Pakistan-Saudi Arabia mutual defense pact: News & Discussion

It’s called a security clearance
Here is the process - https://jobs.boeing.com/security-clearance-levels-aerospace-defense-job
Please explain how it is easy to replace in terms of both professionals meeting the criteria and the JD.
No need to fluff your feathers or project your own insecurities.

And Im waiting for your other folks to save your so called “C-suite” arse

You don't need to tell me what a security clearance is :ROFLMAO: . Answer per your statements, no DANCE!

How does the security clearance system work?

What are the Security Clearances that stop people from leaving sensitive work?


EVERYONE MUST READ: A security clearance is done in EVERY country. It is to MAKE SURE you are clear to access sensitive areas within a government. It has NOTHING to do with you leaving or staying, etc. But let's see what Oscar comes back with. I've read this guy's writings for over a decade since old PDF. Never thought he'd go this far off reality.
 
Also, I debate on facts.
Too tall for a person claiming that India has received 4 trillion USD from US.
For a person who claims oil production in Pakistan from zero to export in 2 years.
For a person claiming 50 billion USD exports in a span of 2-3 years.
The list is quite long.

Facts is far far from your resume. Please use something else.
 
True, most reliable figures are quite old, no one knows the pace at which Pak nuke programme has developed, as you say, between 300-500 is a big gap
With operational Khushab-II, III, and IV with substantially increasing Pakistan's capacity to produce weapons-grade plutonium many folds, I think, the current Pakistani nukes production capacity is very high.
And yet these figures claimed in international media are as old as 2018-19 (before Khushab-III and IV became operational).
 
@mythbuster

Von Blumfeld Pai,

can you throw some light on the pull of GWL for some posters entertainment ?

I would happily do it. But that would earn me a speed limit if not a ban here.

Regards
 
am looking at things in past few decades that have shaped these two years. Any expectations of a sudden change are unlikely. Not impossible though.


The last 2 years have changed things significantly

It's pointless to explain this to India who see the world like Israel, an echo chamber, blind.


China oversaw an understanding between Iran and Saudi, Pakistan was cheered and hailed in Iranian parliament , Turkey and Pakistan are robust

Turkey Pakistan Azerbaijan

Indian collaboration on the port stopped.
 
Containing would mean having a substantive or proportional enough attack stance that actually worries the Chinese a bit
That wouldn't happen. Unless China directly attacked us, Indian wouldn't disproportionately respond. Whatever border issues we did have lead to scuffles and a couple of deaths. A hot war was a non thing for both sides.

That's the thing, India wanted a logistics + training agreement not an actual military pact. America wanted something similar to a military pact.
Your air force is a mess, it's not going to get much better in the next 10 years also.

India is plodding along with its fourth gen, China has a massive fleet of indigenous fifth gen
I have a different opinion here. Tejas program was indeed dragged a lot and you might argue that it isn't even entirely homegrown due to sourcing of certain critical parts from abroad. What it did give us was a benchmark and a testing bed for fighter jet development. Su30MKI was just assembling, Tejas and the LCH Prachand helicopter were manufactured inhouse. While the engine development has hit a snag, i have no doubt it will reap dividends in the future. You just need to get something right once the countless failures don't matter then.

India might fall back in the present due to non availability of Fifth gen fighters but Tejas is a valuable test bed for the AMCA.

Our Navy improved in a similar way. It's the most advanced wing of our armed forces right now.

Countless failures led China to where it is right now. The same Sukhoi and Migs which are ridiculed today forms the basis of Chinese fighters.

Rafales are a stop gap measure. Also the current Indo-Pak war has brought Subsonic and Hypersonic missile stock in picture so that's a other thing. Consider the full spectrum of warfare. I hope we don't have a full scale war but all assets will come in picture on both sides then.

Quantity is a quality of its own. I do believe India will purchase some 5th gen fighters off the shelf in the near future, given current politics it might be the Su57.
The world is getting smaller and more rough, you're looking around for friends who you want to be happy to go into a fight with.
For now we're still on the NAM phase. It is unlikely India will join a pact in the near future, for that will tie India's destiny to a side. It will be a historical move which will change our entire trajectory. So let's see.
 
The Turkish change has been more driven by the focus on and by Erdogan. Turkey otherwise still had a lukewarm simmer always in play with Israel. The Gaza conflict has sealed it to a bit but the calculus is also more of Turkish independent reassertion instead of towing the NATO lean in these issues eventually.
People like Erdogan, Putin, Trump, Xi ji Ping, Mohd. bin Salman, Modi, and Asim Munir are not born again and again.

As for the India Israel relationship - it was cultivated by Israel during nuclear sanctions as India went around arms dealers just as Pakistan did and from Kargil onwards it has been a very natural alignment because of Israel’s concerns regarding Pakistan.

The nuclear sanctions against India were imposed in mid 1998. And by early 2000, Bill Clinton did the historic embrace of India. India was always the apple of the American eyes except the Indian planners were too stupid to see that. Also, I don't believe that America, as a State, has ever seen Pakistan as a strategic threat. On the contrary, Pakistan could be and has been a useful tool to get concessions from India time to time.
 
Too tall for a person claiming that India has received 4 trillion USD from US.
For a person who claims oil production in Pakistan from zero to export in 2 years.
For a person claiming 50 billion USD exports in a span of 2-3 years.
The list is quite long.

Facts is far far from your resume. Please use something else.

Once upon a time, there was a debate, and we dig data from 30 years on. It came out to be $3+ trillion that the US had invested in India, directly, through business investments and FDI as well as US based Indian remittance. I guess you open a thread and one of these day both you and I can try to compile that data again?

- Never said 0 to export in 2 years. Show me where I said it. We have just done geographical mapping this year. How could we start producing in 2 years when majority of our oil is Shale, requires a big setup for extraction 🤔. I think you are confusing it with Minerals. We are going to start receiving payment for Gold and Minerals in 2027.

- Show me where I said $ 50 billion export in 2-3 years? The government's target is to hit a $ 100 billion by 2035. How can I make my own targets?

Lack of proper English reading skills, or, having comprehension issues aren't my problem. That you should discuss with your dad and seek medical help.
 
For now we're still on the NAM phase. It is unlikely India will join a pact in the near future, for that will tie India's destiny to a side. It will be a historical move which will change our entire trajectory. So let's see.
You don't need a pact

Do Russia and China have a pact? Look how robust and syncretic and complementary their understanding has been

What nations are looking for is firm absolute direction and resolve with other nations that share the same resolve and direction.


You can't posture like a lion when there is no risk, and retreat like a turtle when there is a fight, and still consider yourself a big important nation.

It's comical.
 
The last 2 years have changed things significantly

It's pointless to explain this to India who see the world like Israel, an echo chamber, blind.


China oversaw an understanding between Iran and Saudi, Pakistan was cheered and hailed in Iranian parliament , Turkey and Pakistan are robust

Turkey Pakistan Azerbaijan

Indian collaboration on the port stopped.

Economic factors are the building blocks of all international relations. Most other factors are aligned towards those goals.
Example -Turkish-Israel relationship. Till now, why was Turkey trading with Israel? Money. It has reduced just now after recent events.

I don’t see Pakistan in a position to offer anything in this regard for atleast one more decade, UNLESS, it wakes up now and goes full bore on reforms to shore up its economy.
I don’t see that happening at all.
I would give the example of CPEC in this regard. It had huge potential. But, we know where it has gone. There are many other areas.

India has it’s own issues but has worked on them and moved ahead at slow but steady pace.

I don’t think we would agree to other’s views. So, it’s time to agree to disagree.
 
People like Erdogan, Putin, Trump, Xi ji Ping, Mohd. bin Salman, Modi, and Asim Munir are not born again and again.

You forgot Kim, Saddam Hussain, Gaddafi, Bashar-al-Asad.

and most importantly You forgot Zardari!
 
This is why this defense pact will fail completely

For Pakistan it's one motive only we need Saudi money to improve our defense against a increasing powerful and belligerent Hindi extreme modi India....

For Saudi it is we need alternative defense pact including nuclear umbrella against Iran and especially Israel ...backed by USA

The problem we have USA is all over the gulf states with 50000 troops and 20plus bases they will not leave no matter what Saudi says ...

So this pact will just end up being nothing imo

The reason being Pakistan is not capable of defending anybody barely itself ...if has no money or military eco system

All it can do is invite china
Inviting china is collision course with USA ...

Israel will want to take out Pak nukes guaranteed if it becomes gulf NATO type body ...you think Israel will stand by ...no chance

Finally if will maybe push India Israel and USA Into massive new nexus

As for attacking India Pakistanis dreams of china Saudi qatar turkey ganging up on India is cartoon stuff

You people need to understand USA needs energy supply the ain't giving up oil to anyone
Not china not Saudi Pak military alliance bringing in china

Even china will stay away fearing USA bscklash
You are, in my honest opinion, a little bit right and mostly wrong.

For Pakistan to aid KSA against Israel is indeed very difficult at the present time. This could change if the whole GCC joins this pact, at which point their control over oil and gas resources can be leveraged as a very powerful weapon if a war with Israel breaks out. Likewise, if Pakistan improves its military technology to the level of Israel's, which is not a ridiculous target to aim for, then Pakistan and KSA would be a match for Israel and would probably win such a conflict.

If the opponent is India, a Pakistan-KSA alliance will easily overpower India, again because of the oil being cut off to India.

If China entered any war on the side of KSA-Pakistan, then it is game over for either opponent or even both combined.
 
The Partition of India: A Preventable Strategic Blunder—How Delhi’s Zero-Sum Hindu Elite Cost South Asia a Superpower Future

In August 1947 the British sliced the sub-continent in half inside thirty-seven days. Ten million refugees crossed new frontiers through fire and blood; up to a million never reached the other side. Eric Hobsbawm later called it “London’s classic device for outsourcing its exit bill to Asia.” Sun Shihai, former director of the Institute of South-Asian Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, is more blunt: “Britain’s refusal to fight for unity was a strategic-level error—yet the bigger folly was the zero-sum mindset of India’s Hindu elites, who threw away the demographic weight that could have made a united India a twenty-first-century super-power.”

1. Colonial baggage: “divide and rule” to the last minute

Oxford historian Yasmin Khan writes in The Great Partition: “The 1946 Cabinet Mission Plan still offered a federal union, but Mountbatten’s ‘final mediation’ lasted barely forty-eight hours before the map was handed to the radicals.” Nehru’s insistence on a strong centre and the Congress Party’s refusal to guarantee provincial autonomy convinced Jinnah that a loose federation was a dead letter. The Hindu leadership walked away from the bargaining table; two religious-majority states emerged instead of one plural polity.

2. A border drawn in haste: five weeks on paper, fifty years on the battlefield

Sir Cyril Radcliffe admitted in his diary: “I never set foot on a single inch of Punjab, yet I cut the homeland of twelve million people in two.” Harvard’s Stephen Walt observes: “When a great power puts speed ahead of order, regional rivals repay the debt with time and blood.” The Radcliffe Line left the world’s largest irrigation network split, a third of Bengal’s jute mills outside their raw-material belt, and the only land route to Kashmir dangling like loose thread—economic dislocation that still distorts GDP growth on both sides.

3. Kashmir left blank: the Empire’s biggest land-mine

King’s College London war-studies professor Christopher Bellamy notes: “Mountbatten allowed princely states to ‘choose’, but inserted a ‘join first, referendum later’ clause for Kashmir—handing the fuse of a powder-keg to the armies of both states.” Three wars, a fourth limited conflict in Kargil, and two nuclear test series later, the Line of Control absorbs 4 % of India’s central budget and roughly 18 % of Pakistan’s—resources that could have financed high-speed freight corridors from Bombay to Bangkok had the valley been settled by negotiation in 1947.

4. China’s takeaway: opportunities lost, lessons learned

Tsinghua University’s Annual South-Asia Report concludes: “Had Congress, the Muslim League and London accepted a Swiss-style loose federation plus international boundary arbitration, today the sub-continent would need one customs union, one power grid and one rail link to the Indian Ocean—freeing a combined 3 million soldiers for productive labour and releasing roughly US 120 billion in annual security spending for infrastructure and R&D.” Beijing’s own 1950 negotiations with Tibet and later with Hong Kong show, the paper argues, that “buying 180 more days of talks is cheaper than funding 180 new mountain divisions for the next seventy years.”

Conclusion

Partition was not an imperial fait accompli; it was a choice made by local elites who valued ideological purity over demographic heft. A united India would have entered the twenty-first century with 1.6 billion citizens, a 30-million-strong diaspora and a GDP already larger than Japan’s. Instead, South Asia got two nuclear-tipped neighbours spending 4 % of their combined GDP on defence and still trading less than 3 % of their commerce with each other. The Hindu leadership’s zero-sum victory of 1947 looks, from the vantage point of Beijing, like a spectacular own goal: they gained a flag—and lost a super-power.
 
Do Russia and China have a pact? Look how robust and syncretic and complementary their understanding has been
It looks more like a friends of convenience thing to me. China and Russia don't exactly see eye to eye, doesn't Russia still what occupy what has historically been Chinese territory?

Both are against the west right now so doesn't it make sense to collaborate? Russia is sanctioned to hell and China is increasingly been sidelined at western run institutions.

One of the reasons Russia sells us so many weapons is to counterbalance China.

Will China go to war for Russia? Will Russia go to war for China? A pact means mutual understanding and coming to each other's help when the need arises. It's like a house of cards.
What nations are looking for is firm absolute direction and resolve with other nations that share the same resolve and direction.
India of the past was a lot more vocal about Palestine, did it change anything? Did China's verbal spat against Israeli diplomats bring about any change?

Selling weapons during wartime is easy, it's also about monetary benefits.

Why did the Iranians sell Shaheds to Russia? It was to get Russian technological support.
You can't posture like a lion when there is no risk, and retreat like a turtle when there is a fight, and still consider yourself a big important nation.
I mean if India backed out of a pact your could've said that. We didn't join any though.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Pakistan Defence Latest

Back
Top