Sanjha Morcha

‘Ready to fight at short notice’

AIR FORCE DAY IAF chief Dhanoa says they are geared up to face any challenge to country’s security, prepared for a war­like situation

From page 01 GHAZIABAD: The air warriors put up a spectacular show, both in air and at the event venue held at the air strips of the Hindon air base in Ghaziabad on the 85th Air Force Day celebrations on Sunday.

The Indian Air Force (IAF) showcased its front line fighters, reconnaissance, bombers and heavy lift transport aircraft in a series of aerial displays. The aircraft that featured in the show included Sukhoi-MKIs, Mirage2000s, Mig-29s, Jaguars, Mig-21 Bisons, C130 Hercules airlifters, and C-17 heavylifters acquired from the US.

The series included ground and aerial display by the indigenous-built Tejas, the light combat aircraft.

Addressing IAF personnel on the occasion, Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa said the IAF is prepared to fight a war at short notice. “We are prepared to fight at a short notice,” he said.

Dhanoa said the air force is confident to take any threat and is fully prepared to undertake the full spectrum of air operations and respond to challenges in a befitting manner. He also asked the personnel to remain combat worthy and to maintain combat system operational for any contingency at short notice.

He also said that the Air Force was acquiring multi- spectrum strategic capabilities and

remained committed to building a “joint manship” with the Indian Army and the Navy.

Dhanoa said security of all Air Force stations have been enhanced to combat any threat, including sub-conventional threats, after the terrorist attack on the Indian Air Force base station in Pathankot last year.

In January last year, terrorists sneaked in from across the border and attacked the air base. The attack claimed the lives of seven security personnel while four terrorists were killed.

President Ram Nath Kovind and Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday hailed the air warriors and extended greetings on the occasion of 85th Air Force Day. “On Air Force Day, I salute the valour, commitment and dedication of our brave air warriors. They safeguard our skies,” Kovind tweeted.

In a tweet, Modi said: “On Air Force Day, best wishes to our courageous air warriors and their families. Their determination and prowess ensure that our skies are safe.” Union minister of state for defence Subhash Bhamre also greeted air warriors and their families.

The show had a major part of the air display of acrobatics and battle tactics performed by LCA Tejas. Its first squadron was formed in July last year.

The event also showcased the flypast by C-17 Globemaster, flanked by two Sukhoi-MKIs and other attack helicopters. The front line aircraft zoomed pass the parade venue, deploying antimissile flares, and were air borne with timely precision from different air bases in north and western sectors. The grand finale was aerial acrobatics by team of Sarang helicopters (the advanced light helicopter – Dhruv), following by breathtaking manoeuvres by the team of red and white striped ‘Surya Kiran’ aircraft acrobatic team of the IAF.

clip


In J&K, a battle of wits with ‘fidayeen’ by Lt Gen Syed Ata Hasnain

Syed Ata Hasnain, a retired lieutenant-general, is a former commander of the Srinagar-based 15 Corps. He is also associated with the Vivekananda International Foundation and the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.The term “fidayeen” is borrowed from the Palestinian conflict.

The Indian Army has faced insurgencies in the Northeast for decades and had a difficult experience in Sri Lanka in the late 1980s. (Photo: PTI)

Whenever the security forces led by the Indian Army create a position of dominance in Jammu and Kashmir and have the terrorists on the run, there is a flurry of so-called fidayeen action by the terrorists under the direction of their proxy masters across the Line of Control. Each time this happens the wheel is reinvented in the public mind, the media and the establishment, questioning the inability of the forces to prevent these intrusions into their camps, which often result in heavy casualties. We had Uri, with almost 20 soldiers killed at a base where they were meant to be safe. It happened in Pathankot and Nagrota, which are some distance from the border. Recently, we had the Pulwama camp incident and just a few days ago the attack on the 184 BSF camp at Humhuma in Srinagar. The security forces are trained to secure themselves, and the repeated ability of terror groups to gain entry into their camps is being questioned, quite justifiably. How valid is this criticism?

The term “fidayeen” is borrowed from the Palestinian conflict. It gives much respect to the individual who decides to sacrifice his life for the cause of his community or nation. No such respect is intended here for such enemies of the state and the term is used purely for convenience. The Indian Army has faced insurgencies in the Northeast for decades and had a difficult experience in Sri Lanka in the late 1980s. It suffered ambushes and had direct contacts with militants or terrorists, but there were hardly any cases of intrusions into its camps. The organised and focused attacks by a few well-armed and logistically-equipped terrorists willing either to blow themselves up with strap-on improvised explosive devices (IEDs) or to fight until death, is something that the Palestinians created and showcased to the world. In our context, I remember being hit with such tactics in the form of a campaign for the first time only in 1999, in the Valley, and a little later in the Jammu region. Pakistan and its proxies used this to try to recover lost space and did initially put the Indian Army and other security forces on the defensive. It was around the aftermath of Kargil, where Pakistan also made a sham of attempting to project that those involved in the operations at the heights were actually local “mujahideen”.  Initially, the target of fidayeen action were primarily military camps of a smaller size. Intrusions were by a varying number of fidayeen, from just two to almost 10-15. The concept was quite ingenuous. The targets were mapped with the assistance of inside sources, who are aplenty. The disguise was invariably that of soldiers or policemen. Thereafter, there was the employment of a ruse to divert attention with a dash by a few terrorists into the innards of the camp even through the gates, to merge with soldiers and systematically attempt to eliminate as many as possible. In a rare case, at a place called Chak Nutnus, near Handwara, a very well-coordinated and extremely daring intrusion, bordering on being a virtual raid, killed an officer and a number of jawans and even made away with a medium machine-gun. It was suspected the intruders were led by a Pakistani SSG regular officer who infiltrated and established a strong terror grid in North Kashmir.

In one of their very daring improvisations, two terrorists did make an attempt to join the tail end of an Army patrol returning to base in the early hours. Alert troops doing counting drill discovered the ploy in time. Thus, no attempt at the execution of a fidayeen action is without deep thought at deception, ingenuity to prevent detection and capability to fight till the end with intent to cause destruction and casualties out of proportion with that employed.

From the vicinity of LoC to camps in the interior, to large headquarters and ultimately institutions of significance, fidayeen attempts force a “fortress mentality” on the forces. That is the intent of the adversary — to  compel us into a defensive mentality, make soldiers jumpy and get larger deployment to secure camps and institutions. The attack on the J&K Assembly and on India’s Parliament; and the series of attacks on the Badami Bagh cantonment’s entry gate in Srinagar were designed with this in mind. To the credit of the security forces, they didn’t become defensive, and found answers through better drills, intelligence and sheer grit. Yet, it may not be possible to always prevent an intrusion as every inch of the perimeter of camps and institutions cannot have physical deployment. Besides, the securitymen can’t remain rooted to their camps. There must be a balance between defensive deployment and proactive domination operations. The forces are on operational duty 24×7, and limits of human stamina force the necessity of organised rest. Terrorists keep the camps under inter-clandestine surveillance to find weaknesses and attempt to exploit chinks in security or moments when the troops are excessively fatigued.

For the security forces, it’s a battle of wits. There can be no justification for any force being unable to prevent intrusions. If an intrusion does take place due to the success of a terrorist ruse or simply laxity of perimeter defences, the next step is to ensure earliest elimination of the intruders before any major harm can be caused. That requires a strong response system with well-trained troops and suitable equipment to neutralise the intruders before excessive harm is caused.

Most fidayeen attempts are made by foreign terrorists dependent on a network of local over-ground workers. Organisations which have control over over-ground workers’ activity succeed in preventing fidayeen action with early intelligence and stronger defensive measures after warnings are issued. The sheer numbers of potential targets gives scope for terror groups to pick and choose. The smaller the quantum of terrorists, the greater the chances of success for them. We have rarely seen suicide bombers in J&K. The fidayeen action there involve suicide attackers who are willing to fight to the last.

While the expectations from the forces are high and they have invariably delivered each time, the situation has slipped a few notches due to the machinations of our adversaries, infallibility in such irregular conflict conditions is something nobody can ever guarantee. Just like in the field of infiltration there can never be a zero-infiltration environment, there can be no such guarantee against the wily fidayeen ready to sacrifice his life and cause maximum harm to the security forces or other government institutions. That understanding doesn’t give leeway to the forces and its hierarchies to underperform. Every lapse must be judged on its merits and counter-measures initiated. It is, however, important for the public, the media and other stakeholders to understand the challenges that our men in the field face and to show empathy towards them.

Tags: indian armyfidayeenpathankot attackpulwama attack

IAF: Ready for two-front war Chief: Capable of striking Pak targets

IAF: Ready for two-front war
BS Dhanoa, Air Chief Marshal

New Delhi, October 5

Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa today said there was a low possibility of a two-front war even as he sounded a note of caution that Chinese forces were present in the Chumbi valley. The Indian Air Force Chief went on to assure that the force had the ability to strike targets in Pakistan.At a press conference ahead of Air Force Day (October 8), the IAF Chief was asked about the safety of Pakistan’s tactical nuclear weapons and whether the IAF would be able to disarm Islamabad of its nuclear assets, if necessary.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)“We have a draft nuclear doctrine. It is answered in that — what happens when the enemy decides to use nuclear weapons on us. As far as the IAF is concerned, it has the ability to locate, fix and strike and that is not only for tactical nuclear weapons but for other targets across the border (as well),” Air Chief Marshal Dhanoa said.On the presence of Chinese troops in the Chumbi valley, he said: “Their (Chinese) forces are still deployed in the Chumbi valley. We expect these forces to withdraw as exercises get over.”The valley lies east of Sikkim and was the site of the 74-day military standoff between the Indian Army and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of China at Doklam plateau. The Tribune had reported that the PLA was maintaining a few hundred troops west of the Torsa nullah at Doklam and its troop numbers were around 10,000 spread across the regions abutting eastern and northern Sikkim. India has two divisions (12,000 men in each)  complete with tanks in these areas.On a two-front war, he said the IAF had an alternative plan to fight such a war with the existing fighter jets.“We need 42 squadrons for a full spectrum of operations. But it does not mean we cannot fight a two-front war with the existing strength. We have Plan B,” the IAF Chief said.He said politically they had never fought a two-front war. On if the threat of a two-front war was lower than assumed, he said: “In the present geo-strategic scenario, the possibility of a two-front war is low. However, the intention of the enemy can change overnight.” Two-front war is a military nomenclature for simultaneous war with neighbours, Pakistan and China. He said additions were being made to the fighter fleet and by 2032, they would have the mandated strength. At present, the IAF has 33 squadrons and 10 of those are listed to be phased out. — TNS


‘Full squadron strength by 2032’“There is a plan by the government to induct fighters and by 2032, we will have authorised strength. But with the numbers that we have, we are capable of carrying out operations anytime.” BS Dhanoa, Air Chief Marshal

3 women pilots set to fly military jets

  • The first three women fighter pilots of the country — Avani Chaturvedi, Bhawana Kanth and Mohana Singh — are set to script history next month when they will fly military jets after a strenuous three-week training. PTI

Pak violates ceasefire for third consecutive day

Pak violates ceasefire for third consecutive day
Villagers show mortar shells fired from the Pakistani side. File photo

Shyam Sood

Rajouri, October 4

The Pakistan army has violated the ceasefire for three consecutive days in the first week of October so far. During these days, a soldier attained martyrdom, three others were injured, while two minor children were killed and 12 others suffered injuries in Qasba, Bagliyar Dhara and Banwat villages of Poonch district.Today, the Pakistan army used mortars and automatic weapons to target Poonch, Balakot (Poonch district) and Lam sector in Rajouri district. No loss to property or injury to any civilian/soldier has been reported today. The Army, however, retaliated heavily to unprovoked mortar shelling and firing by the Pakistan army.In Balakot sector, troops of Pakistan’s 801 Mujahidin battalion targeted Indian forward posts manned by Gorkha unit using mortars and automatic weapons around 5.30 am.In Lam sector, the Pakistan army violated the truce and fired mortar shells on Indian posts manned by Sikh Li unit. It initiated unprovoked firing/mortar shelling along the LoC in Poonch sector around 9 am.“The Indian Army has retaliated strongly and effectively” said defence spokesman Col NN Joshi.


LAC summer vigil extends into winter

LAC summer vigil extends into winter
File photo

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, October 4

In what may indicate a “frosty winter” ahead for the India-China military relations, the Army has extended its ongoing “operational alert” all along the 3,488-km Line of Actual Control (LAC), the de facto boundary with China.Operational alert by the Indian Army along the LAC entails high-altitude acclimatisation of a greater number of troops as the LAC along the Himalayan ridgeline is at heights that have rarefied oxygen — it takes around four weeks for acclimatisation of a human being.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)Additional force is stationed at identified vulnerable points along the LAC. All military platforms like artillery guns, tanks, short-range shoulder-fired missiles have to be kept in a state of readiness. Also, the repair of all roads and bridges is done constantly.Confirming this to The Tribune, a top source said: “So far, no instructions have been issued to wind down the operational alert and it could get extended well into the winter.”The move comes as the People Liberation Army (PLA) of China has not withdrawn far enough from the Doklam Plateau where the armies of the two countries were locked in a 74-day military standoff (June 16 to August 28).The “operational alert” had commenced in August. As per an annual schedule, the “alert” winds down in phases and by the last week of October, when the weather starts getting colder in the upper reaches of the Himalayas, it ends.A sizeable number of China’s troops are still positioned “west of the Torsa Nullah” near the Doklam Plateau. At the onset of winter, these PLA troops usually move northwards to their garrisons. The Doklam standoff was “east of Torsa Nullah”.India had been insisting that the land east of the Torsa Nullah (a snowmelt rivulet) is with Bhutan. The PLA is maintaining a few hundred troops west of the nullah and their numbers are around 10,000 spread across the region abutting eastern and northern Sikkim. India has two divisions, some 12,000 men in each, complete with tanks in these areas.


BONUS ARMY

The Bonus Army was the name applied a group over 17,000 U.S  WW1veterans who marched on Washington, D.C. during the summer of 1932 demanding immediate cash payment of the service bonuses promised to them by Congress eight years earlier.
WHY THE BONUS ARMY MARCHED
Most of the veterans marched on the Capitol in 1932 to protest against the World War Adjusted Compensation Act of 1924 promised to them, but not until 1945 — a full 27 years after the end of the war they had fought in. Something like the OROP and downgrading of the military protocol being junked by successive Indian Govts. False promises.
The World War Adjusted Compensation Act was passed by Congress as sort of a 20-year insurance policy  redeemable “Adjusted Service Certificate” worth a certain amount not  redeemable until their individual birthdays in 1945.
On May 15, 1924, President Calvin Coolidge had, veetoed the bill providing for the bonuses stating, “Patriotism, bought and paid for, is not patriotism.” Congress, however, overrode his veto a few days later.
While the veterans might have been happy to wait for their bonuses and so called promises, they had immediate needs for the money and for feeding themselves and their families.
THE BONUS ARMY VETERANS OCCUPY D.C.
The Bonus March actually began in May 1932 as some 15,000 veterans assembled in makeshift camps scattered around Washington, D.C.
where they planned to demand and wait for the immediate payment of their bonuses peacefully like Indian veteran soldiers at Jantar Mantar
The largest of the veterans’ camp was at Hooverville and housed about 10,000 veterans and their families in ramshackle shelters built from old lumber, packing boxes, and scrapped tin from a nearby junk pile. Including the veterans, their families, and other supporters, the crowd of protesters eventually grew to nearly 45,000 people.
Veterans maintained order in the camps, built military-style sanitation facilities, and held orderly daily protest parades.
THE D.C. POLICE ATTACK THE VETERANS
On June 15, 1932, the US House of Representatives passed the Wright Patman Bonus Bill to move up the payment date of the veterans’ bonuses. However, the Senate defeated the bill. The veterans protested peacefully. On June 17 the D.C. police reacted violently, resulting in the deaths of two veterans and two police officers.
THE U.S. ARMY ATTACKS THE VETERANS
On the morning of July 28, 1932, President Hoover, in his capacity as commander in chief of the military, ordered his Secretary of War Patrick J. Hurley to clear the Bonus Army camps and disperse the protesters. At 4:45 p.m., U.S. Army infantry and cavalry regiments supported by six M1917 light tanks assembled on Pennsylvania Avenue to carry out President Hoover’s orders. This was the biggest mistake of his life.
With sabers, fixed bayonets, tear gas, and a mounted machine gun, the infantry and the cavalry charged the veterans, forcibly evicting them and their families from the smaller camps on the Capitol Building side of the Anacostia River. When the veterans retreated back across the river to the Hooverville camp, President Hoover ordered the troops to stand down until the next day.
 By the end, 55 veterans had been injured and 135 arrested.
THE AFTERMATH OF THE BONUS ARMY PROTEST
In the 1932 presidential election, Roosevelt defeated Hoover by a landslide vote. Hoover’s militaristic treatment of the Bonus Army veterans had contributed to his defeat, Roosevelt had also opposed the veterans’ demands during the 1932 campaign. However, when the veterans held a similar protest in May 1933, he provided them with meals and a secure campsite.
On January 22, 1936, both houses of Congress passed the Adjusted Compensation Payment Act in 1936, appropriating $2 billion for the immediate payment of all World War I veterans’ bonuses. 
Ultimately, the events of the Bonus Army veterans’ march on Washington contributed to the enactment in 1944 of the GI Bill, which has since assisted thousands of veterans make the often difficult transition to civilian life and in some small way pay back the debt owed to those who risk their lives for their country.

*_The Indo-China war began on October 20, 1962. A new book states that it was China that decided to go to war._* by Bertil Lintner

Chinese preparations for the war obviously began long before October 1962 – and the November 1961 meeting where Nehru had outlined his Forward Policy. Even if there already were new roads and military camps in the area, tens of thousands of more People’s Liberation Army [PLA] troops and tons of supplies, including heavy military equipment, had to be moved over some of the most difficult terrain in the world. Mao sent altogether 80,000 Chinese soldiers to Ladakh and the eastern Himalayas to attack India. Supply lines had to be established and secured to the rear bases inside Tibet.
Once across the border, it was also apparent that the Chinese had detailed knowledge of the terrain, where the Indian troops were stationed, and how to best attack them. This was well before China had access to satellite imagery. Aerial surveillance from spotter planes would also have been impossible at that time. China depended entirely on human intelligence collected by its agents in the field, which would have taken time in the North-East Frontier Agency [NEFA]’s rough and roadless terrain. But China’s agents would also be confined largely to areas where the local population spoke languages and dialects related to Tibetan. It was nearly impossible for the Chinese to penetrate most parts of the NEFA where the local tribal population spoke other, non-Tibetan languages and dialects.
Consequently, the areas where the Chinese launched their attacks were carefully selected, and contrary to what many researchers, including those from India, have assumed, relatively limited. There is a common misperception that the PLA overran most of the NEFA and reached the lowlands at Bhalukpong, which now marks the state border between Arunachal Pradesh and Assam. Bhalukpong was abandoned and the PLA’s last encounter with Indian troops was at Chakhu, a small town near Bomdila, south of Rupa. In the east, they did not go much farther than Walong, and the incursions into Subansiri and Siang in the central sector were relatively minor.
*_All these areas have one thing in common. They are populated by Tibetan-speaking people or people speaking languages and dialects related to Tibetan._*
They were also areas where human intelligence operations had been possible before the war, and where the Chinese, through their Tibetan interpreters, were able to communicate with the locals who had stayed behind once the PLA crossed into the NEFA. Although the Indian Army had retreated from all its positions in the northeastern mountains, it is significant that the PLA did not venture into areas of the NEFA populated by Mishmis, Apatanis, Nyishis, and other non-Tibetan speaking tribes because no on-the-ground intelligence had been collected from there before the meticulously planned war. Those tribal groups would have been perceived as alien and therefore potentially hostile.
There were also other preparations that the Chinese had undertaken before the attacks in October 1962. Indian brigadier John Dalvi, who was captured alive with some of his men on October 22, 1962 and remained a prisoner of war in China until May 1963, recorded the events in his book Himalayan Blunder: The Angry Truth about India’s Most Crushing Military Disaster. Once captured and taken to the other side, Dalvi was able to observe how meticulously the Chinese had prepared their blitzkrieg against India.
He discovered that the Chinese had erected prisoner of war camps to hold up to 3,000 men and found out that interpreters for all major Indian languages had been moved to Lhasa between March and May 1962. Not only had tens of thousands of troops been redeployed to the area to be acclimatised to the high altitudes of the border mountains well before the attacks took place, but thousands of Tibetan porters had also been recruited and forward dumps had been established all along the frontier. Even more tellingly, Dalvi noticed that the Chinese had built a road strong enough to hold 7-tonne vehicles all the way up to Marmang near the McMahon Line.
*_All this, Dalvi wrote later, “was not an accident and was certainly not decided after 8th September 1962. It was coldly and calculatingly planned by the Chinese.”_*
While it is not inconceivable that the very final order to attack was given a week or so before the PLA swung into action (which would make sense from a tactical military point of view), it is also important to remember that the 1962 War also had nothing to do with the establishment of an Indian Army post in one of the remotest corners of the subcontinent. That could be seen as a pretext, but even then, at best, a rather flimsy one. Even Mao Zedong had told the Nepalese and the Soviet delegations before and after the war that the issue was never the McMahon Line or the border dispute. China thought that India had designs for Tibet, which, in the 1950s, was being integrated into Mao’s People’s Republic.
At a meeting on March 25, 1959, only three weeks after the outbreak of the Lhasa uprising and as the Dalai Lama was on his way over the mountains to India, Deng Xiaoping, then a political as well as a military leader, made China’s position clear: “When the time comes, we certainly will settle accounts with them [the Indians]” And, according to Bruce Riedel, one of American’s leading experts on US security as well as South Asian issues, “[p]robably as early as 1959, Mao decided that he would have to take firm action against Nehru”.
Zhao Weiwen, a South Asian analyst at China’s premier intelligence agency, the Ministry of State Security, wrote after the war in 1962 that “India ardently hoped to continue England’s legacy in Tibet” and that Nehru himself “harboured a sort of dark mentality”. Those factors, Zhao argued, led Nehru to demonstrate an “irresolute attitude” in 1959. And that “dark mentality”, US-China scholar John Garver quotes him as saying, led Nehru to give a free rein to “anti-China forces” in an attempt to foment unrest in Tibet to “throw off the jurisdiction of China’s central government”.
According to Garver, Mao was also present at the same meeting as Deng in March 1959, and the Chairman said that India “was doing bad things in Tibet” and therefore had to be dealt with. Mao, however, told the assembled members of the inner circle of the Chinese leadership that China should not condemn India openly for the time being. Instead, India would be given enough rope to hang itself, quo xingbuyi bi zibii, literally “to do evil deeds frequently brings ruin to the evil doer”.
*_China was waiting for the right moment to “deal” with India. But first, it needed precise and accurate intelligence from across the border._*
Findings by Nicholas Effimiades, an expert on China’s intelligence operations, reveals that the Chinese began sending agents into the NEFA and other areas two years before the military offensive. “The PLA gathered facts on India’s order of battle, terrain features, and military strategy through agents planted among road gangs, porters and muleteers working in border areas.” These agents, Effimiades states, “later guided PLA forces across the area during offensive operations…junior PLA commander – disguised as Tibetans – had reconnoitred their future area of operation.”
‘Two years before the military offensive” began in October 1962 means at least a year before the Forward Policy was conceived, which makes it hard to argue that India’s moves in the area provoked China to attack. Furthermore, the date, October 20, 1962, for the final assault after years of preparations was carefully chosen because it would coincide with the Cuban missile crisis, which the Chinese knew about beforehand through their contacts with the leaders of the Soviet Union. With Soviet missiles on Cuba, the Chinese were convinced that the USA would be too preoccupied to pay much attention to a war in the distant Himalayas.

WhatsApp shares location with friends

WhatsApp shares location with friends

Andrew Griffin

WhatsApp will now tell you friends where you are, so you don’t have to.

The chat app is introducing “Live Location”, a feature that lets people give out their location in real time to their friends. None of the information will be public, and it’s intended only to be used for a short amount of time.

So if you’re going to meet someone and are not sure where they are, you can show them on a map, for instance.

It’s used by heading to a WhatsApp chat, clicking on the “add” button, press on Location and switch it on. It can be used with just one person or in group chats, where everyone will get access to your location and everyone in the chat will be shown on one map.

The feature will be rolling out on both Android and iOS “in the coming weeks”, WhatsApp said. Some people claim to already have access to it.

A number of apps have recently run into trouble over location services. Snapchat, for instance, recently added a feature that allows people to see precisely where people are — and those people might not even know they’re being tracked.

But WhatsApp will only enable the feature with explicit consent, and will let people do so for a specific amount of time if they choose.

The app has allowed people to share their location for some time. But until now it was only static, so that you could send your current location but it wouldn’t then be updated.

The new feature is similar to one offered in iMessage, but only for people who are using Apple products. From a chat, you can click the little “i” button in the corner, and opt to share your location forever or just for a short while.

— The Independent