More fundamentally, though, the AWACS (Airborne Warning and ControlSystem) extends China's deep and broad network of air defence CommandControl Communications Intelligence Surveillance Reconnaissance (C3ISR)systems into a key airborne area. In doing so, China is now acquiringthe radar and passive early warning and air defence command, controland communications it needs to counter foreign fighters and cruisemissiles.

Yet despite the fact that this system employs radar technology twogenerations ahead of that used by the US Air Force’s E-3CAWACS—generally seen as a benchmark by the rest of the world—thedeployment of China’s new aircraft elicited almost no response fromWashington.

Airborne C3ISR systems such as AWACS aircraft typically operate asextensions to ground-based networks of air defence radar systems anddefensive Surface to Air Missile (SAM) batteries, providing forwardcoverage against targets that are hidden from ground-based sensors by‘terrain shadowing’ or the earth’s curvature. Such targets can below-flying combat aircraft, but in an increasing number of cases arelikely to be low-flying cruise missiles.

So, how important a step is this new system for China? To betterunderstand the implications, it’s useful to look at the evolution ofChina's air defence capabilities more generally.

During the 1950s, the Soviets exported a range of air defenceequipment to China, much of which reflected what was thenstate-of-the-art Soviet radar technology. But the Khrushchev-eratensions put an end to that, and over time China proceeded to reverseengineer all of these Soviet designs.

By the 1970s, China was producing clones or derivatives of most ofthis equipment, especially ‘acquisition’ radars designed to search foraircraft that could then be targeted by SAM batteries or interceptoraircraft. This area of military technology was so valued by the PLAthat in 1969 it had initiated development of an indigenous AWACS—theKJ-1. This radar design was built into a 1950s Tupolev Tu-4 Bullaircraft which itself was a reverse engineered Boeing B-29Superfortress. This project was repeatedly disrupted by the unstablepolitical environment, and never produced an operational capability.Still, the efforts highlight the PLA’s long-standing interest in havingcredible airborne C3ISR.

 Antony is set toundertake a two-day visit to the East Asian nation  South Korea  in a bid to “boostdefence co-operation between the two countries”.

Antony, who willbegin his visit on 2 September, will be accompanied by defencesecretary Pradeep Kumar, defence adviser Sundaram Krishna and seniorarmy and navy officials.

“The visit is part of India’s ‘Look Eastpolicy’ and a wide range of issues, including defence and bilateralco-operation in research and development for manufacture of militaryequipment, will figure prominently during the visit,” the defenceministry said in a statement on Tuesday.

The visit comes in thebackdrop of reports of a massive Chinese military presence in theGilgit-Baltistan region in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) and a recentPentagon report that details the Chinese build-up. “Antony was supposedto visit South Korea later this year but the fact that he is going now,so close after Krishna’s visit, indicates that there is some urgency incountering China’s military build-up by forging stronger military andstrategic ties with South Korea,” said Rajaram Panda, senior fellow atthe Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (Idsa). Since May,Antony has visited Oman and Seychelles and is scheduled to visit the USin late September and Vietnam in October as part of a summit of theAssociation of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean).

Panda said Indiais looking to effectively counter the Chinese “string of pearls”strategy and Antony’s visit should be looked at in a larger context.“We could safely say that these are the beginnings of an India-SouthKorea-Japan axis as a counterpoise to the Pakistan-China-North Koreaone,” he said. China’s “string of pearls” strategy is designed tocontrol maritime interests in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR)) bybuilding bases or partnering with countries such as Pakistan, Sri Lankaand Myanmar in securing sea routes to move cargo and oil.

Indiaand Japan have been holding negotiations toward concluding a civilnuclear deal and analysts point out that India would actively look topursue a similar deal with South Korea. “Although chances of anIndo-Japan civil nuclear deal appear bright, Japan does have domesticpolitical issues which could come in the way. In South Korea’s case,though, there is no such issue,” said Panda.

“Japan has alwaysbeen on India’s strategic grid but not South Korea, which, because ofits technological prowess, has a potentially large stake in India’sdefence market,” said defence analyst Commodore C. Uday Bhaskar. “Theseback-to-back visits and bilateral exchanges are a tacit acknowledgementof that fact.”
Analysts say India would also seek to tap intoSouth Korea’s strong capabilities in ship-building technology. “SouthKorea has marched ahead of Japan in naval ship-building technology, soit makes sense for India to build synergies with that country,considering the fact that our naval ship-building yards have theirhands full,” added Bhaskar.

In recent years, India has increased its military, especially maritime, engagement with countries in the IOR.
The Indian Navy has been involved in anti-piracy operations off the Gulf of Aden.
“Boththe South Koreans and the Japanese are equally dependent on the IOR astheir maritime trade routes run via the IOR. Considering the fact thatIndia is the predominant naval force in the IOR, co-operation withIndia becomes inevitable,” Bhaskar said.

These were momentous events set in motion 25 years earlier when, inAugust 1950, the first shipload of US arms arrived in Vietnam,ostensibly to bolster France's ability to suppress a mountingCommunist-led insurgency against continued colonial rule.


But while that conflict is now just another part of history, thetragic events that culminated in the United States’ ignominious defeatthen might be instructive in its now almost decade-long war on the samecontinent. And, as the United States slips into anotherquagmire—committing ever more resources to try to quell theTaliban-al-Qaeda insurgency in Afghanistan—its policymakers would dowell to consider the increasingly obvious parallels with this earlierendeavour.

The most important of these similarities is almost certainly thecritical variable that eventually convinced the US public that theVietnam War was unwinnable and provoked growing and ultimately decisiveopposition to its continuation—mounting casualties.

When casualty rates rose from a relative handful per month to thelevel of scores and ultimately hundreds per month, no amount ofreassurance that there was light at the end of the tunnel—and thatperseverance would eventually carry the day—was going to convince asceptical US public it should continue.

This isn’t to say that the level of casualties has yet (or everwill) compare with the Vietnam fiasco. But relative to the scope of warnow being waged in the AfPak theatre, casualties are risinguncomfortably sharply and the US public is growing restive.

There’s considerable evidence that the jihadi quasi-state that nowembraces a significant portion of the tribal mountain region situatedbetween the Afghani and Pakistani heartlands has jelled into aformidable socio-political entity with significant militarycapabilities. This quasi-state is the reason why no matter how manyTaliban leaders have been killed by drones, insurgent attacks havepersisted and even escalated.

This ‘state’ possesses the fiscal,manpower and administrative and ideological resources to replace itsbattlefield losses, resupply its military equipment, and mountsustained and sophisticated attacks against US and NATO forces.

As a consequence of all this, public opposition to the war, ashappened with Vietnam, is trending toward critical mass, a shift likelyto be fanned by the public scepticism on display by key opinion formers.

Back in the 1960s, it was pronouncements like that from the late WalterCronkite, who declared in 1968 that ‘We have been too oftendisappointed by the optimism of the American leaders, both in Vietnamand Washington, to have faith any longer in the silver linings theyfind,’ which helped solidify opposition.

Now, concerns are being raised by leading foreign policy intellectualssuch as Council on Foreign Relations President Richard Haas, formerlydirector of policy planning in the US State Department under Gen. ColinPowell, who had a cover story in Newsweek last month that effectivelydeclared the Afghan war a failure and called for a complete rethink.

And, while back in 1971 the release of the Pentagon Papers blew thelid off public confidence in its leaders, the WikiLeaks publication haslaid bare for all to see the mounting problems in Afghanistan

In the latter’s case, there’s too much in the 90,000 pages ofdocuments to quickly digest. But one element already stands out asparticularly troubling: the nefarious role that elements in Pakistanhave from the outset played in the conflict.

Pakistan has, in the words of the New York Times, been playingsomething of a ‘double game,' allowing ‘representatives of its spyservice to meet directly with the Taliban in secret strategy sessionsto organize networks of militant groups that fight against Americansoldiers in Afghanistan, and even hatch plots to assassinate Afghanleaders.’

So what should US policymakers take from this? It’s not thatPakistani officials are ambivalent about what’s happening inAfghanistan (that should already be obvious). Instead, it’s that thecountry's political society is so fractionalized that in many crucialrespects there are actually two ‘governments' simultaneously in play inthe country.

These two ‘governments’—one headed by President Asif Ali Zardari andthe other a de facto shadow government that is nurtured by the militaryand which surreptitiously maintains links to the Taliban—are working atcross-purposes to each other.

The WikiLeaks data make it clear that as long as this shadowgovernment remains viable and effective, the constitutional governmentof Pakistan can neither effectively cope with the Taliban quasi-stateembedded in the AfPak tribal region, nor successfully carry out itsrecently negotiated political and economic agreements with the UnitedStates. Indeed, the legitimate government of Pakistan is paralyzed bypolitical schizophrenia and can’t hope to be truly effective againstIslamic fanatics in its midst until it finds ways to assert fullsovereignty over the entire country, and particularly the ISI cancerthat infects the military.

So what next? At the very least the Obama administration should consider a significant course correction in its AfPak strategy.

The time has come to cut Pakistan loose from the decades-long policyof treating it as a ‘rental state', to use Pakistani Ambassador to theUnited States Husain Haqqani's well-worn phrase. This would meancurtailing US military assistance only to that which directly affectsPakistan's ability to effectively battle the jihadi quasi-state. If thegovernment is not willing to do this, then military assistance shouldbe suspended.

On the Afghan side, meanwhile, to quote Haas, ‘Thetime has come to scale back US objectives and sharply reduce USinvolvement on the ground.’

Where, then, should the US turn if it leaves Pakistan andAfghanistan to their own devices? The answer is India. The UnitedStates should materially increase its military collaboration withIndia—the only genuinely politically stable state in the region—so thattogether they can form a strategic nexus of stable states confrontinga Pakistan that seems poised to collapse unless it finds ways to getits political house in order. Above all, Pakistan must be allowed tosolve its own political problems, free of American paternalism andoverindulgence of its military.

This of course implies a radical reworking of the US strategicorientation to South Asia and would mean crafting what is effectivelyan alliance designed to preserve as much peace, secularism andpolitical stability as the considerable resources of the two statesworking in concert can achieve.
Source Here

It is not known which of the country's state departments or institutions ordered the helicopters, the report said.

In May, the Azerbaijan Emergencies Ministry bought two Ka-32 helicopters from Russia.
The Ka-32 is a 12-ton coaxial twin-rotor helicopter that can carry a payload of up to four tons.
It is commonly used in utility cargo work and fire-fighting, has anendurance of about four hours and cruises at 205 kilometers per hour

BrahMos, the missile joint venture between India and Russia, isinviting a lot of global attention, particularly from South America,Middle East, Asia Pacific and African regions, a senior defenceofficial told ET. With this newfangled demand BrahMos aims at creatingan export order of $13 billion for the indigenously-built Brah-Mos.

Although there are over 60,000 cruise missiles worldwide, most ofthem are pretty archaic, having been developed in the 1970s. Thisexplains the reason for the spurt in demand for the new BrahMos fleet, say defence officials.The supersonic cruise missile system has also caughtthe attention of many countries such as Brazil, South Africa and Chilebecause it has been developed at a low-cost budget of $300 million.

Named after India’s Brahmaputra river and Russia’s Moskva river, theBrahmos missile can travel at nearly three times the speed of sound andhit targets up to 300 km away. It can be launched from submarines, ships, aircraft or land. “It is the best missile — simple but universal.

We are working along with the state-owned Defence Research andDevelopment Organisation (DRDO) labs and PSUs such as DRDL and BEML.Private players such as Larsen & Toubro, Godrej are alsocollaborating for the project”, Alexander B Maksichev, deputy generaldirector at NPO Mashinostroyenia and managing director at Brah-MosAerospace, told ET. “BrahMos is moving in a new direction with airborne missile version,” he added.

“The negotiations and ground work to export these missiles to othercountries have started. The export of BrahMos will start once therequirements of Indian defence are met”, said a senior defence officialspeaking on condition of anonymity. On its part, India has alreadyplaced $3 billion of missile orders including ground systems andreceivers with BrahMos for next 7-8 years.

The missiles will also be exported to the Russian military, which hasshown interest in the new air-borne version, the defence official said.

The success of the BrahMos model comes at a time when India isconsidering deploying its nuclear-capable ballistic missiles in theNorth East, close to its border with China in an apparent attempt toenhance its military preparedness. The move comes close after therelease of a report by Pentagon, which suggested that China has movedits new advanced long-range CSS-5 missiles close to its border withIndia and developed contingency plans to shift airborne forces to theregion.

BrahMos is capable of carrying conventional as well as nuclearwarheads, with a payload of 200-300 kg. The test of the air-launchedversion of Brah-Mos supersonic cruise missile is expected to take placein 2012, said Dr Apathukatha Sivathanu Pillai chief executive, BrahMosAerospace, during the Bangalore Space Expo 2010. He said the Indian AirForce has chosen the Su-30MKI fighter aircraft as a launch platform forthe BrahMos missile. The IAF has also placed orders for land-to-landattack missiles.

Meanwhile, the Indian Army, which has given orders for long targetmissiles, is also procuring block-two BrahMos missiles for precise andcontrolled attacks on small targets. This will prevent the surroundinginfrastructure from being destroyed. “BrahMos is a landmark projectbecause it was started from scratch in India. We have been developingballistic missiles. But it is a good learning process for Indianscientists to design and develop the cruise missile technology”, saidAjey Lele from the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), aDelhi-based think-tank.

Going forward , a hypersonic version of the missile — BrahMos-II ispresently under development. The missile can touch speeds ranging fromfive to seven times that of sound, making it the fastest cruise missilein the world. Brahmos-II is expected to be ready by 2013-14 and willarm the Project 15B destroyers of the Indian Navy.

Lin, amember of the ruling Kuomintang party, declined to specify the range ofthe missiles or the number to be put into service.
The defence ministry would not provide details of the sensitive weaponry development project when approached for comment.
A source close to the ministry said the military "has produced at least dozens of cruise missiles."
Atop military chief spoke of the need for a military build-up despitethe fast warming ties between Taipei and Beijing over the past twoyears.
"Although tensions between Taipei and Beijing have easedsubstantially, the Chinese Communists have not renounced the use offorce against Taiwan," Lin Chen-yi, chief of the General Staff, toldreporters in Taipei.
President Ma Ying-jeou gave an order in 2008for the production of 300 Hsiungfeng 2E cruise missiles, according tothe Taipei-based China Times.
The paper said Hsiungfeng 2E, whichwas developed by the military-run Chungshan Institute of Science andTechnology, has a range of around 800 kilometres (500 miles).
Theinstitute has spent 2.2 billion Taiwan dollars (68 million US) eachyear since 2000 on developing the missiles, whose name means BraveWind, and managed to expand its range from 600 to 800 kilometres, itsaid.
The missile could be launched on land or at sea, the papersaid, adding that it would be capable of hitting airports and missilebases in southeast China, as well as cities such as Shanghai and HongKong.

September 01, 2010
 RAWALPINDI:A delegation, comprising officials from Pakistan Army, has resolvedcancellation of US visit after they were mishandled by US officials ofTransport Security at Washington Airport, Geo News reported.

Accordingto Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) sources, a delegation ofPakistan Army was invited to Central Command meeting in US wheredelegation announced calling off visit after arrival at Washingtonairport when US security officials misbehaved Pakistan army officials.

Delegation has been called back to country.

Meanwhile, US Defense Department has strongly deplored the incident, sources said.

SOURCE HERE

Pakistan’s nuclear assets are often described as the “Islamic bomb.”Given that no other Muslim-majority country has the bomb, is thisdescription something that you agree with?

The term “Islamic Bomb” was mischievously coined by the Western worldto frighten the rest of the world and to portray Muslims, and Pakistan,as terrorists who should not possess an atom bomb. The Western world isunited in Muslim-bashing and ridiculing Islam and its golden values.

The U.N. has slapped sanctions on Iran—ostensibly as punishment forthe Islamic country’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. How do you see globalgeopolitics shifting if Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons?


In Iran the same mischievous propaganda is at work to befool the ratherignorant—or less knowledgeable—public that it poses a threat and is afanatic, terrorist country. Have we already forgotten that, despite therepeated statements of no WMD in Iraq that were made by [former U.N.weapons inspector] Hans Blix after IAEA [International Atomic EnergyAgency] inspectors made regular visits to that country, Bush and Blairstill attacked Iraq? In this process they killed thousands of people,destroyed an ancient civilization, occupied the country, and putstooges in place to play their part in the killing of their own people.Iran, as everyone knows, is a member of the NPT [NuclearNon-Proliferation Treaty] regime, that it is open to IAEA inspection ofall its sites, to which it is adhering, and that it cannot producenuclear weapons material or nuclear weapons. This is yet anotherexample of Western hypocrisy.

Most here take pride in the fact that Pakistan is a nuclear stateand believe this has served as a deterrent to conventional war withIndia.

Yes, I fully agree. Our nuclear program has ensured our survival, oursecurity, and our sovereignty ... I am proud to have contributed to ittogether with my patriotic and able colleagues.

Former ISI chief Javed Ashraf Qazi recently told Pakistan’s DawnNews TV channel that CIA agents were caught in 1994–95 trying to buyinformation on Pakistan’s nuclear program. The refrain that Pakistan’snuclear weapons are unsafe and can fall into the hands of radicalIslamic organizations is also often played up in the Western press. Howsecure is the nuclear arsenal?

Nobody ever penetrated Kahuta [the site of Pakistan’s main nuclearfacility], nor could they do so. The Americans, contrary to their tallclaims, were totally in the dark about the status of our program.Majors—or even generals, for that matter—had no access to sensitive andclassified information ... [Kahuta] or PAEC [Pakistan Atomic EnergyCommission] were never a department store where one could go and pickup a bomb! The American and British intelligence agencies tried tobribe and buy two of our scientists, who refused all sorts ofincentives and reported the matter to me.

Can nuclear weapons fall into the wrong hands?

This is again a Western myth and one of their phobias. A nuclearweapon—good or dirty—is a highly complicated and sophisticated device.A large number of parts are needed, and expertise is required toassemble such a device. Even scientists and engineers without therelevant experience are not able to do this, let alone to talk ofilliterate, untrained terrorists.
We have examples of countries, like South Africa and, to an extent,Libya, that decided to give up on their nuclear ambitions. Howrealistic is the possibility of a world with no nukes?

It is very convenient to give South Africa and Libya as examples ofself-deweaponization. However, let us look at the backgrounds first. InSouth Africa the “whites” destroyed their nuclear weapons beforehanding over power to the “blacks.” They could not accept the fact that“black” people should—or could—possess them. The Libyans panicked afterthe West attacked Iraq and eliminated Saddam Hussein by falselyaccusing that country of possessing nuclear weapons.
The U.S. was aware of Pakistan’s nuclear program but turned a blindeye to it during the original Afghan jihad. As soon as the Soviets weredefeated, the U.S. Congress barred American military aid to Pakistan.Has the world made an unfair distinction between Pakistan’s and India’spursuit of a nuclear program?

The Afghan War was a blessing for our nuclear program. It was not thatthe Western countries actively supported it but that they were tooscared and occupied with the Russian invasion of Afghanistan and itsfuture consequences to actively oppose it. Neither the Americans northe British had a clue about the status of our program until 1990.After the Afghan War they slapped sanctions on us to extractconcessions from [fomer Pakistani president] Benazir Bhutto’sgovernment, but [former president] Ghulam Ishaq Khan and [former Armychief] Gen. Aslam Beg frustrated their nefarious designs.

There have been reports that the American Joint Special Operations Command wanted to assassinate you. How safe do you feel?

It is all pure humbug. Nobody ever tried to assassinate me. I traveledall over the world at a time when everyone knew that I was thearchitect of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program. The fact is that AllahAlmighty had not yet fixed the time and place for my demise. I neverwas, and never will be, afraid of so-called threats. When ourpredetermined time comes, Hazrat Izrael [the angel of death] will findus, no matter where we are hiding.
Have the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq made the world safer?

No, the world is not a safer place. Nationalists—call themfundamentalists or extremists if you like—have obtained a mobilizationpoint with [the wars], have united, and are determined to negate theplans and designs of the Western countries.

The CIA chief, Leon Panetta, said earlier this year that Pakistan isnow the headquarters of Al Qaeda. British leaders have declaredPakistan the exporter of global terrorism. Is this accurate, and, ifso, what can Pakistan do to turn the tide?

The CIA chief—like his bosses and those before him—is a liar. There isno headquarters of Al Qaeda in Pakistan. Yes, Pakistan has become veryunsafe due to foreign troops in Afghanistan. Our cohesion has beenshattered. The spineless political leaders have turned our country—anuclear and missile power with 175 million people—into a beggar state,a third-rate country. If there had been any pride left in our leaders,they would have responded appropriately and nobody would have dared tosay such things in the first place.

Despite your televised address more than six years ago, yourpopularity among Pakistanis has largely remained intact. Did you everfeel let down?

There is a saying that the common people are too clever to be fooled bycrooks. The nation as a whole is aware of the truth ... No, I do notfeel let down by the Pakistani people, but I do feel let down by thePakistani government.

Is Pakistan a threat to the world?

No, Pakistan is not a threat to any country. If Western troops withdrawfrom this area we would once again have peace and tranquility here. Istill hope that someday we will find honest, God-fearing leaders toturn this country into one of prosperity and peace.
There is also the popular theory that Pakistan is a nation with nosustainable identity. The bomb, like cricket, is one of those thingsthat bind all Pakistanis in common pride and cause. Do you agree?

Pakistan was not an artificially created country. We, the Muslims inIndia, were a separate nation with a distinct culture, history, socialorder, and heritage. By any definition we were a nation. Unfortunately,selfish, narrow-minded leaders broke it into ethnic groups, which ledto exploitation. Nuclear weapons made the nation walk with heads heldhigh.

SOURCE HERE

TEHRAN willtarget Israel's Dimona reactor in a retaliatory attack if the it is attacked by an Israeli or US air strike, a Iranian official toldthe Arabic-language newspaper Asharq al-Awsat on Monday. 
Tehran is aware that Israel and the United Stateswant to attack Iran, but we are also aware that while they actuallyhave the option to launch war, they do not have the option to end it.This is America's and Israel's point of weakness. We know that there isno solution to this point of weakness, thanks to the importance of theGulf region, America's problems in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the(geographically) small area of the Zionist entity," the anonymousofficial was quoted by the paper as saying. He also specified that theDimona Nuclear reactor would be on the top of Iran's target list in a potentialwar.

The Termendies speed at which China has been moving to build up itsnavy is causing concern in the  Japan, the United States—and  in India.

Recent decisions by China’s People’s Liberation Army-Navy (PLAN) haveleft China-watchers wondering where the Chinese juggernaut will stop.The latest decision to garner attention has been the apparent decisionby the Central Military Commission—China’s highest military planningbody—to give the green light to the building of two new nuclear-poweredaircraft carriers.


One aircraft carrier—the Kuznetsov class Varyag—is already beingrefitted after being taken off Russian hands. All three aircraftcarriers will be available to China by 2017 and will be responsible forpatrolling the South China Sea, Western Pacific and Indian Ocean, thussignaling to the world that China has indeed truly become a superpower.

So what is India doing to counter the growing Chinese naval might? TheChinese naval buildup is a matter of deep concern for Indian securitymanagers. However, New Delhi is busy developing an effective counter.Two aircraft carriers—the INS Vikramaditya (Admiral Gorshkov of Russia)and INS Vikrant—are under construction. In addition, the Indiangovernment in March 2009 approved Project 15B under whichnext-generation warships are in various stages of construction.Meanwhile, at least three Kolkata class destroyers are underconstruction under Project 15A.

But there’s more. The Indian Navy has also launched several newprojects to develop a beefed up fleet of stealth frigates. The leadvessels will be the Shivalik class of frigates—India’s first suchstealth vessels. The Sahyadri and Satpura are also in advanced stagesof construction, meaning the Indian government is well on its way toachieving its goal of maintaining a force of more than 140 warships.

Meanwhile, construction work on at least four nuclear submarines is infull swing, while the indigenous Arihant nuclear-powered submarine hasalready been launched (India plans to have at least 30 submarines by2030 (although this target may be tough to achieve with the submarinefleet expected to shrink to 16 by 2012 with the decommissioning of twoFoxtrot submarines).

Clearly, China has set off a naval race in the region. Japan and theUnited States, which are set to lag far behind in the Asia-Pacific,need to stand by India if the international community’s unfetteredaccess to the South China Sea, Western Pacific and Indian Ocean is tobe maintained.

The navy’s decision, explained a senior admiral on condition ofanonymity, stems from delays that have been endemic to indigenoussubmarine construction. India bought four HDW submarines in the 1980s.HDW’s shipyard in Germany built two of them in just 56 months each. Incontrast, Mazagon Dock took 98 months and 116 months to build theremaining two. Mazagon Dock is also running 30 months late indelivering the first of six Scorpene submarines that it was contractedto build under Project 75.
“At least two submarines will come in quickly by building themabroad,” said the admiral. “We are desperately short of submarines.” Aperformance audit of the navy by the Comptroller and Auditor Generalhas documented that just seven or eight of India’s 15 submarines areoperational at any given time against a projected requirement of atleast 24.
Yet, curiously, despite the dismal track record of Mazagon Dock, thedefence acquisition council has decided to hand it a prime role inProject 75I as well. While the cost of Project 75I is still not known,it will substantially exceed the Rs 23,562 crores that India paidFrench companies Armaris and DCNS for Project 75, since building twosubmarines abroad will inflate the cost.
Furthermore, that decision will require fresh sanction from theCabinet Committee on Security — typically involving a 12-24-month delay— since the current sanction mandates that all the submarines must bebuilt in India.
Only after that will a tender be issued to identify a foreigntechnology partner. Among the possible bidders for the contract areRussia’s Amur Shipbuilding Plant, Germany’s HDW, Spain’s Navantia,Italy’s Fincantieri, and France’s DCNS.
In 1999, the Cabinet Committee on Security approved a 30-year planfor 24 conventional submarines to be constructed in India. Thissanctioned two simultaneous construction lines: six using westerntechnology; and six based on Russian knowhow. After that, 12indigenously-designed submarines were to be built.
The navy believes that Russian submarines have greater endurance,firepower and strategic utility, while western submarines arestealthier and, therefore, harder to detect. It was reasoned thatIndian designers would adopt the best of both traditions when designingthe 12 indigenous submarines.
Private companies such as L&T and Pipavav have investedthousands of crores of rupees to build world-class shipyards, and havelobbied intensely for a share of the submarine programme. Over the lastdecade, L&T has played a central role in building and outfittingthe nuclear-powered INS Arihant, and will do so for its two successorvessels.
Senior L&T officials have argued that Mazagon Dock would haveits hands full with Scorpene production until at least 2019 and has nocapacity to take on another three submarines. But the MoD has presenteda detailed plan for the shipyard to set up a second submarine line.

Iran said in July that its nuclear agency began research on the experimental reactor.
Nuclearfusion, the process powering the sun and stars, has so far only beenmastered as a weapon, producing the thermonuclear explosions ofhydrogen bombs. It has never been harnessed for power generation.
AsgharSediqzadeh, the head of the new fusion research center, is quoted bythe semi-official ISNA news agency as saying the center will hire 100experts to join the national project.
Tehran is not known to have carried out anything but basic fusion research.

The race to build the world's first flying military jeep just moved astep closer to the finish line. The Pentagon's Defense AdvancedResearch Projects Agency (DARPA) has selected two companies to proceedwith the next stage of its Transformer, known as TX.

A fully automatedfour-person vehicle that can drive like a car and then take off and flylike an aircraft to avoid roadside bombs. Lockheed Martin and AAICorp., a unit of Textron Systems, are currently in negotiations withDARPA for the first stage of the Transformer project, several industrysources told Popular Mechanics at a robotics conference here in Denver.DARPA has not announced the official winners yet.


It's unclear how many companies competed for the DARPA project, but thecompetition brought together an unusual mix of large defense companieswith smaller aviation firms vying to build the vertical takeoff andlanding craft. Perhaps most surprising—and for some competitorsgalling— is that DARPA selected a rotor-based aircraft for one of thetwo winning submissions. At an industry day held earlier this year,DARPA officials had initially said they weren't interested in atraditional rotary-wing aircraft, though they might consider a vehicleif the rotor was shrouded.

AAI's winning concept does not have a shrouded rotor, but it is alsofar from being a traditional helicopter. The company, which producesthe Shadow unmanned aerial vehicle, is basing its proposal in part onthe slowed-rotor/compound concept, a technology that uses rotor bladesheavily weighted in the tips, or high inertia. The rotor provides lifton takeoff, and then as it gains speed, the rotor slows down and thewings provide lift.

Lockheed Martin has declined to detail any aspect of its submission,but those familiar with the Phantom Works project speculated that itmight combine aspects of the company's Joint Tactical Light Vehicle, afollow-on to the Humvee, with a ducted fan propulsion system that itwould use to fly.

The two companies are still a ways away from building flying Humvees;the first stage of the DARPA project is merely working on conceptualdesigns. The total funding available for Transformer is about $40million.
Source Here

WASHINGTON: Pakistan and United States signed a contract for thetransfer of the guided-missile frigate USS McInerney here on Tuesday.

The contract will enable Pakistan to take over the USS McInerney at theUS Naval station Mayport, Florida on August 31 this year, after whichit will be commissioned as PNS Alamgir .A comprehensive refurbishmentof the ship will be undertaken under the supervision of US Navy, whichwill be completed by January 2011.


Defence Procurement AttachÈ Captain Abdur Rehman inked the contract onbehalf of Pakistan Navy. The successful culmination of this contractwill also pave way for acquisition of more vessels of same class forthe Pakistan Navy to raise a squadron of eight Perry-Class frigates.This will greatly enhance operational readiness of Pakistan Navy.

USS McInerney is the second ship of the Oliver Hazard Perry-Class ofguided-missile frigates. In September 2008, the US Congress hadapproved provision of the frigate to Pakistan with a delivery date ofAugust 2010. Citing the Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms ExportControl Act, Pakistan is considered a major non-Nato ally and is ableto receive older unneeded US military equipment. Additionally, the32-year-old frigate will be given a $ 65 million refurbishment,including anti-submarine capability paid for with foreign military aidprovided by the US to the friendly countries. Pakistan will pay $78million for the frigate

With public sector shipyard Mazagon Dock Ltd (MDL), Mumbai, yearsbehind schedule in building six conventional Scorpene submarines forthe Indian Navy, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) is handing Mazagon Dockanother lucrative order to build three more submarines.

Althoughprivate sector shipbuilders — especially L&T and Pipavav ShipyardLtd (PSL) — argue that Mazagon Dock already has more than it canhandle, MoD insists the public sector shipyard can execute this order.


The MoD’s Secretary of Defence Production, R K Singh, talkingexclusively to Business Standard, has detailed Mazagon Dock’s road mapfor simultaneously executing the Scorpene order (Project 75, as it istermed) and the three additional submarines that are a part of thesix-submarine Project 75I order.

Business Standard had reported yesterday that the MoD’s apex DefenceAcquisition Council (DAC) had ruled out India’s private sector fromProject 75I. The first two submarines of Project 75I will be builtabroad in the foreign collaborator’s shipyard. The other foursubmarines will be built in MoD-owned shipyards: recently acquiredHindustan Shipyard Ltd will build one, while MDL builds three.

R K Singh explains, “First, the Scorpene delay will be trimmed down toless than 18 months. The original plan was for the first Scorpene to bedelivered in December 2012; and the other five submarines at one-yearintervals till December 2017. While the first Scorpene will only beready in August 2015, Mazagon Dock will deliver the others faster, atnine-month intervals, and finish the last Scorpene by May 2019.”

MoD sources say Mazagon Dock is being pushed towards an even moreambitious delivery schedule: Of one Scorpene every seven months. OnAugust 11, Defence Minister A K Antony told Parliament that Project 75would complete work by the second half of 2018.

But Project 75I, argues R K Singh, does not have to wait till then; itcan begin as early as 2012. By that year, with all six Scorpene hullsfully built, the specialised hull workers and welders of Mazagon Dockcould begin fabricating hulls for Project 75I.

Singh explains, “Two Scorpene hulls are already built and MDL is closeto completing the third. By early 2012, all six Scorpene hulls will beready. MDL’s hull fabrication shop — which cuts steel for the hull,rolls it, fabricates hull segments and then welds them together into acomplete hull — will be sitting idle from 2012, and ready to bediverted to Project 75I.”

The Department of Defence Production also points out that Project 75Icannot begin for another five years. At least 12-24 months are neededfor a Cabinet sanction for building the first two Project 75Isubmarines abroad. Selecting a foreign shipyard as collaborator forProject 75I will take another 24-36 months and then one year for pricenegotiations.

The six Project 75I submarines will be built on a new production line,on which work has already begun. During a visit to MDL in 2009,Business Standard was shown a 16-acre plot, adjoining MDL’s facilitiesin Mazagon, Mumbai, which the shipyard had acquired in the 1980s fromGujarat state PSU, Alcock Ashdown.

R K Singh confirmed, “We are going to execute Project 75I in a newyard, the Alcock Yard, on which MDL is building a second submarineproduction line.”

Private sector shipbuilder Larsen & Toubro finds the MoD’s decisionto patronise Mazagon Dock inexplicable. L&T sources say the companywas given to understand that they would participate in Project 75I asthe second submarine line. Now, L&T’s experience and infrastructurewould lie idle.

In a bid to counter bad press that they are receiving, the UShelicopter company Sikorsky has made a commercial offer to the IndianNavy. The offer includes servicing and spares for six obsolete SikorskyUH-3H Sea King helicopters that came onboard the USS Trenton renamed asINS Jalashva which have received a lot of flak for their sub standardquality.


The comptroller and auditor general has strongly criticised the qualityof the machines on the aircraft carrier that came through US governmentforeign military sales.

According to the CAG the ($39 million) machines did not come equippedwith any type of weather or surface surveillance radar and the defenceministry failed to secure any “guarantee for the replacement ofdefective rotables due to obsolescence”.

Talking to FE, AVM (retd) AJS Walia, managing director for India andSouth Asia, Sikorsky Aircraft said that, “We have sent an unsolicitedletter to the Indian Navy offering to provide whatever support theywant. We have also offered to supply spares which will finish by 2010.”

“These helicopters came through the government to government route. Itwas not a commercial deal. And that we are offering now will be acommercial deal between us and the Indian Navy,” Walia added.

According to the comptroller and auditor general, the 1960s vintageaircraft – decommissioned by the US Navy in 2005 – were “life-expiredand had defects that could compromise their operational effectiveness”.

The INS Jalashva, is the second largest ship with the Indian Navy,after the aircraft carrier Viraat and is believed to ‘add punch toIndia’s maritime forces’ with its capacity to participate in navaloperations, peacekeeping operations, tri-service operations andhumanitarian relief.

The US Congress had cleared the transfer of the vessel under theForeign Military Sales Program in August 2005 and the government signedthe ‘Letter of Acceptance’ on July 31, 2006.

India's effort to build French Scorpene submarines, under license, hasbeen further delayed, and the price has now gone up to $5 billion ($834million each). While this effort will leave India with thousands ofworkers and specialists experienced in building modern submarines, thatwill be wasted because the defense procurement bureaucrats seem to havelearned nothing.
These officials already caused numerous delays, andcost overruns, during negotiations to build the six Scorpenediesel-electric submarines. The bureaucrats have mismanaged this dealto the extent that it is nearly three years behind schedule. But it iseven more behind schedule if you count the several years the Indianbureaucrats delayed it even getting started.
The delays andmismanagement have so far increased the cost of the $4 billion projectby 25 percent. The first Scorpene is supposed to enter service in twoyears, with one a year after that until all six are delivered.

There's some urgency to all this, because by 2012, five of India's 16subs (10 Kilo and two Foxtrot class Russian built boats and , fourGerman Type 209s) will be retired (some are already semi-retiredbecause of age and infirmity). Two years after that, India will onlyhave five working subs.

But the bureaucrats and politicians dithered for nearly a decade, andit wasn't until 2005 that India signed a deal to buy six FrenchScorpene class boat. The delays led to the French increasing prices onsome key components, and India has had some problems in gettingproduction going on their end. The first Scorpene was to be built inFrance, with the other five built in India. While some problems wereexpected (India has been doing license manufacturing of complex weaponsfor decades), the defense ministry procurement bureaucrats never ceasedto amaze when it came to delaying work, or just getting in the way.

The Scorpenes are similar to the Agosta 90B subs (also French) thatPakistan recently bought. The first of the Agosta's was built inFrance, but the other two were built in Pakistan. The Scorpene purchasewas seen as a response to the Pakistani Agostas. The Scorpene are amore recent design, the result of cooperation between a French and aSpanish firm. The Agosta is a 1,500 ton (surface displacement)diesel-electric sub with a 36 man crew and four 21 inch torpedo tubes(with 20 torpedoes and/or anti-ship missiles carried.) The Scorpene isa little heavier (1700 tons), has a smaller crew (32) and is a littlefaster. It has six 21 inch torpedo tubes, and carries 18 torpedoesand/or missiles. Both models can be equipped with an AIP (airindependent propulsion) system. This enables the sub to stay underlonger, thus making the sub harder to find. AIP allows the sub totravel under water for more than a week, at low speed (5-10 kilometersan hour). The Pakistanis have an option to retrofit AIP in theircurrent two Agostas.

Both of these modern subs are very lethal weapons against surfacewarships. With well trained crews, Agostas and Scorpenes can get closeto just about any surface ship, no matter how good the defendersanti-submarine defenses are. But it's the AIP boats that are the realkillers. Without AIP, subs spend most of their time just below surface,using their noisy diesel engines (via a snorkel device that breaks thesurface to take in air, and get rid of the engine exhaust.) Snorkelscan be spotted by modern maritime patrol aircraft, and both nations aregetting more of these. The noise of the diesel engines can easily bepicked up by other subs. The introduction of the Agostas and Scorpeneswas seen as an escalation in the naval arms race between Pakistan andIndia.

While India was largely concerned with the Pakistani navy when theScorpene contract was negotiated and signed, China is now seen as theprimary adversary. The Chinese subs are not as effective as thePakistani boats, both because of less advanced technology, and lesswell trained crews. India could use their Scorpenes to confront anyChinese attempt to expand their naval presence into the Indian ocean.Thus the delays and cost overruns with the Scorpenes are causing quitea lot of commotion in India. But at the rate India is going, it will benearly a decade before all six of the Scorpenes are in service. At thatpoint, India would have about a dozen subs (including nuclear poweredmodels under construction. China will have over 60 boats, about 20percent of them nuclear.
Source Here

U.S. State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley saidearlier this week that the U.S. sale includes "defense services,technical data, and defense articles" for Taiwan's air defense system,and radar equipment for the island's Indigenous Defense Fighter jets.
Crowleydid not put a monetary figure on the deal or identify the Americancompanies involved. The U.S. is obligated by its own laws to provideTaiwan defensive weapons.
Beijing opposes any military sales toTaiwan as interference in its internal affairs, and the issue has oftenstrained U.S.-China relations.
"China resolutely opposes theUnited States selling weapons and relevant technical assistance toTaiwan," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said in a statement.
"Weurge the United States to ... put an end to arms sales to Taiwan andmilitary ties with Taiwan to avoid causing new harm to Sino-U.S.relations."
Taiwan's Defense Ministry has not commented on theplanned sale, but the U.S.-Taiwan Business Council, a private advocacygroup based in suburban Washington, called it "a small move."
Foryears the island has been pressing the U.S. to sell it 66 F-16 C/Dfighter jets to help counteract a long-standing Chinese militarybuildup, much of which has been aimed at providing Beijing thewherewithal to invade across the 100-mile- (160-kilometer-) wide TaiwanStrait.
Taiwan and China split amid civil war in 1949 and themainland still claims the island as part of its territory. It hasthreatened to attack if democratic Taiwan moves to make its de factoindependence permanent.
Earlier this year it suspended defenseexchanges with Washington after the U.S. announced it would makeavailable to Taiwan a $6.4 billion weapons package.
SomeTaiwanese defense officials fear that the threat of additional Chinesepressure has already convinced Washington to take the F-16 C/D sale offthe table.
However, they continue to hope that the Obamaadministration might agree to a substantial upgrade of the F-16 A/Bfighters currently in the island's inventory as a kind of consolationprize.
Last week after the release of a Pentagon reportcriticizing the secrecy surrounding China's military expansion, TaiwanPresident Ma Ying-jeou urged Washington to sell the advanced version ofthe F16 fighter. Beijing said the report was "not beneficial."
Incontrast to F-16s, the Indigenous Defense Fighter at the center of thenew radar deal is widely regarded as a relatively unsophisticatedaircraft, incapable of holding its own against the fourth generationfighters now in the possession of the Chinese air force.

India will refurbish Russian-origin T-72 tanks operated by its Armyinstead of completely phasing them out, Defence Minister A K Antony hassaid.

While the Army has placed an order with DRDO to acquire124 indigenously-built Arjun Main Battle Tanks (MBTs), “it intends toretrofit/upgrade these tanks (T-72) to enhance their missionreliability and life expectancy,” Antony told the Parliament.

The Army has so far received 85 Arjun MBT .

“Keepingin view the production capacity for MBT Arjun Tanks and strategicconsiderations, the Government is also exercising the option formodernising T-72 tanks instead of total replacement of these tanks oncompletion of their life span,” Antony said.

The Soviet-era T-72Main Battle Tanks were acquired from Russia over 30 years ago. About1600 such tanks are presently being operated by the Indian Arm

Israel's defense minister Lt. General (Ret) Ehud Barak has given thego-ahead to a $2.75 billion purchase of 20 Lockheed Martin F-35ILightning II fighter jets.
The new fighter will be provided along withan integral support package, sustaining the aircraft through itsservice life. The decision has yet to pass the approval of the Israeligovernment. The purchase will be funded by U.S. military aid to Israel.Israel originally planned to buy 75 such planes, with an initial optionof 25 aircraft. According to Israel MOD sources, the flyaway cost ofthese aircraft will be $96 million, but this cost reflects only the netplatform price.

The expenses including the preparation of the new squadron, initialinfrastructure, logistical and support package is expected eventuallyto exceed $150 million per plane. Given the additional integration costof locally developed Israeli systems planned for integration into thishighly complex aircraft, the cost is expected to rise significantly forthe fully equipped F-35Is in following years. Furthermore, for theseenhancement and adaptations Israel may have to rely on local currencyfunding, unlike the aircraft acquisition program that will be fundedentirely by the annual U.S. aid amounting over $2 billion per year.

How Much it Really Costs?

What Price InJuly this year Canada has ordered 65 F-35As fora total amount of C$9billion, reflecting a flyaway cost of $138 million. According toLockheed Martin, the Canadian F-35A is configured as the least costlyversion of the aircraft offered at a cost of US$60 million peraircraft. The remaining amount reflect training, logistics and supportcosts. Israel is expected to opt for one of the more expensive versionsof the stealth fighter, therefore it was priced slightly above theaverage cost of the F-35A (US$92.5 million). The manufacturer LockheedMartin is offering the new fighter with turnkey life cycle supportprogram. Although the cost and specific details of these supportpackages has not been announced yet, given the high readiness levelrequired by the IAF, U.S. analysts have determined the estimated lifecycle cost of the aircraft could reach up to $380 million.
Israeli pilots will begin training on the new aircraft by 2014 and thefirst aircraft are expected to arrive in Israel by 2015. The firstsquadron could become operational in less than two years at one of theIsrael Air Force (IAF) southern air bases. Four Israeli pilots havealready flew in the F-35 simulator in the U.S.A. The F-35 cockpit andavionics are not strange to the Israelis. Elbit Systems is the supplierof the advanced Helmet Mounted Display System (HMDS), which providesthe pilot's primary interface with the aircraft.
Thedecision marks the culmination of a debate within the Israel defenseestablishment about the high cost of the program. Some argued thatcommitting such a large portion of the annual defense budget to asingle acquisition program is not justifiable, and that Israel shouldseek less costly alternatives for the modernization of its air force,especially, given the changing priorities of Israel's defense. Othersclaim that the fielding of the world's most advanced fifth generationaircraft creates an important deterrence, while maintaining the IAFqualitative edge over its regional opponents. Another issue was theinclusion of indigenous Israeli systems in this Fifth Generationfighter aircraft.
The initial F-35I will representstandard F-35A models. However, the F-35I acquisition agreement isopening opportunities for the installation of Israeli systems in futureproduction batches. These opportunities will also open the aircraft formarketing Israeli systems to other air forces, reflecting anopportunity worth several billions of dollars for the local industry.Maj. General (ret) Udi Shani, Director Israel of Israel MOD has statedthat the acquisition agreement also includes a framework for buybackpurchasing from the Israeli industry worth $4 billion. The introductionof Israeli components, systems and technologies into the world's newestfighter plane will also open a potential market opportunity worth about$5 billion among the aircraft users.

New Opportunities for Israeli Systems

The airframe,subsystems and components for the current models of the F-35 – the landbased F-35A, Carrier model F-35C and Short TakeOff Vertical Landing(STOL) F-35B are all contracted, but some of the weapons systems areyet to be decided, and open future opportunities for the Israelis.Among these are the air/air missiles – the types currently consideredfor the F-35 are the U.S. made AIM-9X, and AMRAAM, and European ASRAAMand Meteor. The Israelis could opt for the Stunner missile (Python 6)under development under a joint venture between Rafael and Raytheon.
TheStunner will provide a common missile that could replace both AIM-9Xand AMRAAM with a single missile. The missile is currently indevelopment a surface-to-air missile, due for first deployment in 2013.Its specifications have already been set to enable carriage andoperation by the F-35. Another weapon considered for the aircraft isthe Spice guided weapon. These weapons will be instrumental for thestealth fighter's 'first day' missions, where the networked-stealthfighters are expected to be penetrate and destroy enemy air defenses,paving the way for other strike fighters in their missions againstairfields, air defenses, and enemy fighters, to achieve air supremacy.Currently RAFAEL is offering a 2,000 lb and 1,000 lb versions of theSpice, all these weapons can be fitted within the F-35's internalweapons bay. The 500 lb version of the Spice, currently in development,could introduce multiple weapon carriage capability for the F-35, alongwith a full load of air-to-air missiles.
Communicationssystems will introduce another opportunity for the Israeli industry. Tointegrate within the Israeli command and control system the F-35I willhave to carry suitable datalinks, satellite communications terminalsand air to ground radios, to ensure integration with the IAF networkcentric system. The IAF may have to settle with the baseline systems,designed to maintain the aircraft low-observability. Yet theintegration of local protocols and waveforms is mandatory for the longrun, either on individual aircraft or over manned or unmanned supportsystems which could also offer interesting solutions for air forcesfacing the same challenge.
Another opportunity for theF-35 community is the employment of a new escort jammer developed byIsrael. Israeli EW systems are often offered with full access to theElectronic Warfare techniques generator, while U.S. jammers often relyon highly classified operating modes restricting the export of suchsystems. If the Israeli stand-off jammer can be adapted to the F-35stealth platform, it could provide an important capability that couldbe highly attractive for many F-35 users. The standoff 'escort' jammeris under development as part of collaboration between IAI/Elta andRafael could, could be adapted for the F-35, it could offer anattractive capability which is currently unavailable for export.

The Beihai fleet of the People's Liberation Army Navy will conduct a"live ammunition drill" from Sept. 1 to Sept. 4 off the coast ofeastern China's Qingdao city, Xinhua news agency reported.

"This is an annual routine training, mainly involving theshooting of shipboard artillery," said the report, citing China'sdefense ministry.
The United States and South Korea are planninga new round of joint drills in the Yellow Sea in September in anothershow of force against North Korea following the sinking of a SouthKorean warship in March.
Any military drills involving the UnitedStates in the Yellow Sea are a sensitive issue because of the area'sproximity to China, and the disputed maritime boundary between Southand North Korea.
China has bristled at the idea of a U.S.aircraft carrier group patrolling waters near its coast, although theU.S. military has said the planned anti-submarine exercise in Septemberwould not involve a carrier.
"This would be a fresh provocationfollowing a series of joint U.S.-[South Korean] activities that havecaused tensions in East Asia," Chinese Rear Adm. Yang Yi said in anAug. 13 commentary in the China Daily.
"Offending Chinese peopleis not in the fundamental interest of the U.S. ... Any activity aimedat pushing a country with a 1.3-billion populace with enormouspotential would be inadvisable."
The United States and SouthKorea have staged massive joint naval and air exercises in the nearbySea of Japan that were opposed by Beijing.
The drills followedthe sinking of the corvette Cheonan in March, which Seoul and itsallies say was caused by a North Korean torpedo attack.
China isNorth Korea's closest ally and trade partner, and Beijing has refusedto join in international condemnation of Pyongyang for the incident.
Chinastaged naval, air and artillery exercises late last month, although itwas not clear if the drills had been pre-planned or were in response tothe U.S.-South Korea exercises.
Source Here

KwonSung Chol, quoted by the Prensa Latina government agency, spoke at anevent late Aug. 27 marking 50 years of diplomatic relations betweenCuba and North Korea.



If North Korea is attacked by U.S. and South Korean forces, "we willrespond with a sacred war based on the strength of our nucleardeterrent forces," Kwon said.
"Our government will make an efforttowards the denuclearization of the peninsula and the establishment ofa system of lasting peace based on the principle of the reunificationof both Koreas," Kwon said, according to Prensa Latina.
NorthKorea on July 24 threatened a "powerful nuclear deterrence" in responseto joint U.S.-South Korean naval exercises then taking place.
NorthKorea was prepared for a "retaliatory sacred war," North Korea'sNational Defense Commission (NDC) said in a statement carried then bythe official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).
Source Here

 
 There are NEWS on INDIAN INTERNET AND INDIAN NEWS FORUMS THAT

BUT THERE IS NO SOURCE TO VERIFY IT.

China and Pakistan have reportedly signed a memorandum of understanding to develop a stealth version ofa light-weight fighter aircraft being jointly produced by them.
F-17 Thunder, also known as FC-1, being jointly built by Kamra-basedPakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) and Chengdu Aerospace Company (CAC)  made its first appearance at an international air show havingflown in here after making refueling stops in Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

The plane, which has been in development in one form or another since 2000, is a symbol of cooperation between China and Pakistan and thefirst assembled version brought out by the Kamra plant, delivered inNovember last year, according to 'Show News,' a special issue ofdefence journal Aviation Week for the Farnborough Air Show.


"The two (countries) have also reportedly signed a memorandum ofunderstanding to develop a stealth variant of the JF-17 Thunder," itsaid.

The journal said that Pakistan Air Force (PAK) is expected to acquirearound 250 JF-17s, but this may be a split of 100 in the JF-17configuration, being displayed at the air show here, and 150 of thestealth multi-role combat aircraft (MCRA) between 2015 and 2025.

Sergei Prikhodko said recent reports in some Israel media outlets misrepresented Russia's position on cooperation with Syria.
The Haaretz daily reported on Friday that Israel was working to"thwart a Russian arms deal with Syria" and that Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahu had asked his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin,to stop the sale of advanced P-800 Yakhont supersonic cruise missiles.

"Lately, some Israeli media outlets have been actively disseminatinginformation distorting Russia's position on the implementation of itsobligations to Syria, including in the sphere of military and technicalcooperation," Prikhodko said.
"I would like to stress that the Russian Federation honors all theagreements that were previously signed between Russia and Syria."
He said Russia's military cooperation policy is shaped by the president and is not directed against third countries.

The Indian-Russian venture BrahMos Aerospace Ltd. plans to produceengines for Brahmos missiles in India, CEO Sivathanu Pillaih said onFriday.
The engines will be produced at the Brahmos plant in the state ofKerala in southeastern India, Pillai said. In two years its productionvolumes will exceed the manufacturing capabilities of the plant inRussia's Orenburg which currently produces the engines.

He said the decision was made due to a mounting demand for Brahmos missiles in the Indian Armed Forces.
The BrahMos missile has a range of 290 km (180 miles) and can carrya conventional warhead of up to 300 kg (660 lbs). It can effectivelyengage ground targets from an altitude as low as 10 meters (30 feet)and has a top speed of Mach 2.8, which is about three times faster thanthe U.S.-made subsonic Tomahawk cruise missile.
Established in 1998, BrahMos Aerospace, a joint Indian-Russianventure, produces and markets BrahMos supersonic missiles. The sea- andground-launched versions have been successfully tested and put intoservice with the Indian Army and Navy.