China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Post Reply
vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2394
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by vivek_ahuja »

Here's an idea of how the terrain looked on the Chinese side near DBO...

Image

-Vivek
VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by VinodTK »

Reading China’s White Paper
:
:
Let's begin with the omissions. Notably, American defence expert James Acton has pointed out that the WP lacks a specific reference to China's policy of "no first use" of nuclear weapons, a promise that China would only use nuclear weapons if others used them against China first, and heretofore considered a central element of China's nuclear strategy. The significance of this omission is still being debated among experts, with some saying it might indicate a major change to Chinese nuclear doctrine, and others saying nothing has changed. The fact that there is now some ambiguity about this is itself damaging and potentially destabilising, and recent news suggests China has reinforced its no-first-use stance in Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty negotiations in Geneva. It is to be hoped that a clarifying statement will come from a more senior source within the Chinese leadership also.
:
:
:
member_23455
BRFite
Posts: 598
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by member_23455 »

Does the US have a no first use policy? Will China, the country that bought the Varyag, through a front company, to use as a floating casino, swear on the little red book and expect the world to believe its no first use policy, if one exists or not.

Ask the average Pakistani if they believe our NFU commitment.
Last edited by member_23455 on 06 May 2013 09:22, edited 1 time in total.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by SaiK »

^^ pic
http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/dyna ... 49065g.jpg

maximize and read:
it does not read that they are asking us to go back, instead we are asking them to go back.. i read at the end like "chinese go back".

?
prashanth
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 04 Sep 2007 16:50
Location: Barad- dyr

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by prashanth »

'You've crossed the border, please go back'
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by SaiK »

ok.. jee, so we crossed the border!
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by rohitvats »

From Orbat.Com. Part 1

A good summary of the forces on ground (although, there are some minor factual errors).

· For those who like to know these things, the entire East Ladakh Line of Actual Control with China is under 3 Infantry Division at Leh. The division was hastily raised in 1962, and took over two brigades. One brigade, 114, was raised in 1959 when the East Ladakh crisis first erupted, with two battalions of locally raised troops, the Jammu & Kashmir Militia. Later, two regular army battalions were inducted. 70 Brigade arrived as a reinforcement after the war began. Later, 163 Brigade was pulled from the Pakistan border and given to 3 Division as division reserve. Still later, 121 (Independent ) Infantry Brigade was raised at Kargil, and put under the division’s command. At some point after 1963, the East Ladakh LAC was bifurcated between 22 Sector north of the Changchemo River, with 114 Brigade at Chushul and 70 Brigade at the southern end of the line at Demchok. 22 Sector has at least two subsectors, with Sub Sector North being responsible for DBO possibly down to the Galwan River.

· Strictly speaking, our intrepid South Asia correspondent Mandeep Bajwa should be telling you all this, as he knows much more about the independent Indian Army’s history that the Editor. The above is to Editor’s best recollection, but likely he’s made errors as he was always more concerned with orbats than history. Still is. But Mandeep is mad at Editor for some reason (he won’t explain why) and refuses to answer emails and chat requests. Please twitter him @MandeepBajwa and tell him to get with the program.


· Okay. In 1971 163 Brigade was withdrawn to Foxtrot Sector in the Punjab for the forthcoming Pakistan War, and it was not replaced because it was appraised there was no longer a China threat. In 1984, 102 (Independent) Brigade was raised at Thoise for the Siachin sector facing Pakistan, and 121 Brigade went under the newly raised 28 Division at Nimu. 102 Brigade was put under 3 Division.

· In 1999, on account of the Kargil War, 70 Brigade went to 8 Division, a formation brought in for the Kashmir Counter Insurgency from Eastern Command and stationed in Kashmir. 28 Division, minus 121 Brigade, went to Kupwara in the Kashmir Valley for the CI. So when the Kargil thing blew up, for operational reasons it was decided not to shift 28 Division back; instead 8 Division took over. Editor believes that 114 Brigade was also withdrawn for a time, leaving the China front denuded of regular troops. Anyway, 114 Brigade came back, and now, 14 years after leaving Demchok, 70 Brigade has come up. So you can see how seriously India was taking Chinese incursions. I.e., not at all seriously.

· To show how urgently India reacted to the threats in the decade 2001-2010, after opening DBO airfield not a single An-32 flight took place. Sub Sector North continued to be protected by outposts of the Indo Tibet Border Police, a high-altitude mountain warfare force raised after 1962 for patrolling the China border with Ladakh, Himachal, and Utter Pradesh. After the 1962 War, a new locally recruited force was raised, the Ladakh Scouts. These used to operate in companies, but after their steller performance in 1999 Kargil, they were given the status of a regular regiment and have, Editor thinks, six battalions. Sub Sector North is protected by 5 Ladakh Scouts, but till the other day this was not forward deployed. The rest of 22 Sector consists, as far as we know, by an infantry battalion, a Ladakh Scouts battalion, and a heavy mortar battery (12 x 120mm mortars), now for some peculiar reason called a heavy mortar regiment.

· After the Operation Trident fuss in 1986-87, India stationed a tank regiment and a mechanized battalion at Leh, under 3 Division; these became part of Corps troops when XIV Corps (Leh) was raised after the Kargil War. After the 2000s Chinese intrusions, India decided to sanction an armored brigade for Ladakh, which is now being raised, slowly. A T-90 tank regiment has gone to Leh and presumably it, plus the mechanized battalion, will form the nucleus of the new independent armored brigade, which will be under HQ XIV Corps as far as we know. India also okayed the raising of an infantry independent brigade group for the middle part of the Ladakh LAC with China. Something is happening, but we don’t know what since Mandeep is unavailable. Our assumption is that this will be based around Changchemo.


India is probably slowly building up to a new division HQ for North Ladakh, leaving 3 Division for South Ladakh. With these new raisings you cannot have a single division HQ controlling the entire 440-km or so Ladakh frontier. Is a third brigade being provided to bring 3 Division to strength? Don’t know – Mandeep will know, but he may not be free to speak, as the information is not released to the public. Sub Sector North also needs to become a separate sector, and the rest of 22 Sector put under a new brigade HQ with a third battalion added. Then 102 Brigade, DBO subsector, the new brigade in lieu of 22 Sector, and the new independent brigade could become part of a new division. But what the Indian Army needs and the bureaucrats agree to are two different things.
Last edited by rohitvats on 06 May 2013 10:03, edited 1 time in total.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by rohitvats »

From Orbat.Com - Part 2
· Last Friday we detailed Indian deployments in Ladakh, current and planned. On China’s side the situation is quite simple. The Lanzhou Military Region has two army corps, one of which has been reduced to three independent brigades. The Xinjiang Military District has an unusually large number of independent formations, giving the MR 1 armored, 3 motorized or mechanized, and 1 infantry division, plus seven infantry, mechanized or motorized, and armored brigades.

· There is no particular reason why today these seven division equivalents cannot be deployed against India in Ladakh, Himachal Pradesh, and Uttarakhand. Personally, we have doubts about the efficiency of these troops, who have spent decades in (relatively) comfortable garrisons, have no experience in mountain warfare, and except a few senior generals have never heard a shot fired in battle. But none of this matters, because China does not intend to fight India in the high mountains as in 1962.

· Primarily it counts on Indian political cowardice to forestall any aggressive action on India’s part. But should that fail, the Chinese plan to let India comes down from their mountains to the plains of the plateau, and crush them there using light and medium armor. Not a bad strategy given they lose very little if they lose their high altitude outposts, because their mountain positions are shallow.

· To reiterate, in Ladakh we had postulated that soon there will be the equivalent of two infantry divisions and an armored brigade. It may appear on the surface of it that India is outnumbered three-to-one and in a very bad situation. At least the political types and Ministry of External Affairs, who are always holding out olive branches to the Chinese, would like Indians to believe that. Impressing on the nation its weakness reduces domestic pressure to take a hard line, and lets people believe “well, we have no choice but to compromise”. Naturally, Indians who cannot remember what happened yesterday and have zero interest in tomorrow, don’t ask why after 50-years and after the creation of the world’s largest mountain warfare force this should be so. No one who operates in a western frame of logic can explain anything India and Indians do.

· In reality there is no 3-1 superiority for China because if we are talking of the Xinjiang theater, India can, without difficulty, reinforce Ladakh-Himachal-Uttarkhand with additional divisions to quickly bring itself up to parity in the theatre.

· To problem is, what then? China is not about to launch a full-scale attack on India. The Chinese are arrogant and run their mouths like sewing machines, but they are not fools. They will get nowhere with an attack because their troops will have to dismount and slog it out in the mountains, where they will be at tremendous disadvantage. India is not about to attack China because of the lack of political will.

· But, readers will object, aren’t you forgetting the highly unfavorable Indian logistical situation. So we can push additional divisions into the Ladakh-Himachal-Uttarakhand sectors, but how are we going to support an offensive? The days are gone when an Indian mountain division needed just 200-tons of supplies a day. Back in those days a Chinese division got by with 50 or less because their divisions had little artillery (in the mountains) and few vehicles. Ah yes, simpler times – Editor gets quite nostalgic. Now the division artillery alone would need 200-tons/day in the attack. Moreover, how is India going to get artillery and vehicles to the mountain passes and across down to the Tibet plateau when roads are lacking?

· And what about an even greater problem: India has almost no east-west interconnectivity because of the mountains. Every sector has deployments like the open fingers of a hand, each finger proceeding up a steep, narrow valley, but the fingers cannot switch forces between them. For the Chinese that is no problem because they are on the plateau and have an excellent east-west main trunk road, plus other roads.


Well, we are not saying that this is not a problem. But where there is a will there is a way. India can still mount major offensives in the northwest and northeast. It would, however, have to carefully plan and carefully prepare. Since there is no will, there is no way. If India has done little in fifty years to prepare, what is the chance it will mend its bad ways and prepare for an all-out war in a year? Zero. But it can be done should in some alternative universe India decide to move. This we will discuss tomorrow.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by chaanakya »

Quid pro quo behind India-China de-escalation?
Rajat Pandit, TNN | May 5, 2013, 11.02 PM IST

NEW DELHI: It seems there was some sort of "a quid pro quo" behind the mutual withdrawal of Indian and Chinese troops from the 16,300-feet face-off site in the Depsang Bulge area of northern Ladakh on Sunday evening.


With India furiously working the diplomatic channels ahead of foreign minister Salman Khurshid's visit to Beijing on May 9, in preparation for Chinese premier Li Keqiang's trip to India on May 20, two back-to-back flag meetings were held between local commanders at Spanggur Gap area between Daulat Beg Oldi and Chushul sectors on Saturday and Sunday afternoons.


By 7.30pm on Sunday, the two forces - with 30 to 40 troops each - had begun to withdraw from the 20-day-old standoff site along the Raki Nala, which India perceives to be 19-km inside Indian territory, after a handshake between the two local commanders at the fifth flag meeting held earlier in the day.

Though there was no immediate official word on what were the exact terms of disengagement but sources said "there was some give-and-take" to resolve the face-off. "There had to be some face-saver for the Chinese," said a source. ( and none for India since we dont have face anyway)

China, since the very beginning and through the first three flag meetings on April 18, 23 and 30, had remained adamant that India should dismantle its forward observation post at Chumar in eastern Ladakh since it overlooks Chinese highways and can detect any troop movement there.

India, in turn, was demanding that the over 32 Chinese troops, who had pitched tents at the face-off site and were getting their supplies through regular vehicular support, should return to their pre-April 15 positions. India was worried about the deep Chinese intrusion in the Depsang Bulge area, a table-top plateau, since it threatened to cut its access to around 750 sqkm area in the region.

The face-off site was just about 40-km south of the strategic Karakoram Pass, which is at the tri-junction of China-Pakistan-India borders, and overlooks the Siachen Glacier-Saltoro Ridge to the west and the Indian observation post in the Chumar sector to the east. ( If you sell off Siachen-Saltoro Ridge to Pakistan the necessity to have Chumar post will cease to exist . Some of us inlcuding most in UPeeA have advocated it as track-II diplomacy. The mistake of such an idea should be obvious to us though. Karakorum pass is important for us as it would need to be cut off during war.)

Though already angry with India's re-activation of advanced landing grounds at Daulat Beg Oldi, Fukche and Nyoma and building of other infrastructure along the LAC over the last four-five years, China had made the dismantling of the Chumar post as a pre-condition for de-escalation.

The Chinese, in fact, had earlier even tried to "immobilize" the surveillance cameras positioned at the Chumar post by cutting wires there. In June last year, Indian troops had intercepted two Chinese personnel on mules across the Chumar post. Though they were subsequently let off, with language being a barrier, China got hugely irritated about the incident. Holding that the two Chinese were from its revenue department, Beijing since then has been pressing hard for the Chumar post to be dismantled.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Philip »

One important reason why China decided to withdraw,with "no loss of face" supposedly,but whatever compromise may exist in the fine print,is the situ in the Pacific with Japan.True,they have tucked their tails between their legs and departed! It is a fine moral victory for India,which for once stood firm.The massive pressure upon the GOI/UPA both from the Opposition and from some of its own allies,not to mention the military,probably shook the Chinese mandarins who had not expected such a response from India.I'm also sure that the consequences of not withdrawing,diplomatic,economic and military,of which we on BR have done our bit in elaborating upon,playing our part in the propaganda war,made them retreat...but for the moment.If we are weak,they will return again another time.

The news today that 3 PLAN warships have intruded into Japanese territorial waters indicate that the PRC takes the situ in the Pacific far more seriously than in Tibet/Ladakh.The Chinese would've also remembered the old adage ,not to fight a war on two fronts simultaneously. At the moment,it is sabre rattling "tous azimuth",raising the concerns of nations all across Asia and beyond.What must not happen now is for Salman-the-Cursed to fly to Beijing,kowtow with his Chinese counterparts and snatch defeat across the table by giving away the victory on the ground!
subhamoy.das
BRFite
Posts: 1027
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by subhamoy.das »

Let us not forget that we blinked first - MMS called up Xi ?
SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1163
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by SagarAg »

^They had intruded into our territory not the other way round. So its logical that MMS calls up Xi. No? To me this was a classic case of "Pen is mightier than sword".
Maybe Chini wanted the next Agni V test to be stalled for sometime. No points for guessing their reaction when we launched the first one. :lol:
Last edited by SagarAg on 06 May 2013 21:53, edited 1 time in total.
Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1167
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Samay »

Somehow it looks like chinese have made a wrong move
After Chinese pullout, India to increase Army presence along LAC
After the pullout by Chinese troops from Daulat beg Oldi area of Ladakh, infrastructure development programme along the line of actual control is expected to be stepped up besides beefing up of the presence of Army there.

Frenquency of patrolling along the LAC is also expected to be enhanced as per the new measures being contemplated by the government, sources said here on Monday.

The government is also planning to give final clearance to a Rs 84,000 crore Army proposal for raising the Mountain Strike Corps along the northeastern borders which will include deployment of IAF assets as per Army's plans, they said.
it also looks like unkil always gets benefited by all this drama in south china sea,senkaku islands or ladakh
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by NRao »

Maharani and MadamRaja, seem to be treating dealing with the Chinese as a internal family affair. Although it is rather normal for governments to make deals and keep them under wraps, this one I thing needs some debate outside the family circles.
member_23657
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 38
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by member_23657 »

It has become a trend in all military and defense forums questioning who blinked first.
I believe war should be the last step, If there are ways to resolve through diplomatic channels, then do it. Please remember "The enemy in a war is war itself"
It is not the question of whether Xi blinked or MMS blinked first.

I think, India as a responsible power has taken the first step to resolve this issue.
we all know china is a bully nation, it does the same with Japan, Vietnam, or whomsoever in the south china sea. We all know the reason why china is doing this, it is just like NKo trying to divert people from unrest to patriotism.

I seriously believe that we not only see infiltrators across the border, we also see some war mongers infiltrating in our forums too, shouting for war or blaming the government of inaction. What I don't understand is why the thought they put into in writing the flamboyant columns be channelized to understand the world politics. Please view this subject as though being out of India and see the larger picture. what i mean to say is, People think out of the box and see the larger picture. Understand the capability of both nations, the implications of a standoff and war as a whole. What will happen to our economy. The whole world is crawling out of a recession. What will a standoff do to the world economy if and when two economic superpower clash.

If war is the only way, then America and Russia would have destroyed each other long back.

I think the war monger will understand only when one fine India escalates the situation and then it grows into a big confrontation like 62. But be aware, in 62 there were no nuclear weapons on both sides, but now both have and that fine day will arrive when china launches a nuke which falls on one such war monger infiltrated in our forum. he will shut, but will it end there?? no we will retaliate, the situation will grow to a nuclear holocaust and we all have to shut.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Prem Kumar »

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Will »

For all the dhoti shivers out there, a point to note about this whole episode is that the Chinese are getting jittery about the Indian military build up along the LAC these past few years. An assertive India is a big headache for China. For all its posturing China, knows that it cant afford to open up to many fronts at the same time. Its okay to browbeat the small east Asian countries but India and Japan are a total different proposition especially with Big Uncle at Japans side.

Jingoism and warmongering among so called patriots is one thing. Ever govt will be blamed if it is seen as going soft on the "enemy". But what everyone should not forget is that we live in a nuclear neighborhood. No one in their right mind would like to spark off an incident that could lead to nuclear war.

Having said that, the Chinese only respect strength.There is a saying "talk peace but keep your powder dry ". We should continue to build up infrastructure and capability not only along the LAC but over every spectrum of the armed forces.

An incident such as this will only help give a push to pending decisions like clearance for the mountain strike corps. Might also hasten the decision to sign the Rafale deal.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Viv S »

Frankly I can't tell just what is driving most of the outrage expressed over the last two pages even after what appears by most accounts to be successful resolution of the issue for India.

1. With regard to the security of the LAC being disregarded by a treacherous government, FACT is the Chinese incursion was a response to the bolstering of Indian defenses all across the LAC.

2. On the issue of the lack of military response to the Chinese troops at DBO, FACT is while the handful of soldiers there might have been dislodged, Chinese capability to reinforce them is far far greater than that India's in the sector (primarily due to the terrain, other factors are secondary). Bottom-line, for the near future DBO is not defensible, regardless of who's having tea and biscuits in New Delhi.

3. The strategy of riposte carries the risk of escalation, and fearless chest thumping aside, FACT is China has the advantage of favourable terrain along most of the LAC and is ahead by decades as far infrastructure development is concerned. And while India is well on its way to establishing a credible military deterrent, we're not there yet. FM Manekshaw's greatest achievement in 1971 was prevailing on Mrs Gandhi to let him choose the time and manner of his offensive. Kneejerk reactions here wouldn't have served us either.

4. Finally, while I would not dismiss the possibility of backroom concessions out-of-hand, FACT still is that India has certain very potent geographic and political advantages over the PRC, knuckling down is not the only explanation for the Chinese withdrawal.

- 80% of China-bound crude passes through the Malacca Strait and while we certainly wouldn't interdict it in response to what was, so far, a minor incident on the LAC, the Chinese still be subtly nudged towards a more realistic analysis of their overall position.

- Secondly and just as importantly, while China is emerging as a superpower with the potential to rival the US, the result of hyphenating Japan-US-India-Australia-Singapore-Malaysia-Vietnam, is still massive conniptions in Beijing. So far India has refrained from participating in any overt alliance against China, but the mandarins may still quietly let the Chinese know that India's policy therewith is not set in stone.
raj-ji
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 67
Joined: 25 Oct 2010 19:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by raj-ji »

gauravsh wrote:What are the 'modalities' as indicated by the news report. What were the Chinese aiming for all through this time and what did we ended giving up ?
Can't believe they withdraw without getting anything in return. Something is missing here :-?
Very good point. There is a lot missing here.

If you read Sun Tzu's Art of War it may explain some of their actions. Sun Tzu's quote "all war is a deception" and other sayings about confusing your enemy and causing conflict within the enemy seem to be very effective from this small experiment.

What has this done in India? All the war mongers will keep talking about China till they are blue in the face. And will overreact by spending much much more on defences in that area than is needed. The existing government will be blamed for making a deal whether one was made or not. So this little experiment will mean India will spend much much more in defence, trying to catch China. Will have a more polarized and bitter political campaign from all sides. Where the focus is on defence spending and posture, rather than economic growth and development, the true topic for discussion.

India for the first time in a very long time has some very powerful friends and some very deep pockets. Thats an excellent combination for us. We are getting buddy-buddy with the US, which is good. And we have close ties with Russia, also very good. We have the Afghans on our side, giving the Pakis a headache on a regular basis. Again, things are not as bad as some are making it out to be.

Again if India loses sight of what is really going on and what is really important, and goes for the bait the Chinese are dropping, we will be our own worst enemies.

Increasing capabilies on the eastern front should continue. Alliances with other friendly neighbors like Afghanistan, Nepal, Burma, Japan, Korea, Vietnam and Phillipines. We shouldn't get complacent or relaxed, but we shouldn't overreact or panick either.

And what this forum has shown most of all, logical and intelligent debate is needed over the future of India. War mongering, finger pointing, defeatist attitudes are a waste of time, IMO.
Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1167
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Samay »

Marten wrote: How exactly is "Unkil" benefited in this case?
By weapons sales sir. though unkil is not the only beneficiary in this case but in case of japan, soko, it is .
The lack of coverage in western media on ladakh should be noted.

If we are going to spend 84000 cr, then we are going to put it in someone's pocket, isnt it?
Such incidents where not a single bullet is fired or the scale is very small is a melodrama caused to benefit parties on both sides.
manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by manum »

it was stupidest move by china...it was exactly like moving back and forth in chess...if feeling threat to overall game...

in realistic situation they have exposed themselves and reduced their positioning...

Itll only help govt to bolster the defence in the region...

Secondly I still think it was very wrong time for china to do it...and chinese military is not in total control of civilians...

They ve exposed cracks in their armer without any of our doings..
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Viv S »

Samay wrote:By weapons sales sir. though unkil is not the only beneficiary in this case but in case of japan, soko, it is .
The lack of coverage in western media on ladakh should be noted.
There's civil war in Syria now involving Israel, a major war buildup on the Korean peninsula, internal and cross-border war in Sudan/South-Sudan, escalating violence in the DRC, war in Northern Mali, US operations in the Maghreb and against the AQAP and more than a dozen lower grade conflicts across the world. And that's in addition to a worldwide recession and a tottering Europe. We shouldn't be surprised that the global media isn't all that interested in a few dozen Indian and Chinese soldiers pitching tents in the middle of nowhere and waving signs at each other.
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Paul »

NYT was predicting resolution of this incursion one way or the other by withdrawal due to weather constraints.

Not sure what the Chinese wanted to accomplish with this incursion. MMS by now has reached the outer limits of appeasement of China Pakistan.

It will be difficult for Army to get control over ITBP with Chidambaram. Recall he wanted control of Assam Rifles under Home ministry some time ago.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by NRao »

China incursion: Antony non-committal on India withdrawal from Chumar
New Delhi: Defence minister AK Antony on Tuesday remained non-committal whether India had agreed to withdraw its troops from a key post in Chumar area in Ladkah as was being demanded by China.

“I will just say that the two sides have agreed to have status quo ante,” he said when asked if the Army has agreed to withdraw troops from bunkers built in Chumar area.

Reports on Tuesday suggested that though the government has asserted that no concessions were offered to the Chinese to end the face-off in east Ladakh, the Army seemed to have agreed to removal of bunkers built by it in Chumar close to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) to facilitate an agreement.

The reports said the 21-day eyeball-to-eyeball situation in Ladakh’s Depsang valley ended only after the Army agreed to demolish bunkers it had built in the region.

During the flag meetings on the issue during the stand-off between the two sides, the Chinese side had been demanding that India dismantle its bunkers in Chumar before talking about withdrawal of its troops from the Depsang valley.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Singha »

I think we tried to get away on the cheap opening these ALGs for fixed wing but not spending the $$ to make them properly up and running for daily ops. afterall, a single C130J or AN32 sortie can surely supply more materials than a Mi17 struggling all the way over the hills.

our bluff has been called. if we want to keep these places we need a solid setup and regular aeroplane flights to supply the larger garrison.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Austin »

China calls US the "real hacking empire" after Pentagon report
The People's Liberation Army Daily called the report a "gross interference in China's internal affairs".

"Promoting the 'China military threat theory' can sow discord between China and other countries, especially its relationship with its neighbouring countries, to contain China and profit from it," the newspaper said in a commentary that was carried on China's Defence Ministry's website.

The United States is "trumpeting China's military threat to promote its domestic interests groups and arms dealers", the newspaper said, adding that it expects "U.S. arms manufacturers are gearing up to start counting their money".
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Lalmohan »

manum - i dont think this was a random move by china, it was a well calibrated probe. just as they have done on their borders with japan, and in the SE Asian Sea, and by proxy in NoKo - all over the last few months

its a muscle flexing exercise by the new leadership

there is a public warning to the US today on cyberwarfare as well
Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Brando »

What does an Indian believe?

India destroyed bunkers in Chumar in return for Chinese withdrawal
or
No talk of scaling down Border Infra

The Chinese military PSY Ops planners couldn't have played it better if they had a crystal ball.
manum
BRFite
Posts: 604
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 15:32
Location: still settling...
Contact:

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by manum »

Lalmohan wrote:manum - i dont think this was a random move by china, it was a well calibrated probe. just as they have done on their borders with japan, and in the SE Asian Sea, and by proxy in NoKo - all over the last few months

its a muscle flexing exercise by the new leadership

there is a public warning to the US today on cyberwarfare as well
Yes, it was well calculated move...but I don't think it paid well, it just came after army chief called China border calm...

In other words, it was very shallow move and its good we did not respond militarily, may be that is what they wanted, they wanted to sacrifice the pawn for bigger leverage...They wanted to shed their own blood on the land, to further the case...

those five tents inhabitants were here for 50:50 chances...considering India might respond and equally might not...
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Paul »

RohitVats ji, Is Avantipur airfield in Srinagar a useful base to base AN 32 aircraft and provide fighter cover to DBO and Leh? Why is this fighter base not a yseful option for defending eastern and Northern Ladakh.

Flt lt. Sekhon had flown out of this airfield in his Gnat IIRC.
Last edited by Paul on 09 May 2013 01:50, edited 1 time in total.
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Paul »

They need to build a road connecting DBO to Thoise.
Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Katare »

Singha wrote:I think we tried to get away on the cheap opening these ALGs for fixed wing but not spending the $$ to make them properly up and running for daily ops. afterall, a single C130J or AN32 sortie can surely supply more materials than a Mi17 struggling all the way over the hills.

our bluff has been called. if we want to keep these places we need a solid setup and regular aeroplane flights to supply the larger garrison.
How many flights were they doing on yearly basis? There was only one source that, i have seen, which talked about lack of flights but by no means that is a confirmation of neglect. Did i miss something else?
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Singha »

The surface itself was not being maintained for fixed wing ops....after the initial opening flight. Nobody disputed that report which said none of the alg have regular logistical flights at present.
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Vipul »

How India played hardball with China.

After initial diffidence and a sense of confusion, India had to play diplomatic hardball to get China to withdraw its troops from Depsang Bulge in eastern Ladakh, which officials claimed was secured without giving any concessions to China, even though New Delhi has agreed to bring down a structure that was erected as "retaliation" to the Chinese incursion.

After the withdrawal, Indian and Chinese officials are expected to meet in the next few days under the rubric of the working mechanism to work out a new set of operating procedures along the 4,057-km Line of Actual Control (LAC). "We will discuss peace and tranquillity on the LAC," said officials.

As flag meetings failed to resolve the face-off which happened after Chinese troops pitched tents in the area, the government decided to abandon a soft approach to China, said officials. In Beijing, Indian ambassador S Jaishankar impressed on the Chinese that not only was India ready to cancel the visit of foreign minister Salman Khurshid to Beijing, it was also willing to cancel the visit of the Chinese premier Li Keqiang to New Delhi on May 20.

The political initiative to take a harder stand was led by defence minister AK Antony, while foreign secretary Ranjan Mathai worked with the army chief to ensure that the Chinese understood that India was ready to escalate matters, if necsaary. In the cabinet meetings, it was Antony's voice that carried the government opinion. Both PM and foreign minister Salman Khurshid had taken a much softer approach.

India insisted Beijing withdraw because they had violated a 2005 protocol. Within the government there were those who were worried about an escalation. However, India apparently had a precedent - in 2002, the NDA government had tackled a similar situation at Barahauti in the middle sector with a tough stand.

India, however, may be ready to agree to a Chinese demand to negotiate a new mechanism on border management. This was a demand by the PLA in response to India's border build-up. India was reluctant earlier but as a result of the standoff, negotiations on this may start, said sources. However, Antony is believed to be reluctant to go down that path.

While the high level visits are still on, the government has now lost the enthusiasm for the Chinese premier's visit. It will go through, and it is important because this is the first overseas visit of the new premier. But with the Depsang incident fresh in their minds, the Indian government will find it difficult to go the extra mile for this relationship just now.

The MEA spokesperson said on Monday that India and China have agreed to restore status quo ante along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the Western Sector of the India-China boundary as it existed prior to 15 April, 2013. While the Chinese side took down their tents, the Indians retreated from the face-off position. In addition, India agreed to bring down a structure that was built on April 20 as part of the trade-off with the Chinese troops.

"There was no deal," said sources. "There is nothing that will stop our efforts to improve infrastructure on the border." The government is taking credit for getting the Chinese to withdraw within three weeks while it took about seven years to get them out during the Wangdung crisis at Sumdurong Chu in Arunachal Pradesh.

Army sources said, it would have to "open" more access routes to the table-top plateau at Depsang Bulge, which became the face-off site between rival troops at an altitude of 16,300-feet.

After the Chinese intrusion 19-km deep into Indian territory on April 15, ITBP and Army troops had to stop their patrolling of the sector on the two available routes going through the Depsang plains and leading up to the strategically-located Daulat Beg Oldie (DBO) and Karakoram Pass to the north.

The Chinese move, as earlier reported by TOI, threatened to cut off access to almost 750 sq km area in northern Ladakh since the Depsang plains are the only flat open land needed for accessibility to the region. ``We will have to slowly open more access routes to the region as well as step up coordinated patrolling with ITBP. If one access route gets blocked, then the others can be used," said an officer.

The military also thinks there will also be the need to build more forward observation posts and other infrastructure in the region, both for surveillance as well as sustaining long-range patrols. China, which itself has bolstered its military infrastructure along the LAC in a major way for well over two decades now, will obviously not be happy with it.

India's re-activation of the DBO, Fukche and Nyoma advanced landing grounds and construction of some posts along the Line of Actual Control as well as troop reinforcements in Ladakh over the last five to six years has proved to be a major irritant for China.
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Vipul »

India weighing China’s border defence cooperation proposal.

India is examining a proposal from China for a border defence cooperation pact, according to a person familiar with the developments. The plan was made by China two or three months ago and focuses on expanding friendly contacts between the troops on both sides, a second person close to the developments said.

“We will respond to their proposal; it’s under consideration,” said the first person cited above. “It is not intended to replace any of the existing protocols,” the person said, referring to the pacts signed in 1993, 1996 and 2005.

Referring to the forthcoming visit of Indian foreign minister Salman Khurshid to Beijing on 9-10 May, the person said both sides would look at ways to maintain peace and tranquillity on the borders, given that the visit is taking place within days of the neighbours defusing a tense situation along their undemarcated border that followed Chinese troops entering Indian territory on 15 April.

“It is the first visit (to Beijing) since the new team took over,” the person said, referring to the once-in-a-decade Chinese leadership change that took place in Beijing in March. India will also seek access to Chinese markets for Indian products, especially pharmaceuticals and information technology, the person said, pointing to the major trade deficit in China’s favour in bilateral economic ties.
Asian giants India and China share a relationship of mutual suspicion, mainly stemming from their 1962 war and China’s friendship with India’s arch-rival Pakistan. The undemarcated border between the two is a source of tension, though bilateral trade has been booming. In 2011, bilateral trade was almost $75 billion. Both sides have set a bilateral trade target of $100 billion by 2015.

The unsettled border has often sparked claims and counter-claims of incursions. In the latest incident, India accused the Chinese army of straying into its territory in Depsang valley in Ladakh, a claim denied by China. Two meetings between the nations’ armies have failed to resolve the matter.
“Overall, the relationship had been moving on a very different trajectory in the last few years. Any incident like this will inevitably lead to some questions... Certainly, we want to bring the relationship back on track,” the first person cited said.

As it stands, China claims 90,000 sq. km of Indian territory in Arunachal Pradesh and occupies around 38,000 sq. km in Jammu and Kashmir that India claims. Also, under the China-Pakistan boundary agreement signed in March 1963, Pakistan illegally ceded 5,180 sq. km of Indian territory in PoK (Pakistan-occupied Kashmir) to China, the Indian foreign ministry says.

Both sides have a variety of mechanisms at the official, military and political levels—including flag meetings, joint working groups, meetings at the levels of experts and special representatives, besides communication through diplomatic channels—to resolve disputes.
The first person cited denied that India had agreed to any demand from the Chinese side to demolish bunkers near their de facto border in the Himalayas though the person did say Indian troops removed a “tin-shed” construction in the Chumar area of Ladakh region in Kashmir once the two sides ended the stand-off.

India’s military position was 7-8km from the area where the shed had been built and was mainly aimed at sheltering Indian foot patrols in cold and inclement weather, the person said, pointing out that India had not compromised any of its military positions.
When asked if India had issued any warnings that a visit by the newly installed Chinese premier Li Keqiang could be called off if the stand-off did not end with the Chinese pulling back, the person said that India had not issued any such threats. “I think they understood the way the background was developing...that this (the incursions) would impact on our bilateral relations.”

As for India’s assessment about what prompted the Chinese to enter Indian territory, the person said it was “still a bit of a mystery”. One of the reasons could be that the Chinese government wanted to bring the issue of the undemarcated border to the centre stage.
Srikanth Kondapalli, a China expert at Jawaharlal Nehru University, said, “I think they are playing with words. Will this stop tensions between the two countries? The important thing is to define the Line of Actual Control and resolve the territorial dispute.”
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Philip »

X-posted earlier elsewhere.

"
All this is another example of the old saying that amateurs (and politicians) talk tactics, while professionals talk logistics. China realized this first and has built 58,000 kilometers of roads to the Indian border, along with five airbases and several rail lines. Thus, China can move thirty divisions to the border, which is three times more than India can get to its side of the frontier."

How best do we prepare for this eventuality?

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurp ... 30507.aspx
India Prepares For Another Chinese Victory

May 7, 2013: The recent (April 15th) Chinese incursion inside Indian Kashmir has reminded Indian military leaders that despite over five years of brave talk and bold plans, not much has actually been accomplished to rectify the shortage of access to the Indian side of the border. It was this lack of access that played a key role in the last border war with China (in 1962) which saw better prepared and supplied Chinese forces wearing down their brave but ill-supplied Indian opponents. Indians are waking up to the fact that a repeat of their 1962 defeat is in the making.

Over the last five years India has ordered roads built so that troops can reach the Chinese border in sufficient strength to stop a Chinese invasion. The roads have, for the most part, not been built. The problem is the Indian bureaucracy and its inability to get anything done quickly or even on time. The military procurement bureaucracy is the best, or worst, example of this. The military procurement bureaucracy takes decades to develop and produce locally made gear and often never delivers. Buying foreign equipment is almost as bad, with corruption and indecisiveness delaying and sometimes halting selection and purchase of needed items.

Despite the bureaucracy, some progress has been made. Three years ago India quietly built and put into service an airfield for transports in the north (Uttarakhand), near their border with China. While the airfield can also be used to bring in urgently needed supplies for local civilians during those months when snow blocks the few roads, it is mainly there for military purposes, in case China invades again. Uttarakhand is near Kashmir and a 38,000 square kilometer chunk of land that China seized after a brief war with India in 1962. This airfield and several similar projects along the Chinese border are all about growing fears of continued Chinese claims on Indian territory. India is alarmed at increasing strident Chinese insistence that it owns northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. This has led to an increased movement of Indian military forces to that remote area.

India has discovered that a buildup in these remote areas is easier said than done. Without new roads nothing else really makes much difference. Airfields require fuel and other supplies to be more than just another place where an aircraft can land (and not take off if it needs refueling). Moreover, the Indians found that they were far behind Chinese efforts. When they took a closer look three years ago, Indian staff officers discovered that China had improved its road network along most of their 4,000 kilometer common border. Indian military planners calculated that, as a result of this network, Chinese military units could move 400 kilometers a day on hard surfaced roads, while Indian units could only move half as fast, while suffering more vehicle damage because of the many unpaved roads. Moreover, China had more roads right up to the border. Building more roads on the Indian side will take years, once the bureaucratic problems are overcome (which often takes a decade). The roads are essential to support Indian plans to build more airfields near the border and stationing modern fighters there. Military planners found, once the terrain was surveyed and calculations completed, that it would take a lot more time because of the need to build maintenance facilities, roads to move in fuel and supplies, and housing for military families.

All these border disputes have been around for centuries but became more immediate when India and China fought a short war, up in these mountains, in 1962. The Indians lost and are determined not to lose a rematch. But so far, the Indians have been falling farther behind China. This situation developed because India, decades ago, decided that one way to deal with a Chinese invasion was to make it difficult for them to move forward. Thus, for decades, the Indians built few roads on their side of the border. But that also made it more difficult for Indian forces to get into the disputed areas. This strategy suited the Indian inability to actually build roads in these sparsely inhabited areas.

The source of the current border tension goes back a century and heated up when China resumed its control over Tibet in the 1950s. From the end of the Chinese empire in 1912 up until 1949 Tibet had been independent. But when the communists took over China in 1949, they sought to reassert control over their "lost province" of Tibet. This began slowly, but once all of Tibet was under Chinese control in 1959, China once again had a border with India and there was immediately a disagreement about exactly where the border should be. That’s because, in 1914, the newly independent government of Tibet worked out a border (the McMahon line) with the British (who controlled India). China considers this border agreement illegal and wants 90,000 square kilometers back. India refused, especially since this would mean losing much of the state of Arunachal Pradesh in northeastern India and some bits elsewhere in the area.

Putting more roads into places like Arunachal Pradesh (83,000 square kilometers and only a million people) and Uttarakhand (53,566 square kilometers and ten million people) will improve the economy, as well as military capabilities. This will be true of most of the border area. For decades local civilians along these borders have been asking for more roads and economic development but were turned down because of the now discredited Indian strategy.

All the roads won't change the fact that most of the border is mountains, the highest mountains (the Himalayas) in the world. So no matter how much you prepare for war, no one is going very far, very fast, when you have to deal with these mountains. As the Indians discovered, the Chinese persevered anyway and built roads and railroads anyway and now India has to quickly respond in kind or face a repeat of their 1962 defeat.

Despite the lack of roads, India has moved several infantry divisions, several squadrons of Su-30 fighters, and six of the first eight squadrons of its new Akash air defense missile systems as close to the Chinese border as their existing road network will allow. Most of these initially went into Assam, just south of Arunachal Pradesh, until the road network is built up sufficiently to allow bases to be maintained closer to the border. It may be a decade or more before those roads are built, meaning China can seize Arunachal Pradesh anytime it wants and there’s not much India can do to stop it.

Undeterred by that the Indian Army has asked for $3.5 billion in order to create three more brigades (two infantry and one armored) to defend the Chinese border. Actually, this new force is in addition to the new mountain corps (of 80,000 troops) nearing approval (at a cost of $11.5 billion). The mountain corps is to be complete in four years. The three proposed brigades would be ready in 4-5 years. By the end of the decade India will have spent nearly five billion dollars on new roads, rail lines, and air fields near the 4,057 kilometer long Chinese border. Spending the money is not the same as actually getting the roads and railroads actually built.

All this is another example of the old saying that amateurs (and politicians) talk tactics, while professionals talk logistics. China realized this first and has built 58,000 kilometers of roads to the Indian border, along with five airbases and several rail lines. Thus, China can move thirty divisions to the border, which is three times more than India can get to its side of the frontier.
manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2615
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by manjgu »

and the pace which roads are being built in AP is pathetic to say the least.... was in AP and met a few BRo chaps and their refrain was ' our cost per km of road is cheapest...".. i was constrained to tell them " that it was also the slowest!!" ... gangs of ladies are busy beating gravel for the roads with hammers ( stone age)... travelled from Assam to bomdila to tawang... to the no mans land... and it was a torture... roads in a mess and travel a nightmare !! army guarding sections of roads in the assam/AP border as there is threat of insurgents... ( so the rear areas are not safe)... a road built in the mountains takes another few years to really stabilize. i dont know wtf is going on... how are you going to supply the new formations??? went to ops room of "balls of fire" division. the GOC saheb appeared so gung ho ...we will give the chinese a bluddy nose if they try any monkey tricks !! very comical to say the least....
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Post by Sanku »

Paul wrote:RohitVats ji, Is Avantipur airfield in Srinagar a useful base to base AN 32 aircraft and provide fighter cover to DBO and Leh? Why is this fighter base not a yseful option for defending eastern and Northern Ladakh.

Flt lt. Sekhon had flown out of this airfield in his Gnat IIRC.
During Safed Sagar the Mig 29s were operating from Avantipur, as well as Mirages. It can handle transports as well, definetly An 32s and I am not sure, but I think it can support Il 76 as well.

The issue with Avantipur is that it is too far to serve as useful logistical nodes for Eastern and Northern Ladakh. From Avantipur, its a days drive easily to those regions, through a torturous road.
Post Reply