Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has recently faced sharp criticism in Parliament and beyond, over the delays in Tejas fighter production, the grounding of Dhruv helicopters, and perceived inefficiencies under scrutiny. Yet, this isn&rsquo;t a tale of defeat&mdash;it&rsquo;s a saga of perseverance, innovation, and a relentless drive to secure India&rsquo;s skies. HAL isn&rsquo;t faltering; it&rsquo;s rising through adversity, proving its mettle with every challenge overcome.
Globally, building a fighter aircraft and bringing it to market is a marathon, not a sprint. Take the Lockheed Martin F-16: conceptualised in the early 1970s, its first flight came in 1974, and it entered service in 1978&mdash;about seven years from idea to operational reality. The Dassault Rafale, France&rsquo;s pride, began development in 1978, flew in 1986, and joined service in 2001&mdash;a 23-year journey. Even the cutting-edge F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, launched in 1995, didn&rsquo;t become operational until 2015, taking 20 years despite the U.S.&rsquo;s vast resources. These timelines reflect the complexity of modern fighters&mdash;integrating avionics, engines, and weapons systems demands time, precision, and resilience.
The Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programme, sanctioned in 1983, took 33 years to reach initial operational clearance in 2016. Critics highlight this as a delay, but context is key. Unlike its global peers, Tejas faced unique turmoil&mdash;U.S. sanctions in 1998 over India&rsquo;s nuclear tests disrupted access to critical technology, notably stalling the indigenous Kaveri engine. HAL pivoted, integrating the GE F404 engine, a move that kept the programme alive. This wasn&rsquo;t a setback; it was a masterstroke of adaptability, adding credibility to Tejas as a fighter born of necessity and ingenuity. Every extra year spent refining it&mdash;amid funding gaps and shifting IAF requirements&mdash;ensured a jet that&rsquo;s not just functional but exceptional.
Also Read:<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/indias-secret-weapon-sfdr-missile-test-stokes-fears-in-pakistan-and-china-784002" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">&nbsp;India's secret weapon? SFDR missile test stokes fears in Pakistan and China</a>
Recent flak over Tejas Mk1A delays misses the bigger picture. The contract revision from Rs 5,989.39 crore to Rs 6,542.20 crore, signed this week, reflects HAL&rsquo;s flexibility to meet evolving IAF needs. The first GE F404-IN20 engine&rsquo;s arrival marks a turning point&mdash;production is set to ramp up to 28 jets annually soon. This isn&rsquo;t tardiness; it&rsquo;s HAL aligning for a sprint after a gruelling marathon. The grounding of over 330 Dhruv helicopters since a January 5 crash isn&rsquo;t failure either&mdash;it&rsquo;s HAL prioritising safety, a hallmark of a mature aerospace player. Each check strengthens trust, ensuring Dhruvs return to the skies more reliable than ever.
Parliament&rsquo;s critique of prolonged timelines and cost overruns overlooks HAL&rsquo;s ambition. Tejas isn&rsquo;t a quick fix; it&rsquo;s a legacy&mdash;50% indigenous, aiming for 60%. Costs are investments in self-reliance, not waste. Strategic opportunities? HAL&rsquo;s seizing them, from AESA radar integration to export talks with Guyana. This is a company building a future, not missing chances. The IAF chief&rsquo;s &ldquo;not confident&rdquo; remark stings, but HAL&rsquo;s answering with action&mdash;Tejas Mk1A&rsquo;s advanced features like BVR missiles and EW suites are proof of capability. Confidence isn&rsquo;t lost; it&rsquo;s being forged, jet by jet.
The IAF needs 40 fighters yearly; HAL&rsquo;s closing in, with a Rs 2.5 lakh crore order book signaling faith in its trajectory. The call for proactive R&amp;D? HAL&rsquo;s already there&mdash;Tejas Mk1A&rsquo;s tech is cutting-edge, born from its labs. Procurement delays and cost overruns, flagged by the 2023 CAG report, are lessons, not failures. HAL&rsquo;s refining its game, outsourcing to private firms, and tightening finances. This is evolution, not stagnation&mdash;a company learning to soar.
Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/encounter-jammu-and-kashmir-3-cops-injured-in-encounter-in-kathua-2-terrorists-shot-dead-8898118" target="_blank" rel="noopener">India: 3 cops killed in encounter in J&amp;K's Kathua, 2 terrorists shot dead</a>
Critics demand rigorous planning and stakeholder ties. HAL&rsquo;s delivering&mdash;streamlining processes, deepening IAF collaboration, and integrating F404 engines with precision. Market research? Tejas exports are in play. Certifications? Engine delivery proves it&rsquo;s on track. HAL&rsquo;s not just aiming for leadership&mdash;it&rsquo;s earning it. India&rsquo;s defence modernisation rests on innovation and management, and HAL excels at both. Tejas and Dhruv are ingenuity incarnate; production bottlenecks are easing, accountability rising. Vision? HAL&rsquo;s eyes are on a modern IAF and a self-reliant India.
HAL&rsquo;s credibility shines brighter because of its trials. Sanctions forced ingenuity; delays honed precision. Every jet strengthens security; every fix solidifies its role as India&rsquo;s aerospace backbone. Tejas Mk1A isn&rsquo;t just a fighter&mdash;it&rsquo;s a symbol of HAL&rsquo;s defiance and promise. Globally, fighters take decades&mdash;Tejas, born amid turmoil, stands tall. Challenges are temporary; HAL&rsquo;s spirit is unbreakable.
As HAL weathers this storm, it&rsquo;s thriving. The IAF&rsquo;s fleet will grow, Dhruvs will fly again, and Tejas will dominate&mdash;not because of pressure, but because HAL&rsquo;s built for it. This isn&rsquo;t a company under fire; it&rsquo;s a force taking flight, securing India&rsquo;s future and etching its name globally. The best is yet to come, and HAL&rsquo;s crafting it, one wing at a time.
(The author, Girish Linganna, of this article is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace &amp; Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him at: girishlinganna@gmail.com)
(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

India News: The Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programme, sanctioned in 1983, took 33 years to reach initial operational clearance in 2016. Critics highlight this as a delay, but context is key.

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has recently faced sharp criticism in Parliament and beyond, over the delays in Tejas fighter production, the grounding of Dhruv helicopters, and perceived inefficiencies under scrutiny. Yet, this isn’t a tale of defeat—it’s a saga of perseverance, innovation, and a relentless drive to secure India’s skies. HAL isn’t faltering; it’s rising through adversity, proving its mettle with every challenge overcome. Globally, building a fighter aircraft and bringing it to market is a marathon, not a sprint. Take the Lockheed Martin F-16: conceptualised in the early 1970s, its first flight came in 1974, and it entered service in 1978—about seven years from idea to operational reality. The Dassault Rafale, France’s pride, began development in 1978, flew in 1986, and joined service in 2001—a 23-year journey. Even the cutting-edge F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, launched in 1995, didn’t become operational until 2015, taking 20 years despite the U.S.’s vast resources. These timelines reflect the complexity of modern fighters—integrating avionics, engines, and weapons systems demands time, precision, and resilience. The Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programme, sanctioned in 1983, took 33 years to reach initial operational clearance in 2016. Critics highlight this as a delay, but context is key. Unlike its global peers, Tejas faced unique turmoil—U.S. sanctions in 1998 over India’s nuclear tests disrupted access to critical technology, notably stalling the indigenous Kaveri engine. HAL pivoted, integrating the GE F404 engine, a move that kept the programme alive. This wasn’t a setback; it was a masterstroke of adaptability, adding credibility to Tejas as a fighter born of necessity and ingenuity. Every extra year spent refining it—amid funding gaps and shifting IAF requirements—ensured a jet that’s not just functional but exceptional. Also Read: India's secret weapon? SFDR missile test stokes fears in Pakistan and China Recent flak over Tejas Mk1A delays misses the bigger picture. The contract revision from Rs 5,989.39 crore to Rs 6,542.20 crore, signed this week, reflects HAL’s flexibility to meet evolving IAF needs. The first GE F404-IN20 engine’s arrival marks a turning point—production is set to ramp up to 28 jets annually soon. This isn’t tardiness; it’s HAL aligning for a sprint after a gruelling marathon. The grounding of over 330 Dhruv helicopters since a January 5 crash isn’t failure either—it’s HAL prioritising safety, a hallmark of a mature aerospace player. Each check strengthens trust, ensuring Dhruvs return to the skies more reliable than ever. Parliament’s critique of prolonged timelines and cost overruns overlooks HAL’s ambition. Tejas isn’t a quick fix; it’s a legacy—50% indigenous, aiming for 60%. Costs are investments in self-reliance, not waste. Strategic opportunities? HAL’s seizing them, from AESA radar integration to export talks with Guyana. This is a company building a future, not missing chances. The IAF chief’s “not confident” remark stings, but HAL’s answering with action—Tejas Mk1A’s advanced features like BVR missiles and EW suites are proof of capability. Confidence isn’t lost; it’s being forged, jet by jet. The IAF needs 40 fighters yearly; HAL’s closing in, with a Rs 2.5 lakh crore order book signaling faith in its trajectory. The call for proactive R&D? HAL’s already there—Tejas Mk1A’s tech is cutting-edge, born from its labs. Procurement delays and cost overruns, flagged by the 2023 CAG report, are lessons, not failures. HAL’s refining its game, outsourcing to private firms, and tightening finances. This is evolution, not stagnation—a company learning to soar. Also read | India: 3 cops killed in encounter in J&K's Kathua, 2 terrorists shot dead Critics demand rigorous planning and stakeholder ties. HAL’s delivering—streamlining processes, deepening IAF collaboration, and integrating F404 engines with precision. Market research? Tejas exports are in play. Certifications? Engine delivery proves it’s on track. HAL’s not just aiming for leadership—it’s earning it. India’s defence modernisation rests on innovation and management, and HAL excels at both. Tejas and Dhruv are ingenuity incarnate; production bottlenecks are easing, accountability rising. Vision? HAL’s eyes are on a modern IAF and a self-reliant India. HAL’s credibility shines brighter because of its trials. Sanctions forced ingenuity; delays honed precision. Every jet strengthens security; every fix solidifies its role as India’s aerospace backbone. Tejas Mk1A isn’t just a fighter—it’s a symbol of HAL’s defiance and promise. Globally, fighters take decades—Tejas, born amid turmoil, stands tall. Challenges are temporary; HAL’s spirit is unbreakable. As HAL weathers this storm, it’s thriving. The IAF’s fleet will grow, Dhruvs will fly again, and Tejas will dominate—not because of pressure, but because HAL’s built for it. This isn’t a company under fire; it’s a force taking flight, securing India’s future and etching its name globally. The best is yet to come, and HAL’s crafting it, one wing at a time. (The author, Girish Linganna, of this article is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace & Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him at: girishlinganna@gmail.com) (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

HAL and Tejas: Soaring through storms to supremacy

The Crocin Cold and Flu &nbsp;medicine bottle always seems to be dusty, worn out, and hidden under a pile of bathroom products when you suddenly catch a cold. It is used to relieve symptoms like fever, minor aches, cough, runny nose, and sneezing, helping you rest and recover, especially at night.
Feeling exhausted and dealing with a runny nose, you glance at the label and realize the medicine expired six months ago. In that moment, it's natural to wonder&mdash;does the expiration date really matter?
Gina Bellottie, a pharmacology professor at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, advises against taking medications after they expire. However, she notes that the importance of expiration dates isn&rsquo;t a simple yes-or-no answer, as mentioned in an online Popular Science report.
The Food and Drug Administration (9) requires drug companies to include an expiration date on all prescription and over-the-counter medicines.
The expiration date is set after extensive testing is done before the medicine is sold.
Scientists keep the medicine at the right temperature, either at room temperature or in the fridge, and test it over time to see if it stays effective or starts to break down.
Companies don&rsquo;t test medicines indefinitely. If a drug stays effective for the entire testing period&mdash;usually six months to two years&mdash;they set that as the expiration date and stop testing.
This means the expiration date is just the last date the company tested and has proof the medicine still works. After that date, the company can&rsquo;t promise the medicine will still be effective," says Bellottie. Without more testing, there's no way to know if it will work the same way.
Recent findings suggest that some medicines might still be effective after they expire. In 2017, ProPublica investigated drug expiration dates and found that many expired medications, even years later, still worked as intended.
The investigation revealed that every year, expensive medicines worth thousands of dollars are thrown away, even though tests show many of them still work.
Unless drug companies start testing medicines for longer, which isn&rsquo;t likely to happen soon, the way we use and dispose of medications will remain the same.
Bellottie explains that her advice to patients remains the same: Never take expired medicine without first asking a pharmacist if it&rsquo;s still safe to use.
Many factors, like how a medicine is stored or how long it has been open, can affect its safety and effectiveness, says Bellottie.
Some medicines might still be safe to use years later, but without more testing, it's hard to know which ones are still effective.
If you have no choice but to take an expired medicine, Bellottie warns that you should never use it for a serious or life-threatening condition.
For some medicines, the worst that could happen is that they might not work as well, says Bellottie.
If you have a headache, it might not be a big problem. But if it's a serious emergency, the wrong medicine or one that doesn&rsquo;t work properly could be dangerous.
She also mentions that old medicines, especially liquids or ones that have been opened, can get contaminated over time.
If you're unsure, she suggests gathering all the medicines from your cabinet, putting them in a bag, and taking them to the nearest pharmacy. The pharmacist can help you figure out which medicines are safe to keep using and which ones aren&rsquo;t. They can also warn you about any side effects or drug interactions.

SCIENCE & TECH | The Crocin Cold and Flu  medicine bottle always seems to be dusty, worn out, and hidden under a pile of bathroom products when you suddenly catch a cold.

The Crocin Cold and Flu medicine bottle always seems to be dusty, worn out, and hidden under a pile of bathroom products when you suddenly catch a cold. It is used to relieve symptoms like fever, minor aches, cough, runny nose, and sneezing, helping you rest and recover, especially at night. Feeling exhausted and dealing with a runny nose, you glance at the label and realize the medicine expired six months ago. In that moment, it's natural to wonder—does the expiration date really matter? Gina Bellottie, a pharmacology professor at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, advises against taking medications after they expire. However, she notes that the importance of expiration dates isn’t a simple yes-or-no answer, as mentioned in an online Popular Science report. The Food and Drug Administration (9) requires drug companies to include an expiration date on all prescription and over-the-counter medicines. The expiration date is set after extensive testing is done before the medicine is sold. Scientists keep the medicine at the right temperature, either at room temperature or in the fridge, and test it over time to see if it stays effective or starts to break down. Companies don’t test medicines indefinitely. If a drug stays effective for the entire testing period—usually six months to two years—they set that as the expiration date and stop testing. This means the expiration date is just the last date the company tested and has proof the medicine still works. After that date, the company can’t promise the medicine will still be effective," says Bellottie. Without more testing, there's no way to know if it will work the same way. Recent findings suggest that some medicines might still be effective after they expire. In 2017, ProPublica investigated drug expiration dates and found that many expired medications, even years later, still worked as intended. The investigation revealed that every year, expensive medicines worth thousands of dollars are thrown away, even though tests show many of them still work. Unless drug companies start testing medicines for longer, which isn’t likely to happen soon, the way we use and dispose of medications will remain the same. Bellottie explains that her advice to patients remains the same: Never take expired medicine without first asking a pharmacist if it’s still safe to use. Many factors, like how a medicine is stored or how long it has been open, can affect its safety and effectiveness, says Bellottie. Some medicines might still be safe to use years later, but without more testing, it's hard to know which ones are still effective. If you have no choice but to take an expired medicine, Bellottie warns that you should never use it for a serious or life-threatening condition. For some medicines, the worst that could happen is that they might not work as well, says Bellottie. If you have a headache, it might not be a big problem. But if it's a serious emergency, the wrong medicine or one that doesn’t work properly could be dangerous. She also mentions that old medicines, especially liquids or ones that have been opened, can get contaminated over time. If you're unsure, she suggests gathering all the medicines from your cabinet, putting them in a bag, and taking them to the nearest pharmacy. The pharmacist can help you figure out which medicines are safe to keep using and which ones aren’t. They can also warn you about any side effects or drug interactions.

Sneezing and Skeptical: Does Expired Medicine Really Work?

Drones, or Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), are being fired in swarms in the Russia-Ukraine war and the barrages are now more intense than ever. Both sides are relying heavily on drones for attacks, surveillance and defence. This has made the conflict even more dangerous and unpredictable. Drones are now changing the way battles are fought. These drones are connected to the ground with fibre-optic cables, making them much more difficult to jam, or disrupt, using electronic attacks or GPS interference.
First-Person View (FPV) kamikaze drones are equipped with a spool&mdash;a wound coil of cable&mdash;of optical fibre that, sometimes, extends over 10 kilometres. FPV technology allows operators to monitor a real-time video feed as if they were inside the drone. By transmitting footage through the fibre-optic cable instead of relying on GPS or radio signals, these drones can accurately locate, and strike, targets while avoiding electronic interference.
Kamikaze drones are small, unmanned aircraft packed with explosives that fly directly into targets to destroy them. They are like guided missiles with wings, controlled remotely, or programmed to hit enemy vehicles, buildings, or troops, sacrificing themselves in the attack. These drones have a dual guidance system that uses both radio signals and fibre-optic cables, which help them stay under control even if the enemy tries to block their radio signals.
The only real challenge comes from physical obstacles, such as trees or bushes, but, in ground war situation, this rarely causes problems. The fibre-optic cable is usually long and flexible enough to avoid being cut.
<h2>World&rsquo;s eyes turn to China</h2>
As drone warfare evolves, the world is once again focussing on China. Chinese companies dominate the drone industry, making up 80% of the global civilian drone market, according to Interesting Engineering. Over the past two years, China has been making it harder to export certain drone parts that could be used for both civilian and military purposes. The goal is to stop these parts from ending up in war zones, especially in Ukraine.
In July 2024, China introduced new rules to limit drone exports, blocking sales for military purposes. The government also stated that it did not provide weapons to any side in the conflict, according to a Bloomberg report. On August 1, 2023, China said it would restrict export of certain drone-related parts, including special motors, important equipment, radio communication devices and civilian technology used to block drones.
China also put a temporary two-year ban on exporting some consumer drones. At the same time, it completely banned the sale of any civilian drones for military use. The latest ban on drone exports has affected Ukraine significantly. Earlier, Ukraine used affordable parts from China to build low-cost kamikaze drones.
The steady supply of parts from China had helped Ukraine fight against a much stronger opponent. It had also allowed Ukraine to stretch its limited resources, making it possible to keep fighting for a longer time. As China enforces stricter rules, Ukraine now has to look for other suppliers.
<h2>Challenges of ban on exports</h2>
China has introduced new export rules that ban the sale of certain high-tech drone equipment. This includes infrared cameras, radar systems, laser-targeting devices and advanced motion sensors. For instance, China now restricts the export of infrared cameras that detect light in the 780-30,000 nanometre range and have a very precise focus of less than 2.5 milliradians. Selling these devices abroad requires special approval.
Infrared cameras work by detecting heat instead of visible light. A range of 780-30,000 nanometres refers to the type of heat energy they can sense. Their precision is measured in milliradians (mrad), a unit used to describe angles in optics and targeting systems. An mrad is a unit of angular measurement equal to 1/1,000th of a radian, which is a unit of measurement of angles equal to about 57.3&deg;.
A camera with a focus of less than 2.5 mrads can capture very fine details, making it highly effective for surveillance and targeting. To put this into perspective, if the camera is looking at an object 1 kilometre (1,000 metres) away, it can distinguish details as small as 2.5 metres wide. The lower the mrad value, the sharper, and more accurate, the image. Because of this high level of precision, these cameras are widely used in military operations, surveillance and scientific research.
&gt; Laser designators used for targeting may be restricted if they meet specific conditions. For instance, they may be banned if they can function above temperatures hotter than 55&deg;C (131&deg;F), since high-temperature capability may make it suitable for use in extreme environments, such as deserts or other hot locations.&nbsp;
&gt; They may also be banned if they produce more than 80 millijoules of energy (millijoule, or mJ, being a unit of energy). If the laser emits more than 80 mJ in its beam, it is considered very powerful. High energy output makes the laser more effective, but also potentially more dangerous, or restricted.
&gt; Another reason for a ban is if a laser designator has a stability margin of within 15% (where stability margin refers to how consistent the laser output is). If the stability margin stays within 15% of its intended power level, it is considered fairly stable. For instance, if the laser is designed to output 100 mJ, it should stay between 85 mJ and 115 mJ to meet this standard.
&gt; This ban could also apply to a beam divergence angle of under 0.3 mrad. Beam divergence is how much the laser beam spreads out as it travels. A small divergence angle (0.3 mrads) means the beam stays narrow and focussed over long distances, making it more precise for targeting. &gt; Yet another reason for a ban on a laser designator is a lack of temperature control. If the device does not have a system to control its internal temperature, it could overheat, or become unstable in performance. Temperature control ensures the laser works reliably, regardless of external conditions.
These lasers play an important role in helping drones and artillery hit their targets accurately. In summary, these criteria describe a laser designator that can handle tough environments, has no temperature safeguards, is very powerful, maintains consistent output and is highly accurate over long distances.
Rules have limited the supply of military drone parts to war zones. Some experts say China is increasing its drone export restrictions to stop its technology from being used as weapons and to avoid conflicts with Western countries.
<h2>Breaking down the barriers</h2>
In reality, stopping advancements in drone warfare through export bans or stricter rules is tough. There are two main problems:
&gt; First, rules cannot keep up with how quickly new technology is being developed &gt; Second, as long as there is demand, suppliers will find a way to meet it. Many drone parts, such as fibre-optics, are made from everyday materials. This makes them almost impossible to regulate
Fibre-optics are highly sought after because they offer faster data speeds and clearer video quality compared to traditional wireless networks. They change light signals into electrical and digital information, helping drones send high-quality video (1080p at 60 frames/second) in real time with very little delay.
Russia, Ukraine and other countries can make, or get fibre-optics. If China tightens restrictions, suppliers from the US or South Korea could still provide them.
A quick look on Taobao, one of China&rsquo;s top online shopping sites, shows many listings for drone fibre-optic storage boxes. They come in different ranges&mdash;including 5km, 10km, 15km and even 20km options. These cylindrical products are light and easy to carry. The 20km spool weighs about 2.2kg, while the 5km version is much lighter at just 0.65kg. Because they are lightweight, they barely affect the flight range or carrying capacity of FPV drones. As for the price, they start around 1,960 RMB ($270) and go up to 4,260 RMB ($590).
<h2>AI-powered precision drones</h2>
In addition to fibre-optic FPV drones, AI-driven auto-targeting systems are also being used in reconnaissance and attack drones on Ukraine&rsquo;s battlefield. A Chinese startup, Littro Innovations, has created a tracking module for drones that uses infrared and AI. It processes video from the drone&rsquo;s camera, allowing it to spot, recognize and follow targets in real time.
The Tofu 3 module, which uses edge computing, can spot moving objects as tiny as 1.5 pixels (the size of one dot on screen). With deep learning, it can also identify drones if they are at least 3 pixels in thermal imaging or 10 pixels (the size of 10 dots on screen) in regular camera footage.
Once a target is detected, the module automatically takes over tracking, adjusts the gimbal servo (a motorised mechanism that stabilises and positions the camera), and controls the zoom without needing any manual input from the operator. If the target is lost due to an obstacle, the system has several ways to recover, and resume, tracking. When there are multiple targets, the operator can tap on the screen to choose one. Once selected, the system will track that target automatically.
AI tracking modules such as these can easily be found on Taobao, costing around 1,300 RMB to 1,500 RMB ($180-$207). Buying in bulk lowers the price even more, making it easier to deploy large groups of drones. In theory, these AI-powered FPV drones can compete with precision-guided missiles, which usually cost tens&mdash;or even hundreds of thousands&mdash;of dollars, while these drones cost only a few thousand RMB.
<h2>The long battle of endurance</h2>
For both Russia and Ukraine, acquiring, and using, these low-cost weapons could keep the war going indefinitely if they can train enough skilled FPV drone pilots and deploy them in battle. China has not restricted the export of fibre-optics, or AI tracking modules yet. Since these technologies have both civilian and military uses, it is hard to tell if they will be used in war zones. This makes it much harder to enforce stricter rules on exporting drones in future.
Chinese companies that produce parts for kamikaze drones often find ways around the restrictions by labelling them &lsquo;components for regular consumer drones&rsquo;.
Drone technology keeps improving. When electronic warfare and GPS jamming caused drones to fail during the early stages of Russia&rsquo;s invasion of Ukraine, such new options as fibre-optic drones and AI-powered tracking drones were quickly developed. This shows how quickly new innovations can outpace efforts to control the spread of technology.
China&rsquo;s drone industry, especially in the tech hub of Shenzhen, is so large and advanced that, if one company is blocked, another quickly steps in with an alternative&mdash;sometimes, an even better one. Some people in China jokingly call the Russia-Ukraine drone war an &ldquo;internal Shenzhen war&rdquo; because the two main tech areas in the city, Bao&rsquo;an and Nanshan, both play a big role in supplying drones.
Who would have imagined that ordinary products made in small factories and sold online could end up influencing a war so far away? Yet, that is exactly what is happening.
It is not clear if China truly wants to prevent drone technology from reaching the militaries of Russia and Ukraine, although reports suggest more is going to Russia. Until then, deadly attacks from the air will, possibly, continue to be a tragic ingredient of the war.
(The author of this article is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace &amp; Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him at: girishlinganna@gmail.com)
(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Opinions & Blogs: Some experts say China is increasing its drone export restrictions to stop its technology from being used as weapons and to avoid conflicts with Western countries.

Drones, or Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), are being fired in swarms in the Russia-Ukraine war and the barrages are now more intense than ever. Both sides are relying heavily on drones for attacks, surveillance and defence. This has made the conflict even more dangerous and unpredictable. Drones are now changing the way battles are fought. These drones are connected to the ground with fibre-optic cables, making them much more difficult to jam, or disrupt, using electronic attacks or GPS interference. First-Person View (FPV) kamikaze drones are equipped with a spool—a wound coil of cable—of optical fibre that, sometimes, extends over 10 kilometres. FPV technology allows operators to monitor a real-time video feed as if they were inside the drone. By transmitting footage through the fibre-optic cable instead of relying on GPS or radio signals, these drones can accurately locate, and strike, targets while avoiding electronic interference. Kamikaze drones are small, unmanned aircraft packed with explosives that fly directly into targets to destroy them. They are like guided missiles with wings, controlled remotely, or programmed to hit enemy vehicles, buildings, or troops, sacrificing themselves in the attack. These drones have a dual guidance system that uses both radio signals and fibre-optic cables, which help them stay under control even if the enemy tries to block their radio signals. The only real challenge comes from physical obstacles, such as trees or bushes, but, in ground war situation, this rarely causes problems. The fibre-optic cable is usually long and flexible enough to avoid being cut. World’s eyes turn to China As drone warfare evolves, the world is once again focussing on China. Chinese companies dominate the drone industry, making up 80% of the global civilian drone market, according to Interesting Engineering. Over the past two years, China has been making it harder to export certain drone parts that could be used for both civilian and military purposes. The goal is to stop these parts from ending up in war zones, especially in Ukraine. In July 2024, China introduced new rules to limit drone exports, blocking sales for military purposes. The government also stated that it did not provide weapons to any side in the conflict, according to a Bloomberg report. On August 1, 2023, China said it would restrict export of certain drone-related parts, including special motors, important equipment, radio communication devices and civilian technology used to block drones. China also put a temporary two-year ban on exporting some consumer drones. At the same time, it completely banned the sale of any civilian drones for military use. The latest ban on drone exports has affected Ukraine significantly. Earlier, Ukraine used affordable parts from China to build low-cost kamikaze drones. The steady supply of parts from China had helped Ukraine fight against a much stronger opponent. It had also allowed Ukraine to stretch its limited resources, making it possible to keep fighting for a longer time. As China enforces stricter rules, Ukraine now has to look for other suppliers. Challenges of ban on exports China has introduced new export rules that ban the sale of certain high-tech drone equipment. This includes infrared cameras, radar systems, laser-targeting devices and advanced motion sensors. For instance, China now restricts the export of infrared cameras that detect light in the 780-30,000 nanometre range and have a very precise focus of less than 2.5 milliradians. Selling these devices abroad requires special approval. Infrared cameras work by detecting heat instead of visible light. A range of 780-30,000 nanometres refers to the type of heat energy they can sense. Their precision is measured in milliradians (mrad), a unit used to describe angles in optics and targeting systems. An mrad is a unit of angular measurement equal to 1/1,000th of a radian, which is a unit of measurement of angles equal to about 57.3°. A camera with a focus of less than 2.5 mrads can capture very fine details, making it highly effective for surveillance and targeting. To put this into perspective, if the camera is looking at an object 1 kilometre (1,000 metres) away, it can distinguish details as small as 2.5 metres wide. The lower the mrad value, the sharper, and more accurate, the image. Because of this high level of precision, these cameras are widely used in military operations, surveillance and scientific research. > Laser designators used for targeting may be restricted if they meet specific conditions. For instance, they may be banned if they can function above temperatures hotter than 55°C (131°F), since high-temperature capability may make it suitable for use in extreme environments, such as deserts or other hot locations. > They may also be banned if they produce more than 80 millijoules of energy (millijoule, or mJ, being a unit of energy). If the laser emits more than 80 mJ in its beam, it is considered very powerful. High energy output makes the laser more effective, but also potentially more dangerous, or restricted. > Another reason for a ban is if a laser designator has a stability margin of within 15% (where stability margin refers to how consistent the laser output is). If the stability margin stays within 15% of its intended power level, it is considered fairly stable. For instance, if the laser is designed to output 100 mJ, it should stay between 85 mJ and 115 mJ to meet this standard. > This ban could also apply to a beam divergence angle of under 0.3 mrad. Beam divergence is how much the laser beam spreads out as it travels. A small divergence angle (0.3 mrads) means the beam stays narrow and focussed over long distances, making it more precise for targeting. > Yet another reason for a ban on a laser designator is a lack of temperature control. If the device does not have a system to control its internal temperature, it could overheat, or become unstable in performance. Temperature control ensures the laser works reliably, regardless of external conditions. These lasers play an important role in helping drones and artillery hit their targets accurately. In summary, these criteria describe a laser designator that can handle tough environments, has no temperature safeguards, is very powerful, maintains consistent output and is highly accurate over long distances. Rules have limited the supply of military drone parts to war zones. Some experts say China is increasing its drone export restrictions to stop its technology from being used as weapons and to avoid conflicts with Western countries. Breaking down the barriers In reality, stopping advancements in drone warfare through export bans or stricter rules is tough. There are two main problems: > First, rules cannot keep up with how quickly new technology is being developed > Second, as long as there is demand, suppliers will find a way to meet it. Many drone parts, such as fibre-optics, are made from everyday materials. This makes them almost impossible to regulate Fibre-optics are highly sought after because they offer faster data speeds and clearer video quality compared to traditional wireless networks. They change light signals into electrical and digital information, helping drones send high-quality video (1080p at 60 frames/second) in real time with very little delay. Russia, Ukraine and other countries can make, or get fibre-optics. If China tightens restrictions, suppliers from the US or South Korea could still provide them. A quick look on Taobao, one of China’s top online shopping sites, shows many listings for drone fibre-optic storage boxes. They come in different ranges—including 5km, 10km, 15km and even 20km options. These cylindrical products are light and easy to carry. The 20km spool weighs about 2.2kg, while the 5km version is much lighter at just 0.65kg. Because they are lightweight, they barely affect the flight range or carrying capacity of FPV drones. As for the price, they start around 1,960 RMB ($270) and go up to 4,260 RMB ($590). AI-powered precision drones In addition to fibre-optic FPV drones, AI-driven auto-targeting systems are also being used in reconnaissance and attack drones on Ukraine’s battlefield. A Chinese startup, Littro Innovations, has created a tracking module for drones that uses infrared and AI. It processes video from the drone’s camera, allowing it to spot, recognize and follow targets in real time. The Tofu 3 module, which uses edge computing, can spot moving objects as tiny as 1.5 pixels (the size of one dot on screen). With deep learning, it can also identify drones if they are at least 3 pixels in thermal imaging or 10 pixels (the size of 10 dots on screen) in regular camera footage. Once a target is detected, the module automatically takes over tracking, adjusts the gimbal servo (a motorised mechanism that stabilises and positions the camera), and controls the zoom without needing any manual input from the operator. If the target is lost due to an obstacle, the system has several ways to recover, and resume, tracking. When there are multiple targets, the operator can tap on the screen to choose one. Once selected, the system will track that target automatically. AI tracking modules such as these can easily be found on Taobao, costing around 1,300 RMB to 1,500 RMB ($180-$207). Buying in bulk lowers the price even more, making it easier to deploy large groups of drones. In theory, these AI-powered FPV drones can compete with precision-guided missiles, which usually cost tens—or even hundreds of thousands—of dollars, while these drones cost only a few thousand RMB. The long battle of endurance For both Russia and Ukraine, acquiring, and using, these low-cost weapons could keep the war going indefinitely if they can train enough skilled FPV drone pilots and deploy them in battle. China has not restricted the export of fibre-optics, or AI tracking modules yet. Since these technologies have both civilian and military uses, it is hard to tell if they will be used in war zones. This makes it much harder to enforce stricter rules on exporting drones in future. Chinese companies that produce parts for kamikaze drones often find ways around the restrictions by labelling them ‘components for regular consumer drones’. Drone technology keeps improving. When electronic warfare and GPS jamming caused drones to fail during the early stages of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, such new options as fibre-optic drones and AI-powered tracking drones were quickly developed. This shows how quickly new innovations can outpace efforts to control the spread of technology. China’s drone industry, especially in the tech hub of Shenzhen, is so large and advanced that, if one company is blocked, another quickly steps in with an alternative—sometimes, an even better one. Some people in China jokingly call the Russia-Ukraine drone war an “internal Shenzhen war” because the two main tech areas in the city, Bao’an and Nanshan, both play a big role in supplying drones. Who would have imagined that ordinary products made in small factories and sold online could end up influencing a war so far away? Yet, that is exactly what is happening. It is not clear if China truly wants to prevent drone technology from reaching the militaries of Russia and Ukraine, although reports suggest more is going to Russia. Until then, deadly attacks from the air will, possibly, continue to be a tragic ingredient of the war. (The author of this article is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace & Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him at: girishlinganna@gmail.com) (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Russia, Ukraine wired for war: Fibre-optic drones redefining conflict

Government sources say that no officials from xAI, the company behind Grok, have been summoned. However, authorities are carefully reviewing the chatbot's responses to ensure they comply with Indian laws.
The government wants to check if Grok's responses could threaten national security, sovereignty, or public order. It is also reviewing whether the chatbot's replies might encourage or support illegal activities.
Grok's straightforward and sometimes bold answers have raised worries about whether they fit with India's laws and cultural values. The government is also checking if the data used to teach Grok follows Indian rules.
This news comes as Grok has become really popular with Indian users. But its blunt and sometimes rude responses have started arguments about whether it&rsquo;s a good fit for a country with so many different views and feelings.
The chatbot, created by Elon Musk to compete with AI from companies like Google and OpenAI, works with X and can also be used as a separate app on your phone. It runs on xAI&rsquo;s superfast Colossus computer (a powerful machine built for big tasks), which they say is 10 times quicker than the older version.
Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/from-debt-traps-to-dead-rivers-chinas-economic-hold-tightens-over-zambia-the-debt-environment-nexus-8876034" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">From debt traps to dead rivers: China&rsquo;s economic hold tightens over Zambia</a>
Grok&rsquo;s makers say it&rsquo;s a chatbot with a bold attitude and a love for jokes. Funny enough, when asked who spreads the most false info on X, Grok pointed to Musk, its own creator!
Some users like its raw and direct style, but others worry about its accuracy and the risk of it being offensive.
Over the past few days, liberal users on X have been having fun asking Grok about right-wing figures and other political topics. The chatbot has responded without hesitation, no matter the language or tone of the question.&nbsp;
People have been amazed by how Grok can respond in romanized forms (using English letters) of Indian languages like Hindi, Telugu, Tamil, and others. This means it can write these languages in a way that&rsquo;s easy to read for those familiar with English spelling, without needing special scripts or keyboards. Even better, Grok smoothly switches back to English during chats, making the conversation flow naturally and keeping things simple for users.
Example : In Hindi, "How are you?" is typically said as "Aap kaise hain?" (आप कैसे हैं?). In a romanized version using English letters, it&rsquo;s written as "Aap kaise hain?"
Compared to Grok, other AI models like Google&rsquo;s Gemini, OpenAI&rsquo;s ChatGPT, and DeepSeek&rsquo;s AI usually avoid political issues or topics that might cause controversy. This difference has made Grok both widely used and debated in India.
(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

The government wants to check if Grok's responses could threaten national security, sovereignty, or public order. It is also reviewing whether the chatbot's replies might encourage or support illegal activities.

Government sources say that no officials from xAI, the company behind Grok, have been summoned. However, authorities are carefully reviewing the chatbot's responses to ensure they comply with Indian laws. The government wants to check if Grok's responses could threaten national security, sovereignty, or public order. It is also reviewing whether the chatbot's replies might encourage or support illegal activities. Grok's straightforward and sometimes bold answers have raised worries about whether they fit with India's laws and cultural values. The government is also checking if the data used to teach Grok follows Indian rules. This news comes as Grok has become really popular with Indian users. But its blunt and sometimes rude responses have started arguments about whether it’s a good fit for a country with so many different views and feelings. The chatbot, created by Elon Musk to compete with AI from companies like Google and OpenAI, works with X and can also be used as a separate app on your phone. It runs on xAI’s superfast Colossus computer (a powerful machine built for big tasks), which they say is 10 times quicker than the older version. Also Read: From debt traps to dead rivers: China’s economic hold tightens over Zambia Grok’s makers say it’s a chatbot with a bold attitude and a love for jokes. Funny enough, when asked who spreads the most false info on X, Grok pointed to Musk, its own creator! Some users like its raw and direct style, but others worry about its accuracy and the risk of it being offensive. Over the past few days, liberal users on X have been having fun asking Grok about right-wing figures and other political topics. The chatbot has responded without hesitation, no matter the language or tone of the question. People have been amazed by how Grok can respond in romanized forms (using English letters) of Indian languages like Hindi, Telugu, Tamil, and others. This means it can write these languages in a way that’s easy to read for those familiar with English spelling, without needing special scripts or keyboards. Even better, Grok smoothly switches back to English during chats, making the conversation flow naturally and keeping things simple for users. Example : In Hindi, "How are you?" is typically said as "Aap kaise hain?" (आप कैसे हैं?). In a romanized version using English letters, it’s written as "Aap kaise hain?" Compared to Grok, other AI models like Google’s Gemini, OpenAI’s ChatGPT, and DeepSeek’s AI usually avoid political issues or topics that might cause controversy. This difference has made Grok both widely used and debated in India. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Bold, Blunt, and Banned? Grok’s Indian Journey Hangs in Balance

NASA's Starliner astronauts were initially set to spend eight days on the International Space Station (ISS) after their arrival in June 2024. However, their stay unexpectedly stretched to almost a year, keeping them in space while a political debate unfolded back on Earth.
Last month, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said that the Starliner astronauts were kept in space &ldquo;for political reasons.&rdquo; His comment sparked disagreement with many people in the space community.
Elon Musk faced criticism after he insulted Andreas Mogensen, a Danish astronaut and former commander of the International Space Station (ISS), on X. The argument started when Mogensen accused Musk of lying, leading to a tense and unpleasant exchange.
According to reports from online media outlet "Interesting Engineering", many space fans and reporters admire Elon Musk for his work with SpaceX, but they also feel frustrated and confused by his behavior in public.
Could Musk&rsquo;s actions push away key partners in the space industry? Is his behaviour affecting SpaceX&rsquo;s work? Here&rsquo;s what we know.
<h2>Musk criticises former ISS Commander</h2>
On February 20, former ISS commander Andreas Mogensen shared a video on X from an interview between Donald Trump and Elon Musk on Fox News.
In the video, Musk talked about the Starliner astronauts who have been on the ISS for nine months. He suggested they were kept there because of politics.
Mogensen shared the clip and commented, "That's not true. And this comes from someone who often criticises the mainstream media for not being honest."
Musk didn&rsquo;t react well to the criticism. He insulted Mogensen and said, &ldquo;SpaceX could have brought them back months ago. I personally offered this to the Biden administration, but they said no. The delay was because of politics.&rdquo;
Many space reporters and experts were surprised by Musk&rsquo;s comments. For months, journalists have warned against exaggerated claims that NASA&rsquo;s Starliner astronauts are "stuck" in space.
Even though Musk is part of NASA&rsquo;s internal discussions, many people doubted his claims. NASA and the Starliner astronauts have repeatedly said they are not "stranded."
<h2>Are the Starliner astronauts actually stuck in space?</h2>
NASA first planned for the Starliner astronauts to stay on the ISS for just eight days. But they have now been in space for about nine months.
It's important to remember that delays and longer missions are normal in human space travel.
Musk is well aware of this. As the CEO of SpaceX, he has dealt with many delayed launches in the Falcon 9 and Starship programmes.
In a live broadcast from the ISS this month, Starliner astronaut Butch Wilmore said he was ready for the extended stay. "We were prepared for a long mission, even though the plan was for a short one," he explained, according to Interesting Engineering.
The human spaceflight programme is all about preparing for the unknown and handling unexpected situations. "And we did that," Butch said.
Starliner astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams have been in space for nearly 300 days. However, this isn't a record. NASA astronaut Frank Rubio holds the longest stay on the ISS, spending 371 days in a row.
The Starliner astronauts have made it clear that they don&rsquo;t feel abandoned. During the same live broadcast from the ISS, Wilmore responded to comments from Trump and Musk, saying, "That&rsquo;s just politics&mdash;it&rsquo;s part of life. For me, politics hasn&rsquo;t influenced this mission at all."
In a February interview with CBS, Starliner astronaut Suni Williams dismissed claims that she felt stranded. "We&rsquo;re part of something bigger&mdash;the International Space Station," she said. "So no, we don&rsquo;t feel abandoned."
<h2>NASA officials deny Starliner 'rescue' claims</h2>
NASA officials working with the ISS crew have also denied the claims made by Musk and Trump.
During a teleconference on March 7, Steve Stich, who leads NASA&rsquo;s Commercial Crew Program, said that after reviewing all the options, the current plan was the best choice.
Even though Trump said the Starliner astronauts were "abandoned," a plan to bring Williams and Wilmore back was already in place before he became president.
In September 2024, NASA decided to send only two astronauts on its Crew-9 mission instead of four. This allowed Williams and Wilmore to come back when Crew-9 finished its mission in February.
Stich explained that for Crew-9, they sent two open seats and a suit for Butch while also making sure the seats were properly adjusted for both Butch and Suni to bring them back safely.
But since Crew-10's launch was delayed, Crew-9 and the Starliner astronauts also had to wait longer to return.
NASA has explained many times that its decision was based on crew schedules and upcoming missions. During a teleconference on March 7, Ken Bowersox, a top NASA official, said this is usually how they make their decisions.
The teams make decisions based on what works best for their programs, both practically and technically. NASA leaders also review these plans, and in this case, they believed the chosen plan was the best option.
<h2>Musk's bold timelines</h2>
Musk insists that those accusing him of lying weren&rsquo;t there. He says if they had been, they would have seen Biden Administration officials turn down his plan to bring Williams and Wilmore back. However, Musk has a history of making claims that aren&rsquo;t always true or backed by facts.
Interestingly, X&rsquo;s Grok AI identified Musk as the biggest source of false information on the platform. Even before he bought Twitter (now called X), Musk was known for making big promises that often didn&rsquo;t happen.
Back in 2019, Musk said Tesla would have a million self-driving "robotaxis" on the roads by 2020. However, that still hasn&rsquo;t happened.
Last year, Musk said that 1,000 Tesla Optimus robots would be working in U.S. factories. The year isn&rsquo;t over yet, but even his fans know to be skeptical of his promises.
Even Tesla&rsquo;s own employees have admitted that Musk often exaggerates. In 2021, he claimed Tesla cars would reach full self-driving (level 5) by the end of the year. However, a leaked company memo revealed that his team disagreed, saying, &ldquo;Elon&rsquo;s tweet does not match engineering reality.&rdquo; At that time, Tesla&rsquo;s self-driving was only at level 2, and four years later, it still hasn&rsquo;t reached level 5.
<h2>Bold claims, controversy, and misinformation</h2>
In 2018, Musk made headlines for insulting cave diver "Vernon Unsworth," who played a key role in rescuing 12 children trapped in a cave in Thailand. Musk called him "pedo guy" (short for "pedophile guy"), a &nbsp;that sparked widespread criticism.
A &nbsp;pedophile is a person who has a sexual attraction to children. It is a very serious accusation and can damage a person&rsquo;s reputation.
Musk's insult was a reaction, just like his response to Mogensen. He made the comment after Unsworth criticized his efforts to build a small submarine for the rescue, calling it just a "PR stunt."
This was one of the first well-known times Musk made a public claim without solid proof.
Unsworth lost the defamation case against Musk. In court, Musk&rsquo;s lawyers argued that his comment was just an insult and not meant to be taken seriously as a fact.
After the verdict, Mark Stephens, Unsworth&rsquo;s lawyer in the UK, said it was unfortunate that a powerful billionaire had such a big influence. Musk&rsquo;s lawyers won the case by arguing that his comment was just an insult and wasn&rsquo;t meant to be taken as a true statement.
Musk frequently makes bold statements on X, claiming he is just using his right to free speech. However, many people have criticized him for not being consistent with his "free speech absolutism." For example, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has accused Musk of banning well-known figures from X if they openly disagree with him.
<h2>Is Musk&rsquo;s behaviour affecting SpaceX&rsquo;s work?</h2>
While Musk appears to be focusing most of his energy on the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), SpaceX&rsquo;s Starship upper-stage rocket has failed its last two test flights.
Some experts believe that Musk&rsquo;s absence from SpaceX&rsquo;s Starbase headquarters in southern Texas might be slowing down the Starship program.
Some experts say the setbacks are just because spaceflight is incredibly difficult. Ars Technica senior editor Eric Berger suggested that the issues might not be due to Musk&rsquo;s absence but rather SpaceX&rsquo;s intense work culture.
Some people believe the challenges are simply because spaceflight is very difficult. Ars Technica senior editor Eric Berger suggested that the problems might be less about Musk not being there and more about SpaceX&rsquo;s demanding work environment.
Some people have a more critical view. Seth Abramson, who is working on a biography of Musk, believes that Musk&rsquo;s unpredictable behavior could have far-reaching effects beyond just the Starship program.
Abramson shared on X that he believes Musk is not mentally stable enough to be involved in government. He also claimed that Musk&rsquo;s actions, both publicly and privately, are leading to lost lives, jobs, and harm to the U.S.&rsquo;s reputation. &ldquo;He is unwell, and we can all see it,&rdquo; Abramson wrote.
Walter Isaacson, who wrote an authorized biography of Elon Musk, recently shared his thoughts with the New York Times. He described Musk as a highly skilled and determined entrepreneur who has helped shape some of the most important companies of our time.
However, he also tends to show little empathy for those around him, and his impulsive actions have made people question how he handles his great power.
The SpaceX CEO has a lot of power when responding to criticism. In 2022, hundreds of SpaceX employees signed an open letter expressing their disappointment with Musk&rsquo;s public behavior.
Those employees were later fired. Last month, not long after insulting Mogensen for accusing him of lying, Musk urged Trump to shut down the International Space Station (ISS) as soon as possible.
Musk has helped bring new energy to the space industry with SpaceX. However, his impulsive behavior and immense influence are serious reasons for concern.
(Girish Linganna is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace &amp; Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also the Director of ADD Engineering Components India Pvt. Ltd., a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. He can be reached at: girishlinganna@gmail.com ).
(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

SCIENCE & TECH | World: During a live broadcast from ISS, Buch Wilmore responded to comments from Trump and Musk, saying, "That’s just politics—it’s part of life. For me, politics hasn’t influenced this mission at all."

NASA's Starliner astronauts were initially set to spend eight days on the International Space Station (ISS) after their arrival in June 2024. However, their stay unexpectedly stretched to almost a year, keeping them in space while a political debate unfolded back on Earth. Last month, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said that the Starliner astronauts were kept in space “for political reasons.” His comment sparked disagreement with many people in the space community. Elon Musk faced criticism after he insulted Andreas Mogensen, a Danish astronaut and former commander of the International Space Station (ISS), on X. The argument started when Mogensen accused Musk of lying, leading to a tense and unpleasant exchange. According to reports from online media outlet "Interesting Engineering", many space fans and reporters admire Elon Musk for his work with SpaceX, but they also feel frustrated and confused by his behavior in public. Could Musk’s actions push away key partners in the space industry? Is his behaviour affecting SpaceX’s work? Here’s what we know. Musk criticises former ISS Commander On February 20, former ISS commander Andreas Mogensen shared a video on X from an interview between Donald Trump and Elon Musk on Fox News. In the video, Musk talked about the Starliner astronauts who have been on the ISS for nine months. He suggested they were kept there because of politics. Mogensen shared the clip and commented, "That's not true. And this comes from someone who often criticises the mainstream media for not being honest." Musk didn’t react well to the criticism. He insulted Mogensen and said, “SpaceX could have brought them back months ago. I personally offered this to the Biden administration, but they said no. The delay was because of politics.” Many space reporters and experts were surprised by Musk’s comments. For months, journalists have warned against exaggerated claims that NASA’s Starliner astronauts are "stuck" in space. Even though Musk is part of NASA’s internal discussions, many people doubted his claims. NASA and the Starliner astronauts have repeatedly said they are not "stranded." Are the Starliner astronauts actually stuck in space? NASA first planned for the Starliner astronauts to stay on the ISS for just eight days. But they have now been in space for about nine months. It's important to remember that delays and longer missions are normal in human space travel. Musk is well aware of this. As the CEO of SpaceX, he has dealt with many delayed launches in the Falcon 9 and Starship programmes. In a live broadcast from the ISS this month, Starliner astronaut Butch Wilmore said he was ready for the extended stay. "We were prepared for a long mission, even though the plan was for a short one," he explained, according to Interesting Engineering. The human spaceflight programme is all about preparing for the unknown and handling unexpected situations. "And we did that," Butch said. Starliner astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams have been in space for nearly 300 days. However, this isn't a record. NASA astronaut Frank Rubio holds the longest stay on the ISS, spending 371 days in a row. The Starliner astronauts have made it clear that they don’t feel abandoned. During the same live broadcast from the ISS, Wilmore responded to comments from Trump and Musk, saying, "That’s just politics—it’s part of life. For me, politics hasn’t influenced this mission at all." In a February interview with CBS, Starliner astronaut Suni Williams dismissed claims that she felt stranded. "We’re part of something bigger—the International Space Station," she said. "So no, we don’t feel abandoned." NASA officials deny Starliner 'rescue' claims NASA officials working with the ISS crew have also denied the claims made by Musk and Trump. During a teleconference on March 7, Steve Stich, who leads NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, said that after reviewing all the options, the current plan was the best choice. Even though Trump said the Starliner astronauts were "abandoned," a plan to bring Williams and Wilmore back was already in place before he became president. In September 2024, NASA decided to send only two astronauts on its Crew-9 mission instead of four. This allowed Williams and Wilmore to come back when Crew-9 finished its mission in February. Stich explained that for Crew-9, they sent two open seats and a suit for Butch while also making sure the seats were properly adjusted for both Butch and Suni to bring them back safely. But since Crew-10's launch was delayed, Crew-9 and the Starliner astronauts also had to wait longer to return. NASA has explained many times that its decision was based on crew schedules and upcoming missions. During a teleconference on March 7, Ken Bowersox, a top NASA official, said this is usually how they make their decisions. The teams make decisions based on what works best for their programs, both practically and technically. NASA leaders also review these plans, and in this case, they believed the chosen plan was the best option. Musk's bold timelines Musk insists that those accusing him of lying weren’t there. He says if they had been, they would have seen Biden Administration officials turn down his plan to bring Williams and Wilmore back. However, Musk has a history of making claims that aren’t always true or backed by facts. Interestingly, X’s Grok AI identified Musk as the biggest source of false information on the platform. Even before he bought Twitter (now called X), Musk was known for making big promises that often didn’t happen. Back in 2019, Musk said Tesla would have a million self-driving "robotaxis" on the roads by 2020. However, that still hasn’t happened. Last year, Musk said that 1,000 Tesla Optimus robots would be working in U.S. factories. The year isn’t over yet, but even his fans know to be skeptical of his promises. Even Tesla’s own employees have admitted that Musk often exaggerates. In 2021, he claimed Tesla cars would reach full self-driving (level 5) by the end of the year. However, a leaked company memo revealed that his team disagreed, saying, “Elon’s tweet does not match engineering reality.” At that time, Tesla’s self-driving was only at level 2, and four years later, it still hasn’t reached level 5. Bold claims, controversy, and misinformation In 2018, Musk made headlines for insulting cave diver "Vernon Unsworth," who played a key role in rescuing 12 children trapped in a cave in Thailand. Musk called him "pedo guy" (short for "pedophile guy"), a that sparked widespread criticism. A pedophile is a person who has a sexual attraction to children. It is a very serious accusation and can damage a person’s reputation. Musk's insult was a reaction, just like his response to Mogensen. He made the comment after Unsworth criticized his efforts to build a small submarine for the rescue, calling it just a "PR stunt." This was one of the first well-known times Musk made a public claim without solid proof. Unsworth lost the defamation case against Musk. In court, Musk’s lawyers argued that his comment was just an insult and not meant to be taken seriously as a fact. After the verdict, Mark Stephens, Unsworth’s lawyer in the UK, said it was unfortunate that a powerful billionaire had such a big influence. Musk’s lawyers won the case by arguing that his comment was just an insult and wasn’t meant to be taken as a true statement. Musk frequently makes bold statements on X, claiming he is just using his right to free speech. However, many people have criticized him for not being consistent with his "free speech absolutism." For example, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has accused Musk of banning well-known figures from X if they openly disagree with him. Is Musk’s behaviour affecting SpaceX’s work? While Musk appears to be focusing most of his energy on the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), SpaceX’s Starship upper-stage rocket has failed its last two test flights. Some experts believe that Musk’s absence from SpaceX’s Starbase headquarters in southern Texas might be slowing down the Starship program. Some experts say the setbacks are just because spaceflight is incredibly difficult. Ars Technica senior editor Eric Berger suggested that the issues might not be due to Musk’s absence but rather SpaceX’s intense work culture. Some people believe the challenges are simply because spaceflight is very difficult. Ars Technica senior editor Eric Berger suggested that the problems might be less about Musk not being there and more about SpaceX’s demanding work environment. Some people have a more critical view. Seth Abramson, who is working on a biography of Musk, believes that Musk’s unpredictable behavior could have far-reaching effects beyond just the Starship program. Abramson shared on X that he believes Musk is not mentally stable enough to be involved in government. He also claimed that Musk’s actions, both publicly and privately, are leading to lost lives, jobs, and harm to the U.S.’s reputation. “He is unwell, and we can all see it,” Abramson wrote. Walter Isaacson, who wrote an authorized biography of Elon Musk, recently shared his thoughts with the New York Times. He described Musk as a highly skilled and determined entrepreneur who has helped shape some of the most important companies of our time. However, he also tends to show little empathy for those around him, and his impulsive actions have made people question how he handles his great power. The SpaceX CEO has a lot of power when responding to criticism. In 2022, hundreds of SpaceX employees signed an open letter expressing their disappointment with Musk’s public behavior. Those employees were later fired. Last month, not long after insulting Mogensen for accusing him of lying, Musk urged Trump to shut down the International Space Station (ISS) as soon as possible. Musk has helped bring new energy to the space industry with SpaceX. However, his impulsive behavior and immense influence are serious reasons for concern. (Girish Linganna is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace & Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also the Director of ADD Engineering Components India Pvt. Ltd., a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. He can be reached at: girishlinganna@gmail.com ). (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

The gravity of politics: Sunita's extended Starliner Mission and the earthbound echoes

At Aero India 2025, held at Yelahanka Air Force Station, Russia&rsquo;s Su-57 fifth-generation fighter jet showcased its aerial manoeuvres, becoming a major highlight of the event. Spectators were impressed by its agility, with some suggesting that India should consider acquiring it.
<h2>Su-57: Russia&rsquo;s Stealth Fighter</h2>
Russia&rsquo;s Su-57 is a modern fighter jet designed for the 21st century. As a fifth-generation aircraft, it is powerful and advanced, attracting interest from around the world.
The Su-57 is Russia&rsquo;s high-tech fighter jet, built with stealth features and powerful abilities. It is designed to compete with the U.S. Air Force&rsquo;s F-35 and F-22 Raptor.
The Su-57, known as &ldquo;Felon&rdquo; by NATO, is a multirole fighter jet with a single seat and twin engines.
Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/us-brings-f-16-f-25-fighter-jets-russia-to-showcase-su-57-at-aero-india-8705342">US brings F-16, F-35 fighter jets, Russia to showcase Su-57 at Aero India</a>
A multirole fighter jet is a military aircraft that can perform different missions, such as air combat, ground attacks, and surveillance. Unlike jets built for just one purpose, these fighters are designed to handle various tasks, making them more flexible and useful in different battle situations.
Indian fighters like LCA Tejas, Rafale and SU-30MKI are capable of Multi-Role Operations.
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-talked-to-putin-says-russian-president-wants-to-see-people-stop-dying-in-ukraine-war-report-8703614" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Also read: Trump talks to Putin, says Russian president &lsquo;wants to see people stop dying&rsquo; in Ukraine war: Report</a>
The Su-57 has a smooth, streamlined shape and strong engines, which help it fly very fast and turn quickly. Its design makes it highly agile and able to perform advanced manoeuvres with ease.
The Su-57, initially known as the PAK-FA (Prospective Aeronautical Complex of Front-Line Air Forces), was developed by Russia&rsquo;s Sukhoi Design Bureau. It is a modern fighter jet designed for stealth, high-speed combat, and superior agility, making it a key asset for Russia&rsquo;s air force. The PAK-FA project aimed to build a fifth-generation fighter jet that could compete with Western aircraft like the F-22 and F-35. However, its development faced many obstacles, including cracks in the airframe, engine issues, and even a prototype crash, causing delays and setbacks.
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/putin-preparing-for-war-not-peace-or-negotiations-zelensky-claims-8703418" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Also read: 'Putin preparing for war, not peace or negotiations', Zelensky claims</a> A major highlight of the Su-57 is its stealth technology, which helps it avoid detection by enemy radar. It also comes with high-tech systems, including a powerful radar, infrared tracking, and electronic countermeasures to disrupt enemy signals. These advanced systems give the pilots a clear view of the battlefield and allow them to track and engage multiple targets at the same time. The Su-57 is armed with a 30mm internal autocannon and has 12 hardpoints for carrying missiles and bombs. With its advanced targeting systems, it can accurately attack both air and ground targets, making it a highly effective combat aircraft. The Su-57 has a powerful engine that gives it a high thrust-to-weight ratio, allowing it to perform impressive manoeuvres and reach supersonic speeds with ease.
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/how-elon-musks-doge-us-treasury-department-shakeup-could-be-biggest-security-breach-in-us-history-8704805" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Also read: 'Massive risks': How Elon Musk&rsquo;s Treasury shakeup could be &lsquo;biggest security breach in US history'</a> A high thrust-to-weight ratio means the Su-57&rsquo;s engines produce more power than its weight, allowing it to accelerate quickly, climb fast, perform sharp turns, and fly at high speeds with ease.
<h2>Su-57 Variants</h2>
Su-57 (Baseline Variant): The Su-57 is a fifth-generation stealth fighter designed by Sukhoi for the Russian Aerospace Forces. It is built for air dominance, precise attacks, and reconnaissance (gathering intelligence and monitoring enemy activities), with advanced stealth and high-tech systems.
Su-57E (Export Variant): The Su-57E is a version made for export, first showcased at the MAKS-2019 air show. It is designed for international buyers, meeting export rules while keeping its stealth and multi-role abilities.
Su-57M (Upgraded Variant): The Su-57M is an upgraded version of the Su-57, designed to include new Izdeliye 30 engines for better thrust, fuel efficiency, and sustained supersonic flight. It is also expected to have improved avionics and enhanced stealth features.
Su-75 Checkmate (Single-Engine Variant): The Su-75 Checkmate is a light, single-engine fighter influenced by the Su-57&rsquo;s design. Built for affordability, easy maintenance, and stealth, it is aimed at international buyers and serves as a lighter counterpart to the Su-57.
FGFA (Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft): The FGFA (Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft) was a planned joint project between Russia and India, based on the Su-57. It aimed to develop a customised version for India, but the project was cancelled in 2018 due to cost concerns and performance issues.
(The author of this article is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace &amp; Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him at: girishlinganna@gmail.com)
(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

World | India News: The Su-57 is Russia’s high-tech fighter jet, built with stealth features and powerful abilities. It is designed to compete with the U.S. Air Force’s F-35 and F-22 Raptor.

At Aero India 2025, held at Yelahanka Air Force Station, Russia’s Su-57 fifth-generation fighter jet showcased its aerial manoeuvres, becoming a major highlight of the event. Spectators were impressed by its agility, with some suggesting that India should consider acquiring it. Su-57: Russia’s Stealth Fighter Russia’s Su-57 is a modern fighter jet designed for the 21st century. As a fifth-generation aircraft, it is powerful and advanced, attracting interest from around the world. The Su-57 is Russia’s high-tech fighter jet, built with stealth features and powerful abilities. It is designed to compete with the U.S. Air Force’s F-35 and F-22 Raptor. The Su-57, known as “Felon” by NATO, is a multirole fighter jet with a single seat and twin engines. Also Read | US brings F-16, F-35 fighter jets, Russia to showcase Su-57 at Aero India A multirole fighter jet is a military aircraft that can perform different missions, such as air combat, ground attacks, and surveillance. Unlike jets built for just one purpose, these fighters are designed to handle various tasks, making them more flexible and useful in different battle situations. Indian fighters like LCA Tejas, Rafale and SU-30MKI are capable of Multi-Role Operations. Also read: Trump talks to Putin, says Russian president ‘wants to see people stop dying’ in Ukraine war: Report The Su-57 has a smooth, streamlined shape and strong engines, which help it fly very fast and turn quickly. Its design makes it highly agile and able to perform advanced manoeuvres with ease. The Su-57, initially known as the PAK-FA (Prospective Aeronautical Complex of Front-Line Air Forces), was developed by Russia’s Sukhoi Design Bureau. It is a modern fighter jet designed for stealth, high-speed combat, and superior agility, making it a key asset for Russia’s air force. The PAK-FA project aimed to build a fifth-generation fighter jet that could compete with Western aircraft like the F-22 and F-35. However, its development faced many obstacles, including cracks in the airframe, engine issues, and even a prototype crash, causing delays and setbacks. Also read: 'Putin preparing for war, not peace or negotiations', Zelensky claims A major highlight of the Su-57 is its stealth technology, which helps it avoid detection by enemy radar. It also comes with high-tech systems, including a powerful radar, infrared tracking, and electronic countermeasures to disrupt enemy signals. These advanced systems give the pilots a clear view of the battlefield and allow them to track and engage multiple targets at the same time. The Su-57 is armed with a 30mm internal autocannon and has 12 hardpoints for carrying missiles and bombs. With its advanced targeting systems, it can accurately attack both air and ground targets, making it a highly effective combat aircraft. The Su-57 has a powerful engine that gives it a high thrust-to-weight ratio, allowing it to perform impressive manoeuvres and reach supersonic speeds with ease. Also read: 'Massive risks': How Elon Musk’s Treasury shakeup could be ‘biggest security breach in US history' A high thrust-to-weight ratio means the Su-57’s engines produce more power than its weight, allowing it to accelerate quickly, climb fast, perform sharp turns, and fly at high speeds with ease. Su-57 Variants Su-57 (Baseline Variant): The Su-57 is a fifth-generation stealth fighter designed by Sukhoi for the Russian Aerospace Forces. It is built for air dominance, precise attacks, and reconnaissance (gathering intelligence and monitoring enemy activities), with advanced stealth and high-tech systems. Su-57E (Export Variant): The Su-57E is a version made for export, first showcased at the MAKS-2019 air show. It is designed for international buyers, meeting export rules while keeping its stealth and multi-role abilities. Su-57M (Upgraded Variant): The Su-57M is an upgraded version of the Su-57, designed to include new Izdeliye 30 engines for better thrust, fuel efficiency, and sustained supersonic flight. It is also expected to have improved avionics and enhanced stealth features. Su-75 Checkmate (Single-Engine Variant): The Su-75 Checkmate is a light, single-engine fighter influenced by the Su-57’s design. Built for affordability, easy maintenance, and stealth, it is aimed at international buyers and serves as a lighter counterpart to the Su-57. FGFA (Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft): The FGFA (Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft) was a planned joint project between Russia and India, based on the Su-57. It aimed to develop a customised version for India, but the project was cancelled in 2018 due to cost concerns and performance issues. (The author of this article is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace & Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him at: girishlinganna@gmail.com) (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

Beyond the Rafale: Could the Su-57 be India’s next strategic fighter acquisition?

India has become an important player in the global defense industry. Major military powers around the world are inviting India to work together on developing advanced fighter jet programs.
According to reports from Bulgarian Military Online media, Germany and Spain have invited India to join their Future Combat Air System (FCAS) program. This is a major European project focused on developing advanced 6th-generation fighter jets.
At the same time, the UK-Japan-Italy partnership has invited India to join the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP). This program aims to transform aerial warfare with advanced technology and strong international collaborations.
These proposals highlight India's growing role as a key strategic partner. However, they also present a challenge for New Delhi. India is deeply focused on its indigenous Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) program, a 5.5-generation fighter jet project designed to move the country toward self-reliance in advanced aerial combat technology.
Also Read:<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/indias-secret-weapon-sfdr-missile-test-stokes-fears-in-pakistan-and-china-784002" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank"> India's secret weapon? SFDR missile test stokes fears in Pakistan and China</a>
Partnering with either FCAS or GCAP could give India access to cutting-edge technologies, but it might also shift attention and resources away from the AMCA program, which is a key part of India&rsquo;s defense goals. Reports suggest that India plans to turn down both offers and focus on developing its own AMCA project.
The Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) is India&rsquo;s most ambitious effort to become a leader in defense technology. Developed by the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and the Indian Air Force (IAF), the AMCA is designed to go beyond the capabilities of a typical 5th-generation fighter jet.
The AMCA combines stealth, advanced electronics, and supersonic cruise abilities, making it a platform that bridges the gap between 5th- and 6th-generation fighter technologies.
The AMCA is designed to avoid detection by radar using special composite materials, stealthy shapes, and radar-absorbing coatings. It will also include AI-powered mission support, helping pilots make better decisions during critical situations.
The AMCA will have advanced sensors to give pilots exceptional awareness of their surroundings. It is also being designed to support futuristic weapons like directed-energy systems, helping India stay ready for future battles.
Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/america-visa-h1b-visa-american-visa-for-indians-americas-h1b-protectionism-is-set-to-benefit-india-8580394" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">America's H1B protectionism is set to benefit India. Here's why</a>
India aims to have the first AMCA fighter jets ready for operation by 2035. By 2040, the plan is to upgrade it into a fully advanced 6th-generation fighter. This step-by-step approach shows India&rsquo;s dedication to becoming self-reliant and advancing its defense technology.
The Future Combat Air System (FCAS) is a joint project by Germany, France, and Spain to revolutionize air combat. It focuses on creating a system that combines manned fighter jets with unmanned drones, all working together through advanced networking. At its core is a 6th-generation fighter jet designed to work seamlessly with these drones and modern warfare technologies.
The FCAS is designed with advanced features like adaptive stealth, customizable weapon systems, and AI that can process data in real time. It also focuses on working smoothly with NATO forces, which could make it an attractive option for India to consider aligning with European defense goals.
For India, being part of FCAS could provide access to advanced European aerospace knowledge and cutting-edge technologies. However, the project&rsquo;s high cost and the need to make decisions jointly with other countries might clash with India&rsquo;s goal of maintaining independence in its defense strategies.
The Global Combat Air Program (GCAP), led by the UK, Japan, and Italy, aims to create a 6th-generation fighter by 2035. Unlike FCAS, GCAP focuses more on being flexible in operations and quickly ready for use, which reflects the different priorities of the countries involved.
Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/india-needs-to-build-ip-driven-companies-to-escape-middle-income-trap-786195" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">India needs to build IP-driven companies to escape middle-income trap</a>
The GCAP fighter is planned to include AI to assist with missions, advanced stealth technology, and new directed-energy weapons. It will also be designed to work closely with unmanned systems, which could change how air combat is carried out in the future.
For India, GCAP&rsquo;s focus on the Indo-Pacific region aligns well with its key regional partners and offers chances for defense collaboration in an important area. However, just like with FCAS, India would need to balance joining GCAP with its commitment to the AMCA program, which represents its goal of being self-reliant in defense.
India's interest in these global programs shows that it understands how quickly technology is changing in aerial warfare. However, it faces the tough challenge of working with other countries while also focusing on developing its own defense projects.
Joining FCAS or GCAP could help India quickly gain access to 6th-generation technologies and improve its global influence. However, these partnerships might also mean sharing sensitive information, giving up control over some decisions, or diverting resources from the AMCA program.
The AMCA project is a key part of India&rsquo;s defense plans. It aims to upgrade the Indian Air Force and pave the way for building a completely homegrown 6th-generation fighter in the future.
DRDO and the IAF are fully dedicated to the AMCA project. They see it as a way to boost innovation within the country and cut down reliance on foreign suppliers.
The global defense industry is changing quickly, with countries like the United States, China, and Russia making big advances in 6th-generation fighter technology. For India, staying out of these international developments could mean falling behind in a field where having the best technology is crucial.
India will need to carefully weigh its priorities when making a decision. Working with FCAS or GCAP could strengthen its technology and global partnerships, while focusing only on the AMCA project would support its goal of being self-reliant. Both options have their risks and benefits, but the decision is very important for the country&rsquo;s future.
By 2040, 6th-generation fighter jets will likely dominate air combat worldwide. India&rsquo;s choices now will decide its position in this new era and its influence on the global balance of power.
Whether India chooses to work with others or rely on itself, its decision will shape the future of its air force and its role in the world.
(The author of this article is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace &amp; Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him at: girishlinganna@gmail.com)

Developed by the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and the Indian Air Force (IAF), the AMCA is designed to go beyond the capabilities of a typical 5th-generation fighter jet.

India has become an important player in the global defense industry. Major military powers around the world are inviting India to work together on developing advanced fighter jet programs. According to reports from Bulgarian Military Online media, Germany and Spain have invited India to join their Future Combat Air System (FCAS) program. This is a major European project focused on developing advanced 6th-generation fighter jets. At the same time, the UK-Japan-Italy partnership has invited India to join the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP). This program aims to transform aerial warfare with advanced technology and strong international collaborations. These proposals highlight India's growing role as a key strategic partner. However, they also present a challenge for New Delhi. India is deeply focused on its indigenous Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) program, a 5.5-generation fighter jet project designed to move the country toward self-reliance in advanced aerial combat technology. Also Read: India's secret weapon? SFDR missile test stokes fears in Pakistan and China Partnering with either FCAS or GCAP could give India access to cutting-edge technologies, but it might also shift attention and resources away from the AMCA program, which is a key part of India’s defense goals. Reports suggest that India plans to turn down both offers and focus on developing its own AMCA project. The Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) is India’s most ambitious effort to become a leader in defense technology. Developed by the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and the Indian Air Force (IAF), the AMCA is designed to go beyond the capabilities of a typical 5th-generation fighter jet. The AMCA combines stealth, advanced electronics, and supersonic cruise abilities, making it a platform that bridges the gap between 5th- and 6th-generation fighter technologies. The AMCA is designed to avoid detection by radar using special composite materials, stealthy shapes, and radar-absorbing coatings. It will also include AI-powered mission support, helping pilots make better decisions during critical situations. The AMCA will have advanced sensors to give pilots exceptional awareness of their surroundings. It is also being designed to support futuristic weapons like directed-energy systems, helping India stay ready for future battles. Also Read: America's H1B protectionism is set to benefit India. Here's why India aims to have the first AMCA fighter jets ready for operation by 2035. By 2040, the plan is to upgrade it into a fully advanced 6th-generation fighter. This step-by-step approach shows India’s dedication to becoming self-reliant and advancing its defense technology. The Future Combat Air System (FCAS) is a joint project by Germany, France, and Spain to revolutionize air combat. It focuses on creating a system that combines manned fighter jets with unmanned drones, all working together through advanced networking. At its core is a 6th-generation fighter jet designed to work seamlessly with these drones and modern warfare technologies. The FCAS is designed with advanced features like adaptive stealth, customizable weapon systems, and AI that can process data in real time. It also focuses on working smoothly with NATO forces, which could make it an attractive option for India to consider aligning with European defense goals. For India, being part of FCAS could provide access to advanced European aerospace knowledge and cutting-edge technologies. However, the project’s high cost and the need to make decisions jointly with other countries might clash with India’s goal of maintaining independence in its defense strategies. The Global Combat Air Program (GCAP), led by the UK, Japan, and Italy, aims to create a 6th-generation fighter by 2035. Unlike FCAS, GCAP focuses more on being flexible in operations and quickly ready for use, which reflects the different priorities of the countries involved. Also Read: India needs to build IP-driven companies to escape middle-income trap The GCAP fighter is planned to include AI to assist with missions, advanced stealth technology, and new directed-energy weapons. It will also be designed to work closely with unmanned systems, which could change how air combat is carried out in the future. For India, GCAP’s focus on the Indo-Pacific region aligns well with its key regional partners and offers chances for defense collaboration in an important area. However, just like with FCAS, India would need to balance joining GCAP with its commitment to the AMCA program, which represents its goal of being self-reliant in defense. India's interest in these global programs shows that it understands how quickly technology is changing in aerial warfare. However, it faces the tough challenge of working with other countries while also focusing on developing its own defense projects. Joining FCAS or GCAP could help India quickly gain access to 6th-generation technologies and improve its global influence. However, these partnerships might also mean sharing sensitive information, giving up control over some decisions, or diverting resources from the AMCA program. The AMCA project is a key part of India’s defense plans. It aims to upgrade the Indian Air Force and pave the way for building a completely homegrown 6th-generation fighter in the future. DRDO and the IAF are fully dedicated to the AMCA project. They see it as a way to boost innovation within the country and cut down reliance on foreign suppliers. The global defense industry is changing quickly, with countries like the United States, China, and Russia making big advances in 6th-generation fighter technology. For India, staying out of these international developments could mean falling behind in a field where having the best technology is crucial. India will need to carefully weigh its priorities when making a decision. Working with FCAS or GCAP could strengthen its technology and global partnerships, while focusing only on the AMCA project would support its goal of being self-reliant. Both options have their risks and benefits, but the decision is very important for the country’s future. By 2040, 6th-generation fighter jets will likely dominate air combat worldwide. India’s choices now will decide its position in this new era and its influence on the global balance of power. Whether India chooses to work with others or rely on itself, its decision will shape the future of its air force and its role in the world. (The author of this article is an award-winning Science Writer and a Defence, Aerospace & Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him at: girishlinganna@gmail.com)

Defying the Odds: Can India's Indigenous AMCA Secure a Foothold in the 6th Generation Fighter Jet Echelon?

<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">
The Space Docking Experiment (SpaDeX), launched by ISRO on December 30, 2024, is a groundbreaking mission set to demonstrate India's capability to dock two spacecraft in orbit.1 Originally scheduled for January 7th, 2025, ISRO has now officially communicated a revised docking date of January 9th, timings not announced.While the reason for this change remains unconfirmed, reliable sources indicate potential technical factors may be at play.
<h2>&nbsp;Why January 7th Was Initially Chosen</h2>
The initial selection of January 7th was the result of meticulous planning, taking into account several crucial elements:
<ol>
<li>Perfect Timing and Space Positioning:&nbsp;Orbital dynamics played a key role, with January 7th providing the ideal conditions for the precise maneuvers required for a safe and successful docking.</li>
<li>Ground Control Support:&nbsp;This date ensured the full preparedness and availability of ISRO's ground stations, particularly ISTRAC in Bengaluru, to provide real-time monitoring and support.</li>
<li>Sunlight and Power:&nbsp;Optimal solar orientation on January 7th guaranteed sufficient power for the satellites' systems, including sensors and communication devices.</li>
<li>Meticulous Planning:&nbsp;The date was chosen after thorough analysis, simulations, and testing, ensuring all systems were in place for a successful mission.</li>
</ol>
<h2>Update: Docking Postponed to January 9th</h2>
While the official reason for the postponement remains undisclosed, sources suggest possible technical considerations necessitated the shift to January 9th. This highlights the dynamic nature of space missions, where adjustments and adaptations are often required to ensure overall success.
<h2>A Big Leap for India in Space Technology</h2>
Despite the change in schedule, SpaDeX remains a significant milestone for India's space program. Successfully docking spacecraft in orbit is a complex feat, and this mission showcases ISRO's growing expertise.&nbsp;SpaDeX paves the way for future endeavors like in-orbit refueling and assembling space structures.2
Stay Tuned for Updates
As ISRO prepares for this historic experiment, we will continue to provide updates on the SpaDeX mission. Stay tuned as India takes a giant leap in space exploration!
</div>
</div>
</div>

India News | Science & Tech | Trending: Originally scheduled for January 7th, 2025, ISRO has now officially communicated a revised docking date of January 9th, timings not announced.

The Space Docking Experiment (SpaDeX), launched by ISRO on December 30, 2024, is a groundbreaking mission set to demonstrate India's capability to dock two spacecraft in orbit.1 Originally scheduled for January 7th, 2025, ISRO has now officially communicated a revised docking date of January 9th, timings not announced.While the reason for this change remains unconfirmed, reliable sources indicate potential technical factors may be at play. Why January 7th Was Initially Chosen The initial selection of January 7th was the result of meticulous planning, taking into account several crucial elements: Perfect Timing and Space Positioning: Orbital dynamics played a key role, with January 7th providing the ideal conditions for the precise maneuvers required for a safe and successful docking. Ground Control Support: This date ensured the full preparedness and availability of ISRO's ground stations, particularly ISTRAC in Bengaluru, to provide real-time monitoring and support. Sunlight and Power: Optimal solar orientation on January 7th guaranteed sufficient power for the satellites' systems, including sensors and communication devices. Meticulous Planning: The date was chosen after thorough analysis, simulations, and testing, ensuring all systems were in place for a successful mission. Update: Docking Postponed to January 9th While the official reason for the postponement remains undisclosed, sources suggest possible technical considerations necessitated the shift to January 9th. This highlights the dynamic nature of space missions, where adjustments and adaptations are often required to ensure overall success. A Big Leap for India in Space Technology Despite the change in schedule, SpaDeX remains a significant milestone for India's space program. Successfully docking spacecraft in orbit is a complex feat, and this mission showcases ISRO's growing expertise. SpaDeX paves the way for future endeavors like in-orbit refueling and assembling space structures.2 Stay Tuned for Updates As ISRO prepares for this historic experiment, we will continue to provide updates on the SpaDeX mission. Stay tuned as India takes a giant leap in space exploration!

SpaDeX: Docking date shifts to January 9 - A developing story

On Tuesday (December 24) night, Pakistani fighter jets carried out airstrikes on four locations in Afghanistan&rsquo;s eastern Paktika province, targeting camps linked to the banned group, Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). According to security officials, several suspected militants were killed or injured in the operation. The Afghan defence ministry, in a post on X (formerly Twitter), confirmed that Pakistani forces had carried out the airstrikes. However, the Afghan Taliban claimed that the attack also caused casualties among civilians, including children.&nbsp;
Sources revealed that the airstrikes targeted TTP camps in the Murgha and Laman areas of Bernal district. One of the camps was reportedly used by key figures, including Sher Zaman, also known as Mukhlis Yar, Commander Abu Hamza, Commander Akhtar Muhammad and the head of TTP&rsquo;s media wing, Umar Media.&nbsp;
This was reportedly the second time since March that Pakistan had carried out an attack targeting what it claims are hideouts of the Pakistani Taliban, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), in areas along the Afghan border. Pakistan often accuses the TTP of using Afghan territory as a base to plan and launch attacks on its soil. However, Afghanistan&rsquo;s government has denied these allegations.&nbsp;
The airstrikes happened on the same day that a Pakistani delegation, led by Special Representative Ambassador Muhammad Sadiq, visited Kabul. They met interim Interior Minister Sirajuddin Haqqani and Foreign Minister Amir Muttaqi to restart diplomatic talks after a year-long break.&nbsp;
Pakistan has faced a rise in violence since the Pakistani Taliban (TTP), an ally of the Afghan Taliban, ended its ceasefire with the government in November 2022. In 2023 alone, over 700 attacks claimed nearly 1,000 lives.&nbsp;
The Pakistani government blames the Afghan Taliban for giving shelter to the TTP. Over the years, Pakistan has tried different ways to control the TTP, such as holding talks, building a border fence with Afghanistan and urging the Afghan government to stop supporting the group. In October 2023, Pakistan expelled over 500,000 Afghan refugees and, in July 2024, a second phase began to expel another 800,000.&nbsp;
Pakistan has little control over the violence in its border areas with Afghanistan. It can no longer use its past support for the Taliban during the US war to stop the TTP. Pakistan is, thus, stuck in a problem it created itself. The Taliban leaders it supported during the 20-year war in Afghanistan are now protecting militant groups that attack Pakistan.&nbsp;
Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/pakistan-launches-airstrike-in-afghanistan-civilians-suffer-no-official-confirmation-from-islamabad-786628" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Pakistan launches overnight airstrike on Afghanistan, targets Taliban hideouts</a>
<h2>Cause of Conflict Between Former Allies&nbsp;</h2>
Pakistan and Afghanistan have had a troubled relationship in recent years, but the main issues&mdash;disputes over the border and violence across it&mdash;have been problems for a long time. Since Pakistan became independent, no Afghan government, including the current Taliban leadership, has accepted the official border, says Michael Kugelman, director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Center. Both countries have also accused each other for years of hiding militants who launch attacks across the border, according to TIME.com.&nbsp;
The Durand Line, a border drawn during colonial times, spans over 1,640 miles (2,640 km) and officially separates Pakistan from Afghanistan. However, Afghanistan has never accepted this border and the Taliban have taken an even tougher stance on the issue. This has led to several clashes between Taliban fighters and Pakistani soldiers working on border fencing, often causing the closure of key border crossings.&nbsp;
Border tensions have worsened because the Taliban have taken a more forceful stand on the issue, says Kugelman. The border runs through tribal areas mostly populated by Pashtuns, the largest ethnic group living on both sides. Pakistan has promised to finish building a barbed-wire fence along the internationally accepted border, but the Taliban argue that it divides families.&nbsp;
Now that the war in Afghanistan is over, the Taliban no longer rely on Pakistan for safe havens or wartime help. Instead, it is focussing on gaining more support within Afghanistan, where many people have always been suspicious of Pakistan&rsquo;s government. According to Kugelman, by criticizing Pakistan, the Taliban hope to win some favour from among the Afghan people.&nbsp;
<h2>Pressure From China Cause of Operation?&nbsp;</h2>
Officials from Pakistan told BBC that the country&rsquo;s new military operation is being carried out because of pressure from China. Many Chinese workers are involved in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) projects under the &lsquo;Belt and Road&rsquo; initiative. In March, a suicide bomber, who Pakistan claimed was an Afghan citizen, attacked their convoy in northwest Pakistan, killing five Chinese engineers.&nbsp;
China has a lot of influence over the Taliban because it can invest in Afghanistan, which is struggling under sanctions. Kugelman explains that, if China uses the promise of investment to persuade the Taliban to reduce militant activities both inside Afghanistan and across the border in Pakistan, it would benefit both China and Pakistan.&nbsp;
<h2>Pakistan&rsquo;s Ongoing Battle for Stability&nbsp;</h2>
The TTP was formed in 2007 as a group that brought together several hardline Sunni Islamist factions operating in Pakistan. This happened after Pakistan&rsquo;s military launched operations against al-Qaeda-linked militants in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).&nbsp;
Before merging with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in 2018, FATA covered 27,220 square kilometres along Pakistan&rsquo;s border with Afghanistan. The region was home to about 5 million people, mostly Pashtun tribes. It spanned a long, narrow strip with varying widths and included seven tribal agencies and six frontier regions. The region operated under a separate administrative system governed by colonial-era laws called the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR), which gave significant authority to tribal elders while limiting the role of Pakistan&rsquo;s central government.&nbsp;
Known for its rugged terrain, tribal traditions and strategic location, FATA was historically challenging to govern due to its remote geography and the independence of its tribal communities. Following the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the region became a hub for such militant groups as the Taliban and al-Qaeda. In 2018, FATA was merged with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), a province in Pakistan, to integrate it into the country&rsquo;s mainstream legal and administrative system. This merger aimed to improve governance, boost development and strengthen security in the region.&nbsp;
The TTP was formed under the leadership of Baitullah Mehsud, who is no longer alive. The group is based along the Pak-Afghan border. It is estimated that the TTP has a membership of around 30,000 to 35,000 fighters. While the TTP operates in regions populated by Pashtuns, it does not represent the Pashtun people as a whole. In fact, many Pashtuns oppose the TTP and have been victims of their violence.&nbsp;
Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghanistan-taliban-government-spokesperson-claims-46-killed-in-pakistans-overnight-strike-786677" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Afghanistan: Taliban government spokesperson claims 46 killed in Pakistan's overnight strike</a>
The United Nations states that the main goal of the TTP is to overthrow Pakistan&rsquo;s elected government and replace it with an emirate&mdash;a government led by a religious leader or ruler under Islamic law&mdash;based on their strict interpretation of Islamic principles. The TTP has tried to weaken Pakistan by targeting the army and assassinating politicians. They have carried out many attacks, including suicide bombings, which have killed hundreds of soldiers, police officers and civilians.&nbsp;
The group has carried out some of the deadliest attacks in Pakistan, targeting such places as churches and schools. They were also behind the 2012 attack on Malala Yousafzai, who was shot for speaking out against their attempts to stop women from getting educated. Despite the attack, Malala survived and continued her campaign for education rights.&nbsp;
After the Afghan Taliban took control of Afghanistan in 2021, it gave new confidence to the TTP, whose leaders and fighters are hiding in Afghanistan. Since November 2022, when the TTP broke a ceasefire with the Pakistani government, attacks on Pakistani soldiers and police have increased. The ceasefire had been agreed upon during talks hosted by Afghanistan&rsquo;s government in Kabul, but the discussions failed. In recent months, the TTP has carried out numerous attacks in Pakistan, killing and injuring many soldiers.&nbsp;
<h2>Roots of Conflict &amp; Strategic Advantage&nbsp;</h2>
The main demand of the TTP is to undo the merger of FATA with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province. This issue has remained a key focus for the group and they continue to push for it for several reasons. Although the TTP is not a single, unified group, its most influential faction has been the Mehsud group, mainly made up of Pashtuns, an ethnic community largely found in the FATA and KP regions of Pakistan.&nbsp;
The TTP uses the FATA regions to strengthen its operations and recruit new members because many local and migrant Pashtuns live in these areas. The TTP takes advantage of their unique political problems and dissatisfaction to gain support. Second, the FATA region gives the TTP a strategic advantage because of its location near the Afghan border. This allows the group to carry out cross-border operations and use Afghanistan as a safe hiding place. They also work with other militant groups, such as the Haqqani Network, taking advantage of shared ethnic and militant ties.&nbsp;

Pakistan has faced a rise in violence since the Pakistani Taliban (TTP), an ally of the Afghan Taliban, ended its ceasefire with the government in November 2022. In 2023 alone, over 700 attacks claimed nearly 1,000 lives.

On Tuesday (December 24) night, Pakistani fighter jets carried out airstrikes on four locations in Afghanistan’s eastern Paktika province, targeting camps linked to the banned group, Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). According to security officials, several suspected militants were killed or injured in the operation. The Afghan defence ministry, in a post on X (formerly Twitter), confirmed that Pakistani forces had carried out the airstrikes. However, the Afghan Taliban claimed that the attack also caused casualties among civilians, including children. Sources revealed that the airstrikes targeted TTP camps in the Murgha and Laman areas of Bernal district. One of the camps was reportedly used by key figures, including Sher Zaman, also known as Mukhlis Yar, Commander Abu Hamza, Commander Akhtar Muhammad and the head of TTP’s media wing, Umar Media. This was reportedly the second time since March that Pakistan had carried out an attack targeting what it claims are hideouts of the Pakistani Taliban, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), in areas along the Afghan border. Pakistan often accuses the TTP of using Afghan territory as a base to plan and launch attacks on its soil. However, Afghanistan’s government has denied these allegations. The airstrikes happened on the same day that a Pakistani delegation, led by Special Representative Ambassador Muhammad Sadiq, visited Kabul. They met interim Interior Minister Sirajuddin Haqqani and Foreign Minister Amir Muttaqi to restart diplomatic talks after a year-long break. Pakistan has faced a rise in violence since the Pakistani Taliban (TTP), an ally of the Afghan Taliban, ended its ceasefire with the government in November 2022. In 2023 alone, over 700 attacks claimed nearly 1,000 lives. The Pakistani government blames the Afghan Taliban for giving shelter to the TTP. Over the years, Pakistan has tried different ways to control the TTP, such as holding talks, building a border fence with Afghanistan and urging the Afghan government to stop supporting the group. In October 2023, Pakistan expelled over 500,000 Afghan refugees and, in July 2024, a second phase began to expel another 800,000. Pakistan has little control over the violence in its border areas with Afghanistan. It can no longer use its past support for the Taliban during the US war to stop the TTP. Pakistan is, thus, stuck in a problem it created itself. The Taliban leaders it supported during the 20-year war in Afghanistan are now protecting militant groups that attack Pakistan. Also read | Pakistan launches overnight airstrike on Afghanistan, targets Taliban hideouts Cause of Conflict Between Former Allies Pakistan and Afghanistan have had a troubled relationship in recent years, but the main issues—disputes over the border and violence across it—have been problems for a long time. Since Pakistan became independent, no Afghan government, including the current Taliban leadership, has accepted the official border, says Michael Kugelman, director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Center. Both countries have also accused each other for years of hiding militants who launch attacks across the border, according to TIME.com. The Durand Line, a border drawn during colonial times, spans over 1,640 miles (2,640 km) and officially separates Pakistan from Afghanistan. However, Afghanistan has never accepted this border and the Taliban have taken an even tougher stance on the issue. This has led to several clashes between Taliban fighters and Pakistani soldiers working on border fencing, often causing the closure of key border crossings. Border tensions have worsened because the Taliban have taken a more forceful stand on the issue, says Kugelman. The border runs through tribal areas mostly populated by Pashtuns, the largest ethnic group living on both sides. Pakistan has promised to finish building a barbed-wire fence along the internationally accepted border, but the Taliban argue that it divides families. Now that the war in Afghanistan is over, the Taliban no longer rely on Pakistan for safe havens or wartime help. Instead, it is focussing on gaining more support within Afghanistan, where many people have always been suspicious of Pakistan’s government. According to Kugelman, by criticizing Pakistan, the Taliban hope to win some favour from among the Afghan people. Pressure From China Cause of Operation? Officials from Pakistan told BBC that the country’s new military operation is being carried out because of pressure from China. Many Chinese workers are involved in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) projects under the ‘Belt and Road’ initiative. In March, a suicide bomber, who Pakistan claimed was an Afghan citizen, attacked their convoy in northwest Pakistan, killing five Chinese engineers. China has a lot of influence over the Taliban because it can invest in Afghanistan, which is struggling under sanctions. Kugelman explains that, if China uses the promise of investment to persuade the Taliban to reduce militant activities both inside Afghanistan and across the border in Pakistan, it would benefit both China and Pakistan. Pakistan’s Ongoing Battle for Stability The TTP was formed in 2007 as a group that brought together several hardline Sunni Islamist factions operating in Pakistan. This happened after Pakistan’s military launched operations against al-Qaeda-linked militants in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). Before merging with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in 2018, FATA covered 27,220 square kilometres along Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan. The region was home to about 5 million people, mostly Pashtun tribes. It spanned a long, narrow strip with varying widths and included seven tribal agencies and six frontier regions. The region operated under a separate administrative system governed by colonial-era laws called the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR), which gave significant authority to tribal elders while limiting the role of Pakistan’s central government. Known for its rugged terrain, tribal traditions and strategic location, FATA was historically challenging to govern due to its remote geography and the independence of its tribal communities. Following the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the region became a hub for such militant groups as the Taliban and al-Qaeda. In 2018, FATA was merged with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), a province in Pakistan, to integrate it into the country’s mainstream legal and administrative system. This merger aimed to improve governance, boost development and strengthen security in the region. The TTP was formed under the leadership of Baitullah Mehsud, who is no longer alive. The group is based along the Pak-Afghan border. It is estimated that the TTP has a membership of around 30,000 to 35,000 fighters. While the TTP operates in regions populated by Pashtuns, it does not represent the Pashtun people as a whole. In fact, many Pashtuns oppose the TTP and have been victims of their violence. Also read | Afghanistan: Taliban government spokesperson claims 46 killed in Pakistan's overnight strike The United Nations states that the main goal of the TTP is to overthrow Pakistan’s elected government and replace it with an emirate—a government led by a religious leader or ruler under Islamic law—based on their strict interpretation of Islamic principles. The TTP has tried to weaken Pakistan by targeting the army and assassinating politicians. They have carried out many attacks, including suicide bombings, which have killed hundreds of soldiers, police officers and civilians. The group has carried out some of the deadliest attacks in Pakistan, targeting such places as churches and schools. They were also behind the 2012 attack on Malala Yousafzai, who was shot for speaking out against their attempts to stop women from getting educated. Despite the attack, Malala survived and continued her campaign for education rights. After the Afghan Taliban took control of Afghanistan in 2021, it gave new confidence to the TTP, whose leaders and fighters are hiding in Afghanistan. Since November 2022, when the TTP broke a ceasefire with the Pakistani government, attacks on Pakistani soldiers and police have increased. The ceasefire had been agreed upon during talks hosted by Afghanistan’s government in Kabul, but the discussions failed. In recent months, the TTP has carried out numerous attacks in Pakistan, killing and injuring many soldiers. Roots of Conflict & Strategic Advantage The main demand of the TTP is to undo the merger of FATA with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province. This issue has remained a key focus for the group and they continue to push for it for several reasons. Although the TTP is not a single, unified group, its most influential faction has been the Mehsud group, mainly made up of Pashtuns, an ethnic community largely found in the FATA and KP regions of Pakistan. The TTP uses the FATA regions to strengthen its operations and recruit new members because many local and migrant Pashtuns live in these areas. The TTP takes advantage of their unique political problems and dissatisfaction to gain support. Second, the FATA region gives the TTP a strategic advantage because of its location near the Afghan border. This allows the group to carry out cross-border operations and use Afghanistan as a safe hiding place. They also work with other militant groups, such as the Haqqani Network, taking advantage of shared ethnic and militant ties.

Why Pakistan bombed four Afghan locations

India has reached a major milestone in missile technology with the successful final test of its Solid Fuel Ducted Ramjet (SFDR) propulsion-based missile system. This achievement highlights significant progress in developing advanced missile propulsion technology.

The indigenously developed missile system was test-fired on Friday, December 13, from a fixed launcher at Launching Complex-III of the Integrated Test Range (ITR) off the Odisha coast. Notably, this is the third successful missile test in a single month, showcasing India’s growing expertise in designing and building advanced missile systems using homegrown technology.

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has developed this advanced technology entirely in India. It is expected to significantly enhance the country's ability to create long-range air-to-air missiles.

The final test of the SFDR system was a complete success, meeting all the goals of the mission with accuracy. It proved that the missile's engine, navigation system, and overall design work perfectly, even in real-life conditions. This shows how reliable and advanced the technology is.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/indias-unity-under-attack-post-independence-says-pm-modi-in-lok-sabha-constitution-debate-speech-783998">India’s unity under attack post-independence, says PM Modi</a>

According to TNIE, the missile followed its planned path at a speed of over Mach 3 (three times the speed of sound, approximately 1 km per second) and accurately destroyed its aerial target with precision.

The SFDR technology works using the principles of a ramjet engine, which uses oxygen from the air to burn its fuel. This means the missile doesn’t need to carry extra oxygen, making it lighter and more efficient. This design helps the missile travel faster and farther, giving it a big advantage in combat situations, especially for air-to-air missions.

This technology allows India to create missiles that can hit targets from much greater distances. It gives the Indian Air Force a powerful weapon to deal with airborne threats effectively. In today’s warfare, being able to engage enemies from far away is very important, especially to counter advanced enemy aircraft.

With the successful development of the SFDR, it can now be used in building new missiles or improving existing ones, like the Astra missile. This could greatly increase their range and performance. This breakthrough puts India in the league of a few countries that have such advanced missile technology.

Although the SFDR technology has been successfully tested, the next step is to use it in actual missiles. After that, more testing will be done to make sure it works well and is effective in real combat situations.

The DRDO and the Indian military are expected to work on improving this technology to meet specific needs. This could result in the development of new types of missiles or upgrades to the ones already in use.

India is reportedly the first country to develop the advanced SFDR technology. This will enable the creation of long-range air-to-air missiles that can destroy fast-moving aerial targets over 300 km away while travelling at supersonic speeds.

On November 16, India successfully tested its first long-range hypersonic missile, capable of hitting targets up to 1,500 km away. Later, on November 27, the 3,500 km range K-4 missile was successfully launched from the INS Arighaat submarine.

Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.

India has reached a major milestone in missile technology with the successful final test of its Solid Fuel Ducted Ramjet (SFDR) propulsion-based missile system. This achievement highlights significant progress in developing advanced missile propulsion technology.

India has reached a major milestone in missile technology with the successful final test of its Solid Fuel Ducted Ramjet (SFDR) propulsion-based missile system. This achievement highlights significant progress in developing advanced missile propulsion technology. The indigenously developed missile system was test-fired on Friday, December 13, from a fixed launcher at Launching Complex-III of the Integrated Test Range (ITR) off the Odisha coast. Notably, this is the third successful missile test in a single month, showcasing India’s growing expertise in designing and building advanced missile systems using homegrown technology. The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has developed this advanced technology entirely in India. It is expected to significantly enhance the country's ability to create long-range air-to-air missiles. The final test of the SFDR system was a complete success, meeting all the goals of the mission with accuracy. It proved that the missile's engine, navigation system, and overall design work perfectly, even in real-life conditions. This shows how reliable and advanced the technology is. Also read: India’s unity under attack post-independence, says PM Modi According to TNIE, the missile followed its planned path at a speed of over Mach 3 (three times the speed of sound, approximately 1 km per second) and accurately destroyed its aerial target with precision. The SFDR technology works using the principles of a ramjet engine, which uses oxygen from the air to burn its fuel. This means the missile doesn’t need to carry extra oxygen, making it lighter and more efficient. This design helps the missile travel faster and farther, giving it a big advantage in combat situations, especially for air-to-air missions. This technology allows India to create missiles that can hit targets from much greater distances. It gives the Indian Air Force a powerful weapon to deal with airborne threats effectively. In today’s warfare, being able to engage enemies from far away is very important, especially to counter advanced enemy aircraft. With the successful development of the SFDR, it can now be used in building new missiles or improving existing ones, like the Astra missile. This could greatly increase their range and performance. This breakthrough puts India in the league of a few countries that have such advanced missile technology. Although the SFDR technology has been successfully tested, the next step is to use it in actual missiles. After that, more testing will be done to make sure it works well and is effective in real combat situations. The DRDO and the Indian military are expected to work on improving this technology to meet specific needs. This could result in the development of new types of missiles or upgrades to the ones already in use. India is reportedly the first country to develop the advanced SFDR technology. This will enable the creation of long-range air-to-air missiles that can destroy fast-moving aerial targets over 300 km away while travelling at supersonic speeds. On November 16, India successfully tested its first long-range hypersonic missile, capable of hitting targets up to 1,500 km away. Later, on November 27, the 3,500 km range K-4 missile was successfully launched from the INS Arighaat submarine. Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.

India's secret weapon? SFDR missile test stokes fears in Pakistan and China

Russia’s nuclear doctrine is a set of guidelines that the country follows regarding when and how it might use nuclear weapons. These rules help outline the circumstances under which Moscow would consider using its nuclear arsenal. The doctrine says Russia can use its large nuclear weapons stockpile if it faces any aggression that seriously threatens the country’s sovereignty or territorial integrity.&nbsp;

On November 19, a new open-ended guideline—a rule or guideline without a fixed end date or clear limitations on its scope—was introduced, following an update approved by President Vladimir Putin just two days after the United States declared it would ease restrictions on Ukraine’s use of long-range weapons. The earlier version of the doctrine set much stricter conditions for nuclear retaliation, allowing it only if Russia’s survival was at risk.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-approves-antipersonnel-land-mines-for-ukraine-amid-escalating-conflict-with-russia-report-777545">Biden approves anti-personnel land mines for Ukraine amid escalating conflict with Russia: Report</a>

The revision, clearly referring to Ukraine and its Western allies, stated that an attack using conventional missiles, drones, or aircraft by a non-nuclear country, backed by a nuclear-armed nation, could justify a nuclear response. The update also extends Russia’s nuclear protection to Belarus, meaning Belarus will now be defended under Russia’s nuclear policies.&nbsp;

For quite some time, hardliners in Moscow have been pushing President Putin to consider lowering the threshold for using nuclear weapons. Their argument is that Russia should respond more aggressively to the military and financial assistance Ukraine is receiving from the West. This support includes advanced weapons, such as Storm Shadow missiles from Britain and France, which Ukraine has used to strike important Russian targets, such as the Black Sea fleet’s headquarters in Crimea, an area Russia currently occupies.&nbsp;

The situation seemed to escalate when President Joe Biden, after months of hesitation, finally approved the use of American ATACMS missiles by Ukraine. These missiles allow Ukraine to target areas deep inside Russian territory. In response, Putin warned that this decision would mean NATO is essentially ‘at war’ with Russia.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russia-ukraine-war-us-embassy-in-kyiv-shuts-down-amid-looming-airstrike-threat-777618">Russia-Ukraine war: US embassy in Kyiv shuts down amid looming airstrike threat</a>

After many months of warnings that were not backed up with real action, Russia’s new strategy could be seen as another empty threat by Western leaders. Over time, the West has pushed the limits set by Putin and found they could cross these ‘red lines’ without facing serious repercussions. This makes it seem Russia’s threats may not be as strong as they first appeared.&nbsp;

On the first day of the war, Putin warned that any interference would bring consequences “like nothing you’ve ever seen before”. However, since then, the West has provided Ukraine with over $100 billion in aid and significantly boosted its military support.&nbsp;

Despite this, the move marks a major change in Russia’s nuclear policy. It now leaves more room for interpretation when deciding what counts as a threat to the country’s ‘sovereignty or territorial integrity’. Putin did not see Ukraine’s attack on the Kursk region as a serious threat to Russia’s survival or his leadership. However, he seems to view the ATACMS missile strikes on Russian territory as a much bigger concern that could pose a significant risk to the country or his rule.&nbsp;

<h2>Higher Risk of Russia Using N-Weapons?&nbsp;</h2>

Russia has announced that it has moved some of its nuclear missiles to Belarus and strengthened its already large military forces in Kaliningrad, a small Russian region located between Poland and Lithuania in the Baltic area. In response, neighbouring Poland said it was ready to host NATO nuclear weapons. Putin also stated that Russia’s updated nuclear policy would now cover Belarus, its closest ally, under its nuclear protection.&nbsp;

Putin has claimed that Russia’s nuclear weapons are more advanced than those of the US and stressed that ‘weapons are made to be used’. Putin has also warned that, if NATO troops are sent to Ukraine, it could lead to a nuclear war. But, so far, this situation has not arisen.&nbsp;

In September, Russia’s nuclear forces faced a setback when an intercontinental ballistic missile, which Putin had once described as unstoppable, exploded in its silo during a test launch, creating a crater about 60 metres wide at the missile’s launch silo at the Plesetsk Cosmodrome in northern Russia. The RS-28 Sarmat, called Satan II in the West, was one of the ‘super-weapons’ Putin had introduced in 2018.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russia-ukraine-war-amid-shifting-political-winds-zelensky-warns-ukraine-will-lose-without-us-aid-777517">Russia-Ukraine war | Amid shifting political winds Zelensky warns Ukraine 'will lose' without US aid</a>

Although President Biden had previously stated that Russia’s nuclear threats were serious, Putin’s repeated warnings without any follow-through have lessened the impact of his words. NATO has consistently stated that there is no evidence showing Russia is getting ready to use its nuclear weapons. Warnings of a nuclear war from Moscow officials, especially from Dmitry Medvedev—Russia’s former prime minister and president, now deputy head of the national security council—are mostly seen by the West as attempts to discourage NATO from supporting Ukraine, rather than actual serious threats.&nbsp;

Still, Washington remains cautious about the risk of escalation. In August, John Kirby, the White House National Security Adviser, reportedly said they were always concerned about the possibility that the conflict in Ukraine could escalate and spread across Europe.&nbsp;

In November, reports revealed that former British prime minister Liz Truss was deeply worried in October 2022 that Putin may launch a nuclear attack. In the final days of her time as prime minister, officials were even checking weather maps and preparing for potential radiation cases in the UK. One of the toughest challenges for Western governments is trying to figure out what Putin is thinking.&nbsp;

In recent years, talk about nuclear weapons has become so common in Russia that it may make it easier, mentally, for them to consider actually using them. There are also worries about Putin’s mental state. Gleb Pavlovsky, a former Kremlin adviser who passed away last year, said after the Ukraine war began that Putin’s mindset had worsened during his time in power. Pavlovsky said Putin was now “reacting to the pictures in his own head”.&nbsp;

<h2>Why Putin May Consider Using N-Weapons&nbsp;</h2>

Faced with the possibility of a long, drawn-out war, Putin, who has full control over Russia’s large stockpile of tactical nuclear weapons, may decide that only a powerful strike using the most dangerous weapon he has could prevent Russia from facing defeat and disgrace. Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller nuclear bombs designed for use on battlefields to target specific military objectives, rather than destroying large areas, such as cities, or causing widespread devastation.&nbsp;

In Putin’s view, a serious threat to his rule, rather than to Russia as a whole, could be enough for him to consider using nuclear weapons against Ukraine or the West. Putin will celebrate 25 years in power on New Year’s Eve, and his supporters have depicted him as the symbol of Russia, itself. According to media reports, Vyacheslav Volodin, speaker of the Russian parliament, went on record to say that, if Putin exists, Russia exists. No Putin, no Russia!&nbsp;

From a Western perspective, it would not make much sense for Russia to use nuclear weapons. Tactical nuclear weapons, which have a shorter range and less power, would cause massive destruction but would not necessarily give Putin a quick victory. Using strategic nuclear weapons, which can completely destroy entire cities, would almost definitely trigger a huge response from the West and could even lead to a Third World War.&nbsp;

Putin may not care about the lives of Ukrainian civilians, but would he really be willing to doom his own young children—whose existence was revealed this month—to spending years in a nuclear bunker deep in Siberia? For Putin, using nuclear weapons could be his way of challenging the West. His message would, possibly, be: “Because you keep supplying Kyiv with more advanced weapons to attack Russian forces, I have no other option.”&nbsp;

Leaked military documents obtained by the Financial Times in February showed Russia had prepared plans to use tactical nuclear weapons early in a conflict with a major power. This is part of a strategy aimed at creating fear and pressure. The documents described possible situations where Russia would use nuclear strikes in response to an invasion. They also mentioned other goals, such as preventing other countries from using force, stopping military conflicts from getting worse, and making Russia’s navy stronger.&nbsp;

The collection of 29 secret documents, created between 2008 and 2014, when Putin was either president or prime minister, is still believed to be relevant to Russia’s current military strategy. These files suggest a much lower threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons than Russian officials have publicly acknowledged.&nbsp;

<h2>What Prevents the Use of Tactical N-Weapons?&nbsp;</h2>

There are two main reasons: the first is China. President Xi has publicly declared and, possibly, privately warned Putin that nuclear weapons should never be used. China is a key strategic partner for Russia and their alliance has strengthened significantly since the start of the war in Ukraine. The Chinese leader has never criticized his Russian counterpart for the invasion of Ukraine. However, despite their growing partnership, China has not provided military assistance to Russia so far.&nbsp;

He is also working to present himself as a peacemaker, aiming to negotiate a solution that could end the war through diplomacy. This effort not only seeks to resolve the conflict, but also helps him enhance his image and influence on the international stage. Putin understands that, if he decides to launch a nuclear attack—even a small one—it could seriously harm, or even completely ruin, his partnership with China.&nbsp;

Interestingly, the secret documents mentioned earlier show that Moscow harbours a strong mistrust of China. They even outline possible scenarios where Russia may use nuclear weapons if China were to invade. Although the two countries have grown into strong allies since those plans were made, with China’s financial backing helping Russia cope with Western sanctions after the Ukraine war, Russia has still been strengthening its defences in the east.&nbsp;

In a military simulation, Russia planned how it might respond to a potential attack by China. In this scenario, Russia was referred to as the ‘Northern Federation’, while China was called ‘the South’. The exercise imagined a situation where China launched an invasion and prepared to send a second wave of troops. To stop this, Russia considered the use of a small, tactical nuclear strike.&nbsp;

It is important to note that this was purely a theoretical exercise and not an actual event. However, it highlights how nations, even allies, sometimes prepare for worst-case scenarios to safeguard their interests. The document states the commander-in-chief has ordered the use of nuclear weapons if the enemy sends in additional troops and ‘the South’ poses a serious threat of advancing further towards the main target.&nbsp;

The second reason is how the US and NATO may react. Putin may convince himself that using nuclear weapons in Ukraine will not trigger a nuclear or military response from the West. This is because Ukraine is not a NATO member and is not protected under Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty, which guarantees mutual defence for its members. This means that, if any member of NATO is attacked, it is treated as an attack on the entire alliance.&nbsp;

The US has warned that, if Putin uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine, it would lead to ‘catastrophic consequences’ for Russia. The exact nature of these consequences has not been clearly explained. However, it raises the question of whether it could result in a direct conflict between NATO and Russia. Before considering the use of nuclear weapons, Putin must carefully think about this potential risk.&nbsp;

<h2>Has there been any change?&nbsp;</h2>

Easing restrictions on the use of ATACMS is the latest step in a series of increasing military support from Western countries. The weapons supplied by the US-led coalition of 50 countries have significantly boosted Ukraine’s military strength and firepower. American F-16 fighter jets are already in action, and Ukraine has used advanced American missiles to target Putin’s forces, including Russian troops gathered near border areas.&nbsp;

Donald Trump’s election in the US may have marked the end of the seemingly endless supply of weapons. He has promised to end the war within 24 hours of assuming office. Some believe he may pressure Zelensky into negotiations by threatening to stop all US aid. Trump has often criticized NATO, stating he would allow Russia to act freely against member-countries that fail to meet their spending commitments.&nbsp;

Last year, Putin took a significant step that seemed to be preparation for a possible nuclear attack by sending the first set of tactical nuclear systems to Belarus, a neighbouring country allied with Russia. This marked the first time since the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991 that Moscow had stationed nuclear missiles outside its borders.&nbsp;

<h2>Could Russia Deploy N-Weapons in Space?&nbsp;</h2>

As attention moves away from the immediate threat of using nuclear weapons on the battlefield, there are rising concerns that Putin may already be thinking about placing a nuclear device in Earth’s orbit. Putin has a strong fascination with advanced weapons, which is clear from his open support for hypersonic missiles, as well as nuclear-powered cruise missiles and torpedoes that are said to have unlimited range.&nbsp;

Putting nuclear devices into orbit—in clear violation of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty which Russia has signed—possibly to target America’s satellite systems, would showcase Russia’s increasing military aggression and turn space into a new area of conflict. This would push the US to create and deploy new defence systems in space, further escalating the arms race between the major powers and making it even more dangerous.&nbsp;

Countries, such as Russia, China, India, North Korea and Iran, are investing heavily in space technology, particularly in weapons that can target satellites. This poses a serious risk to America’s global satellite communication network, which is essential for the US military’s navigation, precision attacks and overall command and control systems.&nbsp;

<h2>What Are Russia’s Current N-Capabilities?&nbsp;</h2>

Russia still has a powerful nuclear arsenal, even though it has signed several arms control treaties since the Cold War ended. The Federation of American Scientists says Russia’s N-weapons stockpile, the world’s largest, comprises 5,580 warheads. Some of these are tactical nuclear weapons meant for use on the battlefield, while others are built to wipe out entire cities.&nbsp;

In 2023, Putin announced that Russia would withdraw from its last nuclear arms control agreement with the US, the New Start treaty, which was the last arms control agreement between Moscow and Washington. It was designed to limit the number of long-range nuclear missiles, warheads and launch systems that both countries could have, aiming to reduce the risk of a nuclear arms race. Earlier, President Trump had withdrawn from a treaty on intermediate-range weapons, claiming Russia had violated its terms.&nbsp;

By stepping away from this agreement, Russia is no longer obligated to follow these restrictions. This decision could lead to an increase in nuclear weapons and heighten tensions between the two nations, raising concerns about global security and stability. The move marks a significant shift in efforts to control nuclear arms and maintain balance between the world’s two largest nuclear powers.&nbsp;

Putin’s decision to suspend Russia’s participation in the treaty does not mean Russia cannot rejoin it before it expires in 2026. However, the Kremlin has made it clear that it will not discuss a new nuclear agreement as long as NATO continues to supply weapons to Ukraine.&nbsp;

Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.

Russia’s nuclear doctrine is a set of guidelines that the country follows regarding when and how it might use nuclear weapons. These rules help outline the circumstances under which Moscow would consider using its nuclear arsenal.

Russia’s nuclear doctrine is a set of guidelines that the country follows regarding when and how it might use nuclear weapons. These rules help outline the circumstances under which Moscow would consider using its nuclear arsenal. The doctrine says Russia can use its large nuclear weapons stockpile if it faces any aggression that seriously threatens the country’s sovereignty or territorial integrity. On November 19, a new open-ended guideline—a rule or guideline without a fixed end date or clear limitations on its scope—was introduced, following an update approved by President Vladimir Putin just two days after the United States declared it would ease restrictions on Ukraine’s use of long-range weapons. The earlier version of the doctrine set much stricter conditions for nuclear retaliation, allowing it only if Russia’s survival was at risk. Also read | Biden approves anti-personnel land mines for Ukraine amid escalating conflict with Russia: Report The revision, clearly referring to Ukraine and its Western allies, stated that an attack using conventional missiles, drones, or aircraft by a non-nuclear country, backed by a nuclear-armed nation, could justify a nuclear response. The update also extends Russia’s nuclear protection to Belarus, meaning Belarus will now be defended under Russia’s nuclear policies. For quite some time, hardliners in Moscow have been pushing President Putin to consider lowering the threshold for using nuclear weapons. Their argument is that Russia should respond more aggressively to the military and financial assistance Ukraine is receiving from the West. This support includes advanced weapons, such as Storm Shadow missiles from Britain and France, which Ukraine has used to strike important Russian targets, such as the Black Sea fleet’s headquarters in Crimea, an area Russia currently occupies. The situation seemed to escalate when President Joe Biden, after months of hesitation, finally approved the use of American ATACMS missiles by Ukraine. These missiles allow Ukraine to target areas deep inside Russian territory. In response, Putin warned that this decision would mean NATO is essentially ‘at war’ with Russia. Also read | Russia-Ukraine war: US embassy in Kyiv shuts down amid looming airstrike threat After many months of warnings that were not backed up with real action, Russia’s new strategy could be seen as another empty threat by Western leaders. Over time, the West has pushed the limits set by Putin and found they could cross these ‘red lines’ without facing serious repercussions. This makes it seem Russia’s threats may not be as strong as they first appeared. On the first day of the war, Putin warned that any interference would bring consequences “like nothing you’ve ever seen before”. However, since then, the West has provided Ukraine with over $100 billion in aid and significantly boosted its military support. Despite this, the move marks a major change in Russia’s nuclear policy. It now leaves more room for interpretation when deciding what counts as a threat to the country’s ‘sovereignty or territorial integrity’. Putin did not see Ukraine’s attack on the Kursk region as a serious threat to Russia’s survival or his leadership. However, he seems to view the ATACMS missile strikes on Russian territory as a much bigger concern that could pose a significant risk to the country or his rule. Higher Risk of Russia Using N-Weapons? Russia has announced that it has moved some of its nuclear missiles to Belarus and strengthened its already large military forces in Kaliningrad, a small Russian region located between Poland and Lithuania in the Baltic area. In response, neighbouring Poland said it was ready to host NATO nuclear weapons. Putin also stated that Russia’s updated nuclear policy would now cover Belarus, its closest ally, under its nuclear protection. Putin has claimed that Russia’s nuclear weapons are more advanced than those of the US and stressed that ‘weapons are made to be used’. Putin has also warned that, if NATO troops are sent to Ukraine, it could lead to a nuclear war. But, so far, this situation has not arisen. In September, Russia’s nuclear forces faced a setback when an intercontinental ballistic missile, which Putin had once described as unstoppable, exploded in its silo during a test launch, creating a crater about 60 metres wide at the missile’s launch silo at the Plesetsk Cosmodrome in northern Russia. The RS-28 Sarmat, called Satan II in the West, was one of the ‘super-weapons’ Putin had introduced in 2018. Also read | Russia-Ukraine war | Amid shifting political winds Zelensky warns Ukraine 'will lose' without US aid Although President Biden had previously stated that Russia’s nuclear threats were serious, Putin’s repeated warnings without any follow-through have lessened the impact of his words. NATO has consistently stated that there is no evidence showing Russia is getting ready to use its nuclear weapons. Warnings of a nuclear war from Moscow officials, especially from Dmitry Medvedev—Russia’s former prime minister and president, now deputy head of the national security council—are mostly seen by the West as attempts to discourage NATO from supporting Ukraine, rather than actual serious threats. Still, Washington remains cautious about the risk of escalation. In August, John Kirby, the White House National Security Adviser, reportedly said they were always concerned about the possibility that the conflict in Ukraine could escalate and spread across Europe. In November, reports revealed that former British prime minister Liz Truss was deeply worried in October 2022 that Putin may launch a nuclear attack. In the final days of her time as prime minister, officials were even checking weather maps and preparing for potential radiation cases in the UK. One of the toughest challenges for Western governments is trying to figure out what Putin is thinking. In recent years, talk about nuclear weapons has become so common in Russia that it may make it easier, mentally, for them to consider actually using them. There are also worries about Putin’s mental state. Gleb Pavlovsky, a former Kremlin adviser who passed away last year, said after the Ukraine war began that Putin’s mindset had worsened during his time in power. Pavlovsky said Putin was now “reacting to the pictures in his own head”. Why Putin May Consider Using N-Weapons Faced with the possibility of a long, drawn-out war, Putin, who has full control over Russia’s large stockpile of tactical nuclear weapons, may decide that only a powerful strike using the most dangerous weapon he has could prevent Russia from facing defeat and disgrace. Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller nuclear bombs designed for use on battlefields to target specific military objectives, rather than destroying large areas, such as cities, or causing widespread devastation. In Putin’s view, a serious threat to his rule, rather than to Russia as a whole, could be enough for him to consider using nuclear weapons against Ukraine or the West. Putin will celebrate 25 years in power on New Year’s Eve, and his supporters have depicted him as the symbol of Russia, itself. According to media reports, Vyacheslav Volodin, speaker of the Russian parliament, went on record to say that, if Putin exists, Russia exists. No Putin, no Russia! From a Western perspective, it would not make much sense for Russia to use nuclear weapons. Tactical nuclear weapons, which have a shorter range and less power, would cause massive destruction but would not necessarily give Putin a quick victory. Using strategic nuclear weapons, which can completely destroy entire cities, would almost definitely trigger a huge response from the West and could even lead to a Third World War. Putin may not care about the lives of Ukrainian civilians, but would he really be willing to doom his own young children—whose existence was revealed this month—to spending years in a nuclear bunker deep in Siberia? For Putin, using nuclear weapons could be his way of challenging the West. His message would, possibly, be: “Because you keep supplying Kyiv with more advanced weapons to attack Russian forces, I have no other option.” Leaked military documents obtained by the Financial Times in February showed Russia had prepared plans to use tactical nuclear weapons early in a conflict with a major power. This is part of a strategy aimed at creating fear and pressure. The documents described possible situations where Russia would use nuclear strikes in response to an invasion. They also mentioned other goals, such as preventing other countries from using force, stopping military conflicts from getting worse, and making Russia’s navy stronger. The collection of 29 secret documents, created between 2008 and 2014, when Putin was either president or prime minister, is still believed to be relevant to Russia’s current military strategy. These files suggest a much lower threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons than Russian officials have publicly acknowledged. What Prevents the Use of Tactical N-Weapons? There are two main reasons: the first is China. President Xi has publicly declared and, possibly, privately warned Putin that nuclear weapons should never be used. China is a key strategic partner for Russia and their alliance has strengthened significantly since the start of the war in Ukraine. The Chinese leader has never criticized his Russian counterpart for the invasion of Ukraine. However, despite their growing partnership, China has not provided military assistance to Russia so far. He is also working to present himself as a peacemaker, aiming to negotiate a solution that could end the war through diplomacy. This effort not only seeks to resolve the conflict, but also helps him enhance his image and influence on the international stage. Putin understands that, if he decides to launch a nuclear attack—even a small one—it could seriously harm, or even completely ruin, his partnership with China. Interestingly, the secret documents mentioned earlier show that Moscow harbours a strong mistrust of China. They even outline possible scenarios where Russia may use nuclear weapons if China were to invade. Although the two countries have grown into strong allies since those plans were made, with China’s financial backing helping Russia cope with Western sanctions after the Ukraine war, Russia has still been strengthening its defences in the east. In a military simulation, Russia planned how it might respond to a potential attack by China. In this scenario, Russia was referred to as the ‘Northern Federation’, while China was called ‘the South’. The exercise imagined a situation where China launched an invasion and prepared to send a second wave of troops. To stop this, Russia considered the use of a small, tactical nuclear strike. It is important to note that this was purely a theoretical exercise and not an actual event. However, it highlights how nations, even allies, sometimes prepare for worst-case scenarios to safeguard their interests. The document states the commander-in-chief has ordered the use of nuclear weapons if the enemy sends in additional troops and ‘the South’ poses a serious threat of advancing further towards the main target. The second reason is how the US and NATO may react. Putin may convince himself that using nuclear weapons in Ukraine will not trigger a nuclear or military response from the West. This is because Ukraine is not a NATO member and is not protected under Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty, which guarantees mutual defence for its members. This means that, if any member of NATO is attacked, it is treated as an attack on the entire alliance. The US has warned that, if Putin uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine, it would lead to ‘catastrophic consequences’ for Russia. The exact nature of these consequences has not been clearly explained. However, it raises the question of whether it could result in a direct conflict between NATO and Russia. Before considering the use of nuclear weapons, Putin must carefully think about this potential risk. Has there been any change? Easing restrictions on the use of ATACMS is the latest step in a series of increasing military support from Western countries. The weapons supplied by the US-led coalition of 50 countries have significantly boosted Ukraine’s military strength and firepower. American F-16 fighter jets are already in action, and Ukraine has used advanced American missiles to target Putin’s forces, including Russian troops gathered near border areas. Donald Trump’s election in the US may have marked the end of the seemingly endless supply of weapons. He has promised to end the war within 24 hours of assuming office. Some believe he may pressure Zelensky into negotiations by threatening to stop all US aid. Trump has often criticized NATO, stating he would allow Russia to act freely against member-countries that fail to meet their spending commitments. Last year, Putin took a significant step that seemed to be preparation for a possible nuclear attack by sending the first set of tactical nuclear systems to Belarus, a neighbouring country allied with Russia. This marked the first time since the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991 that Moscow had stationed nuclear missiles outside its borders. Could Russia Deploy N-Weapons in Space? As attention moves away from the immediate threat of using nuclear weapons on the battlefield, there are rising concerns that Putin may already be thinking about placing a nuclear device in Earth’s orbit. Putin has a strong fascination with advanced weapons, which is clear from his open support for hypersonic missiles, as well as nuclear-powered cruise missiles and torpedoes that are said to have unlimited range. Putting nuclear devices into orbit—in clear violation of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty which Russia has signed—possibly to target America’s satellite systems, would showcase Russia’s increasing military aggression and turn space into a new area of conflict. This would push the US to create and deploy new defence systems in space, further escalating the arms race between the major powers and making it even more dangerous. Countries, such as Russia, China, India, North Korea and Iran, are investing heavily in space technology, particularly in weapons that can target satellites. This poses a serious risk to America’s global satellite communication network, which is essential for the US military’s navigation, precision attacks and overall command and control systems. What Are Russia’s Current N-Capabilities? Russia still has a powerful nuclear arsenal, even though it has signed several arms control treaties since the Cold War ended. The Federation of American Scientists says Russia’s N-weapons stockpile, the world’s largest, comprises 5,580 warheads. Some of these are tactical nuclear weapons meant for use on the battlefield, while others are built to wipe out entire cities. In 2023, Putin announced that Russia would withdraw from its last nuclear arms control agreement with the US, the New Start treaty, which was the last arms control agreement between Moscow and Washington. It was designed to limit the number of long-range nuclear missiles, warheads and launch systems that both countries could have, aiming to reduce the risk of a nuclear arms race. Earlier, President Trump had withdrawn from a treaty on intermediate-range weapons, claiming Russia had violated its terms. By stepping away from this agreement, Russia is no longer obligated to follow these restrictions. This decision could lead to an increase in nuclear weapons and heighten tensions between the two nations, raising concerns about global security and stability. The move marks a significant shift in efforts to control nuclear arms and maintain balance between the world’s two largest nuclear powers. Putin’s decision to suspend Russia’s participation in the treaty does not mean Russia cannot rejoin it before it expires in 2026. However, the Kremlin has made it clear that it will not discuss a new nuclear agreement as long as NATO continues to supply weapons to Ukraine. Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.

Will Russia resort to using Nuclear weapons? An analysis of Putin's potential choices

It seems China may be planning more than just economic conflicts with the United States. Reports suggest the Chinese Navy is preparing to potentially invade Taiwan by 2027. In response, the US Navy is increasing the readiness of its fleet, which has not been involved in major combat for many years.

The US naval fleet, despite its size and advanced technology, may be facing problems. This means even though it is big and modern, there are challenges it needs to address. Across the Pacific, China has rapidly expanded its navy, becoming a significant rival to America’s long-standing naval dominance.

Here is a comparison of the two countries’ naval forces, along with insights from military experts on what could be a decisive factor in a potential conflict.

<h2>Chances of US-China conflict</h2>

In 2021, Admiral Phil Davidson, leader of the US Indo-Pacific Command, told Congress that China might be planning to invade Taiwan by 2027, according to Popular Mechanics an online media.

If such a move happens, it could lead to a conflict between the US and China. This is because the US has promised to protect the island, which is also called the Republic of China. In 2022, President Biden clearly said the US would protect Taiwan if China tried to invade.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-navy-warship-commander-relieved-of-duty-months-after-rifle-scope-mishap-went-viral-756045">US Navy warship commander relieved of duty months after rifle scope mishap went viral</a>

Although US intelligence has not confirmed the exact plans of China’s Navy to start an attack, it seems the Chinese Navy is preparing the necessary resources for it. Knowing this pushed US military leaders to respond. The time after 2027, called the ‘Davidson Window’, became a key focus in US military planning efforts. The ‘Davidson Window’ refers to a period identified by US military leaders, suggesting that China may be capable of taking military action against Taiwan by 2027. It highlights the urgency for the US to prepare its defences and strategies accordingly.

Both the US and Chinese navies are hurrying to prepare for a possible conflict that may happen in just three years. Considering it takes five years to build an aircraft carrier, three years is a very short time to get ready.

<h2>US Navy versus China’s Navy</h2>

China has been gradually increasing the size of its naval fleet. However, military strength goes beyond just having more ships. Here’s a summary of how China’s forces stack up against those of the US.

Aircraft Carriers

The strongest vessels in the navies of the US and China are aircraft carriers.

<h3>America</h3>

The US Navy operates 11 aircraft carriers, with six of them stationed in the Pacific Fleet.

Each aircraft carrier has an air wing with over 70 aircraft. This includes 40 to 44 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and F-35C fighter jets. They are supported by E/A-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft, E-2D Hawkeye early warning planes and up to 12 utility and anti-submarine helicopters. This creates a powerful air combat team, backed by over 100 years of experience in operating aircraft carriers.

<h3>China</h3>

China has three aircraft carriers—Liaoning, Shandong and Fujian. These carriers are equipped with Shenyang J-15 Flying Shark fighter jets. These initial ships serve as both fighting vessels and a learning opportunity for the Chinese Navy.

Naval analyst Craig Hooper from The Themistocles Advisory Group, as mentioned in Popular Mechanics, explains that after China launched the Liaoning in September 2012, they began developing various prototypes with the goal of eventually creating carriers comparable to America’s super-carriers. Once China finalizes the design, they are expected to rapidly produce identical carriers, increasing their fleet to at least five, possibly even six.

China’s carriers can only hold about 67% of the aircraft that American carriers can. Additionally, the Chinese Navy is still working on developing the aircraft needed for a well-rounded carrier air wing. Hooper notes that even if China has several large, modern aircraft carriers by 2027, the planes on them will still be in the early stages of adapting to sea operations.

China’s version of a highly coordinated group of specialized military aircraft, such as the US’s E/A-18G Growlers, E-2D Hawkeyes and F-35s—which work together to understand and control the battlefield at sea—will not be fully ready any time soon.

<h2>Cruisers and destroyers</h2>

<h3>America</h3>

In both navies, the most common ships are cruisers and destroyers. These surface ships are built to protect bigger vessels, track down submarines, or team up with other ships to boost their attack power. Cruisers and destroyers are typically equipped with one or two large guns, 64 to 122 missile launchers, helicopters, anti-submarine torpedoes and close-range defence systems that use both missiles and guns to protect the ship.

By 2027, the US Pacific Fleet is expected to have around 52 cruisers and destroyers in service. The Navy is retiring its cruisers because they are old and worn out, having been in use for over 30 years on average and now needing to be replaced. Each cruiser carries an impressive 122 missile launcher. Without them, the navy will be left with destroyers, which have only 80-96 missile launchers per ship. This number also assumes that the Navy will replace each retiring cruiser with a destroyer.

The remaining Zumwalt- and Arleigh Burke-class destroyers are more advanced than Chinese ships. They have 50% more missile launchers per ship and can handle a variety of missions, including fighting against ships, submarines, aircraft and even satellites. The Pacific Fleet will also have two of the three Zumwalt-class stealth destroyers, Michael Monsoor and Lyndon Johnson. Each of these ships will be equipped with 12 hypersonic missiles.

<h3>China</h3>

The Chinese Navy (PLAN) has a fleet of similar size, with around 50 surface ships, as noted in the Pentagon’s 2023 report on China’s military power. However, despite having a large number of ships, the overall firepower of this fleet is comparatively lower.

The ships include eight Renhai-class cruisers, each equipped with 112 missile launchers. There are also Type 052C and Type 052D destroyers, but these carry fewer missile launchers, between 56 and 64, compared to similar American warships.

The weapons and sensors on these ships have not been tested in real combat as the American systems have. In contrast, the US systems have shown to be very effective in recent operations in the Middle East, successfully defending against kamikaze drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.

<h2>Submarines</h2>

<h3>America</h3>

By 2027, the US Pacific Fleet will have around 23 submarines. This will include Los Angeles-class, all three Seawolf-class and Virginia-class nuclear-powered attack submarines. The fleet also has two guided missile submarines, Ohio and Michigan. Each of these submarines can carry an impressive 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, which are designed to strike targets on land.

The US Navy is also developing a new version of the Virginia-class submarines, called Block V. These submarines will be able to carry 28 more cruise missiles or a few hypersonic weapons designed for quick, precise strikes.

<h3>China</h3>

China, meanwhile, has a fleet of 53 attack submarines powered by either nuclear or conventional energy. Chinese submarines are, generally, thought to be one or two generations behind US submarines, but due to lessons learned from the war in Ukraine, they are expected to quickly close that gap.

Russia is giving China military technology in exchange for help with its war in Ukraine. According to Hooper, this support will possibly allow China to start producing more advanced submarines at a faster rate soon. Hooper predicts that, by 2027, China will be working hard to adopt Russian submarine technology and incorporate it into their ongoing prototypes and experiments.

It will be a race to see if China can settle on a submarine design it likes, so it can use its industrial power to quickly modernize its fleet.

<h2>The key to winning a war</h2>

The US Navy has another advantage in a conflict with China: “America won’t face China alone,” says Hooper. Allies, such as Japan, South Korea and Australia will create significant obstacles for China in naval battles.

Japan’s Maritime Self-Defence Force has a fleet of 36 destroyers. Two of them, the Izumo and Kaga, are being upgraded to carry F-35B Lightning II fighter jets. It also has a fleet of 24 diesel-electric attack submarines. South Korea operates a fleet of 23 attack submarines and 13 destroyers. Another key ally, Australia, has a fleet of six submarines and three destroyers. Nearly all of these ships, aircraft and submarines are equipped with American weapons, sensors and communication systems. This makes it easier for them to work together smoothly with the US Navy.

Another advantage of America’s alliances is the network of ports and bases throughout the region that can support US ships during a war. Currently, America’s allies in the Pacific are getting ready to assist with the forward deployment of US naval forces.

Thanks to the AUKUS agreement between the US, UK and Australia, Australian workers will assist in maintaining US submarines stationed in the region, says Hooper. Japan has become a leader in offering top-notch maintenance and support for US ships stationed in the region. Both countries would be able to assist the US fleet during times of heightened tension.

(The author of this article is a Defence, Aerospace &amp; Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also the Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him at: girishlinganna@gmail.com)

It seems China may be planning more than just economic conflicts with the United States. Reports suggest the Chinese Navy is preparing to potentially invade Taiwan by 2027.

It seems China may be planning more than just economic conflicts with the United States. Reports suggest the Chinese Navy is preparing to potentially invade Taiwan by 2027. In response, the US Navy is increasing the readiness of its fleet, which has not been involved in major combat for many years. The US naval fleet, despite its size and advanced technology, may be facing problems. This means even though it is big and modern, there are challenges it needs to address. Across the Pacific, China has rapidly expanded its navy, becoming a significant rival to America’s long-standing naval dominance. Here is a comparison of the two countries’ naval forces, along with insights from military experts on what could be a decisive factor in a potential conflict. Chances of US-China conflict In 2021, Admiral Phil Davidson, leader of the US Indo-Pacific Command, told Congress that China might be planning to invade Taiwan by 2027, according to Popular Mechanics an online media. If such a move happens, it could lead to a conflict between the US and China. This is because the US has promised to protect the island, which is also called the Republic of China. In 2022, President Biden clearly said the US would protect Taiwan if China tried to invade. Also read | US Navy warship commander relieved of duty months after rifle scope mishap went viral Although US intelligence has not confirmed the exact plans of China’s Navy to start an attack, it seems the Chinese Navy is preparing the necessary resources for it. Knowing this pushed US military leaders to respond. The time after 2027, called the ‘Davidson Window’, became a key focus in US military planning efforts. The ‘Davidson Window’ refers to a period identified by US military leaders, suggesting that China may be capable of taking military action against Taiwan by 2027. It highlights the urgency for the US to prepare its defences and strategies accordingly. Both the US and Chinese navies are hurrying to prepare for a possible conflict that may happen in just three years. Considering it takes five years to build an aircraft carrier, three years is a very short time to get ready. US Navy versus China’s Navy China has been gradually increasing the size of its naval fleet. However, military strength goes beyond just having more ships. Here’s a summary of how China’s forces stack up against those of the US. Aircraft Carriers The strongest vessels in the navies of the US and China are aircraft carriers. America The US Navy operates 11 aircraft carriers, with six of them stationed in the Pacific Fleet. Each aircraft carrier has an air wing with over 70 aircraft. This includes 40 to 44 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and F-35C fighter jets. They are supported by E/A-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft, E-2D Hawkeye early warning planes and up to 12 utility and anti-submarine helicopters. This creates a powerful air combat team, backed by over 100 years of experience in operating aircraft carriers. China China has three aircraft carriers—Liaoning, Shandong and Fujian. These carriers are equipped with Shenyang J-15 Flying Shark fighter jets. These initial ships serve as both fighting vessels and a learning opportunity for the Chinese Navy. Naval analyst Craig Hooper from The Themistocles Advisory Group, as mentioned in Popular Mechanics, explains that after China launched the Liaoning in September 2012, they began developing various prototypes with the goal of eventually creating carriers comparable to America’s super-carriers. Once China finalizes the design, they are expected to rapidly produce identical carriers, increasing their fleet to at least five, possibly even six. China’s carriers can only hold about 67% of the aircraft that American carriers can. Additionally, the Chinese Navy is still working on developing the aircraft needed for a well-rounded carrier air wing. Hooper notes that even if China has several large, modern aircraft carriers by 2027, the planes on them will still be in the early stages of adapting to sea operations. China’s version of a highly coordinated group of specialized military aircraft, such as the US’s E/A-18G Growlers, E-2D Hawkeyes and F-35s—which work together to understand and control the battlefield at sea—will not be fully ready any time soon. Cruisers and destroyers America In both navies, the most common ships are cruisers and destroyers. These surface ships are built to protect bigger vessels, track down submarines, or team up with other ships to boost their attack power. Cruisers and destroyers are typically equipped with one or two large guns, 64 to 122 missile launchers, helicopters, anti-submarine torpedoes and close-range defence systems that use both missiles and guns to protect the ship. By 2027, the US Pacific Fleet is expected to have around 52 cruisers and destroyers in service. The Navy is retiring its cruisers because they are old and worn out, having been in use for over 30 years on average and now needing to be replaced. Each cruiser carries an impressive 122 missile launcher. Without them, the navy will be left with destroyers, which have only 80-96 missile launchers per ship. This number also assumes that the Navy will replace each retiring cruiser with a destroyer. The remaining Zumwalt- and Arleigh Burke-class destroyers are more advanced than Chinese ships. They have 50% more missile launchers per ship and can handle a variety of missions, including fighting against ships, submarines, aircraft and even satellites. The Pacific Fleet will also have two of the three Zumwalt-class stealth destroyers, Michael Monsoor and Lyndon Johnson. Each of these ships will be equipped with 12 hypersonic missiles. China The Chinese Navy (PLAN) has a fleet of similar size, with around 50 surface ships, as noted in the Pentagon’s 2023 report on China’s military power. However, despite having a large number of ships, the overall firepower of this fleet is comparatively lower. The ships include eight Renhai-class cruisers, each equipped with 112 missile launchers. There are also Type 052C and Type 052D destroyers, but these carry fewer missile launchers, between 56 and 64, compared to similar American warships. The weapons and sensors on these ships have not been tested in real combat as the American systems have. In contrast, the US systems have shown to be very effective in recent operations in the Middle East, successfully defending against kamikaze drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. Submarines America By 2027, the US Pacific Fleet will have around 23 submarines. This will include Los Angeles-class, all three Seawolf-class and Virginia-class nuclear-powered attack submarines. The fleet also has two guided missile submarines, Ohio and Michigan. Each of these submarines can carry an impressive 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, which are designed to strike targets on land. The US Navy is also developing a new version of the Virginia-class submarines, called Block V. These submarines will be able to carry 28 more cruise missiles or a few hypersonic weapons designed for quick, precise strikes. China China, meanwhile, has a fleet of 53 attack submarines powered by either nuclear or conventional energy. Chinese submarines are, generally, thought to be one or two generations behind US submarines, but due to lessons learned from the war in Ukraine, they are expected to quickly close that gap. Russia is giving China military technology in exchange for help with its war in Ukraine. According to Hooper, this support will possibly allow China to start producing more advanced submarines at a faster rate soon. Hooper predicts that, by 2027, China will be working hard to adopt Russian submarine technology and incorporate it into their ongoing prototypes and experiments. It will be a race to see if China can settle on a submarine design it likes, so it can use its industrial power to quickly modernize its fleet. The key to winning a war The US Navy has another advantage in a conflict with China: “America won’t face China alone,” says Hooper. Allies, such as Japan, South Korea and Australia will create significant obstacles for China in naval battles. Japan’s Maritime Self-Defence Force has a fleet of 36 destroyers. Two of them, the Izumo and Kaga, are being upgraded to carry F-35B Lightning II fighter jets. It also has a fleet of 24 diesel-electric attack submarines. South Korea operates a fleet of 23 attack submarines and 13 destroyers. Another key ally, Australia, has a fleet of six submarines and three destroyers. Nearly all of these ships, aircraft and submarines are equipped with American weapons, sensors and communication systems. This makes it easier for them to work together smoothly with the US Navy. Another advantage of America’s alliances is the network of ports and bases throughout the region that can support US ships during a war. Currently, America’s allies in the Pacific are getting ready to assist with the forward deployment of US naval forces. Thanks to the AUKUS agreement between the US, UK and Australia, Australian workers will assist in maintaining US submarines stationed in the region, says Hooper. Japan has become a leader in offering top-notch maintenance and support for US ships stationed in the region. Both countries would be able to assist the US fleet during times of heightened tension. (The author of this article is a Defence, Aerospace & Political Analyst based in Bengaluru. He is also the Director of ADD Engineering Components, India, Pvt. Ltd, a subsidiary of ADD Engineering GmbH, Germany. You can reach him at: girishlinganna@gmail.com)

A sea of uncertainty: The US-China naval rivalry and the quest for dominance

Author

Zee News Rajasthan

Editor

Girish Linganna

Home

Live Tv

Latest

World

India

Business

Entertainment

Sports

Opinions

Videos

Photos

Gravitas

Lifestyle

Science

Tech

Rajasthan News in Hindi: In-depth coverage of Rajasthan Crime, Political News, Education, Rajasthan Weather Update and Latest Rajasthan News on Zee News Rajasthan.