Quwa podcasts & articles | Latest content & discussions

To be clear, Pakistan can scale up production capacity via NESCOM or some other state-owned enterprise. I think that's the plan for the time being.

But with that you're going to eat a lot of long-term cost, i.e., pensioned government jobs, static skill-sets, production overhead (CNCs etc) and so on.

We'd ideally shift this mass-production capacity off to the private sector that all that infrastructure and salary overhead is off the public exchequer. Moreover, with the right incentives, the military's demand will drive private investors into the area and generate lots of good jobs and, in turn, drive growth in other areas (e.g., housing, services, etc). It's the kind of economic stimulus we need and can drive through defence.

The incentives structure is key. We need to encourage the private sector to not just set up shops, but to keep innovating. Ideally, we'd reach a point similar to India or Turkey where a big defence requirement drives direct production investment which, in turn, drives the local development of tooling and jigs which, in turn, drives R&D in these areas. It's doable, but it takes time, persistence, and can-do mentality. BEC was producing jigs and tooling for Pakistani manufactures until ZAB came into power.

Pakistani private capital exists, it's just being sunk into land (literally) or into UAE due to the otherwise shaky economic climate at home. We carry out the right reforms re: tax and co-investment (e.g., government owning a minority share in new startups with an option to sell, maybe as incentives for offsets with foreign OEMs), we can start growing the economy on the right foundations and indigenize our defence needs.
How are Chinese state owned entities so massively efficient. They have entirely state owned defence industry and is probably the most efficient and massive in capacities.

No private sector entity in the world comes even close.
 
How are Chinese state owned entities so massively efficient. They have entirely state owned defence industry and is probably the most efficient and massive in capacities.

No private sector entity in the world comes even close.
That's exactly what I wanted to know. But now before that, Please clarify that you and Quwa are two different Bilal ... for the sake of my sanity lolz.
 
That's exactly what I wanted to know. But now before that, Please clarify that you and Quwa are two different Bilal ... for the sake of my sanity lolz.
Yes. I had clarified that I am a different Bilal elsewhere. It’s a common name you know or so I think😂

@Quwa from now on you are legally mark sein.
 
How are Chinese state owned entities so massively efficient. They have entirely state owned defence industry and is probably the most efficient and massive in capacities.

No private sector entity in the world comes even close.

That's exactly what I wanted to know. But now before that, Please clarify that you and Quwa are two different Bilal ... for the sake of my sanity lolz.
China's state-owned enterprises (SOE) are basically managed by experts of industry, not generals or random CPC members. So, the heads of AVIC, NORINCO, CETC, etc., all need to meet certain KPIs in the way of profit, cost reductions, project delivery, etc., to get bonuses and other benefits. None of that is a given. If they don't perform, they get fired.

That said, it's possible that many of the ones heading the SOEs see an opportunity to one day join the CPC's higher ranks. So, they use the SOEs as a stepping stone to build a solid track record and case for their promotion in China's broader system.

Either way, the government takes a step back from the day-to-day and focuses more on the accountability side. So, it forms a board within each SOE and then keeps the CEO and executes in check by holding them against their goals.

I'd say this is broadly comparable to the Turkish SOE model. In Turkey, the main 'investor' of the SOEs (like TAI, Aselsan, etc) is the military's pension fund. Again, they invested and set up the SOEs, handed the reins over to industry professionals, and then formed boards to hold the SOEs accountable to their profit and project delivery targets. The boards could include retired generals and political appointees.

Basically, what Pakistan needs to do is take the day-to-day ops of the SOEs out of the hands of the generals and political appointees. Instead, hire professional leaderships to manage all of the SOEs (including PCB, PIA, PSML, etc). Form director boards to hold the SOEs accountable and post the best generals/appointees to said boards; so, they can take a more high-level look at direction, see if the math is mathing, etc.
 
To be clear, Pakistan can scale up production capacity via NESCOM or some other state-owned enterprise. I think that's the plan for the time being.

But with that you're going to eat a lot of long-term cost, i.e., pensioned government jobs, static skill-sets, production overhead (CNCs etc) and so on.

We'd ideally shift this mass-production capacity off to the private sector that all that infrastructure and salary overhead is off the public exchequer. Moreover, with the right incentives, the military's demand will drive private investors into the area and generate lots of good jobs and, in turn, drive growth in other areas (e.g., housing, services, etc). It's the kind of economic stimulus we need and can drive through defence.

The incentives structure is key. We need to encourage the private sector to not just set up shops, but to keep innovating. Ideally, we'd reach a point similar to India or Turkey where a big defence requirement drives direct production investment which, in turn, drives the local development of tooling and jigs which, in turn, drives R&D in these areas. It's doable, but it takes time, persistence, and can-do mentality. BEC was producing jigs and tooling for Pakistani manufactures until ZAB came into power.

Pakistani private capital exists, it's just being sunk into land (literally) or into UAE due to the otherwise shaky economic climate at home. We carry out the right reforms re: tax and co-investment (e.g., government owning a minority share in new startups with an option to sell, maybe as incentives for offsets with foreign OEMs), we can start growing the economy on the right foundations and indigenize our defence needs.
How much Pakistan's private sector prospects got compromised by various control regimes of US and allies to prevent Pakistan from developing defense industrial capabilities by clamping down on our ability to import required hardware to build factories to take a product from prototype to mass production. Recently, US hindered Pakistan's missile program. Couple of years ago, India off-load a dual-purpose machine preventing it from reaching Pakistan under the same pretext. I think Pakistan-China need to establish railways link to prevent any such eventuality. KKH has limitations in terms of length of vehicles and weight both. Chinese have build world's heighest railway tracks in its own mountainous region in Tibet and other places. Secondly, I want to know, does out private sector has requried talent-pool in terms in engineers, scientists, technicians etc? We never invested in our R&D knowledge base. HEC has always declining budget and whatever is available is spent on sending students abroad. No development of new labs at own public sector universities. In this backdrop, will it not be wise to follow and implement Chinese defense industrial model where despite everything being state control, the pace is just exponential.
 
China's state-owned enterprises (SOE) are basically managed by experts of industry, not generals or random CPC members. So, the heads of AVIC, NORINCO, CETC, etc., all need to meet certain KPIs in the way of profit, cost reductions, project delivery, etc., to get bonuses and other benefits. None of that is a given. If they don't perform, they get fired.

That said, it's possible that many of the ones heading the SOEs see an opportunity to one day join the CPC's higher ranks. So, they use the SOEs as a stepping stone to build a solid track record and case for their promotion in China's broader system.

Either way, the government takes a step back from the day-to-day and focuses more on the accountability side. So, it forms a board within each SOE and then keeps the CEO and executes in check by holding them against their goals.

I'd say this is broadly comparable to the Turkish SOE model. In Turkey, the main 'investor' of the SOEs (like TAI, Aselsan, etc) is the military's pension fund. Again, they invested and set up the SOEs, handed the reins over to industry professionals, and then formed boards to hold the SOEs accountable to their profit and project delivery targets. The boards could include retired generals and political appointees.

Basically, what Pakistan needs to do is take the day-to-day ops of the SOEs out of the hands of the generals and political appointees. Instead, hire professional leaderships to manage all of the SOEs (including PCB, PIA, PSML, etc). Form director boards to hold the SOEs accountable and post the best generals/appointees to said boards; so, they can take a more high-level look at direction, see if the math is mathing, etc.
It like every other thing in Pakistan is a governance problem. Either model can work (or not) depending on the governance.
 
How much Pakistan's private sector prospects got compromised by various control regimes of US and allies to prevent Pakistan from developing defense industrial capabilities by clamping down on our ability to import required hardware to build factories to take a product from prototype to mass production. Recently, US hindered Pakistan's missile program.

Couple of years ago, India off-load a dual-purpose machine preventing it from reaching Pakistan under the same pretext. I think Pakistan-China need to establish railways link to prevent any such eventuality. KKH has limitations in terms of length of vehicles and weight both.

Chinese have build world's heighest railway tracks in its own mountainous region in Tibet and other places.

Secondly, I want to know, does out private sector has requried talent-pool in terms in engineers, scientists, technicians etc? We never invested in our R&D knowledge base.

HEC has always declining budget and whatever is available is spent on sending students abroad. No development of new labs at own public sector universities.

In this backdrop, will it not be wise to follow and implement Chinese defense industrial model where despite everything being state control, the pace is just exponential.
US controls are a hindering factor, but when we do things right on our end, we get through them. For ex., the US clamped down hard on the nuclear fuel cycle when we began our nuclear program, but both well-run SOEs (i.e., PAEC) and private sector companies (e.g., DESCON) overcame them through indigenous development. The messed up thing was that even back then we had babu bureaucrats trying to get into both of these entities to scuttle them for no reason except for personal issues and grudges. It's this stupid stuff that weighs us down the most.

That said, re: conventional munitions production, I do think we can genuinely build our own indigenous manufacturing stack. The key is to nurture the incentives for the private sector invest in R&D and explore partnerships with countries who do have the industrial expertise at a high-level.

For ex., we can partner with industrial firms across Turkey, Poland, Ukraine, Hungary, Brazil, Czech Republic etc., to develop our own CNC and other tooling.

Of course, we won't go from zero to instrumentation for hypersonic munitions in one swoop, but we can go from zero to tooling for mass-producing our REK/AZB series by the tens of thousands, or from zero to tooling for subsonic ALCM inputs like miniature turbojets and small aerostructures and so on.

My main issue with expanding state-owned infrastructure any further is that we generally lack the planning for what happens after the initial requirements are met. So, we basically end up with a lot of people on the payroll (with pensions) and constant spending into updating production facilities while cutting losses early with older programs (e.g., going from AK to Haider).

Our public exchequer is constrained, I'd rather we max it out in actual defence procurement than to let it get eaten up by pensions, salaries, and overhead, which would balloon if we keep expanding state-owned facilities. That said, one way to remediate that is to export, but our SOEs don't do well on exporting or any of the requisite steps for exporting (e.g., marketing). They just lack the incentives for it.
 
@Quwa

Bilal bhai,

The basic issue is that you can't escape the constraints set up by your overall manufacturing/industrial and research (including basic education) base. Better planning and efficiency can improve things a bit but can't break out of the straitjacket altogether. This would forever disadvantage PAK vis-a-vis IND and IND vis-a-vis PRC.

This is also what essentially doomed GER in the two WWs, and USSR in the Cold War.

Regards
 
US controls are a hindering factor, but when we do things right on our end, we get through them. For ex., the US clamped down hard on the nuclear fuel cycle when we began our nuclear program, but both well-run SOEs (i.e., PAEC) and private sector companies (e.g., DESCON) overcame them through indigenous development. The messed up thing was that even back then we had babu bureaucrats trying to get into both of these entities to scuttle them for no reason except for personal issues and grudges. It's this stupid stuff that weighs us down the most.

That said, re: conventional munitions production, I do think we can genuinely build our own indigenous manufacturing stack. The key is to nurture the incentives for the private sector invest in R&D and explore partnerships with countries who do have the industrial expertise at a high-level.

For ex., we can partner with industrial firms across Turkey, Poland, Ukraine, Hungary, Brazil, Czech Republic etc., to develop our own CNC and other tooling.

Of course, we won't go from zero to instrumentation for hypersonic munitions in one swoop, but we can go from zero to tooling for mass-producing our REK/AZB series by the tens of thousands, or from zero to tooling for subsonic ALCM inputs like miniature turbojets and small aerostructures and so on.

My main issue with expanding state-owned infrastructure any further is that we generally lack the planning for what happens after the initial requirements are met. So, we basically end up with a lot of people on the payroll (with pensions) and constant spending into updating production facilities while cutting losses early with older programs (e.g., going from AK to Haider).

Our public exchequer is constrained, I'd rather we max it out in actual defence procurement than to let it get eaten up by pensions, salaries, and overhead, which would balloon if we keep expanding state-owned facilities. That said, one way to remediate that is to export, but our SOEs don't do well on exporting or any of the requisite steps for exporting (e.g., marketing). They just lack the incentives for it.
I think export is the keyword here in the context of this discussion else even if we have very viberant private sector it would eventually suffer from not getting orders. GE shutdown the production of F-404 series and when suddenly India placed massive order they are still struggling to restart the production in full swing due to various supply chain issues hence productio rate is very low per month. Our defense budget is very small considering against even India, how much local orders can be. Let's say a private entity with the help of multiple industrial partner in private sector complete the order of 5000 small armed drone in a year for own forces, then what? If there is no export order...things will be v tough. A more contemporary example is JF-17 project which survived this long because of its limited export success. Still, order from Azerbaijan kept the produciton running and allowed PAF to do more marketing. Though, I am certain, after May 2025 conflict, PAF will exceedingly luck to get any more order where we make J-10CE an allout star with such reputation that even BlockIIIs vanished somewhere in the background. But that's another stroy for another time. Right now, exports of JF-17 are critical to keep PFX alive and we do need our own homegrown (80-90% indeginous airframe) fighter to be able to fight protracted wars. Imported weapons can't win you wars they bearly able you to defend against overwhelmingly larger enemy with ever blooming defense budget. Now when we talk about own systems, export oriented defense industry, I see there are key fundamentals which needs to be fixed. Expensive electricity, rampant corruption in public utility offices, Predatory FBR culture which often first try to scare investors then demands bribes, lack of accountability etc. These culture ills are key contributor in discourging any new investment in this resouce intensive sector.
 
How are Chinese state owned entities so massively efficient. They have entirely state owned defence industry and is probably the most efficient and massive in capacities.

No private sector entity in the world comes even close.
There are no 'knock knock' jokes being told in those state owned enterprises. That has to be the reason.

Strict work ethic and 0 tolerance for 'knock knock' jokes.
 
@Quwa @arslank01 why aren't you guys posting new videos. It's been some time. Plzz upload vidss. You guys gutta lock in. We need more vids, we need more vidss..
 
@Quwa @arslank01 why aren't you guys posting new videos. It's been some time. Plzz upload vidss. You guys gutta lock in. We need more vids, we need more vidss..
We’ve all been super duper busy- o think there’s a new video out this week but I’m not in it, absolutely up to the neck with work during the daytimes.
 
@Quwa

Bilal bhai,

The basic issue is that you can't escape the constraints set up by your overall manufacturing/industrial and research (including basic education) base. Better planning and efficiency can improve things a bit but can't break out of the straitjacket altogether. This would forever disadvantage PAK vis-a-vis IND and IND vis-a-vis PRC.

This is also what essentially doomed GER in the two WWs, and USSR in the Cold War.

Regards
True to a certain extent.... you can't underestimate the cultural traits , work ethics in general and nationalistic motivations of the Chinese.... south Asians are lacking in all of them.
 
Someone's overview of Rocket Force.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Not my channel
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Back
Top