China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 22 Oct 2011 23:54

See my post in the Su-30 thread. You have basically created much ado over nothing. Wake us up when PRC stops buying AL-31Fs and having to go to Russia for SAM tech etc despite investing billions. Basically, hype does not necessarily mean substance. Their copied Su-27 clones are not even the peers of Indian Su-30 MKIs let alone upgrades currently being negotiated!

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 24 Oct 2011 02:46

Video of Chinese UAV in attack mode

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 25 Oct 2011 07:15

saptarishi wrote:
I dont know how much my patriotic friends might take it,,i am posting an excerpt,from a chinese defence blog,in which the aurthor insists how being in same position china developed its aviation industry and india failed...even though the chinese copied they are developing a robust industry.a similar tone echoed by AIR CHIEF NAK BROWNE WHEN HE INSISTS THAT DRDO MIGHT BEG BORROW OR STEAL BUT THEY MUST DEVELOP MODERN AVIATION TECHNOLOGIES

http://china-pla.blogspot.com/2011/09/d ... china.html

Fighter development is a costly affair. And going forward to the 6th generation variant it will become even more. See the decline in the number of companies which have bid for F-22 and F-35. Or compare the fact that the entire Europe has three companies to speak off, SAAB of Sweden, EADS constorium and Dassault of France. Wonder which of these companies will survive in decades to come. We should not overlook the fact that none of the European companies have sought to build a 5th generation fighter on their own. Rather all of them have partnered with US. While we might speculate about a future pure air-dominance 5th generation fighter coming out of Europe, on the lines of EFT, this is as best speculation at this moment.

That said, there are some advantages in competition. It is true that India has only one entity, HAL which is responsible for all the defense aviation. Going forward the winner of MMRCA tender and its Indian counterparts will get one leg up. We can truly see a rise of Indian defense aviation companies.

The benefit of the tree is the fruit that it gives. It is the fighter that comes out of companies, whether state owned entities or private sector entities, that matter. So we should compare the output of these companies, Indias HAL and the chinese companies to actually come to a conclusion.

Also it is heartening to see such a sober view point from across the McMohan line.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 26 Oct 2011 05:05

China seeks military bases in Pakistan

ISLAMABAD - While Pakistan wants China to build a naval base at its southwestern seaport of Gwadar in Balochistan province, Beijing is more interested in setting up military bases either in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan or in the Federally Administered Northern Areas (FANA) that border Xinjiang province.

The Chinese desire is meant to contain growing terrorist activities of Chinese rebels belonging to the al-Qaeda-linked East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) that is also described as the Turkistani Islamic Party (TIP).

The Chinese Muslim rebels want the creation of an independent Islamic state and are allegedly being trained in the tribal areas of Pakistan. According to well-placed diplomatic circles in Islamabad, Beijing's wish for a military presence in Pakistan was discussed at length by the political and military leadership of both countries in recent months as China (which views the Uyghur separatist sentiment as a dire threat) has become ever-more concerned about Pakistan's tribal areas as a haven for radicals.

Beijing believes that similar to the United States military presence in Pakistan, a Chinese attendance would enable its military to effectively counter the Muslim separatists who have been operating from the tribal areas of Pakistan for almost a decade, carrying out cross-border terrorist activities in trouble-stricken Xinjiang province.
:
:
:

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Oct 2011 05:55

Funny.

I think as a CBM Pakistan should follow up WRT the release of the Helo with Indian bases in Pakistan. Goodwill really will count.

After that allow A'stan, Iran, ..... Russia perhaps.

Tell me why is there a Pakistan?

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 26 Oct 2011 15:04

VinodTK wrote:China seeks military bases in Pakistan
ISLAMABAD - While Pakistan wants China to build a naval base at its southwestern seaport of Gwadar in Balochistan province, Beijing is more interested in setting up military bases either in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan or in the Federally Administered Northern Areas (FANA) that border Xinjiang province.

The Chinese desire is meant to contain growing terrorist activities of Chinese rebels belonging to the al-Qaeda-linked East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) that is also described as the Turkistani Islamic Party (TIP).

The Chinese Muslim rebels want the creation of an independent Islamic state and are allegedly being trained in the tribal areas of Pakistan. According to well-placed diplomatic circles in Islamabad, Beijing's wish for a military presence in Pakistan was discussed at length by the political and military leadership of both countries in recent months as China (which views the Uyghur separatist sentiment as a dire threat) has become ever-more concerned about Pakistan's tribal areas as a haven for radicals.

Beijing believes that similar to the United States military presence in Pakistan, a Chinese attendance would enable its military to effectively counter the Muslim separatists who have been operating from the tribal areas of Pakistan for almost a decade, carrying out cross-border terrorist activities in trouble-stricken Xinjiang province.
:
:
:

WOW this is just great. Allow not one but two external forces into one country. It is true then as they say, islamabad has lost control over a significant portion of its territories. Hurrahhhhhhhhhhh.

Now consider another fact, Out of 4 countries that border one nation, two nations have decided to fence the border completely. One of the other two nation cannot fence the border due to financial considerations. Leper is the word which comes to ones mind.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 28 Oct 2011 00:16

NDTV show on Chinese "threat" to India. It is good to finally watch a balanced and sensible talk all around. There is also an interesting clip which shows what happens when IA and PLA patrols do when they come across each other in disputed territory.

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/left-r ... /214696?hp

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 28 Oct 2011 02:06

earlier it was "6 divisions low threat scenario", " 22 divisions high threat scenario" "in two seasons"

now it is " 34 divisions in one fr*** season" (italics min

)

sigh.

more indianism: their budget is 95 billion officially; gods know how much it is unofficially. Ours is only 35 billion. how can we fight hainji?

or better still - their literacy rate is 96 per cent ours is only 74 how can we fight hain? they are decades ahead of us - i think saying such things gives Indians some kind of twisted pleasure somewhere. dhimmitude after all is a raison in itself.

it's as if both countries will take a green back dump on each other to see who wins. it's also as if asymmetry of any kind precludes the very prospect of warfare on the part of the supposedly weaker party. Whenever the question of taking on somebody arises - arrey artillery nahin hain, arrey medium fighter nahin hain, arrey pandoobi nahin hain. To bh** kab ladayi ke liye tayaar hoge? kab apna system badloge ki sab aa jaaye?

Mao ke paas kya tha when he ordered his troops to cross the Yalu river in Korea?

With this kind of blissful logic on the part of our deshwasis i can see why the border has remained peaceful and is likely to remain thus.
After all China already has what it wants. It has tibet. It has aksai chin. it has the headwaters of the brahmaputra.

And now it is making sure that it keeps Gilgit-Baltistan as well.

While in the case of India, after splurging for a decade on foreign weapon systems it will pat itself on the back around 2015-16 and you may hear studio discussions echoing "yes we have deterred the chinese in the vulnerability window" , " yeah baby our defence is absolute". of course lost will be the fact that you deterred an attack that was never going to be mounted anyway and gloss over your own incompetence in shaping a military that can go beyond the holy grail of defence and actually act as an instrument of furthering strategic interests.

every time China doesn't do something that it won't anyway, sarkari types will pat themselves on the back and breathe a sigh of relief - " we have maintained peace and tranquility wonlee saar". of course you have - the status quo is already in the enemy's favour and pre-emption does not exist in your vocabulary.

All that the Chinese have to do to keep India dis-balanced - not settle the border. And tweetoor indicated as much in that studio discussion.

P.S: Mao ke g*** mein dam tha. however he wasn't the biggest asymmetric khiladi. The greatest was the one we call the Mahatma. Its funny how we play lip service to his legacy and draw no lessons from the strategic moves he made in the 1917-37 period.

Bande me tha Dam Vande Mataram!

SKrishna · Post by **SKrishna** » 31 Oct 2011 14:38

Dragon’s Familiar Dance - Brahma Chellany

As the 50th anniversary of China’s invasion approaches, history is in danger of repeating itself, with Chinese military pressures and aggressive designs against India not only mirroring the pre-1962 war situation but also extending to Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) and the oceans around India. China’s expanding axis of evil with Pakistan, including a new troop presence in PoK, heightens India’s vulnerability in Jammu and Kashmir, even as India has beefed up its defences in Arunachal Pradesh.

By muscling up to India, what is China seeking to achieve? The present situation, ominously, is no different in several key aspects from the one that prevailed in the run-up to the 1962 war.

● The aim of “Mao’s India war” in 1962, as Harvard scholar Roderick MacFarquhar has called it, was largely political: to cut India to size by demolishing what it represented—a democratic alternative to China’s autocracy. The swiftness and force with which Mao Zedong defeated India helped discredit the Indian model, boost China’s international image, and consolidate Mao’s internal power. The return of the China-India pairing decades later riles Beijing.

● Just as the Dalai Lama’s flight to India in 1959 set the stage for the Chinese military attack, the exiled Tibetan leader today has become a bigger challenge for China than ever. The continuing security clampdown across the Tibetan plateau since the March 2008 Tibetan uprising parallels the harsh Chinese crackdown in Tibet during 1959-62.

● The prevailing pattern of cross-frontier incursions and other border incidents is no different than the situation that led up to the 1962 war. Yet, India is repeating the same mistake by playing down the Chinese intrusions. Gratuitously stretching the truth, Indian officials say the incursions are the result of differing perceptions about the line of control. But which side has refused to define the line of control? It speaks for itself that China hasn’t offered this excuse. The fact is that Chinese forces are intruding even into Utttarakhand—the only sector where the line of control has been clarified by an exchange of maps—and into Sikkim, whose 206-km border with Tibet is recognised by Beijing.

● The 1962 war occurred against the backdrop of China instigating and arming insurgents in India’s northeast. Although such Chinese activities ceased after Mao’s death, China has come full circle today, with Chinese-made arms increasingly flowing into guerrilla ranks in northeast India via Burmese front organisations. In fact, Pakistan-based terrorists targeting India also rely on Chinese arms.

● China’s pre-1962 psychological war is returning. In recent years, Beijing has employed its state-run media and nationalistic websites to warn of another armed conflict. It is a throwback to the coarse rhetoric China had used in its build-up to the 1962 war. Its People’s Daily, for example, has warned India to weigh “the consequences of a potential confrontation with China.” China merrily builds strategic projects in an internationally disputed area like PoK but responds with crude threats when others explore just for oil in the South China Sea.

● Just as India in the early 1960s retreated to a defensive position in the border negotiations after having undermined its leverage through a formal acceptance of the “Tibet region of China,” the spotlight now is on China’s revived Tibet-linked claim to Arunachal rather than on the core issue, Tibet itself. India, with its focus on process than results, has remained locked in continuous border negotiations with China since 1981—the longest and the most-fruitless process between any two nations post-Second World War. This process has only aided China’s containment-with-engagement strategy.

● In the same way that India under Nehru unwittingly created the context to embolden Beijing to wage aggression, New Delhi is again staring at the consequences of a mismanagement of relations. The more China’s trade surplus with India has swelled—jumping from $2 billion in 2002 to more than $30 billion now—the greater has been its condescension toward India. To make matters worse, the insidious, V.K. Krishna Menon-style shadow has returned to haunt Indian defence management and policy. India has never had more clueless defence and foreign ministers or a weaker Prime Minister with a credibility problem than it does today.

In fact, as it aims to mould a Sino-centric Asia, China is hinting that its real geopolitical contest is more with India than with the distant United States. The countries around India have become battlegrounds for China’s moves to encircle India. From a military invasion in 1962 and a subsequent cartographic aggression, China is moving towards a hydrological aggression and a multipronged strategic squeeze of India. China’s damming of rivers flowing from Tibet to India are highlighting Indian vulnerability on the water front even before India has plugged its disadvantage on the nuclear front by building a credible but minimal deterrent.

Whether Beijing actually sets out to teach India “the final lesson” by launching a 1962-style attack will depend on several factors. They include India’s domestic political situation, its defence preparedness, and the availability for China of a propitious international timing of the type the Cuban missile crisis provided in 1962. If India does not want to be caught napping again, it has to come out of the present political paralysis and inject greater realism into its China policy, which today bears a close resemblance to a studied imitation of an ostrich burying its head in the sand.

SKrishna · Post by **SKrishna** » 31 Oct 2011 14:53

deleted----

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 31 Oct 2011 16:56

We should increase the khujli in south china sea by engaging Vietnam militarily. What are the other probable khujli spots?

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 31 Oct 2011 20:50

P Chitkara wrote:We should increase the khujli in south china sea by engaging Vietnam militarily. What are the other probable khujli spots?

I have a fair idea

India needs to keep East China Sea Lanes Open

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 Oct 2011 21:06

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-new ... 62969.aspx

China could do a Kargil on India "to teach India a lesson", warned strategic affairs think-tank Insitute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), adding it could be a "limited war".

The limited hostilties could be confined to a specific section of the border, limited in duration
and amenable to a negotiated termination, IDSA said in its report.

Projecting conflict scenarios between the two Asian giants, a report titled A Consideration of Sino Indian Conflict by Ali Ahmed said, "The lower end of the conflict at this level could be a Kargil-like situation. China's aim could be to teach India a lesson so as to influence India's rise before its capacity building underway acquires traction."

The report warned this "could be a limited war confined to a specific section of the border or LAC, limited in duration and amenable to a negotiated termination".

The Kargil hostilities were triggered by infiltration of Pakistani soldiers and Kashmiri militants into positions on the Indian side of the Line of Control (LoC) in 1999.

Ahmed warns at a higher level, China could indulge in a "territorial grab" by entering an area such as Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh.

"At the next rung, it could be a more ambitious bid southwards up to its claim line. Lateral or horizontal expansion of conflict from one theatre to another is the next step, with the conflict engulfing one or more of the four possible theatres -- Ladakh, Central Sector, Sikkim and Arunachal," the report said.

The think-tank said in view of India becoming better prepared in future with its capability-development programmes, it could engage China's "hegemonic attention."

"Since India would be better prepared by then, China may instead wish to set India back now by a preventive war. This means current day preparedness is as essential as preparation for the future," it said.

member_20033 · Post by **member_20033** » 31 Oct 2011 22:00

I think two major events are going to happen which will increase India's strategic capability manifold. first is a nuclear submarine which will be leased by the end of this year and second would be INS Vikramaditya which we will get by December 2012 - Mid 2013. Once both assets come China will have to think twice before attacking India.

One question I would like to ask the masters. Is Russian Sub is coming with long range nuclear capable torpedo's?

Marut · Post by **Marut** » 31 Oct 2011 22:22

Nerpa and Vikad are not going to change anything for the short term lower level conflict being postulated in the IDSA report. Arty & Mountain Divs along with improved infra for the border posts will change the tide in our favour. China will need to defeat us, we only need to stalemate them at the current positions.

manum · Post by **manum** » 31 Oct 2011 22:53

How can China attack us...just to push us back...isnt it that if they attack us and pushed backwards...it'll be a bigger setback for them on many fronts?

I think Chinese have bigger things at stake like India has wrt pukes...and then they wont risk loosing face...If they do Kargil on us, they'll make pukes do it and support them with tech...this is what they are doing anyways...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 31 Oct 2011 23:11

China key suspect in U.S. satellite hacks: commission

At least two U.S. environment-monitoring satellites were interfered with four or more times in 2007 and 2008 via a ground station in Norway, and China's military is a prime suspect, a draft report to Congress said.

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, which reported the interference, said the events had not actually been traced to China. It said it was citing them "because the techniques appear consistent with authoritative Chinese military writings" that have advocated disabling satellite control facilities in any conflict.

member_20033 · Post by **member_20033** » 01 Nov 2011 00:17

I tend to agree with Marut. I think in todays world it will not be possible for anyone forcefully come and occupy Indian terriotery. What could be the possible reason for China to attack India. One could be to humiliate us by a sharp and swift attack like they did in 1962. In any such attack their aim would be to penetrate as deep as they can and bring the war to a swift end.

But What did china achieved by 1962 attack. I think it made India confront realities and become self independent in terms of defense and arm itself with nukes. Another such attack will only be long term negative for China as India will rearm itself more vigrously after any probable defeat.

To stop such an attack we need to update our border infrastructure raise more mountain division and arm them with best possible arms. (ordering more self propelled howizer should be the priority along with more attack helicopter). Marut is probably right they need to defeat us while we just need a stalemate.

The second objective can be to completely destroy India so that we can never compete with them in future. But can they afford an all out war with India given taht we accquire Nerpa and Vikramdity and a credible third strike capability to destory their indusrial power house and cities.

Will the chinese take such risk. I think it would be utterly paranoid of them to even contemplate it.

Since I am working in Finance I think that Chinese will face very hard times due to the inhrerent imbalacne nature of their ecnomy. When economy will faltter unempoyement will rise which will lead to civil strife. In worst case scenario if the Communist party faces a threat to their existence they will wage a war to mobilize public opinion.

Such a war could be raised with India (which have nukes so they should not go for a long sustained war). It can start a war with Mayanmar or Vietnam

Interestingly in last 300 years Chinese have been utterly defeated by Manaynmer between 1767 -1769 while vietnam showed them how fierece they are in 1979.

India is the only country which was defeated by the chinese but now we have nukes (which they also know we wont use unless we have existential threat)

So whom would they attack.

Interesting scenario.

I wonder what our millitary generals must be thinking about it

aditya.agd · Post by **aditya.agd** » 01 Nov 2011 01:14

I do not trust Indian defence preparedness ... I think we cannot be complacent against chinese.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Nov 2011 06:42

SKrishna wrote:Dragon’s Familiar Dance - Brahma Chellany

In fact, as it aims to mould a Sino-centric Asia, China is hinting that its real geopolitical contest is more with India than with the distant United States. The countries around India have become battlegrounds for China’s moves to encircle India. From a military invasion in 1962 and a subsequent cartographic aggression, China is moving towards a hydrological aggression and a multipronged strategic squeeze of India. China’s damming of rivers flowing from Tibet to India are highlighting Indian vulnerability on the water front even before India has plugged its disadvantage on the nuclear front by building a credible but minimal deterrent.

Whether Beijing actually sets out to teach India “the final lesson” by launching a 1962-style attack will depend on several factors. They include India’s domestic political situation, its defence preparedness, and the availability for China of a propitious international timing of the type the Cuban missile crisis provided in 1962. If India does not want to be caught napping again, it has to come out of the present political paralysis and inject greater realism into its China policy, which today bears a close resemblance to a studied imitation of an ostrich burying its head in the sand.

I am always fascinated by the "tone" of indian voices, even a one such as Chellaney as compared to the tone of voices from other nations.

In 1965 Ayub Khan warned that a if the Hindu was struck a sharp blow at the right time and place he would (gather up his dhoti) and run.

In 197i it was Yahya Khan of Pakistan about Bengali fearing the sound of gunfire.

In 2001, Bush said "With us or against us" and Armitage warned that an uncooperative Pakistan would be bombed back into the stone age. That made Pakistan cooperate with the USA.

From China we hear:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/ ... 9X20111025

China paper warns of "sound of cannons" in sea disputes
One of China's most popular newspapers warned on Tuesday that nations involved in territorial disputes in the South China Sea should "mentally prepare for the sounds of cannons" if they remain at loggerheads with Beijing.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Nov 2011 06:58

Tim eto remind them of Pindi channa's effect!

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 02 Nov 2011 07:38

Chinese airfields encircle Ladakh
* India has 2 airbases at Leh & Thoise * China has 6 fully-functional airfields adjoining Ladakh

In the vast windswept and barren landscape that divides India and China in southeastern Ladakh, temperatures can drop to a numbing minus 10 degree Celsius at the start of winter. What’s more bone chilling for India is recent military developments in western parts of Tibet and Xinjiang province in China that pose a new challenge for Indian defence establishment and its forces.
fortress-like three-storey Chinese observation post across the LAC in south-eastern Ladakh.
A fortress-like three-storey Chinese observation post across the LAC in south-eastern Ladakh. Tribune photos: Mukesh Aggarwal

There can be no masking the fact that India needs to prioritise and speed up its thrust into eastern Ladakh. Setting up of vital airfields, infrastructure on the LAC, storehouses for supplies and better accommodation for troops just cannot be postponed any more.

At the beginning of October, the Indian Defence Ministry gave its nod to develop an airfield at Nyoma and expand the one at Kargil. At present India has two full-fledged airbases at Leh and Thoise.

Meanwhile, China has readied six airbases on its side in areas of western Tibet and Xinjiang province adjoining Ladakh.

The Indian security establishment has irrefutable visual inputs on Chinese airfields. Beijing now has the capability to launch fighter aircrafts carrying deadly strike weapons or transport planes carrying tonnes of equipment or hundreds of troops to land then close to Indian forward defence lines along the LAC. These fully-functional airfields virtually form a ‘ring’ around Ladakh.

A senior official explained to The Tribune the fresh challenges saying Kashgar, Korla, Yarkand, Hotan, Cherchen (Qiemo) and Gardzong, have operational airfields. Large planes like the IL76 transporter operate from there. Last winter, the Chinese conducted a major military exercise and even operated their own version of the Sukhoi-30 fighter from at least three of these bases.

In India, only Leh and Thoise allow operations of all types of small and large planes. The Kargil airstrip is just 6,000-feet long and allows only smaller planes like AN32 or the C-130-Js to land. It will be expanded by the year 2016.

Nyoma in southeastern Ladakh is a mud-paved advanced landing ground (ALG). This sits at a junction from where three pressure points along the LAC-Demchok, Chushul and Chumar sector-are close by. Indian strategic planners have ruled out having a full operational usage of the ALG’s at Fukche and Chushul as they are deemed too close to China.

In China, the accommodation coming up is all in concrete. China terms the structures as the ‘nomad-huts’. The Indian Army suspects these are of dual use and can be converted into supply depots or even bunkers. The Chinese watch towers at Domshele and Demchok are three-storey high and are visibly well protected and insulated. The Indian side has basic amenities but those are way behind China.

A China-watcher at the New-Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation, Dr K Yhome, says, “From a military point of view, the Chinese infrastructure of airfields, roads and rail-network threatens India. Our pace is not quick enough,” he adds.

It’s important that defence planners take note of his assessment.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 02 Nov 2011 21:16

China is even encircling the military bases!! NOT GOOD!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 02 Nov 2011 21:56

er, we have plenty of major airbases in reach of ladakh-hp-uttaranchal border. the ALGs are for surge mobilization on eve of hostilities not for fighter ops.

distance from kashgar - leh is around 500km, same as chandigarh (or any base like ambala) to leh.
hotan to leh is around 350km...similar to avantipur (srinagar)

our fighters and strike birds will take off from sea level with full payload, we have a grid of bases on the map and places in the south to act as buffer.
their fighters if they use short runs will take off with less payload
if they want full payload will have to use long runways and burn more fuel (they have build long runways in tibet for this)

hotan and kashgar seem to be civil airports of 10,500ft length and no military looking parking stands.

so they must be building the alleged 16,000ft long mil-std runways and aprons separately sneaking around in the interior.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 02 Nov 2011 22:14

Marut wrote:Nerpa and Vikad are not going to change anything for the short term lower level conflict being postulated in the IDSA report. Arty & Mountain Divs along with improved infra for the border posts will change the tide in our favour. China will need to defeat us, we only need to stalemate them at the current positions.

Interesting view. Speaks volumes. Not saying you are wrong, with regards to GOI thought process, just interesting. What has China to gain by "defeating" us in the mountains vs defeating us on the seas and the IOR would be an interesting comparison to make, on likely PRC strategic thought processes when confronted with India's. A SWOT analysis of the mountains against seas is in order.

member_20011 · Post by **member_20011** » 03 Nov 2011 00:08

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/a-kar ... 111102.htm

Summarily ruling out the possibility of China engineering a 'Kargil-type' misadventure along the Indian border, government sources in New Delhi said on Wednesday that Chinese incursions into Indian territory have progressively decreased over the last five years.
"The Army says it (Kargil-type attack by China) is out of the question and that it can handle it," a top government source said.

"Why would they make trouble? What will they gain that substantially outweighs the losses they could incur? The capabilities of India and China have vastly increased over time and no one is crazy enough to spark off a confrontation," he said.

He was speaking in the backdrop of a report by strategic affairs think-tank Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses which suggested that it is conceivable that China could do a Kargil on India 'to teach India a lesson' and that it could be a 'limited war'.

Though so called top government source is not identified by the article but if this is true the it does reflect the thinking of decision makers.

aditya.agd · Post by **aditya.agd** » 03 Nov 2011 00:47

Indian Government's complacency is a matter of concern. In the end they will push the blame to Intelligence agencies and army.

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 03 Nov 2011 09:04

Chinese spacecraft dock in orbit

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Nov 2011 10:31

ashi wrote:Chinese spacecraft dock in orbit

Ah Congrats. Gentle collision this time and no space debris.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 03 Nov 2011 10:59

Singha wrote:http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-new ... 62969.aspx

China could do a Kargil on India "to teach India a lesson", warned strategic affairs think-tank Insitute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), adding it could be a "limited war".
Snip......
"Since India would be better prepared by then, China may instead wish to set India back now by a preventive war. This means current day preparedness is as essential as preparation for the future," it said.

I fully agree with author about the possibility of a preventive war with PRC. But I disagree with the geographic location of any possible future war. A was will have to be one that is constraining India's ability to react in a timely manner. A land war in these circumstances will not do that. Nor will the mission be accomplished by Air campaign on Indian soil. The war will have to be in an extra regional location for India.

Right now, India is expanding its foot print in some regions and is militarily incapable of defending it self in a timely manner in those regions.

member_20021 · Post by **member_20021** » 03 Nov 2011 12:08

Pratyush wrote:
Singha wrote:http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-new ... 62969.aspx

I fully agree with author about the possibility of a preventive war with PRC. But I disagree with the geographic location of any possible future war. A was will have to be one that is constraining India's ability to react in a timely manner. A land war in these circumstances will not do that. Nor will the mission be accomplished by Air campaign on Indian soil. The war will have to be in an extra regional location for India.

Right now, India is expanding its foot print in some regions and is militarily incapable of defending it self in a timely manner in those regions.

I am not saying it would definitely happen, but I tend to agree that a military conflict between China and India is possible. China just held a large scale military game in the Xizhang-Qinghai region to test the high altitude war capacity.

Marut · Post by **Marut** » 03 Nov 2011 22:12

ShauryaT wrote:
Marut wrote:Nerpa and Vikad are not going to change anything for the short term lower level conflict being postulated in the IDSA report. Arty & Mountain Divs along with improved infra for the border posts will change the tide in our favour. China will need to defeat us, we only need to stalemate them at the current positions.
Interesting view. Speaks volumes. Not saying you are wrong, with regards to GOI thought process, just interesting. What has China to gain by "defeating" us in the mountains vs defeating us on the seas and the IOR would be an interesting comparison to make, on likely PRC strategic thought processes when confronted with India's. A SWOT analysis of the mountains against seas is in order.

The thinking is based on the assumption that PRC will initiate the war to teach us a lesson. After inflicting losses and taking losses but no territorial gains, they will have to show what they have taught us. This very same question racked the Pakis when they pondered what the Kargil misadventure gained for them other than military defeat and international scorn. So it was disingenuously declared to have 'internationalised' the Kashmir issue! China can't get away with such spin since it will show them in poor light. And losing face is a big no-no for the Chinese. They will sustain losses unflinchingly so long as they can keep their face (H&D) intact - not very different than pakis in some ways. Hence my assertion that in case of Chinese misadventures, we need to not cede ground to them (net-net) especially Tawang. The rest will fall in place accordingly.

With regards to the mountains vs seas debate, there are two reasons for the Indo-China conflict.
1. The Tibet issue which basically started it all in the 1950s
2. The transport and movement of oil, gas and goods aka supply chain for the Chinese economy

Any conflict in the sea will need to be either closer to the Indian peninsula or the South China Sea closer to Chinese mainland. Other locations are not feasible since they are very close to international SLOCs and world powers will come down like bricks on both of us to cut it out. Hence you will end with more of skirmishes at sea rather than any full fledged conflict unless of course we are talking about the "decisive" fight - which IMO opinion is still some years away. Additionally other claiming to turned a ship/sub into piece of metal junk, there isn't anything tangible to show for spoils of war from these skirmishes. PLAN will behave more like PNS Babur or the SL navy harassing TN fishermen than any serious fireworks.

Mountain war will be the more preferred option since territorial gains are more tangible and credible things which can be shown off, especially if it's in the region PRC terms as 'Southern Tibet'. The dividends from this victory will help consolidate their claims on Tibet by virtue of having the main Tibetan monasteries located on it territory, much like KSA becoming guardian of Islam due to the holy sites. Any territorial gain in the Northern sector will help consolidate their position to access Central Asia and the Persian Gulf through their rent-boy Pakistan thereby securing their supply chain while cutting India down to its size.

Hence it is my assertion that China will prefer a mountain war and focus on Northern sector and Tawang in the Eastern sector to ensure we don't threaten the Karakoram Highway and to legitimize their occupation of Tibet with religious sanction.

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 04 Nov 2011 00:07

Any attack on India will bring all chinese shipping lanes to close and bombed. That will be the end of their trade route from Indian ocean. On the top if they try to use gwader that will be bombed too. Very nasty strategy. Indian navy will cause shite out of them in the region. not to forget un trade embargo's and miserable life that comes when India starts supplyimg arms to Tibetan population in full swing. China can implode from within. If i was China i would never want to be in nasty situation like this.

member_20021 · Post by **member_20021** » 04 Nov 2011 00:33

ashish raval wrote:Any attack on India will bring all chinese shipping lanes to close and bombed. That will be the end of their trade route from Indian ocean. On the top if they try to use gwader that will be bombed too. Very nasty strategy. Indian navy will cause shite out of them in the region. not to forget un trade embargo's and miserable life that comes when India starts supplyimg arms to Tibetan population in full swing. China can implode from within. If i was China i would never want to be in nasty situation like this.

There are a lot of things that I do not know, but one of things that I do know: you are not China. Let me remind you, P.R. China had weathered what you mentioned before, such as nuclear threat, economical embargo, CIA sponsored unrest in Xizhang; China still became China today. What you predicted may happen to Republic of China, but not People's Republic of China.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 04 Nov 2011 01:21

Jimi wrote:There are a lot of things that I do not know, but one of things that I do know: you are not China. Let me remind you, P.R. China had weathered what you mentioned before, such as nuclear threat, economical embargo, CIA sponsored unrest in Xizhang; China still became China today. What you predicted may happen to Republic of China, but not People's Republic of China.

Republic of China didn't proliferate nuclear weapons, nor did it threaten India to invite such a response. Nor could India in any way be accused of issues mentioned above. It is precisely because of PRC that this all is discussed here.

member_20021 · Post by **member_20021** » 04 Nov 2011 02:21

vishvak wrote:
Jimi wrote:There are a lot of things that I do not know, but one of things that I do know: you are not China. Let me remind you, P.R. China had weathered what you mentioned before, such as nuclear threat, economical embargo, CIA sponsored unrest in Xizhang; China still became China today. What you predicted may happen to Republic of China, but not People's Republic of China.
Republic of China didn't proliferate nuclear weapons, nor did it threaten India to invite such a response. Nor could India in any way be accused of issues mentioned above. It is precisely because of PRC that this all is discussed here.

I felt you are fooled by western propaganda and poisoned by their thinking. Who proliferated? The USA has been the biggest "proliferator", who even provided already-made" nukes to the British, and provided substantial assistance to Israel, and perhaps France. The so called proliferation may not be a totally bad thing, especially in the context of nuclear monopoly, which is far more dangerous than a balanced nuclear deterrence. Since the Soviets got their nukes, there have been no hot wars between the two nuclear powers, but so many wars imposed by the nuclear powers to the non-nuclear nations. I doubt Pakistan really needed major, specific help from China, in consideration that Pak has world class nuclear scientists and the needed minerals. But if China had provided assistance, I believe it greatly helped the peace in the region. The result, there has been no major armed conflicts between India and Pak.

member_20069 · Post by **member_20069** » 04 Nov 2011 02:40

"I felt you are fooled by western propaganda and poisoned by their thinking. Who proliferated? The USA has been the biggest "proliferator", who even provided already-made" nukes to the British, and provided substantial assistance to Israel, and perhaps France. The so called proliferation may not be a totally bad thing, especially in the context of nuclear monopoly, which is far more dangerous than a balanced nuclear deterrence. Since the Soviets got their nukes, there have been no hot wars between the two nuclear powers, but so many wars imposed by the nuclear powers to the non-nuclear nations. I doubt Pakistan really needed major, specific help from China, in consideration that Pak has world class nuclear scientists and the needed minerals. But if China had provided assistance, I believe it greatly helped the peace in the region. The result, there has been no major armed conflicts between India and Pak."[/size]

Perhaps this is the reason why Porkistan does what is does, in terms of exporting terror to it's neighbors and helps proliferating nuclear tech. 1st it was Libya that admitted and now it is Syria's turn. I doubt, if next terrorist strike will hold back India from teaching Porkistan a lesson despite deterrence. A limited war is a possibility under a nuclear over hang.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 04 Nov 2011 02:42

Jimi, then I guess you shouldnt have a problem if south korea, taiwan, vietnam, malaysia, all of them get nukes and it is definitely for peace and deterrence.

member_20021 · Post by **member_20021** » 04 Nov 2011 02:54

Virupaksha wrote:Jimi, then I guess you shouldnt have a problem if south korea, taiwan, vietnam, malaysia, all of them get nukes and it is definitely for peace and deterrence.

Nope, I do not think that China would be bothered a lot more than other countries. Is it that China fought direct wars with the mightier nuclear USA and USSR?

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 04 Nov 2011 05:18

Panic over China's four new nuke ballistic missiles

Indian officials say it's worrisome that Delingha in central Qinghai province is one of the places, where most of the upgrade is taking place. Not more than 2,000km from Delhi, Delingha is meant to be used almost exclusively for India as other countries from here like Nepal, Myanmar and Pakistan are not identified as potential targets.

Kristensen told TOI that India was a potential target, but added that the Chinese nuclear policy is geared towards all potential adversaries, each of which has its own characteristics. "India to the south is countered with medium-range missiles from central (Delingha region) and southern (Kunming region) China," he said.

"One factor that can contribute to making the situation better or worse between China and India is of course India's own military modernization along the India-China border as well as India's development of longer-range nuclear missiles that are more directly aimed at China," he added.