Bharat Rakshak

Pointing out these short-comings and accepting them is the first step to building a robust defense force. Accepting the short-falls are not dhoti-shivering. Why this insecurity in jumping at every short-comings pointed out and painting it as dhoti-shivering?

All of us know that neither India is a push-over nor is China.

But, raise the bar of defense capabilities so high that China will not even be able to wage a photo-shop psywar - that is where we should get to.

Every short-coming and lacunae has to be identified, accepted and corrected to make that happen.

Why these "shortcoming" have to be highlighted in a thread about "Chinese Military" ?? Aren't their enough threads to discuss Indian military shortcomings ??

Why always shortcomings are discussed, does discussing Indian military strengths causes epileptic fits to the "shortcoming highlighting group" ???

If India military is so short of strength why hasn't China attacked us and taken the land that they claim is theirs ???

Shiv

While I agree there should be no dhoti-shivering, there has to be a pragmatic debate about India's short-comings based on 'perceived' MIC capability. And in the case of war, we should err on the side of caution. Chinese may be producing junk - but unless there is a war there is no way of knowing. And we better not know that it is not junk - in a war!

Well they do say that strong enemies is what keeps a nation strong. Dhoti Shivering has to stop but vigilance should not be let down.

Would you kindly care to read my post completely and understand the content before you comment? Thanks.

Remember - we are discussing this vis-a-vis Chinese strengths - hence an appropriate forum?

If you think all is well with Indian defense versus Chinese, we might as well go home and sleep.

Remember, it is never so and these are not highlighted/discussed versus defense capabilities of Bhutan, SriLanka, Nepal or Bangladesh. Care to think why we bring up Chinese and compare India?

Again, would you care to read my post? "The very fact that India has not been attacked is a testimony." before you did. Are you criticizing me or repeating me? I am confused.

I believe it is an appropriate thread to discuss Indian capabilities versus Chinese - when a Chinese capability is identified/recognized. If you think all is well and that there is lasting peace because India has the greatest military in the world, we might just pack up this thread and go to sleep.

I believe there is always room for improvements, bettering defenses (and developing offences) - knowing your threats. Knowing threats and preparing for them is not dhoti-shivering - it is a reflection of the confidence and furthering preparedness to face any eventuality.

Even Unkil and Russkies know China is a threat (varied assessments). Is it dhoti-shivering? They recognize it to take appropriate counter-measures/posture change.

It is an ostrich mentality to hide heads under ground and think that all is well in the world.

Again, I am not here to win brownie points in a debate (lot of others are good at that) -

it is just that India needs to recognize threats, identify gaps and close them.

I hope you do not tell me that India has a perfect defense organization against any threat, for now and future - no gaps at all!

I had some thoughts sparked off by a discussion ongoing in another thread and thought it might be best to post them here.

I have assumed for many years, rightly or wrongly, that the lack of development of roads right up to the Chinese border in India is based on the idea that an invading Chinese force cannot use the roads to come swarming into the plains. If they get into the border areas, the terrain will halt them and buy time.

Militarily this sounds like a valid tactic, and I have heard military people tell me this. The counter argument is that lack of border infrastructure contributes to under development on the Indian side of the border. But that is a natural consequence of a defensive posture of a nation not confident of opposing a powerful China.

All seemed OK until the last decade or so when the Chinese have started building roads and railways right up to the border with India. In the media I have heard only paranoia and fear. And on BRF also I have heard the cry that the Chinese can now move heavy equipment right up to the border and that we will be overwhelmed because the Chinese can move much war materiel up to the border for an invasion, and India does not have the infrastructure to move such overwhelming forces.

But there are two sides to the story which makes us (Indians) face a dilemma

1. Yes the Chinese can mount a massive invasion, but they will get bottled up by the lack of roads and poor terrain on the Indian side and can be held at bay and driven out at leisure. We too can use Chinese roads to occupy parts of Chinese held territory in areas where we may have an upper hand while they can't do that to us

2. China is building roads right up to the border not for war materiel, but for development. The Chinese understand that if Indian forces make a breakthrough into China those same Chinese roads can be used by Indian forces to grab Chinese held territory, but Chin is not intending to start a war and its intentions are peaceful. This is what the Chinese are saying.

The dilemma we face is as follows:

1. If the Chinese intend to attack us using their superior border infrastructure we are better off using our underdeveloped terrain to stop their advance and we might be able to use their roads and grab their territory

2. If the Chinese intent is peaceful, then we should really stop worrying about war and build up our infrastructure up to the border for the purpose of development

Now consider this. Suppose the Chinese are peaceful today and wait patiently till we build our border roads and then mount an overwhelming attack. Will we be able to hold back an overwhelming attack against a vastly superior China at all points on our newly developed border? If the Chinese come in and grab a huge chunk of China are we likely to regret the fact that they used our roads, tunnels and bridges to grab our land?

What in your view is the way forward?

Shiv, the poor infrastructure is an impediment for all purposes. eg defense, offense, civilians etc. ie, it helps no one. Paying such a price, so that a hypothetical Chinese invasion will be delayed as a result of poor infrastructure is foolish.

If defensive positions are built up in peacetime in the absence of good roads up to the border, an enemy will not be able to use your roads to attack your interior even if he is able to overwhelm your defending forces.

But if war were to break out then we have panic and insecurity as the settled people up to the border have to start a mass exodus clogging up roads. Then those same roads can serve as inroads for the Chinese so a short border war can leave us smaller by a few hundreds or thousands of square km.

I am not quite content with this assumption saab.
Lets say a Chinese offensive starts using our roads to move deeper into our territory, cant we sap/mine every mile of it making it a highway to hell? Won't our artillery, Aircraft or LACMs find it easier to ambush/attack enemy advancing on a highway in a line i.e a predictable way?

"If we fail to handle this issue well, it could prove fatal to the party, and even cause the collapse of the party and the fall of the state. We must thus make unremitting efforts to combat corruption."

1. Yes the Chinese can mount a massive invasion, but they will get bottled up by the lack of roads and poor terrain on the Indian side and can be held at bay and driven out at leisure. We too can use Chinese roads to occupy parts of Chinese held territory in areas where we may have an upper hand while they can't do that to us
2. China is building roads right up to the border not for war materiel, but for development. The Chinese understand that if Indian forces make a breakthrough into China those same Chinese roads can be used by Indian forces to grab Chinese held territory, but Chin is not intending to start a war and its intentions are peaceful. This is what the Chinese are saying.
The dilemma we face is as follows:
1. If the Chinese intend to attack us using their superior border infrastructure we are better off using our underdeveloped terrain to stop their advance and we might be able to use their roads and grab their territory
2. If the Chinese intent is peaceful, then we should really stop worrying about war and build up our infrastructure up to the border for the purpose of development
Now consider this. Suppose the Chinese are peaceful today and wait patiently till we build our border roads and then mount an overwhelming attack. Will we be able to hold back an overwhelming attack against a vastly superior China at all points on our newly developed border? If the Chinese come in and grab a huge chunk of China are we likely to regret the fact that they used our roads, tunnels and bridges to grab our land?
What in your view is the way forward?

Will we be able to hold back an overwhelming attack against a vastly superior China at all points on our newly developed border?

China today said it will speed up modernisation of military and build itself into a "maritime power", an announcement which may cause anxiety in India and some other neighbours of the Communist giant.

Invoking Chinese Communist Party leader Mao Zedong's military strategic theories, which were stated to be one of the successes of Chinese revolution, President Hu Jintao told the once-in-a-decade leadership Party Congress here that China will speed up modernisation of its 2.3 million-strong People's Liberation Army (PLA), the world's largest standing army.

"To modernise the national defence and the armed forces we must follow Mao Zedong's military thinking, (his successor) Deng Xiaoping's thinking in enhancing military capabilities," Hu, who will be stepping down as President and General Secretary of the ruling CPC soon, told the party conference.

He said China should implement the military strategy of active defence, expand and intensify military preparedness, and enhance the capability to accomplish a wide range of military tasks, the most important of which is to win local war in an information age.

Hu also called for more efforts to build China into a maritime power.

"We should enhance our capacity for exploiting marine resources, resolutely safeguard China's maritime rights and interests, and build China into a maritime power," he said.

Besides increasing its defence budget to USD 100 billion this year, China has acquired its first aircraft carrier. It also launched two versions of stealth bombers, becoming the second country to do so after the US.

Its officials also claimed to have developed a whole range of missiles, including a new ICBM which could hit targets 14000 km away, besides a long range carrier killer missile.

The rapid modernisation of Chinese military is taking place in the midst of the US policy of focusing on Asia Pacific by deploying large assets in the region where China is locked in maritime disputes with a host neighbours, including Japan.

In his report to Party Congress, Hu also said China will strive to basically complete military mechanisation and make major progress in full military IT application by 2020.

"We should unswervingly pursue full IT application as the goal in achieving military modernisation and step up this effort," he said at the meet attended by over 2,200 delegates.

China should strengthen the development of new-and- high-technology weapons and equipment, speed up the complete development of modern logistics, train a new type of high-caliber military personnel in large numbers, intensively carry out military training under computerised conditions, and enhance integrated combat capability based on extensive IT application, Hu said.

He said China should implement the military strategy of active defence for the new period, and enhance military strategic guidance as the times so require.

"We should attach great importance to maritime, space and cyberspace security. We should make active planning for the use of military forces in peacetime, expand and intensify military preparedness, and enhance the capability to accomplish a wide range of military tasks, the most important of which is to win local war in an information age," he said.

He also said the Communist Party should retain total control over the Chinese armed forces.

"We must unwaveringly adhere to the principle of the Party's absolute leadership over the armed forces and continue to educate them in the system of theories of socialism with Chinese characteristics," he said.

Hu emphasised that China pursues a national defence policy that is defensive in nature. "Our endeavours to strengthen national defence aim to safeguard China's sovereignty, security and territorial integrity and ensure its peaceful development."

Just a question - how did you arrive at this assessment?

How many divisions of the IA are committed for the defense of Bhutan? Is it 1 or 2?

The data is there in the sentence itself. China is vastly superior to India on every count.

You see, if you want to get into an argument with me on that point I will wrestle you to the ground and prove to you that China is militarily superior to India on every count and therefore India cannot possibly win any conflict with China. In doing that I will merely be echoing the "discussion" we have had on this thread where it has been impossible for anyone to say that there may be some situations where India has an advantage over China.

Now if you disagree that China is superior to India in all respects and in all areas, please post a few points to say why you think so. At last it would make an entertaining change from the monotony of proof of overwhelming Chinese superiority.

I agree with you, Shiv. That is what I said before as well - looks like this forum is too intolerant to accept anyone else's comment but of a few - I just referred to them as India's shortcomings/gaps, if you will. You put it as China is "vastly superior to India on every count" - so admittedly there are gaps and short-comings on the Indian side vis-a-vis China?

I am disappointed at the 'my way or the highway' kind of arguments here - it just does not allow fresh ideas. It only leads to sycophancy as we see on other fronts in India. If some say it, it becomes "Dhoti-Shiver" and downright objectionable, but when you say it, it is infinite wisdom. Why are we intolerant towards others' views here on this forum? Looks like brow-beating and one-up manship is considered fashionable than an open and honest discussion. I admit I am not a know all - well, for that matter, no one here is either. I will not post on this anymore here.

Apologies due if it is OT.

Yes, Chinese are cagey. To their advantage, they only release pictures of a 'F-35' copy. We do not know if it flies, if it does, for how long/far. Unfortunately, we only get to see their projected positives there, if any, in the form of pictures, and deliberately 'leaked' information. While our DDM highlights failed IJT efforts in the same breath!

Indian objective should be ..

we should just go ahead and build infrastructure on our side of the border anyway. That in itself will send a message to the Chinese of our confidence and capability to mount an offensive. At the least, we can take care of our citizens in peace time and keep them happy - Armstrong Pame's need not struggle to build roads for their welfare

For example if you find that India has not developed roads and infrastructure in a particular area should we conclude
a. That Indians are worthless incompetent bums
b. That the Indian military sees a situation where defence would require the area to remain without roads for now

You might want to add a third option, especially for some sectors in the NE:

c. That the roads and infrastructure cannot be developed except at murderous cost

Since we are neither Indian defence planners nor Chinese military planners, we can assess the information we have in a different way. Making our recommendations assumes that we know everything that we do not. We don't even know what we don't know.

For example if you find that India has not developed roads and infrastructure in a particular area should we conclude
a. That Indians are worthless incompetent bums
b. That the Indian military sees a situation where defence would require the area to remain without roads for now

If you find, in another area, that India has developed infrastructure should we conclude
a. That India sees itself in a strong position here and has no problem with such development
b. India is simply posturing and hoping that the Chinese will simply be scared, seeing the development
c. India does not care about what China might do.

How are we to say which one or more of these possibilities is the right one in the absence of information?

b. That the Indian military sees a situation where defence would require the area to remain without roads for now

a. That India sees itself in a strong position here and has no problem with such development

A lot of emphasis is being given to speedy construction of quality roads along the borders with China and Pakistan, the Rajya Sabha was informed on Wednesday.

Of the 61 roads on borders with China, work on 16 roads spanning 58 km has been completed by the Border Roads Organisation while work was in progress on 43 other roads, Minister of State for Defence M M Pallam Raju said during Question Hour.

"We are taking all measures to speed up construction of roads," he said, pointing that the terrain and weather on Indian side was much more difficult than those on the Chinese side which has seen several roads being constructed during recent times.

In a written reply to the House, Defence Minister A K Antony said, "Government has identified strategically important border roads for development along the India-China border. As per the Long Term Perspective Plan, other roads have also been identified for development there."
He said the government is aware of the need for infrastructure development in areas along India-China border and, "steps as required have been initiated to undertake infrastructure development in consonance without threat perception."

On whether government proposes to increase the strength of force deployed there, Antony said, "Military capacity enhancement and modernisation of armed force is a dynamic process which takes into account the cumulative security challenges envisaged by the nation."

The Chinese J-20 FGFA, by most expert opinion, is dead in water – without an engine, AESA radar, technologies that the Chinese lack.

China is making an attempt to catch up with world leaders and develop hi-tech vehicles in the absence of crucial military know-how and technology, like engines for ultrasonic cruise flights and active phased array antennas.
“As of now, it is too early to say that China is capable of creating a fifth-generation jet from start to finish,” told RT Vasily Kashin from the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies....
As of now, the J-20 flies with two Russian AL-31F jet engines it borrowed from the Russian Su-27 fighter jet that entered Chinese service in the mid-1980s.
China also tried to put engines of their own on a second test J-20 vehicle, but the copycat of the Soviet engine AL-31F made by China is not in the same league as the Russian analogue for reliability and durability....

So where has all those money gone that they put in so called research and development to develop a world class engine

As for military affairs, Hu promised that China would complete military mechanization and "full IT application" in its armed forces by 2020. He described the military's most important task as its ability "to win local wars in an information age".

Comment: This statement means that China's leaders do not envision their armed forces as capable of winning a general war with the United States or a coalition of its neighbors. This self-portrait might be deceptive, but it apparently is the genuine and current formula for force development. It implies that cyber warfare is intrinsic to winning.

There is only one sure way of converting money into an engine and that is to buy from established players.

Anything else remains an uncertain exercise fraught with hurdles.

The problem is that if you spend X time developing say a particular blade alloy and run it. Suppose it runs 10 hours and fails. You scrap it and try a new formula. The new formula runs 50 hours. You think you have hit the jackpot and then at 52 hours it fails. Trial 3 gets a blade that fails. Trial 4 gets an alloy that lasts 100 hours and you say "heck we Chinese are bold. Put it in a plane and fly it". Fine it flies but conks out at 250 hours or at high RPM. Then what?

Then you look at the calendar and find that 5-10 years have gone and several million spent. Apply the same issues to several other components. You get an engine that looks like its great but you find that the damn thing chokes up and stops if the plane tries to do a loop. Then what?

Technology is knowing what will fail. Knowing what you must not do and which direction you need to head. The existing engine manufacturers have done all that 50 years ago. Try throwing money at a calendar. It won't move you back to last year. The Chinese will never ever talk about failures because they are a people who put very great emphasis on not losing face. And in communist China a functionary who brings shame by admitting a mistake may have his balls converted to noodle fry.