India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020 - Part 2

[sudarshan]

I guess that's the difference between India and China. China has no compunctions taking over Tibet, whose population hates them. Not to mention swallowing pieces of Nepal, Bhutan, Kazakhstan, Russia.... Most of India's problem with China is because of a border which only exists, because China has no qualms in taking over territory, and India is also on the defensive because of this. Gilgit-Baltistan has a lower avg. population density than Sweden (though not as low as Tibet).

Land border = access, so land border with Central Asia would be a huge plus. Having the territory in hand allows construction of roads and railways for access, and these pass through mostly uninhabited areas.

[RKumar]

We could have taken PoK in 48 or 71. We didn't because we don't want more people who don't like us.

I don't agree with your statement, western countries arm-twisted us in the favour of Napak. Our HM, DM and PM have given clear statements in the parliament as well as outside that only remaining issues with Napak are PoK and that is part of India.

With your logic, 5-7% of BIF wants to break India - should we create 300-400 princely states so that next Mughal or East India trading company can march in and enslave us for next 500 years

[chola]

If we want to seriously look at what Cheen's strategy is in Ladakh then we need to look at their modus operandi in the SCS, the Taiwan Strait and Japan.

Forget these fear fantasies of Cheen attacking the IA in a conventional war like 1962. This current chini military has shown every evidence that it doesn't like full kinetics. Even the attack on Bihar 16 has shown that. Why use bats and clubs like some cavemen if they wanted a proper fight? They didn't. It was calculated gray-zone stuff to keep things from going hot but creating an environment where it becomes a norm for them to flood equipment into the area.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/militar ... -down-over

By air and sea: China’s two-pronged strategy to grind Japan down over disputed islands

...

In the last few years, China has been ramping up its civilian and military presence in the airspace and waters around a rocky, uninhabited group of islands in the East China Sea.

...

As part of its strategy, China has sent military planes on hundreds of sorties in the area, forcing the Japan Self-Defence Forces to scramble its fighter jets from dawn till dusk.

Observers say the tactic is draining Japanese personnel and equipment but also comes at a big risk for China.

...

From 2013 and 2018, an average of 720 Chinese coastguard vessels ventured into the waters. And in 2020, 1,157 of the Chinese ships went in the contiguous zone of the islands, up more than 5 per cent from last year and almost triple the number from 2012.

...

Timothy Heath, also from the Rand Corporation, said China’s strategy for the Senkakus depended on “wearing down” Japan’s resistance over time so that eventually Tokyo acquiesced without fighting.

...

“First, the huge amount of resources available to the Chinese coastguard and People’s Liberation Army Navy provides an important material advantage. Japan cannot match China plane for plane and ship for ship. Tokyo will become exhausted if it tries to do so,” Heath said.

...

However, Heath cautioned that China’s strategy could fail if Japan and the US responded to the increased pressure by stepping up cooperation near the Senkakus, raising the risk of a crisis or clash that nobody wanted.

Their intention is to wear the opponent down by flooding you in peacetime with their machines. Even an advanced state like Japan can't keep up with the numbers. But because it is not actual warfare, Japan cannot retaliate with far better combat ability in reducing chini numbers.

Over time, their vessels (land, air or sea) will become part of the landscape. They are there in places you can't be all the time and they are in numbers you can't match (unless you build up a comparable MIC/industrial base.)

So what is the response? You need to raise the risk of hot war. In fact, you might NEED to go hot to stop this.

[Adrija]

We could have taken PoK in 48 or 71. We didn't because we don't want more people who don't like us.

Sorry, but that is simply not a correct statement

and the move to electric for surface transport simply shifts the locus of demand upstream more towards electricity generation, not eliminate energy demand... and till the nuclear industry comes up with significant innovations fossil fuels will continue to be a major mix for both India and China at the very least...the importance of the Wells of Power will continue... so either the Mideast or the CARs or the US (for India) will remain fulcrum of our energy policy...

[schinnas]

With increased discovery of natural gas in India and move towards electricity for transport, our dependence on imported crude will decrease as a percentage of energy needs every year for the forseeable future. However, for next decade atleast (till 2035), our crude imports will continue to grow in absolute terms.

India should accelerate clean electricity generation (solar, wind) while continuing explore options towards accelerating discovery and production of natural gas and crude. Breaking up into 3 parts (oil discovery and R&D, production and oil field ownership) and privatising all three parts (no company should be allowed to purchase more than one of the three parts) can help accomplish that.

How does this play into border security:

#1. Our substantial and growing oil imports from gulf for the next decade are a critical leverage we have on Arab states and OIC. This is the time window India has to solve Pak problem.

#2. Focus on local electricity generation in border areas so that power distribution can be decentralised and made resilient to single point attacks. The challenge here is that both Solar and wind energy productivity is difficult in Indo-Tibetan border but very much possible in Indo-Pak border. So, India needs to double down on local grid based electricity generation and distribution and incentivising electric vehicles for civilian and commercial use in Rajastan, Gujarat, Punjab and Haryana.

#3. Build pipelines to transport oil and gas reliably and efficiently to Indo Tibetan border. This along with installation of good amount of redundant diesel powered generators will greatly reduce supply chain pressure and reduce vehicular transport for army logistics.

[Philip]

See the latest CPC decision giving overwhelming power to the military and XI,the only civvie above it, where PRC "developmental interests" are a good enough pretext to going to war.
Imaging the next Indo- Pak spat where Gwadar will be toast.The Chins will use ANY Chin interest affected to be a legitimate reason to attack India. The decision is fraught with consequtnces and the GOI must truly wake up to the gravity of the situ.

We MUST use the 2 " T" cards ,recognition of Taiwan and the illegal occupation of Tibet,recognising the govt. in exile and saying goodbye to thd LAC, which for all practical purposes China treats as a flexible line which it can alter at will.

[Yagnasri]

Going towards thorium cycle may be the only way forward for us.

[LakshmanPST]

India should first be clear of their overall strategic objectives...
-
1) Do we want to be content in simply defending our current borders, LAC, LOC and littorals...?
2) Do we plan to take back all occupied territories from Pak and China and be content with it...???
3) Do we want to see ourselves as a South Asian & Indian Ocean superpower and play the big game...???
----
Post 1990 until 2014, I feel Indian policy makers were planning for objective 1 and 1 only...
They were simply content with being able to defend the current boundaries... There was never any talk about reclaiming POK or COK...
And post 2004, we had a govt. that messed up internal security and also left many gaps in our armed forces...
----
Post 2014, I feel Govt. showed intention to shift towards objective 2...
There is talk about taking back Indian territories and some assertive statements in the parliament... But I feel govt. is still primarily focussed on first being able to defend current borders, filling up all gaps and improving internal security...
----
Coming to objective 3, I feel this is where most ppl on BRF want to see India...
Objective 3 would mean, apart from India being able to play 4D chess in all neighbouring countries, India should also be able to deploy armed forces in any country in South Asia and Indian Ocean Rim...
I feel India briefly tried to achieve this objective post 1970, starting from Bangladesh War, Operations in Maldives and Sri Lanka, integration of Sikkim etc....
But post 1990, we somehow lost our way...
-
I feel we need to up the game...
Our long term objectives should be liberation of Tibet, break-up of Pakistan, reigning in other nearby countries from moving closer to 'outsider' superpowers irrespective of Govt. in power in these countries etc....
Along with this, we should be able to project military power in the entire South Asia and IOR...
Even if India can not state this openly, we need to be working towards it...

[nam]

I don't agree with your statement, western countries arm-twisted us in the favour of Napak. Our HM, DM and PM have given clear statements in the parliament as well as outside that only remaining issues with Napak are PoK and that is part of India.

With your logic, 5-7% of BIF wants to break India - should we create 300-400 princely states so that next Mughal or East India trading company can march in and enslave us for next 500 years

You don't bring in more people, who will change the demography of a region, which is already not in our favor. If India was a single entity, we would have been worse than Africa and in constant civil war.

Thank god for the partition, we are now a 3T economy. Jinnah did our country a massive favor by taking all the nutcases along with him, put them in a place, which is now famous for hosting bin laden.

[SSridhar]

We could have taken PoK in 48 or 71. We didn't because we don't want more people who don't like us.

That's incorrect.

In 48, we were so tied in Jammu and the Kashmir Valley that we could not pay attention to Skardu and beyond. We still made some attempts but we did not have backup. The heroic efforts of the IA at the Skardu Fort and the MVC awarded to Sher Jung Thapa attest to that. The IAF made a few bombing sorties but nothing beyond that because our resources were stretched and Kashmir was way too important.

In 1971, even the USSR was against any attempt to change status-quo in the Western sector.

[vimal]

You don't bring in more people, who will change the demography of a region, which is already not in our favor. If India was a single entity, we would have been worse than Africa and in constant civil war.

Thank god for the partition, we are now a 3T economy. Jinnah did our country a massive favor by taking all the nutcases along with him, put them in a place, which is now famous for hosting bin laden.

India has more pissfuls than napakis and they already act as king makers in a lot of states. If demography is destiny then it looks pretty bleak for India at this point.

[nam]

That's incorrect.

In 48, we were so tied in Jammu and the Kashmir Valley that we could not pay attention to Skardu and beyond. We still made some attempts but we did not have backup. The heroic efforts of the IA at the Skardu Fort and the MVC awarded to Sher Jung Thapa attest to that. The IAF made a few bombing sorties but nothing beyond that because our resources were stretched and Kashmir was way too important.

In 1971, even the USSR was against any attempt to change status-quo in the Western sector.

I did read that we didn't go for Muzzafarabad, because the locals were not supportive of Abdulla. Irrespective of that, if we really wanted to get back PoK, we had enough time from 48 to even 65. Pak was more desperate to get our part of J&K than we were.

As I mentioned earlier, the demography was not on our side and Pak was allowed to keep PoK to convince it to finalise the border. The same was attempted in 71.

USSR might have been against going in to Pak proper, but don't see why they would have problem with PoK. We could have asked for parts of PoK in return for the prisoners. We didn't. Issues of demography.

[nam]

India has more pissfuls than napakis and they already act as king makers in a lot of states. If demography is destiny then it looks pretty bleak for India at this point.

A reason why I am against any population control policies. It is better have 2 billion Indians with 5K per capita, than 500M with 10K per capita. Doesn't matter if we loose some land. New land can always be got. A nation with 2B and 10T GDP can always eye or make deal for some other land.. We can go to war for unpopulated land if required. Won't run out of men to fight.

Population is what allowed Indian civilization to survive.

Demography is destiny.

[Aditya_V]

In 1948, PAK was allowed to keep POK due to British influence on Nehru, Till operation Eraze Pakis had the advantage, after that they had nothing in Gilgit-Baltistan - plus British influence on Nehru that we would too close to comfort to GHQ Rawalpindi.

There was no concept of International -pressure and ceasefire as long as the Pakis were threatening whole of Ladakh till Operation Eraze.

In 1971 the war was fought in Winter and we did not have immediate capability mount local offensive, if we continued the war for 4 months with International pressure we could have done that- but we would have to taken the US big time and I don't we were ready for such consequences.

[sanjayc]

India has more pissfuls than napakis and they already act as king makers in a lot of states. If demography is destiny then it looks pretty bleak for India at this point.

This is due to stupidity of Gandhi and Nehru. Problem would have been solved had Gandhi-Nehru allowed full transfer of population, when they so casually handed over 1/3rd of Indian landmass to Muslims on a platter. The turds have now died and all their delusions went away with them, while we remain behind, with so much needless suffering for the next generation. Some Muslims I have spoken to are gleeful that the way their population is going up, there will a "takhta-palat" (power reversal) in India in next 30 years and Muslims will capture the country. They said all the infrastructure that is being built (bullet trains, etc.) is fantastic as that will be used by the newly built Muslim state. So Modi's strategy of "Vikas, Vikas, Vikas" is going to carry us only so far till this demography threat is addressed.

[prashanth]

Population is what allowed Indian civilization to survive.

Demography is destiny.

+10000

It is the numbers that spared our civilization from extermination. Greek, Roman, Egypt, Maya, Inca etc were erased because of lack of numbers. Even in the Indian subcontinent, look at what is happening to Indics in tsp, bdesh and Afg. It is very likely they will be driven out/converted by the end of this century. Sorry for OT. Won't post on this topic anymore in this thread.

[LakshmanPST]

What we really need in POK is the land more than the ppl... It has immense security and strategic value...
If not the entire POK, we should atleast take back the Northern part of POK to cut off land access between Pak and China...
-
In case we feel POK is not required, the next best thing to do is occupy it, then exchange it for some land in Sindh or Punjab, get all Non-Muslim population in Pak transferred to this land...
That way, Hindu minority issues in Pak will also be solved...

[Aditya_V]

The number of people in Gilgit Baltistan, Poonch Bulge, Nellam Valley are not much, if we get these areas plus Shakargarh Bulge, Pakis can keep Mirpur Khuritta and Muzaffarabad- they will not be able tinflrate easily to Kashmir valley also if we get the Poonch Bulge and the Neelum Valley.

[RajaRudra]

Winter gave time, but issue in LAC has not got resolved. We may not like it, but we are into some serious happenings in the upcoming summer.
whatever the signaling in business/imports/diplomacy had not yet achieved its objectives with regard to China.

Only option left now is boots on the ground to reclaim. Hope we will not be waiting for the first hit, and will be starting with time of our choosing.

[ramana]

nam it's matter of power..India did not have the power to alter political geography.

Demography is destiny in modern Democratic world only.
Throughout history a small group would capture the capital and rule the country for power centered on the capital

Eg..India, China, Afghanistan under Taliban....

[ramana]

sudarshan, China likes to claim historical continuity of political rule but after 1200, it's Mongol rule with a Han overlay.
They have nothing to do with ancient China.

[nam]

Demography is destiny in modern Democratic world only.
Throughout history a small group would capture the capital and rule the country for power centered on the capital

Eg..India, China, Afghanistan under Taliban....

That is correct. Modern united India with a centralized capital, large GDP, nukes and a large population will make sure the country is never invaded again.

[ramana]

Hari Nair, Manjugu, Philip, jamwal, rohitvats, chola, Deans,

What did 2020 reveal to each of you about the Chinese you did not know earlier?

I would like to answer this question too!
1. I found the fact that Chinese troops getting Canadian training in cold weather operations since 2018 shows there was intent to escalate in Ladakh or Tawang. This puts paid to the claim that A370 removal somehow made the PLA deploy in Ladakh this April.
2. I find interesting that PLA has revised their orbat after Vietnam war and Desert Storm with more firepower units. In the four earlier wars: 1948 war against Kuomintang, 1950 Korean War, 1962 skirmish with India, 1979 Vietnam War, the PLA relied for volume in mass deployment of soldiers. Now after RMA they rely on fire power. Even their mountain units are motorized and lots of firepower.
3. Despite everything they adhered to the no fire arms rule!!!
4. They seem averse to start hostilities in Tawang.
5. Rest Vidur and others have captured well.


About India
1. The CDS system has worked in the first warm crisis of the millennium. Long after we are gone, this will be written as Asia's Cuban Missile Crisis between two Asian nuke powers. One generalization from studying the warm wars of 20th century, two hostile nuke powers with out common borders will fight proxy wars in third world. On the other hand two hostile nuke powers with common borders will fight border skirmishes.
2. India has shown it can fight an integrated war on many layers and dimensions. This is a new thing wrt nuke powers - Economic trade ban, app bans, revive industry etc. It was fascinating to me that since 2008 Congress party - China accord in Beijing the cumulative trade deficit from 2009 to 2019 is $550B. That is half a trillion dollars!!! and caused by killing domestic supply while demand increased. Now this is flattened.
3. Rest I don't want to talk about.

[ramana]

Why do we need PoK, where people don't like us anyways? or invade in to a failed state like Pak?

Wow... this is a most surprising statement Nam-ji.......... we need POK for linking to the CARs and ensuring an overland and safe route for them being able to evacuate their oil & gas deposits so that they can develop an alternate to their current dependence to China ..... right now they are landlocked and their only economic lifeline is selling their mineral wealth to China... so they remain bound to it inspite of not liking the Hans. civl

And yes, they don't like the Hans at all... the main reason why Kazakhs developed a new capital (Astana) as an alternate to Almaty right in the middle of the steppes with absolutely no shelter from the winds is that is pretty much the farthest point from the China border

The Great Game has not changed much since the time the British, after having having looted India's wealth, shifted the fulcrum of their entire foreign policy to safeguarding the Wells of Power in the Mideast in the 1910s...... which the US inherited after WWII. Fracking and the resulting abundance of energy sources in continental US has made the Mid-East rulers insecure in the US' continued stake in their stability, and they look to China as the second guarantor. So China becomes a fulcrum for Mideast, CARs as well as RU now. India is the only (potential) alternate, but will be unable to play a full alternate role till either its economy crosses say ~ USD 10 trn mark, and/or at least starts offering the CARs an economic alternate for their minerals... then China gets pressurized on its western and northern flanks as well in addition to the lock the US has on their first and second island chains to their east

China is well aware of the strategic value of the Gilgit-Baltistan belt for both it AND India... hence the CPEC

very good geo-political post.

Also current Chinese like to claim links to ancient China while they are Sinicised Mongols with a Han veneer.
They don't have many Tang or Ming civilizational culture.

Mao erased all that.

[ramana]

Having made the above very important point about the nuclear bogey I will address Pargha's point about manpower

1. We have 9 Divs in Eastern Command which are adequate. We have 2 Divs deployed in Eastern Ladakh (3 Div reinforced by 1 more). We have adequate forces in Northern Command for Pakistan. We have a Mountain Strike Corps which can carry out ops both in NC and EC. We have 3 Strike Corps against Pak + 6 Pivot Corps. Our entire strength against Pak is the size of entire Pak army + we have adequate forces against China.

2. I believe we can with these forces fight a 2 front war - being defensive in one front and offensive in another. We cannot be offensive in both fronts. But do we need to be ? I don't think so. Even if you want to take Aksai Chin and GB at same time the constraint is not so much troops but air mobility. You need to be able to air assault with atleast 2 full divisions and then build an air bridge that can bring another 2/3 Divs into theatre. I believer we can rejig our forces to rustle up the troops but the limiting factor will be transport a/c, light guns etc. We have only 1 Para Brigade now.

3. So I believe our troop strength is adequate even for a 2 front war with 1 front offensive. We can move up 1/2 divs from WC/SWC/SC to NC if needed

Good summary. Especially that PLA needs 3 to 10x to counter our 9 divisions.

[ramana]

...

Purely on point of nuclear powers will only skirmish - thats buying into the nuclear bogey and blackmail argument that we have been attempting to wean India away from. I strongly disagree with this nuclear bogey and will take the liberty of calling it wrong and illogical. Don't want to get into the concepts of nuclear weapons and their use here but I wanted to unambiguously counter this bogey.

Galwan has no connection. Surprised to see it mentioned. It was an ambush that was broken by our bravehearts despite all odds. Crushing defeat was inflicted on enemy. No connection whatsoever to nuclear doctrine or policy. Lets be very clear.

I believe there will be a full fledged conventional war between 2 nuclear states within the next 10 years.

Please define war.
To me in context of India and the neighbors, 1962 was a border skirmish. Yes Indian territory was occupied but it was not war which engaged the full resources of India.
1965 was a limited war in Punjab. Kashmir was precursor. Rann of Kutch was also skirmish.

1971 was full scale war as it engaged the three services and more.
1999 Kargil was a sector battle.

Galwan was a non-firearm skirmish. More than an ambush.
From the forces gathered by PRC it was a prelude to an attack on Leh or DBO.

I call it skirmish as its still sub-theater.

So what is this war in next ten years you envisage.

I expect a probable full blown battle in Ladakh in next six months.
Probable for PRC is the non status quo power.

[fanne]

I think we have more than 9 divs in Eastern command (unless the divisions under MSCs are being counted separately). Similarly on Ladhak front - we have deployed more than 2 divs (and we have some reserves still left for northern front). Rohitvats historical tweets gets into more details.
Plus many of our divs are bolstered with RR units (i.e. extra manpower for the .5 front).
Bottom line is IA really through through all the scenarios and raised formations to counter them. When they say, they are ready to fight 2.5 war, they mean it. The equipment could be better (instead of 130 mm guns, bofors would be better, instead of T-72 maybe T-90S, more accurate rounds...). But with current equipment (what budget and MOD can provide), they are OK if not great.
The enemy needs 3x -9x is only true for where they intend to fight. If Chinese thinks that they can teach us a lesson say in Depsang plane or in Sikkim (Nathu La), they have to only have 3x superiority there. Which is not much. They can of course perhaps make another assumption (IMHO false) that India will not attack anywhere else where it has supremacy, it will simply roll over and play dead. So chinese can amass troops at Galwan, some 3000-10000 will give then 3x superiority (assuming our troops are between is 1000-3000 - basically 1 brigade) and do a surprise attack, cut the road link to Sub sector north. Of course, in war there are many surprises and things may not go as planned. We have shown them that we are ready to escalate things on Naval front (so must be ready to hit in other places). For attack, now we need 3-10 times superiority...
I think, both IA and PLA are professional forces, they have deployed taking into account all kinds of contingencies. There is not much scope of a one sided battle, it will be death of large number of troops on both side with little gains. Having said that, at micro there is always a scope to do some more without much (even 0) causality - as we did in Kailash range and top of finger 4-8 and chinese did near the shore of finger 4-8.

[fanne]

One other thing, at many places in North against China, we are in the Himalayan mountain (with its plus and minuses, more pluses) and chinese are on a relatively flatter ground - Tibetian Plateau. All of their logistic lines and nodes are within 100 km of the border, many immediate ones within artillery range (all within missile and IAF range). They are more exposed (but have multiple axis of advance). They have connectivity with mainland China (that is 2000 miles away), through limited roads and nodes (they are also within range of disruption). Having mechanized division is their majboori, no infantry can march 100 km to battlefield at 4000m height in a cold desert (where the land cannot support them with food, water or shelter, even air). Most of our men are entrenched in the mountain where mechanized division are not good either, and where there is open ground (Depsang valley, Galwan, Chusul, we have amassed tanks (our being T72-T-90 against chinese light T-15 tanks). We are well deployed to repel any chinese attack. Whereas, equipment wise, we are not yet equipped for an attack. After we cross into the Tibetian plateau, we will also need a very mechanized force to move and occupy land (to what objective, cut G-219 at multiple places, liberate Lhasa? , take back Kailash, secure river water sheds?). We will need additional $15-$20 billion in equipment (ICV, tanks, 4*4, SPG, attack and transport helicopter/planes, UAV, other logistical equipment) and men to achieve that (assuming chinese now roll over and play dead)

[rajpa]

It seems Sugars are transporting UAVs for repair using horses in the LAC area since they stop working there

[Philip]

I agree with Ramana's assessment about a "war" with the PRC within the next 6 months,perhaps even sooner,as the stand-off stalemate is insufferable to the Chins. The current situ only highlights India's military resolve to stand up and fight the Chins,blunting their land- grab ambitions. It is loss of face for them,something that they cannot tolerate.As time goes by,the GOI efforts at plugging the gaps in our preparedness for war will make it more difficult for the Chins to achieve a " victory" for them to crow about.

[ramana]

Actually, NaMo is using Chanakaya tactics to make China choose.
They can withdraw or fight. Right now winter doesn't allow either.
Hence my timeline from April to June for the choice.
To withdraw will be a loss of face.
To fight will also lead to real losses.
Like Ajit says
"Isko Liquid Oxygen de de!
Liquid maar dega aur Oxygen marne nahin dega!"

[ramana]

Eastern Command revamp in works. It will be augmented with troops from Ist Corps.

Army plans to deploy 2 Strike corps in Mountains after Ladakh

Current I st Corps will be tasked to Western Himalayas and its Armoured Division become an Army Hqts strategic reserve.

Basically, these will be two divisions each strike corps. Total 4 divisions.
Keep in mind the 9 divisions in Eastern Command.

This is almost an Army Command in the old days!!!

Now tie this with the order for 400 Tatra trucks for logistics.

Brilliant reordering the forces.

[Ankit Desai]

And another division dedicated to central sector.

-Ankit

[fanne]

There will be no surprise in April to November of this year then. We have taken note. War is unpredictable, but we are doing everything humanly possible to be ready for that. Maybe this time around china will have to learn the lesson.

[fanne]

A question that should not be answered BUT I am asking anyways - 17 corps does or does not have a mountain division called 72 mountain division (it has 59 mountain division). That would make 17 corps with its own 2 mountain div. There are many conflicting stories on internet. Please post open source info only.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 884540.cms

https://bharatshakti.in/armys-three-rs-plan-gets-going/
Accordingly, only the newly raised 59 Mountain Division, co-located with the 17 Corps HQ at Panagarh, and the Dehradun-based 14 Division will be permanent part of the Mountain Strike Corps. Other formations like the Ranchi-based 23 Division and the yet-to-be-fully-raised 72 Division at Pathankot, will now have dual tasking —to be part of western command as well as get assigned to 17 Corps— when needed.

[nandakumar]

Saw a news item in Economic Times yesterday. It spoke of IOC oil marketing terminal at New Jalpaiguri being shut because one set of transporters who bring petroleum products have gone on a strike demanding higher freight rates. Evacuation of petroleum products has been stopped for the last 4 days. Now this terminal services needs of army and airforce units besides civilian needs. Wonder if something is cooking in the North East?

[manjgu]

One other thing, at many places in North against China, we are in the Himalayan mountain (with its plus and minuses, more pluses) and chinese are on a relatively flatter ground - Tibetian Plateau. All of their logistic lines and nodes are within 100 km of the border, many immediate ones within artillery range (all within missile and IAF range). They are more exposed (but have multiple axis of advance). They have connectivity with mainland China (that is 2000 miles away), through limited roads and nodes (they are also within range of disruption). Having mechanized division is their majboori, no infantry can march 100 km to battlefield at 4000m height in a cold desert (where the land cannot support them with food, water or shelter, even air). Most of our men are entrenched in the mountain where mechanized division are not good either, and where there is open ground (Depsang valley, Galwan, Chusul, we have amassed tanks (our being T72-T-90 against chinese light T-15 tanks). We are well deployed to repel any chinese attack. Whereas, equipment wise, we are not yet equipped for an attack. After we cross into the Tibetian plateau, we will also need a very mechanized force to move and occupy land (to what objective, cut G-219 at multiple places, liberate Lhasa? , take back Kailash, secure river water sheds?). We will need additional $15-$20 billion in equipment (ICV, tanks, 4*4, SPG, attack and transport helicopter/planes, UAV, other logistical equipment) and men to achieve that (assuming chinese now roll over and play dead)

well ... even our logistics lines / nodes ( Leh being close to border as well) are very tenous albeit shorter. we have connectivity to mainland india ( 1000 tp 1500 km away) through limited (2) now (3) lines.. thru mountainous terrain/high passes. most of our men are entrenched in flat grounds and relatively few in the mountains.

[vnadendla]

well ... even our logistics lines / nodes ( Leh being close to border as well) are very tenous albeit shorter. we have connectivity to mainland india ( 1000 tp 1500 km away) through limited (2) now (3) lines.. thru mountainous terrain/high passes. most of our men are entrenched in flat grounds and relatively few in the mountains.

Could be closer if have have bases in Himachal. The lines can be increased with time. More tunnels and roads. China mainland cannot come closer in the cold desert.

[fanne]

The chinese logistic tail is in fact very long. Arunachal is almost 1500 km from main population centers. Chengudu, the last big city is almost 1600 km away. Add additional 2000 km of G219 to Ladhak. The road runs parallel to LAC with average of 70 km away (not that hard to interdict). No pop center (except lahasa) can support even a regiment worth of additional soldier. On our side Chandigarh is 250 km away. Himachal cities and towns are much nearer. The scale itself is different. On our side, just after 50 km you have many small cities that can support a brigade worth of extra men.
Our planes and heli can take off with max weight from sea level and land in ladhak, while for chinse sea level is at least 4000 km away. Hotan at 1500 m can support nearby areas, but that city is around nowhere, it gets its own supplies from 3000 km away. We are not that badly placed.

[csharma]

Chinese have a big problem with Modi. Jayadev Ranade writes on what Chinese scholars on India are writing

https://www.vifindia.org/article/2021/j ... iews-india