We must also improve our relations with other neighboring states (such as BD, Nepal, and even TSP, however superficially) so that they hesitate to help China militarily in the case of a conflict.
Lessons of 1962 War for a possible new Sino-India conflict
One of the biggest fears that China has is that India may start a military campaign against China while it's engaged in a military campaign against Taiwan and US forces in the strait. The recent superficial diplomatic accomodations, as well as the strategic encirclement of India, stem from this fear. What we need to do is realize China's fear and use it to take an aggressive stance against China (bordering on breaking relations). If we do take an aggressive enough stance, we can get what we need from China (border dispute resolution, accomodation in the UN, etc.) But the Indian govt. first needs to realize that China has this fear of India, despite the aggressive stance taken by it. Ofcourse when China does start an invasion against Taiwan, we will still use the opportunity to take back the Chinese-occupied Indian territory along with freeing Tibet. But we must make them believe that we will not do this, in exchange for accomodation on border disputes and in the UN.
We must also improve our relations with other neighboring states (such as BD, Nepal, and even TSP, however superficially) so that they hesitate to help China militarily in the case of a conflict.
We must also improve our relations with other neighboring states (such as BD, Nepal, and even TSP, however superficially) so that they hesitate to help China militarily in the case of a conflict.
Caution: Taiwan, for what it is worth, does support Chicom WRT Chinese claims vs. India.
The threat towards Chicom, if there is one, should not just be acrried out, but sustained after the effort - an exit strategy is required. Else it could be worse than the US effort in Iraq. So, taking back some areas is one thing. But to expect to liberate Tibet is another.
However, one could see some countries worth such an effort: Nepal and even may be Burma. BD I am not that sure, but it could be worth the effort.
The threat towards Chicom, if there is one, should not just be acrried out, but sustained after the effort - an exit strategy is required. Else it could be worse than the US effort in Iraq. So, taking back some areas is one thing. But to expect to liberate Tibet is another.
However, one could see some countries worth such an effort: Nepal and even may be Burma. BD I am not that sure, but it could be worth the effort.
Even so, we can still attack China when it's busy dealing with Taiwan, and that is the point I was trying to make; i.e. that China fears a second front with India in starting a war with Taiwan. We can use this fear to our advantage to try to get what we want (for now, we want China to drop all claims in Arunachal Pradesh and the Indian NorthEast, and to become more accomodating to India in the UN and elsewhere). And when the conflict with Taiwan does actually occur, we can still use the opportunity to take back Aksai Chin and other Indian territory currently occupied by China. Whether Tibet can be freed would depend largely on the military situation at the time. But a free Tibet would again create a buffer zone between India and China, so it would be to our advantage in the long term.Caution: Taiwan, for what it is worth, does support Chicom WRT Chinese claims vs. India.
Isn't physical occupation a necessary prerequisite to occupy/ take back terrotory? Taking back Aksai Chin is one thing, liberating Tibet is another. I would rather say, let's be realistic. Taking back Aksai Chin & severing Paki-Chincom road link should be a good enough achievable strategic goal.appuseth wrote:...Even so, we can still attack China when it's busy dealing with Taiwan, and that is the point I was trying to make; i.e. that China fears a second front with India in starting a war with Taiwan... And when the conflict with Taiwan does actually occur, we can still use the opportunity to take back Aksai Chin and other Indian territory currently occupied by China. Whether Tibet can be freed would depend largely on the military situation at the time. But a free Tibet would again create a buffer zone between India and China, so it would be to our advantage in the long term.
In any future conflict with Chicom, it is imperative that GoI be able to dish out pain to the heart of the Chicom industrial complex. In the near future, should an all-out conventional conflict break out, all of our northern industrial/manufacturing/IT corridors in the North can and will become targets for the PLAAF. Such attacks would have ripple effects on the Indian economy, not to mention morale. In the near future, our responses are limited to using long range ballistic missiles with conventional warheads on the economic hub on the east coast. Not only is this of questionable utility, it is also an invitation for serious misunderstanding. We could target energy flows b/w the Middle East and the Chinese Ports. But with the proactive approach that Chicom has been taking (String of Pearls et al), we could face similar retaliation.
What we need is the ability to selectively and effectively target economic targets on the Eastern sea board. A few squadrons of Tu22s. MKIized is just what the Dr. ordered.
Else we risk fighting the next big Indo-China conflict over Indian Skies. The ability to target Military targets in Tibet is not a deterrant enuf for Chicom to back off shoud the need arise.
What we need is the ability to selectively and effectively target economic targets on the Eastern sea board. A few squadrons of Tu22s.
MKIized is just what the Dr. ordered. Else we risk fighting the next big Indo-China conflict over Indian Skies. The ability to target Military targets in Tibet is not a deterrant enuf for Chicom to back off shoud the need arise.
-
saumitra_j
- BRFite
- Posts: 382
- Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
- Location: Pune, India
Hi All,
Pardon my naievity here but I am not quite able to comprehend why some of us are advocating offensive actions against China.
AFAIK, Indian Army has always trained with a defensive mindset vis a vis the Chinese and given the record of our political/miltary set up, I am not too sure that we would be ready to exploit any of China's weakness in case China starts a war with Taiwan.
Secondly, I don't quite understand what is to gain strategically by liberating Tibet - to start with that would certainly provocate China to contenplate nuking us and secondly, given what is happening after liberating Bangladesh, I am not too sure if it is such a wise idea.
IMHO, the best thing for us to do is to be prepared to give a bloody nose to the Chines if they attack us and keep their economic clout under check by building stronger relationships with SE Asian states - the subtle plan would be to make their support to anti India brigade very expensive economically by concentrating on our own economic development.
JMT....
Saumitra
Pardon my naievity here but I am not quite able to comprehend why some of us are advocating offensive actions against China.
AFAIK, Indian Army has always trained with a defensive mindset vis a vis the Chinese and given the record of our political/miltary set up, I am not too sure that we would be ready to exploit any of China's weakness in case China starts a war with Taiwan.
Secondly, I don't quite understand what is to gain strategically by liberating Tibet - to start with that would certainly provocate China to contenplate nuking us and secondly, given what is happening after liberating Bangladesh, I am not too sure if it is such a wise idea.
IMHO, the best thing for us to do is to be prepared to give a bloody nose to the Chines if they attack us and keep their economic clout under check by building stronger relationships with SE Asian states - the subtle plan would be to make their support to anti India brigade very expensive economically by concentrating on our own economic development.
JMT....
Saumitra
FWIW, I agree with Saumitra. All this talk of liberating Tibet is just so much hot air. In 1950, Mao threatened India with war when we spoke of Tibetan autonomy. In 2005, China is poised to do far greater damage to India than in 1950.
When confronted with uncomfortable truths about the expansion of Chinese influence in our neighbourhood, we see such jingoistic posts which are so far removed from reality that they offer nothing more than a misplaced sense of security.
The need of the hour is to prevent Chinese surveillance in our interior and of our shipping lanes. It is to prevent their force build-up in third countries (Nepal, Bangladesh and in the future, Bhutan) in our neighbourhood, so that they cannot present us with a fait-accompli. This requires us to understand a great deal more about the compulsions of these third countries and to find ways to be their first and last resort, instead of China. Because all the long-range bombers and missiles are not going to be of much use when China stations and mans AA batteries in Nepal or Bangladesh and a fleet of warships in Burma.
When confronted with uncomfortable truths about the expansion of Chinese influence in our neighbourhood, we see such jingoistic posts which are so far removed from reality that they offer nothing more than a misplaced sense of security.
The need of the hour is to prevent Chinese surveillance in our interior and of our shipping lanes. It is to prevent their force build-up in third countries (Nepal, Bangladesh and in the future, Bhutan) in our neighbourhood, so that they cannot present us with a fait-accompli. This requires us to understand a great deal more about the compulsions of these third countries and to find ways to be their first and last resort, instead of China. Because all the long-range bombers and missiles are not going to be of much use when China stations and mans AA batteries in Nepal or Bangladesh and a fleet of warships in Burma.
ATM, I believe that India is most similar to pre-WWII US. At that time, the US was a big country with lots of potential but was also plagued with many problems (depression, etc.). As a result, America decided not to interfere with world affairs (i.e. anything except the Americas would be ignored). It was essentially forced into both world wars and won both times even though it started out as the underdog. However, after WWII, america realized its true power and began to throw it around, and still is today.
What I am trying to say is that India will not really do anything untill push comes to shove. All this "attack china" stuff will never happen untill something big takes place
What I am trying to say is that India will not really do anything untill push comes to shove. All this "attack china" stuff will never happen untill something big takes place
-
Vijay Hirani
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 17
- Joined: 17 Apr 2005 01:23
I agree with Anoop / Saumitra,
We have to be realistic and take all necesary measures to defence INDIAs integrity.
India's Nuclear defence must be Iron clad, we need Agni III and the ATVs.
And come up with some good strategy to deal with the rouge neighbours right now who are using China to needle India.
It is obvious that pakistan is a client state of China. The way I see it is that if Paki ever nuke Banglore and/or Mumbai ( a big percentage of India economy) it should automatically nuke China as well as Pakistan as a matter of policy. A strong and secure nuclear deterrent would ensure that China and Pakistan are treated as one.
Attacking China is fantasy, But what India must do is to ensure that the price of attacking India will be very severe and this should be a matter of policy. India needs to arm Itself to do this.
Vijay[/quote]
We have to be realistic and take all necesary measures to defence INDIAs integrity.
India's Nuclear defence must be Iron clad, we need Agni III and the ATVs.
And come up with some good strategy to deal with the rouge neighbours right now who are using China to needle India.
It is obvious that pakistan is a client state of China. The way I see it is that if Paki ever nuke Banglore and/or Mumbai ( a big percentage of India economy) it should automatically nuke China as well as Pakistan as a matter of policy. A strong and secure nuclear deterrent would ensure that China and Pakistan are treated as one.
Attacking China is fantasy, But what India must do is to ensure that the price of attacking India will be very severe and this should be a matter of policy. India needs to arm Itself to do this.
Vijay[/quote]
The only real currency that we will ever have when dealing with Chicom is the understanding that we can hurt them if the need should arise.
IMHO, China is a nation that will not hesistate to apply conventional force to fulfill a strategic objective, no matter what the status of our strategic forces are. We can have a robust Nuclear triad all up and running, but I sincerely doubt that it can deter them from conducting limited conventional assaults.
For the most part, the Chinese leadership has played a game of active containment wrt to India. Using client states and local players, it has atleast in part made us divert precious resources, which could have instead been used for much more productive purposes. I don't think its farfetched to see the Chicom leadership take the view that Indians need to be taught a lesson once again. A repetition of 62 if you will. I sincerely believe that future conventional skirmishes are not a matter of if but when.
This defensive mindset that China could perpetrate far greater damage in 2005 than in 1962 needs to go. While I'm no military expert, I do feel that the Indian forces can more that hold their own in 2005. But what is worrying is that no matter what the military outcome of the conflict is, the economic repercussions will be more severe for India. Geography is on the side of the Chinese. As in my previous post, I'd like to reteriate, we need to have the ability to hurt their economic engine. This is crucial - similar to the ability that they have (or will shortly have) to hurt ours.
While I agree, that the liberation of Tibet is wishful thinking, I see no reason why we should restrict ourselves to thinking that we cannot take on chicom in a strictly military sense.
Long Range Fast Bombers based in the Andamans, with the ability to launch ALCMs on targets on the Chinese east coast. This coupled with decent IA/IAF assets to fight the Chinese to a stalemate on the border, and IN assets to establish sea dominance vis-a-vis PLAAN in the Indian Ocean, will make Chicom long and hard before they try another 62. Without the ability to go on the offensive, we will lose the war before it even begins.
IMHO, China is a nation that will not hesistate to apply conventional force to fulfill a strategic objective, no matter what the status of our strategic forces are. We can have a robust Nuclear triad all up and running, but I sincerely doubt that it can deter them from conducting limited conventional assaults.
For the most part, the Chinese leadership has played a game of active containment wrt to India. Using client states and local players, it has atleast in part made us divert precious resources, which could have instead been used for much more productive purposes. I don't think its farfetched to see the Chicom leadership take the view that Indians need to be taught a lesson once again. A repetition of 62 if you will. I sincerely believe that future conventional skirmishes are not a matter of if but when.
This defensive mindset that China could perpetrate far greater damage in 2005 than in 1962 needs to go. While I'm no military expert, I do feel that the Indian forces can more that hold their own in 2005. But what is worrying is that no matter what the military outcome of the conflict is, the economic repercussions will be more severe for India. Geography is on the side of the Chinese. As in my previous post, I'd like to reteriate, we need to have the ability to hurt their economic engine. This is crucial - similar to the ability that they have (or will shortly have) to hurt ours.
While I agree, that the liberation of Tibet is wishful thinking, I see no reason why we should restrict ourselves to thinking that we cannot take on chicom in a strictly military sense.
Long Range Fast Bombers based in the Andamans, with the ability to launch ALCMs on targets on the Chinese east coast. This coupled with decent IA/IAF assets to fight the Chinese to a stalemate on the border, and IN assets to establish sea dominance vis-a-vis PLAAN in the Indian Ocean, will make Chicom long and hard before they try another 62. Without the ability to go on the offensive, we will lose the war before it even begins.
-
Raj Malhotra
- BRFite
- Posts: 997
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
Todays HT has published a news article that Chinese Army has intruded in numerous districts in Bhutan and even built pucca bridges.
And lot of us were saying that China will not create confontration on Indo-China border!
Bhutan depends on India for security and this is direct challenge to India, de-facto they are taking on India.
Our high altitude warfare capacity was found seriously lacking in 1999 but we have spent 6 years strengthing our "possible" security in 2050 by multi-billion dollar multi decade programmes, while forgetting immediate concerns
I started this thread to point out that we don't have any strategy, equipment or guts to challenge any Chinese confrontation by/of this sort of salami slicing action.
Most of the top brass in India have lost sight of the fact that armies are required to defend nations and not other way around. or they are too busy getting 32 pieces of silver. Now ask them to use the Gorky, hawk and Tungushka on Chinese border.
Now how do we tackle this action by China:-
1. Allow military bases to US for over-flights over China and intelligence gathering, on shared basis.
2. Use Afghanistan and CIS nations bordering China to encourage independence of Xinxiang, Tibet and other provinces
3. Transfer nuclear, missile and military technology to Vietnam and othe friendly nations (NSG, NPT, US agreement be damned)
4. Strengthen our mountain light infantry and area specific SF . Retaliate by intruding into Chinese areas bordering Bhutan and Nepal
5. Bomb the sh!t out of Bangladesh. Cut off its northern area to enlarge our chicken corridor and chittagong to get access to sea for NE.
6. Get back Nepal by less painful assissination policy. In the meanwhile use the porous borders of Nepal for moral and diplomatic support to oppressed people of China
And lot of us were saying that China will not create confontration on Indo-China border!
Bhutan depends on India for security and this is direct challenge to India, de-facto they are taking on India.
Our high altitude warfare capacity was found seriously lacking in 1999 but we have spent 6 years strengthing our "possible" security in 2050 by multi-billion dollar multi decade programmes, while forgetting immediate concerns
I started this thread to point out that we don't have any strategy, equipment or guts to challenge any Chinese confrontation by/of this sort of salami slicing action.
Most of the top brass in India have lost sight of the fact that armies are required to defend nations and not other way around. or they are too busy getting 32 pieces of silver. Now ask them to use the Gorky, hawk and Tungushka on Chinese border.
Now how do we tackle this action by China:-
1. Allow military bases to US for over-flights over China and intelligence gathering, on shared basis.
2. Use Afghanistan and CIS nations bordering China to encourage independence of Xinxiang, Tibet and other provinces
3. Transfer nuclear, missile and military technology to Vietnam and othe friendly nations (NSG, NPT, US agreement be damned)
4. Strengthen our mountain light infantry and area specific SF . Retaliate by intruding into Chinese areas bordering Bhutan and Nepal
5. Bomb the sh!t out of Bangladesh. Cut off its northern area to enlarge our chicken corridor and chittagong to get access to sea for NE.
6. Get back Nepal by less painful assissination policy. In the meanwhile use the porous borders of Nepal for moral and diplomatic support to oppressed people of China
Fully agree, Raj. Some nitpicking here though, I fail to see why should CIS countries play ball with us, when they stand to gain much more from the energy/ gas supplies to PRC.Raj Malhotra wrote: ..Now how do we tackle this action by China:-
1. Allow military bases to US for over-flights over China and intelligence gathering, on shared basis.
2. Use Afghanistan and CIS nations bordering China to encourage independence of Xinxiang, Tibet and other provinces
3. Transfer nuclear, missile and military technology to Vietnam and othe friendly nations (NSG, NPT, US agreement be damned)
4. Strengthen our mountain light infantry and area specific SF . Retaliate by intruding into Chinese areas bordering Bhutan and Nepal
5. Bomb the sh!t out of Bangladesh. Cut off its northern area to enlarge our chicken corridor and chittagong to get access to sea for NE.
6. Get back Nepal by less painful assissination policy. In the meanwhile use the porous borders of Nepal for moral and diplomatic support to oppressed people of China
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship ... index.html
Des 11 Luda and Anshan must not be counted
Fri 23 No Jianghu
GMB 40 No Huangfeng
Sub
SSBN 4
SSN ~20 No Ming
Reason:http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship ... n/ming.htm
Not any big difference except Indian Navy will have the latest warships with the latest tech.
Des 11 Luda and Anshan must not be counted
Fri 23 No Jianghu
GMB 40 No Huangfeng
Sub
SSBN 4
SSN ~20 No Ming
Reason:http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship ... n/ming.htm
Not any big difference except Indian Navy will have the latest warships with the latest tech.
-
Raj Malhotra
- BRFite
- Posts: 997
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
there are always some friendly elements in nations with bad economiesShibaPJ wrote:Fully agree, Raj. Some nitpicking here though, I fail to see why should CIS countries play ball with us, when they stand to gain much more from the energy/ gas supplies to PRC.Raj Malhotra wrote: ..Now how do we tackle this action by China:-
1. Allow military bases to US for over-flights over China and intelligence gathering, on shared basis.
2. Use Afghanistan and CIS nations bordering China to encourage independence of Xinxiang, Tibet and other provinces
3. Transfer nuclear, missile and military technology to Vietnam and othe friendly nations (NSG, NPT, US agreement be damned)
4. Strengthen our mountain light infantry and area specific SF . Retaliate by intruding into Chinese areas bordering Bhutan and Nepal
5. Bomb the sh!t out of Bangladesh. Cut off its northern area to enlarge our chicken corridor and chittagong to get access to sea for NE.
6. Get back Nepal by less painful assissination policy. In the meanwhile use the porous borders of Nepal for moral and diplomatic support to oppressed people of China
-
Raj Malhotra
- BRFite
- Posts: 997
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
For those of you who suggest that we assume a defensive posture and wait until China attacks India, that is not how wars are won. Offense is defense. We did not stop China when they invaded Tibet, and the result was the '62 invasion of India. If you want to utilize an airforce to its maximum, you have to attack first and establish air superiority early on.
By the way, the Chinese are not just building roads into Bhutan, but also in Arunachal Pradesh (in Indian territory). So in a way, China has already attacked India by building roads on Indian territory. Yet our government is silent because they fear China. If China is not stopped, they will keep going. First Arunachal Pradesh, then the rest of the Indian NorthEast.
Our govt. needs to warn China publicly to get out of Bhutan and Arunachal Pradesh, or face the consequences (mainly to justify a war in the international circle, and get more allies on our side). We need to strengthen our defenses in AP; let the Chinese complain, but we should still do what needs to be done. Simultaneously we should give the Americans a few airfields to operate stealth fighters (F-22, etc.) from: Of course this would have to be done secretly, otherwise the left would not let it happen.
If we don't stop China now, it will be too late. They will have taken Bhutan and Nepal (by alliance), and strengthened their military infrastructure there. It will be Tibet all over again. If we want India to win, we have to start preparing now. China will not stop marching until it's forced to stop, like it was in the Taiwan Strait. China needs to be taught a lesson. I can only hope that our leadership has enough courage to act now. Otherwise we will eventually lose.
Added later: The American involvement will also keep TSP out of the war (since the US has TSP on a leash).
Also, the issue of the Chinese invasion of Bhutan needs to be raised in the UN.
By the way, the Chinese are not just building roads into Bhutan, but also in Arunachal Pradesh (in Indian territory). So in a way, China has already attacked India by building roads on Indian territory. Yet our government is silent because they fear China. If China is not stopped, they will keep going. First Arunachal Pradesh, then the rest of the Indian NorthEast.
Our govt. needs to warn China publicly to get out of Bhutan and Arunachal Pradesh, or face the consequences (mainly to justify a war in the international circle, and get more allies on our side). We need to strengthen our defenses in AP; let the Chinese complain, but we should still do what needs to be done. Simultaneously we should give the Americans a few airfields to operate stealth fighters (F-22, etc.) from: Of course this would have to be done secretly, otherwise the left would not let it happen.
If we don't stop China now, it will be too late. They will have taken Bhutan and Nepal (by alliance), and strengthened their military infrastructure there. It will be Tibet all over again. If we want India to win, we have to start preparing now. China will not stop marching until it's forced to stop, like it was in the Taiwan Strait. China needs to be taught a lesson. I can only hope that our leadership has enough courage to act now. Otherwise we will eventually lose.
Added later: The American involvement will also keep TSP out of the war (since the US has TSP on a leash).
Also, the issue of the Chinese invasion of Bhutan needs to be raised in the UN.
Last edited by appuseth on 29 Dec 2005 02:48, edited 2 times in total.
As they say 'Offence is the best defence'.. but can we go on overtly offensive, when we have such volatile borders elsewhere and the house itself is not in order.. Million $ question is is it sustainable in the first place?appuseth wrote:For those of you who suggest that we assume a defensive posture and wait until China attacks India, that is not how wars are won. Offense is defense...
India should go offensive in a covert manner.. Build roads/ occupy territories, keep their side of the border boiling. If you look at PRC, only once they went publicly offensive ('62), else they have been using their client states to do their dirty job!!! Same as Unkil has been doing all thru (Pakis/ Taleban, Taiwan, u take ur pick). Kaante ko nikalne ke liye kaanta hi chahiye hota hai na!!!
That is why I said that US involvement is necessary. If the US is helping us free Bhutan, then TSP will not enter the war. And if we keep the conflict limited to freeing Bhutan and parts of AP occupied by China (and Aksai Chin), then we can sustain it with American help. The million $ question is, will the US help in this effort, since it's currently occupied in Iraq and Afghanistan. My guess is that this is why the Chinese picked this moment to start something. We would definitely need American involvement to get TSP off our back momentarily.but can we go on overtly offensive, when we have such volatile borders elsewhere and the house itself is not in order.. Million $ question is is it sustainable in the first place?
pray tell why US involvement is necessary? !?! Why would the US even care for Bhutan? There is no national interest at threat.
The PLA are probing to test Bhutanese resolve. The King is stepping down, new democratic system being established... PLA will probe. THey will not do too much, since it will be a clear provocation, not something they want right now.
besides, how will IA respond? PLA will be watching.
Someone who understands the military geography of the NE... does control of Bhutan facilitate invasion of INdian NE? Not aware that there are advantageous passes from Tibet into Bhutan, and thence down to Indian plains. This is all political in my simple understanding
The PLA are probing to test Bhutanese resolve. The King is stepping down, new democratic system being established... PLA will probe. THey will not do too much, since it will be a clear provocation, not something they want right now.
besides, how will IA respond? PLA will be watching.
Someone who understands the military geography of the NE... does control of Bhutan facilitate invasion of INdian NE? Not aware that there are advantageous passes from Tibet into Bhutan, and thence down to Indian plains. This is all political in my simple understanding
The US does not care about Bhutan true, but the US is very interested in containing China to stop it from becoming more powerful. Also, as I already said above, we need to get TSP off our back in order to beat China. The US can facilitate this because it has TSP on a leash. TSP will not fight against the US, and the US can help make sure that TSP does not start a war in Kashmir while India is engaged with China. Ofcourse the use of American F-22's along with the MKI's to establish air superiority (against the numerical superiority of the PLAAF) does not hurt either.pray tell why US involvement is necessary? !?! Why would the US even care for Bhutan?
Taking over Bhutan (and building up the Chinese military there) very much improves the war equation for China against India (and the Indian NorthEast). Looking at a map, we can see that Bhutan is adjacent to the narrow land corridor that connects the Indian NorthEast with the rest of India. Taking over Bhutan will definitely facilitate the eventual conquest of the Indian NorthEast because it will become easier for China to disconnect the Indian NorthEast from the rest of India. This is why the Chinese are building roads (that can support tanks) in Bhutan. Note that the other side of the narrow Indian land corridor is Bangladesh, the new military ally of China: Note the recently signed (2002) Bangladesh-China Defence Co-operation Agreement. Read the following:does control of Bhutan facilitate invasion of INdian NE?
Bangladesh-China Defence Co-operation Agreements Strategic Implications: An Analysis
The Chinese are imperialist expansionists and are also taking over Bhutan just to grab the land. Tomorrow the Chicom will say that Bhutan belongs with China, just like they did with Tibet.
Anoop,
Perhaps your sarcasm did pass by but as you said, I thought this was a serious thread too.
Look at the subsequent posts. The point I am trying to make is, many times I have seen jingoestic posting that I feel are balloon full of hot air. I for one like to be practical then a dreamer. If I had to fight Chicom, the two things I would like to know really, really well are, A: Can I defend to the end and B: Can I win the war.
The number issue is extremely important in every way possible. The more frontier chicoms open the more numbers you need. Otherwise, you are spread thin and can be disintegrated easily.
Another big thing that I always wonder is the Navy factor. We always talk about chicoms coming from North. What if chickoms attack using navy / subs on any southern cities. A – how can I defend and B how can I win.
The point I am trying to make is, and I know I will get killed over this here but – we are not ready now, and will not be ready in next 10 years if we don’t start thinking big in numbers. Email me if you wish to discuss further about war scenario. :)
Perhaps your sarcasm did pass by but as you said, I thought this was a serious thread too.
Look at the subsequent posts. The point I am trying to make is, many times I have seen jingoestic posting that I feel are balloon full of hot air. I for one like to be practical then a dreamer. If I had to fight Chicom, the two things I would like to know really, really well are, A: Can I defend to the end and B: Can I win the war.
The number issue is extremely important in every way possible. The more frontier chicoms open the more numbers you need. Otherwise, you are spread thin and can be disintegrated easily.
Another big thing that I always wonder is the Navy factor. We always talk about chicoms coming from North. What if chickoms attack using navy / subs on any southern cities. A – how can I defend and B how can I win.
The point I am trying to make is, and I know I will get killed over this here but – we are not ready now, and will not be ready in next 10 years if we don’t start thinking big in numbers. Email me if you wish to discuss further about war scenario. :)
Some people may dismiss the above discussion of war with China as resulting from jingoism, but the fact is that war is being thrust upon us, whether you like it or not.
China is going to overrun Bhutan, and it's doing this with India-specific goals in mind. That is why Chinese soldiers invaded Bhutan, and are building a road (that can support their tanks) in Bhutan right now. Eventually China's plan is to sever the Indian NorthEast from the rest of India: Check on a map how the Indian NorthEast is surrounded on all sides by China and Chinese allies; add Bhutan and the encirclement is complete.
It's true that India cannot beat China by itself, but as I mentioned in my last post above, we will need an alliance with the US to get the job done (and also to keep Pakistan from joining the party). We can either wait for China to attack us and beat us, or we can start planning for it now.
China is going to overrun Bhutan, and it's doing this with India-specific goals in mind. That is why Chinese soldiers invaded Bhutan, and are building a road (that can support their tanks) in Bhutan right now. Eventually China's plan is to sever the Indian NorthEast from the rest of India: Check on a map how the Indian NorthEast is surrounded on all sides by China and Chinese allies; add Bhutan and the encirclement is complete.
It's true that India cannot beat China by itself, but as I mentioned in my last post above, we will need an alliance with the US to get the job done (and also to keep Pakistan from joining the party). We can either wait for China to attack us and beat us, or we can start planning for it now.
-
Ramanujan
Appuseth,
I enjoyed reading your posts in this thread. Just some thoughts along similar lines.
China aspires for greater influence in the Indian NE for several reasons in addition to creating trouble for India. Access to shipping lanes via Bay of Bengal and friendly markets in Myanmar and Bangladesh (for cheap goods as well as military wares) will facilitate the development of the southern provinces in China. Traditionally, this part of the world has been under Indian influence and the Chinese designs compete with our aspirations to expand the Indian sphere of influence toward Vietnam. By virtue of its superior economic and political position, China is better placed to grab the initiative and push it forward in typically Chinese manner that shows the patience of a Burmese Python. However, militarily, it would be a big mistake to overestimate the capacity of Chinese to enforce such designs against timely Indian countermeasures. Chinese have yet to establish any significant presence in Bay of Bengal / Indian Ocean and there are significant impediments that will prevent them in doing so for another couple of decades. First, its awfully hard for China to break out of the South China Sea and roam freely under the watchful eye of American and Japanese naval forces. Secondly, despite the calm, confident demeanor, Chinese are well aware of the fact that sustenance of Chinese economy and the survival of its regime depends heavily on ceaseless maritime trade which can be disrupted by a number of navies in the region – including the IN. In reality, although Chinese have established a fearsome reputation in land warfare due to their political ability to absorb massive losses in manpower – their inexperience with naval engagements denies them a similar psychological advantage on the high seas (and in the air?). While 1962 was almost exclusively a land war, its unlikely that India will cooperate in a similar manner in the future. If a war is thrust upon India, its very likely that India will choose an additional theatre of war that is far from the NE and nearer to Malacca straits, through which a good no. of oil tankers pass through carrying the Chinese Flag.
In case of a military conflict with China in the NE, the critical factors will be political in nature. If the Indian leadership remains poised and takes appropriate measures to exploit Chinese weaknesses, the simulations should actually favor adequate frustration of Chinese designs. The challenge for India is to create political and military conditions in the region so that Chinese influence in the region does not reach a point where governments of Bhutan, Bangladesh and Myanmar actually invite China to set up elaborate military presence in the region. This can occur if these countries feel that it is futile to resist Chinese influence (in comparison to Indian) – this could be the case for Bhutan and Myanmar. In case of Bangladesh, the ruling class may perceive an alliance with China to be in its best interests if the greater prosperity in India is denied to them. India cannot afford to look militarily weak vis-a-vis China and it should work on enlisting Japanese and American support to strengthen its position in the Indian NE – particularly with Bangladesh. If the situation deteriorates in a precipitous manner and India and China are locked into a low intensity conflict over Bhutan, its unreasonable to expect the US to start hostilities against the Chinese. The game in the NE has to be decided by astute political moves and military *postures* rather than by war. Its more of Sumo wrestling rather than boxing and it will take more than a decade or two to play out.
I enjoyed reading your posts in this thread. Just some thoughts along similar lines.
China aspires for greater influence in the Indian NE for several reasons in addition to creating trouble for India. Access to shipping lanes via Bay of Bengal and friendly markets in Myanmar and Bangladesh (for cheap goods as well as military wares) will facilitate the development of the southern provinces in China. Traditionally, this part of the world has been under Indian influence and the Chinese designs compete with our aspirations to expand the Indian sphere of influence toward Vietnam. By virtue of its superior economic and political position, China is better placed to grab the initiative and push it forward in typically Chinese manner that shows the patience of a Burmese Python. However, militarily, it would be a big mistake to overestimate the capacity of Chinese to enforce such designs against timely Indian countermeasures. Chinese have yet to establish any significant presence in Bay of Bengal / Indian Ocean and there are significant impediments that will prevent them in doing so for another couple of decades. First, its awfully hard for China to break out of the South China Sea and roam freely under the watchful eye of American and Japanese naval forces. Secondly, despite the calm, confident demeanor, Chinese are well aware of the fact that sustenance of Chinese economy and the survival of its regime depends heavily on ceaseless maritime trade which can be disrupted by a number of navies in the region – including the IN. In reality, although Chinese have established a fearsome reputation in land warfare due to their political ability to absorb massive losses in manpower – their inexperience with naval engagements denies them a similar psychological advantage on the high seas (and in the air?). While 1962 was almost exclusively a land war, its unlikely that India will cooperate in a similar manner in the future. If a war is thrust upon India, its very likely that India will choose an additional theatre of war that is far from the NE and nearer to Malacca straits, through which a good no. of oil tankers pass through carrying the Chinese Flag.
In case of a military conflict with China in the NE, the critical factors will be political in nature. If the Indian leadership remains poised and takes appropriate measures to exploit Chinese weaknesses, the simulations should actually favor adequate frustration of Chinese designs. The challenge for India is to create political and military conditions in the region so that Chinese influence in the region does not reach a point where governments of Bhutan, Bangladesh and Myanmar actually invite China to set up elaborate military presence in the region. This can occur if these countries feel that it is futile to resist Chinese influence (in comparison to Indian) – this could be the case for Bhutan and Myanmar. In case of Bangladesh, the ruling class may perceive an alliance with China to be in its best interests if the greater prosperity in India is denied to them. India cannot afford to look militarily weak vis-a-vis China and it should work on enlisting Japanese and American support to strengthen its position in the Indian NE – particularly with Bangladesh. If the situation deteriorates in a precipitous manner and India and China are locked into a low intensity conflict over Bhutan, its unreasonable to expect the US to start hostilities against the Chinese. The game in the NE has to be decided by astute political moves and military *postures* rather than by war. Its more of Sumo wrestling rather than boxing and it will take more than a decade or two to play out.
-
Raj Malhotra
- BRFite
- Posts: 997
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
I thought many times about alliances as it will be needed to balance china in Asia. But I don’t think USA will send forces to help India. I am thinking, China India fighting helps USA big time. My reasoning – in present day climate, only china is emerging as a USSR caliber threat. Should India and China go to war, lets say a major conflict without involving nukes, inflecting equal damage to each other (me thinks chinks can damage India more then other way around in foreseeable future) they can cut each other by maybe ¼ or 1/3rd. That makes US stronger automatically compare to china.
The latest book out about Mao has only 2 pages on 62 war. But it shows how quickly allies become dispensable and window of opportunity arrive to meet a short term objective for the time being. And lets say US does really whish to send troops, I don’t think they can the way they are spread out today.
I hope BABU loge are reading this thread. What are the odds of that??
The latest book out about Mao has only 2 pages on 62 war. But it shows how quickly allies become dispensable and window of opportunity arrive to meet a short term objective for the time being. And lets say US does really whish to send troops, I don’t think they can the way they are spread out today.
I hope BABU loge are reading this thread. What are the odds of that??
Last edited by R Patel on 30 Dec 2005 01:26, edited 2 times in total.
We need to convince the king of Bhutan to allow Indian troops into Bhutan to stop the Chinese invasion. If he does not agree, then yes, we may have to counter-infiltrate. Better to stop the Chinese in Bhutan than in India.The only thing we can do immediatly is to counter-infilterate
We don't need any American ground troops. What we need is American stealth (F-22's etc.) to establish air superiority against PLAAF's numerical superiority. The US is not using any F-22s in Iraq or Afghanistan right now, so these can be sent.And lets say US does really whish to send troops, I don’t think they can the way they are spread out today.
As far as whether the US air force is willing to help out against China, the recent air exercises in Kalaikunda (note the air base's strategic importance vis-a-vis China) were for a reason.
Anyhow, it doesn't hurt to ask the US for help in checking Chinese imperialism.
India to take up with China incursions into Bhutan
India will take up with China the reported matter of Chinese border incursion into Bhutan at the next meeting of the Special Representatives of India and China to be held in January, a senior Home Ministry official said today.
Special Representatives of India and China on resolving the border dispute are scheduled to meet in January.
''Our Special Representatives are meeting in January. We will discuss it there,'' the official told UNI.
The sixth round of talks between Special Representatives of two countries was held in Beijing from September 26-28 and the next round will be held in January.
Reports from Bhutan capital Thimpu said earlier this week that Chinese soldiers were building roads and bridges deep inside Bhutan's territory, setting off alarms in both Thimphu and New Delhi. Bhutan took up the matter with the Union Home Ministry.
The reports said that on November 13, more than 200 Chinese soldiers entered Bhutan's northern districts, including Paro, and marched 20 km inland, claiming that they had been forced by melting glaciers and heavy snowfall in Tibet to breach the border.
''India and Bhutan enjoy a special relationship. The developments are a matter of serious concern,'' the official added.
Ramanujan wrote:
Feb 2000, reports that China has constructed a road stretching almost 5 kilometers into Indian territory
China was building a reinforced road (for its tanks) 5 km into Arunachal Pradesh as far back as 2000. All our govt can do is complain about it. China reassures that it's no big deal and continues with the work. This is what has been happening ON INDIAN TERRITORY, forget Bhutan. What military posturing is going to stop this? We have to be aggressive in defending our borders; that is the only solution. Our govt. has been afraid of China and so does not even attempt to stop the Chinese from builiding on Indian territory.
Ramanujan, things are not limited to military posturing. Check the bottom of the following page:The game in the NE has to be decided by astute political moves and military *postures* rather than by war. Its more of Sumo wrestling rather than boxing and it will take more than a decade or two to play out.
Feb 2000, reports that China has constructed a road stretching almost 5 kilometers into Indian territory
China was building a reinforced road (for its tanks) 5 km into Arunachal Pradesh as far back as 2000. All our govt can do is complain about it. China reassures that it's no big deal and continues with the work. This is what has been happening ON INDIAN TERRITORY, forget Bhutan. What military posturing is going to stop this? We have to be aggressive in defending our borders; that is the only solution. Our govt. has been afraid of China and so does not even attempt to stop the Chinese from builiding on Indian territory.
-
Raj Malhotra
- BRFite
- Posts: 997
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
Actually we are strengthening our military, we plan to use ADS, Gorky, MRCA, Tungushka, Hawk, Talwar & Scorps lead by Arjun to attack beijing in 3125 AD
appuseth wrote:Ramanujan wrote:Ramanujan, things are not limited to military posturing. Check the bottom of the following page:The game in the NE has to be decided by astute political moves and military *postures* rather than by war. Its more of Sumo wrestling rather than boxing and it will take more than a decade or two to play out.
Feb 2000, reports that China has constructed a road stretching almost 5 kilometers into Indian territory
China was building a reinforced road (for its tanks) 5 km into Arunachal Pradesh as far back as 2000. All our govt can do is complain about it. China reassures that it's no big deal and continues with the work. This is what has been happening ON INDIAN TERRITORY, forget Bhutan. What military posturing is going to stop this? We have to be aggressive in defending our borders; that is the only solution. Our govt. has been afraid of China and so does not even attempt to stop the Chinese from builiding on Indian territory.
It may not be correct to apply the western concept of strategy and warfighting to the Chinese.
Their concept of Shi requires to be understood.
There is no Western equivalent to the concept of “shi.” It is suppposed to
be "the alignment of forces", "the propensity of things" or the "potential born of disposition", that only a skilled strategist can exploit to ensure victory over a superior force.
There are four aspects of shi.
1. The idea of qi and zheng. Zheng is the regular military way of doing things. This is known to the enemy. Qi is the important aspect where the commander engages tehe enemy in "extraordinary" ways. The variables and the variations are inexhaustible.
2. Creating an overwhelming force with irresistible unleashing
power like the strike of a hawk on its prey.
3. Developing a favorable situation with great potential to achieve the political objectives (it must be remembered that the Chinese believe that the use of force is achieving by "other means" diplomatic goals).
4. Taking and maintaining the initiative in all fields.
In our way of military thinking it is like a games of chess (power-based fi ght), poker (bluffing and risk-taking) and boxing (force on force).
In the Chinese way, the Chinese place heavy emphasis on strategy and stratagems and a dialectic view on the way to fight.
In the Art of War, Sun Tzu treats warfare, from its preparation to execution and termination as first and foremost a contest of wisdom. Use of force is secondary.
The Art of War is full of observations about the dialectic nature of strategic concepts such as weak vs. strong, more vs. few, defense vs. offense, regular vs. extraordinary (qi and zheng), direct vs. indirect, division vs. unity, laboring vs. resting, advance vs. retreat, far vs. near, and the relativity and mutual transformation of these strategic situations. Sun Tzu’s teaching is to exploit the opposite of the enemy’s strategy and action.
"Therefore, when capable, feign incapacity; when active, inactivity. When near, make it appear that you are far away; when far away, that you are near. Offer the enemy a bait to lure him; feign disorder and strike
him. When he concentrates, prepare against him; where he is strong,
avoid him. Anger his general and confuse him. Pretend inferiority and
encourage his arrogance. Keep him under stress and wear him down.
When he is united, divide him. Attack when he is unprepared; sally out
when he does not expect you".
And so on and so forth.
Therefore, maybe it is time to rethink?
Their concept of Shi requires to be understood.
There is no Western equivalent to the concept of “shi.” It is suppposed to
be "the alignment of forces", "the propensity of things" or the "potential born of disposition", that only a skilled strategist can exploit to ensure victory over a superior force.
There are four aspects of shi.
1. The idea of qi and zheng. Zheng is the regular military way of doing things. This is known to the enemy. Qi is the important aspect where the commander engages tehe enemy in "extraordinary" ways. The variables and the variations are inexhaustible.
2. Creating an overwhelming force with irresistible unleashing
power like the strike of a hawk on its prey.
3. Developing a favorable situation with great potential to achieve the political objectives (it must be remembered that the Chinese believe that the use of force is achieving by "other means" diplomatic goals).
4. Taking and maintaining the initiative in all fields.
In our way of military thinking it is like a games of chess (power-based fi ght), poker (bluffing and risk-taking) and boxing (force on force).
In the Chinese way, the Chinese place heavy emphasis on strategy and stratagems and a dialectic view on the way to fight.
In the Art of War, Sun Tzu treats warfare, from its preparation to execution and termination as first and foremost a contest of wisdom. Use of force is secondary.
The Art of War is full of observations about the dialectic nature of strategic concepts such as weak vs. strong, more vs. few, defense vs. offense, regular vs. extraordinary (qi and zheng), direct vs. indirect, division vs. unity, laboring vs. resting, advance vs. retreat, far vs. near, and the relativity and mutual transformation of these strategic situations. Sun Tzu’s teaching is to exploit the opposite of the enemy’s strategy and action.
"Therefore, when capable, feign incapacity; when active, inactivity. When near, make it appear that you are far away; when far away, that you are near. Offer the enemy a bait to lure him; feign disorder and strike
him. When he concentrates, prepare against him; where he is strong,
avoid him. Anger his general and confuse him. Pretend inferiority and
encourage his arrogance. Keep him under stress and wear him down.
When he is united, divide him. Attack when he is unprepared; sally out
when he does not expect you".
And so on and so forth.
Therefore, maybe it is time to rethink?
-
Raj Malhotra
- BRFite
- Posts: 997
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
Frankly I am more of a simplicton. My understanding is that China believes that there generally there is no complete war and no full peace but there is pepetual state of conflict of some degree.
Indians always want to resolve all issues and live happily ever after. I think we should learn that world only understands force or intention to use some.
India should not go to war with Lizard but neither should expect peace. The only coherent way to make the cost of infilteration higher for China is to lend bases to USA, clearly telling them that it is due to their provocation of incursion
Also we should provide assets to CIA to run operations in Tibet etc through Nepal, taking benefit of turmoil created there due to China, clearly telling them that it is again due to their misdeeds in Nepal and provocation of using Nangadesh & Burma for assisting terrorist organisations in NE
This will make China pause and think again. We will also get a bargain space. It is very important to react tangentially to threats, otherwise enemy will always play to its strenght and your dis-advantage.
Indians always want to resolve all issues and live happily ever after. I think we should learn that world only understands force or intention to use some.
India should not go to war with Lizard but neither should expect peace. The only coherent way to make the cost of infilteration higher for China is to lend bases to USA, clearly telling them that it is due to their provocation of incursion
Also we should provide assets to CIA to run operations in Tibet etc through Nepal, taking benefit of turmoil created there due to China, clearly telling them that it is again due to their misdeeds in Nepal and provocation of using Nangadesh & Burma for assisting terrorist organisations in NE
This will make China pause and think again. We will also get a bargain space. It is very important to react tangentially to threats, otherwise enemy will always play to its strenght and your dis-advantage.
There has been repeated talk of lending bases to the US, asking for CIA help etc. in defending Indian interests against China in our neighbourhood.
What message will it send to the smaller neighbours? That India is not capable of resisting Chinese influence in our own neighbourhood on our own. Then what is the need for these smaller countries like Nepal or Bhutan to even consider India's interests vis-a-vis China? Why wouldn't they strike a bargain directly with the US to ensure a balance between China's and the U.S.' interests, ignoring India's?
This is India's neighbourhood. We, not the US, need to protect it.
-----------------
Ray sahab,
That is a very interesting report on China's statecraft. It ties in with the view that China's strategy relies on presenting fait accompli whenever possible. It does that by taking a 1000 minute steps, diverting attention elsewhere, until the adequate response to those steps would have to be a giant leap for the adversary, which due to the suddenness and large distance to be covered, is usually avoided. The correct and timely response would have been to take a 1000 minute steps ourselves, thereby frustrating their strategy at every step, rather than waiting for the final denouement. I believe that our countersteps should be directed at the playground (i.e. the governments of the third countries) rather than at the player (i.e. China). The devil, of course, is in the details.
Btw, what is your opinion of the reports on Chinese road building in AP and Bhutan?
What message will it send to the smaller neighbours? That India is not capable of resisting Chinese influence in our own neighbourhood on our own. Then what is the need for these smaller countries like Nepal or Bhutan to even consider India's interests vis-a-vis China? Why wouldn't they strike a bargain directly with the US to ensure a balance between China's and the U.S.' interests, ignoring India's?
This is India's neighbourhood. We, not the US, need to protect it.
-----------------
Ray sahab,
That is a very interesting report on China's statecraft. It ties in with the view that China's strategy relies on presenting fait accompli whenever possible. It does that by taking a 1000 minute steps, diverting attention elsewhere, until the adequate response to those steps would have to be a giant leap for the adversary, which due to the suddenness and large distance to be covered, is usually avoided. The correct and timely response would have been to take a 1000 minute steps ourselves, thereby frustrating their strategy at every step, rather than waiting for the final denouement. I believe that our countersteps should be directed at the playground (i.e. the governments of the third countries) rather than at the player (i.e. China). The devil, of course, is in the details.
Btw, what is your opinion of the reports on Chinese road building in AP and Bhutan?
What do you expect from a nation with its tail between her legs. Our politicians namely Harkishen Singh Surjeet once said, "China is such a friendly country, we should have assuage their concerns". Weak PM physically, mentally--Some of the nationalists held hostage by the likes of Yadavs, Singh's, etc yield in losing territory to chinese, ass whopping from a lone gunman that brought down the entire city of Bangalore to its knees, one scientists dead. What was the response from Mera Bharat Mahan, put his tail between legs and complain to dragon, lodge protest to the owner of rabid pit bull. One member here said, now the choice is either we keep getting our security forces, innocent civilians killed by the dozen or take the fight to enemy. I am sure this nation has decided to take the former. As long as the sons and daughters of these scum bags politicians are protected behind the thick ring of security apparatus they don't give a damn about everyday citizen. Terrorists know that fully well, they have good planners who understand this nation to its core. They tested the resolve of this nation by attacking Parliament and enitre Indian military was asked to fight, these terrorists asked their mentors who in turn ask their General in Chief Colon Pow-well who pressured the weak PM(who was busy eating spicy food and enjoying his scotch every evening) to back off, so he obliged.appuseth wrote:Ramanujan wrote:Ramanujan, things are not limited to military posturing. Check the bottom of the following page:The game in the NE has to be decided by astute political moves and military *postures* rather than by war. Its more of Sumo wrestling rather than boxing and it will take more than a decade or two to play out.
Feb 2000, reports that China has constructed a road stretching almost 5 kilometers into Indian territory
China was building a reinforced road (for its tanks) 5 km into Arunachal Pradesh as far back as 2000. All our govt can do is complain about it. China reassures that it's no big deal and continues with the work. This is what has been happening ON INDIAN TERRITORY, forget Bhutan. What military posturing is going to stop this? We have to be aggressive in defending our borders; that is the only solution. Our govt. has been afraid of China and so does not even attempt to stop the Chinese from builiding on Indian territory.
One of the reason for these weak suck leaders is none of them is a well versed in real politik. After Indira Gandhi here is the list of PM's we had.
1. Morarji Desai (too busy drinking his own urine)
2. Charan Singh (Lived in a pipe dream of Kissan utopia)
3. Rajiv Gandhi (Didn't know from his head to his Arse)
4. VP Singh (imposed his cancer on the nation--Reservations)
5. Chandershekhar (Capture prime land in the name of public welfare in Bhondsi)
6. PV Rao (Couldn't make decisions unless pressured)
7. IK Gujral (Pakjabi in Indian Clothing)
8. AB Vajpayee (Too Busy drinking scotch, eating spicy food)
9. ManMohan Singh (Can't thank British Raj enough. Guess still yearning for Slavery)
One thing common among them; they were all poets who couldn't make honest living writing poetry so they decided to join politics and use their oratorial skills to manipulate, confuse the people.
Lastly, Bhagwan ki Kirpa sey yeah desh chal raha hai along with few mortals whose stead fast dedication is acknowledged by the God of India.
-
Raj Malhotra
- BRFite
- Posts: 997
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
Not doing anything will sure impress the neighbours. Well though out of policy even with US will not undermine Indian influence.Anoop wrote:There has been repeated talk of lending bases to the US, asking for CIA help etc. in defending Indian interests against China in our neighbourhood.
What message will it send to the smaller neighbours? That India is not capable of resisting Chinese influence in our own neighbourhood on our own. Then what is the need for these smaller countries like Nepal or Bhutan to even consider India's interests vis-a-vis China? Why wouldn't they strike a bargain directly with the US to ensure a balance between China's and the U.S.' interests, ignoring India's?
This is India's neighbourhood. We, not the US, need to protect it.
-----------------
You don't say!Raj Malhotra wrote:Not doing anything will sure impress the neighbours.
. On the other hand, maybe they will be impressed by India adopting the Chinese "inscrutability" 
[quote='Raj Malhotra"]Well though out of policy even with US will not undermine Indian influence.[/quote]
Which begs the question what this "well thought out policy" will be.