Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1453
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby ldev » 17 Jul 2017 22:11

Suraj wrote:Xi's ambitions would be very interesting to keep an eye on. Due to the way they work, starting a war won't help Xi's chances in the 2017 conference; he has no public perception to handle, and his detractors may use it as a case of him starting an unnecessary fight at the border even as he purges opponents inside.


That is why this move from the Chinese makes no sense. The only explanation is that they did not feel that India would confront them by deploying troops in a disputed territory in a third country i.e. Bhutan. Although not exactly similar, what India has done is tantamount to US marines landing on the reefs in the South China Sea to physically stop the Chinese from converting the reefs disputed by China, Phillipines etc. into fortified artificial island military bases.

I wonder if there's any corresponding set of political events in 1962 when Mao attacked. We know external events occuring when he attacked - the Cuban Missile Crisis. What about internal events ? The Lin Biao event was years later, and the Great Leap Forward (1959-61) was done by 1962. Cultural Revolution was 4 years away in 1966.


Offhand I cannot think of any internal political event then. I think then as now, there was no internal stimulus for the confrontation with India. But given the extent of Xi's power play unfolding now, chances are remote of any settlement to this dispute till the Party Congress is over.

Also, China's outreach to Indian opposition parties should be seen in the light of Xi's ambitions for staying on in power for an unprecedented 3rd, five year term from 2022 onwards i.e. he is hoping to outlast Modi.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10593
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Suraj » 17 Jul 2017 22:28

Any attempt by Xi to stay on for a third term will be IMMENSELY destabilizing for China's political existence. This isn't really a 'fine fine, you want another term, ok, we'll make an exception for you. Everyone, adjust onlee'. There's no such thing as 'adjust' in their system. He'll have to break large parts of the system to make his case work, because there's a career line of people being elevated and moved into Politburo and then PSC, and then out of it, either after serving term or post 1-2 terms as Premier/President. Anyone occupying the top too long causes sewage to build up below him. It will not be pretty.

For all the talk of great Chinese long term thinking ability, it is also a repeatedly demonstrated fact that they're incredibly good at ignoring the lessons of their own history. Deng (second generation leadership) tried to ensure stability for the next several generations. 3rd gen (Jiang) and 4th gen (Hu) largely followed the rules. But by 5th generation (Xi) they're already demonstrating that they're stupid enough not to remember their own history, and what the first gen (Mao) did. Kind of funny because Xi's father suffered immensely in Cultural Revolution and Xi was old enough to experience the suffering himself too.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46724
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby ramana » 17 Jul 2017 22:49

Paul wrote:That is why we need to focus on land forces, more MSCs, PGMs, SAMs etc to take over and hold Tibet in a deep thrust.

The nukes will suffice for the eastern seaboard of china.



I agree. India has a land based threat just as it was in the pre Christian era. And needs more land troops. Another Mountain Strike Corps would do more wonders than all those naval ships and patrol aircraft which are to reduce uncle Sam burden.

An MSC costs about 100K crores and is easily doable.

Just shakedown the corrupt politicians.


Rohitvats can tell ideal location for this.
for dual use.

rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2880
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby rsingh » 17 Jul 2017 23:04

Right. My bad. Guy who WPd me was supposed to be descent guy.
Last edited by rsingh on 17 Jul 2017 23:15, edited 2 times in total.

Marten
BRFite
Posts: 1778
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Marten » 17 Jul 2017 23:07

Will a victory over India help his chances of a third term?
*(assuming that his goal is to ensure that OBOR will continue unharmed with a more pliable govt in place in India). Is that the reason to meet INC representatives?

How important is energy security for China at this point? What affects the current relationship with Putin? Are they expecting a higher price over the next few years, once the middle east *US takes a break from the decades old war? Is this only about getting rm inputs to feed the global manufacturing engine?

Posturing to grab land without getting into armed conflict is not their end game. It is the means to establishing rights over some specific resource. What is the resource targeted in B'Desh? They understand the advantages they hold over us at the moment will probably be wiped out within a few years. Perhaps that accelerates the urgency.
PS: rsingh, is this from a reliable channel?

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8842
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby pankajs » 17 Jul 2017 23:07

rsingh wrote:Getting news that Chinese fired rocket at indian position and there are many casualties.
Bakistani media: 158 Indian Jawan died.
Apparently CCTV has aired 2min clip. Do not trust harami media but they were quite on Indo -china for long time.


Please post link ... the ones posted previously were all baki sites are not trustworthy.
Last edited by pankajs on 17 Jul 2017 23:10, edited 1 time in total.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4159
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Arjun » 17 Jul 2017 23:08

rsingh wrote:Getting news that Chinese fired rocket at indian position and there are many casualties.
Bakistani media: 158 Indian Jawan died.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/paki ... 04444.html

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10593
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Suraj » 17 Jul 2017 23:09

rsingh wrote:Getting news that Chinese fired rocket at indian position and there are many casualties.
Bakistani media: 158 Indian Jawan died.

Please don't propagate rumors here. It's not others' business to verify it for you. It's your responsibility to check before posting.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2702
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Rudradev » 17 Jul 2017 23:11

Yes. Very reliable. Exercise (all of 9 hours long) just ended, but already Pakis were able to verify the precise count of Indian jawans killed. Not 160. Not 159. 157.644382, which after much thoughtful debate they rounded up to 158.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8842
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby pankajs » 17 Jul 2017 23:12

The last we head .. Indian and Chinese soldiers were in an eyeball to eyeball confrontation. How is it possible to fire upon such a assembly without hitting own soldiers?

Folks please use past information and commonsense AND bakis are known to make all kinds of absurd claims. Since when did baki channels become our primary source.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8842
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby pankajs » 17 Jul 2017 23:16

Related to my previous post.

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/at-dokla ... ff-1725900
At Doklam, Human Chains Face-Off, Soldiers Replaced Every 2 Hours [Updated: July 17, 2017 22:13 IST]

Kolkata: For the last 30 days at least, 350-odd Indian soldiers have been standing in a human chain, eyeball to eyeball with Chinese troops at Dhoka La in Bhutan. Armed, but guns pointed down, the two lines of soldiers stand just metres apart. The lines stretch across 500-odd meters, in an area located roughly 15 km from the Nathu La pass.

If this was a baki report about bakis killing Indian soldiers at LOC all would have laughed it off. But a baki fart on the Chinese killing Indian soldier suddenly becomes kosher?

Ravi Karumanchiri
BRFite
Posts: 549
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
Contact:

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Ravi Karumanchiri » 17 Jul 2017 23:42

ldev wrote:<SNIP>

Offhand I cannot think of any internal political event then. I think then as now, there was no internal stimulus for the confrontation with India. But given the extent of Xi's power play unfolding now, chances are remote of any settlement to this dispute till the Party Congress is over.

Also, China's outreach to Indian opposition parties should be seen in the light of Xi's ambitions for staying on in power for an unprecedented 3rd, five year term from 2022 onwards i.e. he is hoping to outlast Modi.


^^^^^^^^
I had thought it was orthodoxy that the entire reason for the 1962 war was for Zhou Enlai's domestic opponents to embarrass him while he was on a state visit to India to proclaim "Chini-Hindi Bhai, Bhai". Other factors are detailed in Wiki... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War

Nobody reading this thread should presume that the Communist Party of China is a solidly unified block. They are not. Neither is "The Center" in total control of "The Provinces". Rather, there is a veneer of unity that confounds outsiders, especially when we wonder how stuff works in China, or how or why certain things happen.

In China, it is the Provinces that have a unified military command (with separate military academies and all); and sometimes a province will do something to embarrass "The Center" on the international stage, as part of some kind of internal squabble.

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 790
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby DavidD » 17 Jul 2017 23:57

ldev wrote:>>They are better off peppering air bases and major military bases and railheads with 100 missiles each - to put them out of action so they can win the land war. Similarly we stand to gain by putting their logistics and supply lines out of action to win the land war

1000 conventional missiles on faraway cities is not a war winning strategy

True, but fighting a conventional war is as much psychology as actual destruction of physical targets. The CPC hold on China is brittle, nobody knows how strong it really is, I doubt that the Chinese will stick to doing only conventional things in the event of a large scale war with India, one that falls short of a nuclear exchange. If as you posture China launches a 1000 missile barrage at Indian airbases and AAM sites, then in theory Indian skies could be vulnerable maybe for an hour or a few hours. If you remember there was that other thread about China sending paratroopers over Delhi which was made much fun off. That paratroop drop over Delhi is not about capturing Delhi, but all about psychology, that India cannot even defend it's capital. Forget about the fact that those paratroops are on a 1 way suicide mission. India needs something similar, that the CPC cannot even defend the Chinese elite in their heartland. India has to get out of this mentality that war is only about slogging away at the border and capturing a few sq kms of territory constitutes victory. There are many paths to fighting a war and many paths to what constitutes victory. One has to be open to that.


You're right that there are many paths to winning a war, but history indicates that conventional bombs on civilian targets is pretty low on the list of ways to winning a war. There are many other ways, however, as war isn't just army A vs. army B at location C. For one, in a war each side would attempt to leverage its strengths to its advantage, and China's strength is its industrial and economic capacity.

For example, what if China decides to drag the war out, into one of attrition? Constant missile and air based attacks on Indian hangars, runways, ammo depots, etc. What's India's capacity to replace the losses? China could also open up the auto market to Ford and GM, which Trump will probably care more about than SEA politics, give Airbus a few hundred A320 orders, and purchase a couple hundred Su-35s at double market rate, all with strings attached of course. How would Indian logistics be affected? Expand the war into the sea, Dalian shipyard alone is constructing 1x 65k carrier, 2x 12k cruisers, and 2x 7k destroyers at the same time. Trade as %GDP has been higher for India than for China for almost a decade now, and while most Chinese seaborne trade goes through the SCS which India can threaten, almost all of India's trade of material goods seaborne or otherwise goes through the IOR or the chicken's neck. Pay the Germans and the Israeli off along with the aforementioned Russians, what will be the Indian capacity to replace lost assets? How would a protracted naval war affect the Indian economy? How long before the PLAN catch up in experience under actual war conditions?

Of course, the winner of such a war would be the US, France, Russia, and basically anyone but India or China, which is why I believe this dispute will not come to an unacceptable conclusion to either side.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46724
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby ramana » 18 Jul 2017 00:00

Ravi< The real message is whenever the Chinese leadership has a succession struggle they go try to beat up neighbors.
Even the China Vietnam war was during a succession struggle.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War


...
Following the death of Mao in September 1976, the overthrow of the Gang of Four and the ascent of Deng Xiaoping, the Chinese leadership would revise its own positions to become compatible with market aspects, denounce the Cultural Revolution, and collaborate with the US against the Soviet Union.

...

China, now under Deng Xiaoping, was starting the Chinese economic reform and opening trade with the West, in turn, growing increasingly defiant of the Soviet Union. On November 3, 1978, the Soviet Union and Vietnam signed a 25-year mutual defense treaty, which made Vietnam the "linchpin" in the Soviet Union's "drive to contain China."[54]

On January 1, 1979, Chinese Vice-premier Deng Xiaoping visited the United States for the first time and told American president Jimmy Carter: "The little child is getting naughty, it's time he get spanked." (original Chinese words: 小朋友不听话,该打打屁股了。).[55] On February 15, the first day that China could have officially announced the termination of the 1950 Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Alliance and Mutual Assistance, Deng Xiaoping declared that China planned to conduct a limited attack on Vietnam.



ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1453
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby ldev » 18 Jul 2017 00:13

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:I had thought it was orthodoxy that the entire reason for the 1962 war was for Zhou Enlai's domestic opponents to embarrass him while he was on a state visit to India to proclaim "Chini-Hindi Bhai, Bhai".


Maybe applicable for 1962.

But right now, Xi is approaching only the end of his first 5 year term. His re-appointment for his second 5 year term is also well within norms laid down from Deng's time, and so is not in doubt. So there is really no need for him to seek a confrontation with India at this stage. Plus via internal purges he has steadily got rid of rivals who could pose a threat to him. The more one thinks about it, the more it looks like a mis-calculation on China's part that India would intervene. And now they cannot back off given the approaching Party Congress.

The level of diatribe against India by the CPC's mouthpieces is also unprecedented and shrill with everybody from the People's Daily to Global Times to the Foreign Ministry threatening India with interference in Kashmir, supporting unrest in the North East, advising India not to forget the 1962 debacle, stating there will be no dialogue until India withdraws etc. etc. This kind of venom was normally reserved for Taiwan or Japan. And I think it stem's from India's completely un-expected move into Bhutan.

ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1453
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby ldev » 18 Jul 2017 00:26

DavidD wrote:For example, what if China decides to drag the war out, into one of attrition?


A naval war will not last for a long time, the reason being that there is a high risk of collateral damage to third countries and assets e.g. if India forces a blockade of the Malacca straits from the western end and China tries to force the blockade from the eastern end, any resulting hostilities could see damage to the coast/ports in Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore. Other countries will intervene and stop it.

On the land frontier, it will be a stalemate, a few kilometers at most for either side depending on the front. Given the terrain, each side will need a 6>1 or maybe a 10>1 superiority to break out. So India is never going to reach Lhasa and China is unlikely to reach the Indian plains.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10593
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Suraj » 18 Jul 2017 00:34

DavidD wrote:You're right that there are many paths to winning a war, but history indicates that conventional bombs on civilian targets is pretty low on the list of ways to winning a war. There are many other ways, however, as war isn't just army A vs. army B at location C. For one, in a war each side would attempt to leverage its strengths to its advantage, and China's strength is its industrial and economic capacity.

For example, what if China decides to drag the war out, into one of attrition?

Because China doesn't have the political capacity to fight such a war. Not since the 1950s. To the point that it doesn't even have the political will to wrest back Kinmen and Matsu Islands from Taiwan because that would trigger an attritionary war with other powers. Us Indians have no idea why you can't grab that back. All those carriers, cruisers and destroyers and instead of grabbing back an island right in front of Xiamen, you instead carry mud across South China Sea and build an island in the middle of nowhere.

"War" for China is 2-3 weeks, tops. The longest it has ever fought was 6 months in the Ussuri Conflict with USSR, a traumatic episode that changed your political landscape. What it does instead is manufacture other trigger points, like the illegal islands its built in SCS. It's a great tactic - seed an idea of potency "yay we built an island - look at our industrial might" without actually facing off anybody.

An attritionary war will hurt China more. It's true that Dalian produces a lot more. It also means China has a lot more concentrated points of production that will hurt it relatively more. And that means India fires a set of (conventional or tactical nuke) missiles that take out Bohai and Dalian. Shanghai Yangshan Deepwater Port handles more container traffic than all of India. A bunch of missiles taking it out and its connecting bridge means China loses more from every hit than us - probably an order of magnitude more. In the event of war, India need not target civilian or even military areas. Just target every major eastern seaboard port complex, shipyard and all major rail junctions. Maybe in the middle of night so we're considerate and no one gets hurt. Minimal casualties, but you'll lose ~$500B-1 trillion in economic activity over a year or two as the world's best manufacturing supply chain has a bunch of swiss cheese holes in it.

That's the problem with the lobbing missiles plan. We just need enough ability to knock out enough of your economic supply chain such that the damage is an order of magnitude larger than the total damage you can cause us, because (shrug) there just isn't enough sh1t to blow up on our side...

nam
BRFite
Posts: 214
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby nam » 18 Jul 2017 00:51

Karthik S wrote:What we need most is Nirbhay over Tibet. Few waves of Nirbhays during the first hour battle will cut their supply lines across the wide border.


A Cruise missile generally has 300KG warhead, which lets says is sort of close to 250KG dumb bombs, the smallest of the dumb bombs.

1000 CM, which sounds massive even for Uncle style shock & awe equal to 1k 250 dumb. if simplified carried by 50 SU30 at 20/jet,

A fight between between two large armies and 50 jets managing to drop "only" 20 bombs each would be laughed at. Actually even 50 jets reaching their target will be laughed at.

So 1000 CM will do equivalent damage of 50 jets.

Cruise Missiles are glorified 250KG bomb dropped along with jet on one way trip. Not saying CM are useless, but any effective attack requires 100s if not thousand.

Nothing comes close to jets offloading their flowers.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 214
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby nam » 18 Jul 2017 01:08

DavidD wrote:For example, what if China decides to drag the war out, into one of attrition?


One thing people keep forgetting is India has been in constant combat for decades. We had daily artillery duels with Pak from 88 to 2003. i.e 15 years!
Double the timeline of WW2.

We have been in COIN for 60 years.

So we will not have shortage of fighting men.

We would need weapons. Despite the OFB being a crappy organisation, it has more 100k people on it's rolls who know how to make weapons. GoI can throw people like peanuts at arm production if need be.

Then their is the private companies. just a company like Tatas with 100 billion turnover and manufacturing history would sure be happy to rise up to the challenge.

And ofcourse there will be lot of countries like US Russia who would love to see China get in to attrition war with a nation of 1.3 billion people. They would gladly supply what we want.

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 790
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby DavidD » 18 Jul 2017 01:43

Suraj wrote:
DavidD wrote:You're right that there are many paths to winning a war, but history indicates that conventional bombs on civilian targets is pretty low on the list of ways to winning a war. There are many other ways, however, as war isn't just army A vs. army B at location C. For one, in a war each side would attempt to leverage its strengths to its advantage, and China's strength is its industrial and economic capacity.

For example, what if China decides to drag the war out, into one of attrition?

Because China doesn't have the political capacity to fight such a war. Not since the 1950s. To the point that it doesn't even have the political will to wrest back Kinmen and Matsu Islands from Taiwan because that would trigger an attritionary war with other powers. Us Indians have no idea why you can't grab that back. All those carriers, cruisers and destroyers and instead of grabbing back an island right in front of Xiamen, you instead carry mud across South China Sea and build an island in the middle of nowhere.

"War" for China is 2-3 weeks, tops. The longest it has ever fought was 6 months in the Ussuri Conflict with USSR, a traumatic episode that changed your political landscape. What it does instead is manufacture other trigger points, like the illegal islands its built in SCS. It's a great tactic - seed an idea of potency "yay we built an island - look at our industrial might" without actually facing off anybody.

An attritionary war will hurt China more. It's true that Dalian produces a lot more. It also means China has a lot more concentrated points of production that will hurt it relatively more. And that means India fires a set of (conventional or tactical nuke) missiles that take out Bohai and Dalian. Shanghai Yangshan Deepwater Port handles more container traffic than all of India. A bunch of missiles taking it out and its connecting bridge means China loses more from every hit than us - probably an order of magnitude more. In the event of war, India need not target civilian or even military areas. Just target every major eastern seaboard port complex, shipyard and all major rail junctions. Maybe in the middle of night so we're considerate and no one gets hurt. Minimal casualties, but you'll lose ~$500B-1 trillion in economic activity over a year or two as the world's best manufacturing supply chain has a bunch of swiss cheese holes in it.

That's the problem with the lobbing missiles plan. We just need enough ability to knock out enough of your economic supply chain such that the damage is an order of magnitude larger than the total damage you can cause us, because (shrug) there just isn't enough sh1t to blow up on our side...


You don't have enough ability to knock out enough economic supply chain. The only Indian missiles that can reach China are strategic missiles, they don't have enough accuracy or cost effectiveness to take out bridges. There are rebuttal for the rest, but all of it is beside the point. The point is that war can be fought in many arenas and on many fronts, and all of them will result in BOTH China and India losing.

I know the '62 war arouses various strong emotions on both sides, but if you really take a hard look at it, both India and China lost that war. Two of the greatest civilizations in history who's almost never been in conflict with each other are now at loggerheads. All over what? A few barren rocks? Imagine if the two countries worked together, it'll be 100 times what France and Germany has been able to achieve in Europe. Nationalists from both sides are now stuck in a blame game, "just draw the border the way we draw it, it's all your fault for this dragging on!" The war in '62 made those rocks a matter of national pride, and now there's no good way to move past it.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10593
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Suraj » 18 Jul 2017 01:55

DavidD wrote:You don't have enough ability to knock out enough economic supply chain. The only Indian missiles that can reach China are strategic missiles, they don't have enough accuracy or cost effectiveness to take out bridges.

You're very confident about that. Good for you :) It's indeed hard to hit Donghai Bridge from so far away, but Yangshan Port itself is a rather more bigger target.

g.sarkar
BRFite
Posts: 1186
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby g.sarkar » 18 Jul 2017 02:19

A few points I would like to make:
1. Let us not assume that China will not start a war at this time. This would be repeating the mistakes of 1962, when Pandit Nehru and Krishna Menon had falsely concluded that China was not going to start a war. They did. The timing of 1962 was well planned. Both Mao and Chou were involved. The international situations were a factor and the weather was another. Once again October is the month; I hope we are reinforcing our troops relentlessly in both East and the West. If we are ready, they will not attack.
2. If China cannot sort out India, a relatively soft power, they can forget becoming number one. Along with this, they can forget about coercing smaller nations in Asia and Africa to follow, whose cooperation is inevitable for China to become the top dog . No one will follow a loser, the end of China’s dream.
3. The US and Europe are now so dependent on cheap imports from China, I do not believe they will stop imports from China if India is attacked. The imports will be stopped only China attacks them or their allies directly. They will willingly send arms and ammunition to India at a price and take a wait and watch attitude over the conflict. So if the conflict widens, we should not think that any other power will come to our aid on the short run. Israel being an exception.
4. A great deal of effort is made at BRF to find a motive to China‘s actions. Why are they are doing so and so, they would be better off if they did something else. It is not possible to find out why a group of insulated people with very little outside world experience leading a closed dictatorship, are acting the way they are. Using the same logic, you may say a peaceful resolution of 1962 may have brought China more benefits. Unfortunately, that is not how they think. Their society and system of government allows them to take sudden and apparently irrational actions. For example, during WWII Germany, Japan and the USSR made unexpected moves that the West could not match.
Gautam

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1135
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby chola » 18 Jul 2017 02:52

g.sarkar wrote:A few points I would like to make:
1. Let us not assume that China will not start a war at this time. This would be repeating the mistakes of 1962, when Pandit Nehru and Krishna Menon had falsely concluded that China was not going to start a war. They did. The timing of 1962 was well planned. Both Mao and Chou were involved. The international situations were a factor and the weather was another. Once again October is the month; I hope we are reinforcing our troops relentlessly in both East and the West. If we are ready, they will not attack.
2. If China cannot sort out India, a relatively soft power, they can forget becoming number one. Along with this, they can forget about coercing smaller nations in Asia and Africa to follow, whose cooperation is inevitable for China to become the top dog . No one will follow a loser, the end of China’s dream.
3. The US and Europe are now so dependent on cheap imports from China, I do not believe they will stop imports from China if India is attacked. The imports will be stopped only China attacks them or their allies directly. They will willingly send arms and ammunition to India at a price and take a wait and watch attitude over the conflict. So if the conflict widens, we should not think that any other power will come to our aid on the short run. Israel being an exception.
4. A great deal of effort is made at BRF to find a motive to China‘s actions. Why are they are doing so and so, they would be better off if they did something else. It is not possible to find out why a group of insulated people with very little outside world experience leading a closed dictatorship, are acting the way they are. Using the same logic, you may say a peaceful resolution of 1962 may have brought China more benefits. Unfortunately, that is not how they think. Their society and system of government allows them to take sudden and apparently irrational actions. For example, during WWII Germany, Japan and the USSR made unexpected moves that the West could not match.
Gautam



1) You don't get to be the largest trading nation on the globe by being an irrational psycho nation, global economics punish those without fail,

2) Because they are an economic power and a weak military nation in terms of culture (not hardware), war weakens their intrinsic strength.

Cheen of Mao WAS a psycho state and global economics punished it as such. The Cheen of today, if it wants to continue advancing, cannot be.

The fact they haven't fought in 4 decades even as their military had grown exponentially shows me they are a rational trading state intent on growing power through intimidation, not fighting.

I would be happy if Cheen were psycho and did start a war that I know we can win easily. But I fear they are not and they won't fight.

But is it to our advantage if they don't fight? I don't think it is. Letting them off the hook without bloodying them means we are still waiting for their hammer to drop. Their hammer is their infrastructure (Gwadar, Djibouti), their schemes (CPEC,OBOR) and their military/industrial production (endless mass of ships and aircraft.) The weight of those will only get heavier with time.

We need to go war, regardless of Cheen does because right now, we own all advantages along the border and in the IOR where we can cut off trade to a trading power in a way that can stunt their strategy of grow and intimidate.

g.sarkar
BRFite
Posts: 1186
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby g.sarkar » 18 Jul 2017 03:38

Cholaji,
I beg to disagree. I do not believe that we will win a war against China easily as you write. We might win but not not easily. Our military has been neglected for a long time now. A war 5 or 10 years down the road would be far better. But all that is theoretical, as a democratic India would not start one, China could. And the Indian army will have to fight with what they have. I do not believe China is an "irrational psycho nation", not today, and not during Mao. I also do not agree that "we need to go to war". It does not make economic sense. The results of any war is uncertain, otherwise any country that was militarily stronger would win every time. Furthermore, the political system in India will not allow a unilateral war just like that. That is how it should be in a democracy. A war with China will only help the other powers, irrespective of the result. Our own development will be postponed by years, as it did in 1971. But fighting a war that was put upon us is different.
Gautam
PS I do not like to start a back and forth argument on why India should start a war with China, so this will be my last comment on this.

Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7191
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Bade » 18 Jul 2017 06:47

It is ok to believe one should not go to war, because a decisive win is uncertain always. But I do not understand why people who are not sure of a win now, want to whine about previous governments for not doing the same. They must have also come to the same conclusion during their time, not to escalate further given the constraints then. So what is different now other than the fact that the economy has grown a lot and we are better armed ?

Iyersan
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 19 Sep 2016 16:13

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Iyersan » 18 Jul 2017 07:50

pankajs wrote:The last we head .. Indian and Chinese soldiers were in an eyeball to eyeball confrontation. How is it possible to fire upon such a assembly without hitting own soldiers?

Folks please use past information and commonsense AND bakis are known to make all kinds of absurd claims. Since when did baki channels become our primary source.

2 front psyops has begun. Pakistan has entered the war thru LoC . We are at war.

Iyersan
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 19 Sep 2016 16:13

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Iyersan » 18 Jul 2017 07:51

India’s provocation will trigger all-out confrontation on LAC
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1056783.shtml

Iyersan
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 19 Sep 2016 16:13

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Iyersan » 18 Jul 2017 07:54

India rejects ‘malicious’ Pakistani media report of soldier deaths in Chinese attack
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... w1GeK.html

Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7191
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Bade » 18 Jul 2017 08:05

Was watching a video of a Chinese tv interview of MD Nalapat and two other Chinese Profs, the Chinese academics were complete hawks when compared to Nalapat. If they want war, then as Chola says we should give them war. The entire Chinese society is so steeped in their own bile, that they believe and become willing mediums of the state's propaganda. Some amount of smacking may be required to bring them to their senses.

Iyersan
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 19 Sep 2016 16:13

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Iyersan » 18 Jul 2017 08:19

http://www.financialexpress.com/india-n ... tly/767594
Sikkim standoff at Doklam: China warns India, says PLA troops will not wait patiently
Sikkim standoff at Doklam: In a stern message directed towards India, China has said that People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have been waiting patiently at Doklam but will not do so for an indefinite period.
By: FE Online | New Delhi | Updated: July 18, 2017 8:00 AM


Sikkim standoff at Doklam: In a stern message directed towards India, China has said that People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have been waiting patiently at Doklam but will not do so for an indefinite period.
Sikkim standoff at Doklam: In a stern message directed towards India, China has said that People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have been waiting patiently at Doklam but will not do so for an indefinite period, according to Indian Express report. Beijing has conveyed this message to foreign diplomats. A few diplomats have conveyed this message to Indian counterparts in Chinese capital and Bhutanese counterparts in New Delhi. It has been learned that foreign diplomats were briefed about ongoing standoff during a closed-door briefing last week. China has also informed some of the G-20 countries about the situation, the report says. Last month, Indian Army blocked Chinese road works in Doklam and have since been in a faceoff with PLA troops. Beijing wants Indian troops must pull back. It has categorically said that the dispute was between China and Bhutan but the Indian soldiers have jumped in.
A diplomat from one of the P-5 (permanent members of the UN Security Council) countries, told The Indian Express that their colleagues in Beijing attended the briefing and were given the impression that the Chinese side will not be waiting for an indefinite period. “This is quite worrying, and we have conveyed it to our Indian colleagues in Beijing and Bhutanese colleagues in Delhi,” the diplomat was quoted as saying IE.
On the other hand, India has maintained that both the governments had reached agreement in 2012 that the trijunction boundary points between India, China and a third country will be finalised in consultation with the country concerned. “Any attempt, therefore, to unilaterally determine trijunction points is in violation of this understanding,” the Ministry of External Affairs said in its statement.

SriKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1478
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby SriKumar » 18 Jul 2017 08:24

Iyersan wrote:
pankajs wrote:The last we head .. Indian and Chinese soldiers were in an eyeball to eyeball confrontation. How is it possible to fire upon such a assembly without hitting own soldiers?

Folks please use past information and commonsense AND bakis are known to make all kinds of absurd claims. Since when did baki channels become our primary source.
We are at war.
Iyersan san, please to let the declaration of war be coming from the gorment officials or phrom Modiji saab. :P

tandav
BRFite
Posts: 163
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 08:24

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby tandav » 18 Jul 2017 08:34

DavidD wrote:
Suraj wrote:
I know the '62 war arouses various strong emotions on both sides, but if you really take a hard look at it, both India and China lost that war. Two of the greatest civilizations in history who's almost never been in conflict with each other are now at loggerheads. All over what? A few barren rocks? Imagine if the two countries worked together, it'll be 100 times what France and Germany has been able to achieve in Europe. Nationalists from both sides are now stuck in a blame game, "just draw the border the way we draw it, it's all your fault for this dragging on!" The war in '62 made those rocks a matter of national pride, and now there's no good way to move past it.


Reason has been obvious... India and China have never shared a border for 1000s of years. Tibet at times was either an Indian protectorate or a Chinese protectorate where sages from both civilizations met and contemplated spirituality, citizens had free access to its vast emptiness. That historic fact has to be restored and things will go back to normal. As I have suggested... There should be a joint India China peace park in Tibet. Hopefully Xi will come to his senses and start the process of pulling back Chinese military from Tibet. Ideally No Chinese or Indian Military force should be deployed at greater than 2000m ASL.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby ArjunPandit » 18 Jul 2017 09:29

Going by history the best opportunity of an operation for Chinese is in October. Wouldn't it be foolish of Chinese to warn us well in advance or am I missing something.. Of course one can argue, we may repeat the mistakes of 62 on the lines same as xi has eleven balls

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8812
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Yagnasri » 18 Jul 2017 09:54

We need to be very careful about the internal sabotage this time. Unlike earlier wars, significant sections of the peacefuls and all the Naxals will be siding with Pakis and Chinese this time. Any planning needs to take that into account. Fortunately, we already have "two and half" front war idea in the open which shows we have seized of the matter.

DrRatnadip
BRFite
Posts: 217
Joined: 31 Dec 2016 00:40

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby DrRatnadip » 18 Jul 2017 10:01

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinio ... 5269/lite/

Danger at Dolam

The longer the standoff lasts, the more easily these positions will harden.
For example, given the unprecedented Indian presence in territory disputed by China and Bhutan, China may conclude that it needs to strengthen its physical position on the Dolam Plateau. Beijing could build more permanent structures a kilometre or two behind the “turning point” at Doka La. That is, China may use the Indian challenge to justify further steps to consolidate its presence on Dolam. India would then be faced with accepting a larger, more permanent Chinese presence or escalating further to stop it. The most realistic outcome would be restoration of the situation before June. This would mean the return of Indian troops to Indian territory and the withdrawal of Chinese construction crews from the area. India may demand or hope that China will vacate the Dolam Plateau, but China is unlikely to leave an area where it believes it had already maintained a presence for decades. The danger inherent in the current stand-off demands a quick resolution.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7283
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Pratyush » 18 Jul 2017 10:25

Yagnasri wrote:We need to be very careful about the internal sabotage this time. Unlike earlier wars, significant sections of the peacefuls and all the Naxals will be siding with Pakis and Chinese this time. Any planning needs to take that into account. Fortunately, we already have "two and half" front war idea in the open which shows we have seized of the matter.



I am more concerned about the over ground workers and the Scamgress.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8842
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby pankajs » 18 Jul 2017 11:19

1. Chinese are so convinced of their overwhelming military superiority that they just don't care.
2. Chinese want to bully India into submission rather than fight. War is uncertain so they might not chance a war.

I mean how many warnings does one give. For the past more than a month it has been at least a warning per day.

India has to confront the Chinese some day on their expansionist definition of border. Forgetting the strategic significance of the trijunction for a moment, If we back down now it will only embolden the Chinese to grab something else somewhere else.

Iyersan
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 19 Sep 2016 16:13

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Iyersan » 18 Jul 2017 11:38

Iyersan wrote:India rejects ‘malicious’ Pakistani media report of soldier deaths in Chinese attack
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... w1GeK.html



India refutes ‘baseless’ Chinese media report of killing 158 Indian soldiers
http://www.newsx.com/national/69370-ind ... n-soldiers

Most important how come the narrative changed from the Indian side to implicate the Chinese media. When the morning mail stated that Baki media Duniya news produced the above fake news

A Deshmukh
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 14:24

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby A Deshmukh » 18 Jul 2017 11:41

as part of psych warfare,
we can distribute flyers to the chinese border soldiers saying: (in chinese) "dont give up your lives for the remote tibet territory. your parents are waiting for you" or something to that effect. can also put in a reminder of how many chinese killed in 1967 border skirmish and 1979 Vietnamese border war to give an idea that they are not invincible.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15035
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby chetak » 18 Jul 2017 11:47

Yagnasri wrote:We need to be very careful about the internal sabotage this time. Unlike earlier wars, significant sections of the peacefuls and all the Naxals will be siding with Pakis and Chinese this time. Any planning needs to take that into account. Fortunately, we already have "two and half" front war idea in the open which shows we have seized of the matter.


That's why the commies are asking for detailed discussions and briefings on the chinese standoff so that information can be leaked.

I would not put it past these buggers to record such proceedings and pass it on


Quick notes: Indian Marxists, Border fence...

Yechury blames govt for Amarnath killings: “Usually terror groups in the state claim attacks immediately, we expressed puzzlement at why that was not the case this time. There were no answers from the government,” Yechury said. "Since that all sections in the Valley, including the separatist Hurriyat, had condemned the Amarnath terror attack, the govt should utilize this positive atmosphere to break the ice and talk to all stakeholders to bring an end to the unrest there".


Yechury blames India for Doklam standoff: "On behalf of the CPM, I told the government that there is a need for them to get to the depth of the reasons for the provocation, the changes in the govt's policy with China, India's growing strategic ties with US, and the joint military naval exercise along with the US and Japan in the South China sea," Yechury said. He also said India's "new permissions" to the Dalai Lama and hoisting of the Tibetan flag in India were other issues that irked the Chinese.


CPM sides with China: "Doka La is Bhutan's standoff with China, India should not interfere"


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: anjan, ldev, Manish_Sharma, UlanBatori and 30 guests