Of course, India is not without its merits.

Among the three major military forces of land, navy and air, India does have an advantage, especially its navy.

The Indian Navy has two medium-sized aircraft carriers capable of carrying fixed-wing fighters, more than a dozen destroyers, more than 20 frigates and more than a dozen submarines.

What about the Pakistan Navy?

There are only eight frigates that are not too large, twelve submarines, and more than two dozen offshore speedboats.

In addition, the Pakistan Naval Air Force does not have fixed-wing fighters, and all fighters belong to the Air Force, although they can be combined with the Navy in wartime.

Purely looking at the strength and combat effectiveness, the Indian Navy's superiority is extremely obvious.

It can be said that if it is only against the Pakistani Navy, the Indian Navy has an overwhelming advantage and can easily blockade Pakistan's ports.

The question is, is it possible to compare them individually?

Apparently not.

First of all, the two aircraft carriers of the Indian Navy are basically decorations.

Why?

The Mig-29 it carries is a medium-sized fighter, and the range is already short, and it may not be able to fill up with fuel when it takes off in a glide, so the combat radius will certainly not be large, so when dealing with the Pakistan Navy, it is inevitable to face the Pakistan Air Force.

In front of the JF-20 and JF-17 of the Pakistan Air Force, what are the chances of victory for the carrier-based fighters of the Indian Navy?

Not to mention that the Pakistani Air Force has AWACS aircraft, while the Indian Navy clearly does not have carrier-based AWACS aircraft.

Of course, the Indian Navy will likewise be supported by the Air Force.

The question is, after the Indian Air Force becomes the main force, what does it have to do with the Indian Navy?

If the Indian Navy's mission is to blockade Pakistani ports, such as Karachi, then the two aircraft carriers will at best be able to carry out long-range blockade missions far from land, that is, to prevent ships from going to Karachi, which may not pose much of a threat to Karachi.

Of course, the same goes for other surface warships of the Indian Navy.

There is nothing wrong with operating in the open sea, far from Pakistan proper, but as long as you are close to Pakistan proper, the problem is serious.

So, is Pakistan afraid of a remote blockade?

Obviously, the answer is no.

At a basic level, Pakistan is able to achieve self-sufficiency.

If a full-scale war breaks out, then Pakistan will rely first on China, not on Saudi Arabia and other rich and powerless Arab League countries.

With the construction of railways and highways with China, Pakistan's dependence on maritime transportation has been greatly reduced.

In other words, even if the ports are blocked, even if the sea routes are cut off, Pakistan will still be able to receive aid from China by rail and road.

A railway line can transport tens of millions of tons, or even hundreds of millions of tons, of materials every year.

For Pakistan, this is enough.

In addition, India may not dare to impose a strategic blockade on Pakistan.

Why?

Pakistan has long leased the port of Gwadar to Huaxia and is managed by Huaxia, and the escort fleet sent by Huaxia to the Gulf of Aden has always used Gwadar port as its main base.

Unless India intends to go to war with China, it will have to let go of the port of Gwadar.

So, when the time comes, in addition to escort warships, will there be ships transporting war materials to Gwadar Port?

You know, the Gwadar port has a maximum throughput capacity of 200 million tons per year, and Huaxia has enough ships to transport these supplies.

It can be seen that the advantages possessed by the Indian Navy are basically useless in the war against Pakistan.

In fact, there is still a question mark over whether this advantage exists.

Why?

The Indian Navy, in fact, is only the tallest of the dwarfs.

Although it has two aircraft carriers, dozens of large warships, and a dozen submarines, the Indian Navy is seriously lacking in anti-submarine capabilities.

Otherwise, India would not have spent a huge amount of money to import the P-8I "Poseidon" anti-submarine patrol aircraft from the United States over the years.

Unfortunately, there are too few of them.

What about the Pakistan Navy?

You must know that the most powerful thing in the Pakistan Navy is submarines, of which six S26 AIP conventional submarines imported from China are the mainstay.

These 6 AIP conventional submarines are capable of submersible for 21 days.

Because it is very close to India, and the main task of Pakistani submarines is to hunt down Indian warships, these submarines can basically maintain the whole submersible voyage and do not need to sail on the sea surface in order to save liquid oxygen, so they are very concealed when performing tasks.

What will the Indian Navy do against these 6 AIP conventional submarines?

You know, theoretically, it only takes one S26 to carry out two torpedo attacks at close range to send all the warships in an aircraft carrier battle group of the Indian Navy to the bottom of the sea.

Even if you don't succeed in a sneak attack every time, you can take out half of the Indian Navy if you succeed once.

For the Indian Navy, which does not have sufficient anti-submarine capabilities, it is a question of whether it dares to leave the port when it is threatened by Pakistani submarines.

Of course, India also has submarines.

The problem is that India's attack nuclear submarines leased from Russia cannot be used for foreign combat operations without Russia's permission.

As for the domestically produced attack nuclear submarine, it is actually a model product, and there is not even a matching torpedo.

Available, all conventional submarines.

Obviously, conventional submarines are not good at performing anti-submarine tasks.

In other words, the main tactical purpose of Indian submarines is also to encircle the surface ships of the Pakistan Navy, especially those frigates.

The problem is that there is no need for the Pakistani Navy to let the warship out of the port at all.

So, what else can Indian submarines do?

Of course, as mentioned earlier, in the war with Pakistan, the navy is inherently on the back burner, or rather dispensable.

As a result, the navy, which India is so proud of, has little military value at all.

Taken together, why should India provoke Pakistan?

Of course, provocation is okay, but if it really comes to war, the Indian top brass will definitely think twice, after all, the current Pakistan is no longer the Pakistan of the third Indo-Pakistani war, and if it is not good, India will lose all the dividends it won before losing the next war.

From India's point of view, maintaining the status quo with Pakistan is actually the most ideal option.

In addition, war is no longer an effective means of resolving national contradictions.

In today's world, it does not mean that if you win a war and defeat a strong enemy on the battlefield, you can be recognized and become a regional hegemon.

What is competing now is the country's development capacity and speed of development.

Clearly, war brings only destruction and destruction, not development.

If India's military superiority is not as great as Pakistan's, it will only be a moon in the water, a flower in the fog, and it will inevitably pay the price for its reckless military policy.

So, what other reason does India have to create an incident that triggers war?