western Pacific and Indian Oceans). As we enjoy an informal but dependable military alliance with China, a great naval power, that vouches to defend our interests, should enhancement of our sub-surface offensive capability still be a military priority?
China provides us with a good example of how the type of naval battles it foresees has enabled it to arm and structure its navy with only the most essential and effective naval battle tools. Implementing an ‘anti-access strategy’, China, despite being a global naval power, showcases only one aircraft carrier that Americans describe as a “refitted Russian-Ukrainian piece of junk” that is “more of an amphibious war ship than an American size carrier”. But China has balanced this against the naval threat it faces from its enemies by investing in its land-based anti-ship ballistic missiles, threatening all the intruding surface warships at long ranges. It has also tested its prototype J-20 stealth fighter, which rivals the American F-22 Raptor (the world’s only operational stealth fighter). It’s not only by reaching out but also by planning a defensive shield that China plans to fight its future naval battles.
Battles at sea have never been our hot military frontline. All the previous wars that we fought with India were lost or stalemated into ceasefire on the ground as an extension of both countries’ efficient and effective land and air warfare. Naval engagements in the past have been small and insignificant when compared to the massive land engagements that took place and the losses suffered by both countries in terms of men and material.
In all likelihood, our military will continue to remain engaged in fighting small irregular battles, proxy wars, and at best, limited wars. In any case, there seems to be a very low probability of an India-Pakistan conflict dominated by or limited to the naval realm.
Shouldn’t the question of military purchases be answered by the type of wars that we are preparing ourselves to fight in the future? We could go ahead and acquire a new Gerald R Ford class aircraft carrier at the cost of $12 billion, but does the defence of Pakistan warrant such a purchase and at what cost? Backbreaking poverty that countries like India and Pakistan experience is a result of increased militarism. It’s only by prioritising our defence procurements and matching them with our vital defence needs that we can achieve a sound defence, as well as economic growth, which is so essential for poverty eradication.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 12th, 2015.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
Pakistani military should get its Aircraft Carrier and Nuclear Submarine because it has a history of getting its toys while the public eats grass!
Surrender of 93,000 in 1971 was some stalemate! Loss of half the country was mostly a stalemate! Defeat in 1999 – Kargil, was also a stalemate!
Submarines are the only offensive weapon that the navy has. On Sub on war patrol can dominate thousands of square miles of area and ties up a lot of enemy’s resources. A blockade by another power is a grave threat that Pakistan faces. Having a potent submarine fleet is best answer.
“I later learnt that after telling Major Bilal to break down the closed door upstairs when I went to check on the vehicles, someone had fired a pistol shot into the room where Major Bilal’s men were collected, luckily no one was hit. Before anyone could stop him a soldier threw a grenade into the veranda from where the pistol shot had come and followed it with a burst from his sub-machine gun. The grenade burst and the sub-machine gun fire made Sheikh Mujib call out from behind the closed room that if an assurance was given that he would not be killed he would come out. He was given an assurance and he came out of the room. When he came out Havaldar Major Khan Wazir, later subedar, gave him a resounding slap on his face”.
The Way It Was by Brig. Z. A. Khan
“His (Yahya Khan) famous weaknesses were women and wine, I fully agree that adultery is highly condemnable thing. Yahya had another weakness that unless others he never hided his relations with women. That was the reason this weakness of his spread so quickly in public. There were two other reasons, one his pride and the other I don’t know why women were mad about him, and sometime some women had relations with him with the consent of their husbands.”
From Bombay to GHQ by Maj. Gen. A. O. Mittha
Author seems to have not heard of subject called economics….India spends only 2.1% of GDP on defence..while for papistan its around 3%…A small mice cant match an elephant at any cost..but if it runs..it may come under elephants legs…than u may think what will happen to the mouse…..live in reality….not any hypothetical world…
Those new subs will be based in Gawadar under PN control but Chinese guidance. The whole point of the exercise is to deny US navy an absolute control of the Persian Gulf.
@Bairooni Haath:
The same public has acquired nuclear power for its country; something the neighbors cannot understand.
@Liberal:
And yet the same Public is blasted like Halal chicken ! What use are those Nukes then?
Nukes are good blackmailing tool for Pakistan , just ;like the North Korean !
@Liberal:
And yet the same Public is blasted like Halal chicken ! What use are those Nukes then?
Nukes are good blackmailing tool for Pakistan , just ;like the North Korean !
Ignoring the junk that has found its way into the comments section from across the border, I would suggest to the author a key geographical feature he may have missed: The Persian Gulf.
.
This energy corridor, or the blockade of it, can cause havoc with India’s energy needs. This alone, can cause jitters in Indian knickers. In addition, submarines will help Pakistan complete a reliable Nuclear triad (Nuclear Submarines are different to Nuclear Capable). I would like to see a ToT with the deal, and no kickbacks, although the Chinese are world known for bribing, and Pakistani Navy officials, for accepting these bribes. I would like to see the deal completed with minimal financial corruption. It can be a good investment.
@Usman
Won’t blocking the Persian gulf hurt China and Europe and India as well as half the world ?
India and China have both developed huge strategic petroleum storage for such an eventuality,maybe only enough for a few weeks, but long enough for a short war.
@mss if this is for China’s benefit, why are we paying for it ?Specially as this stops us investing in roads and metros, oh yeah and health and education and water ?
Lol….Pakistan have navy too??? India has two aircraft carriers ….so Pakistan should purchase 4 aircraft carriers to beat India 🙂
What’s the point of spending more on weapons? We already have sufficient weapons which is still unused….and don’t copy India…India has good economy and resources to spend billions on it’s defense budge, but our economy is fragile, so we must use our funds for basic needs like electricity, gas, clean water, health etc
J-10 stealth is pitched against F-35, not F-22 raptor. Please get your facts right.
Like the saying “an apple a day keeps the doctor away”, 8 submarines loaded with 8 war heads each will keep the Indian supremacists away. Simple as that. Doesn’t need a genius to figure that out. Why sacrifice life when it can easily be avoided with half the amount we spend every year on other means to defend ourselves.
Author’s knowledge on the subject is very shallow and he is just towing army bases and mindset with few Naval high sounding words he might have learnt from here and there. At one place he is giving navy meager role in Defence of country due geographical features and at the same time emphasising importance of Indian ocean with more intrest of China US and India pouring more submarines in the region. Another dichotomy is with respect to his assurance of defence by China in case of crises. When it happens in the past in his so called statement wars. Poorly written with no vision and knowledge of anything.
@Bewildered:
“8 submarines loaded with 8 war heads each will keep the Indian supremacists away. Simple as that.”
It is not really as simple as that. If it is, why is it that Bangladesh that was once part of Pakistan doesn’t see the need for nukes, missiles, submarines etc. to protect itself from “Indian supremacists”?
Pakistanis are better submariners than Indians. Also submarines are force multipliers and can enable a smaller navy like Pakistan to stave of a larger navy like India’s. Plus with some modifications its possible to put nuclear missiles on these submarines.