thediplomat-screen-shot-2019-04-03-at-9.28_.54-am_

Arrival of the S-400 air defense system (ADS) is being marked with festive celebrations in India with the media tagging the system as a game-changing technology. Their excitement can be felt from the fact that the S-400 is being called ‘The Brahmastra’ – a formidable and divine weapon of the first Hindu God. The narrative being marketed by the regime is that acquisition of this system will turn the tables in India’s favor in any potential conflict, particularly with Pakistan. Despite such amplified assertions, the hype created by this system is considerably exaggerated.

First, the sense of security provided by the S-400 is absurd in itself. New Delhi claims that the S-400 will endow her with the capability to control Pakistani airspace and avert any sort of aerial attack. Realistically, even with all five systems, the entire Indian territory cannot be protected. Additionally, no technology can claim to be 100 percent invincible, not even the S-400. In fact, the arrival of a new technology often has a destabilizing impact on the region; and with the passage of time, adversaries are always able to find and detect chinks in the armour, as they say.

Like other systems, this system can be countered through kinetic as well as non-kinetic means. For example, it can be neutralized by saturation techniques. In this regard, decoys or numerous aerial assets can be employed to saturate (or overwhelm) its intercepting capability by sending more targets than the system can handle. Resultantly, some of the targets are likely to avoid interception by the ADS. Multiple Independently-targetable Reentry Vehicles (MIRVs) have the potential to saturate such systems. These technologies can be reinforced to address the threat from ADS. Aerial assets, which can fly at lower heights, can avoid being detected by ADS radars. Cruise missiles, which have a terrain-hugging trajectory, can also prove useful in this regard. Low flying tactics can also be refined to counter this threat.

Emerging technologies such as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have also emerged as valuable assets against the ADS. In 2020, the vulnerabilities of Russian air defenses were exposed in Armenia, Libya, and Syria where they became easy targets of UAVs. Drone swarming technology can also be used for this purpose.

In the Nagorno-Karabakh incident, Azerbaijan used decoy targets against Armenia which were shot down by the latter’s ADS, ultimately revealing their position. Subsequently, Turkish drones were employed to destroy them allowing the Azerbaijan defense forces to proceed further into Armenian territory. In May 2020, Bayraktar (Turkish medium-altitude long-endurance (MALE) unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) were employed by the Libyan Army to attack the Russian ADS in territories which were under the control of Khalifa Haftar. The ADS became an easy target of the UCAVs paving way for the Libyan Army to recapture occupied territories. Similar events were witnessed in Syria where Israel used armed UAVs against Russian AD systems present in the country. These examples show that improvements in UAV technology are likely to increase the vulnerability of advanced air defense systems.

Kinetic means are not the only way to counter ADS, they can also be dealt with by non-kinetic measures. Both active and passive electronic countermeasures can be employed to jam the radars of the S-400. Last year, the S-300 systems deployed in Syria were unable to detect Israeli cruise missiles due to the employment of electronic warfare techniques against them.

Second, technology adaptation takes time. The S-400 may have been acquired by India, but its impact will not be immediate. It will take considerable time before it can be operationalized in accordance with Indian ambitions. In addition, interoperability issues will also be one of the major hurdles for the Indian Armed Forces. The S-400 has to be integrated with other Indian weaponry. India maintains an arsenal where it has acquired arms from different countries such as France, United States, Israel, and Russia etc. Integrating systems of different origin is a difficult task and will impact the military strategy over the potential use of S-400.

The purpose of building up these arguments is to emphasize that the hype around the S-400 is being considerably overplayed by India, most likely for domestic reasons. Like it has done so in the past, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) will develop innovative strategies, better training programs and employment of emerging technologies to address this threat. Till then, Pakistan’s forward-looking Armed Forces are capable of dealing with any adversary’s dangerous plans.

Shaza Arif is a Researcher at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. The article was first published in Khaleej Mag. She can be reached at [email protected]

Image Source:Gady, Franz Stephan. Senior US Official: No Blanket Waiver for India on S-400. The Diplomat. January 10, 2020.https://thediplomat.com/2020/01/senior-us-official-no-blanket-waiver-for-india-on-s-400-buy/


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »