China Military Watch

[Juggi G]

In face of Beijing Counterclaim, Delhi Orders Fresh ‘Hi-Tech’ Survey of Sikkim
IndianExpress
[quote]In face of Beijing Counterclaim, Delhi Orders Fresh ‘Hi-Tech’ Survey of Sikkim
Pranab Dhal Samanta
Posted online: Sunday, May 25, 2008 at 0029 hrs

Until now, India relied on a 1924 map. With China claiming its maps more accurate, MEA hopes new survey will validate Indian position

New Delhi, May 24: Stumped by fresh Chinese claims in North Sikkim that Beijing seeks to substantiate by producing maps which it says are “more accurateâ€

[Juggi G]

Israel-China Link
The Washington Times

Israel-China Link
By Bill Gertz
May 23, 2008

Defense intelligence officials said this week that China's new J-10 jet fighter was built with the help of Israel, under the U.S.-sponsored Lavi jet fighter program canceled back in 1987.

"China's J-10 program was assisted by engineers who worked on the Israeli Lavi program," one defense official told Inside the Ring. "The J-10 and Lavi share many of the same design elements."

According to the officials, Russia also has helped with the J-10 program, helping Beijing to develop a new J-10 engine to replace the current one — a Chinese copy of the CFM-56 jet engine developed jointly by General Electric and the French company Snecma.

The J-10 was under development in secret for years but its deployment was only acknowledged by Beijing in January 2007. It is considered a fourth-generation fighter-bomber comparable to the U.S. F-16.

The defense officials' comments followed a report in Jane's Defence Weekly stating that the J-10 is a close copy of the Lavi jet, and that Chinese developers had access to a Lavi prototype in Chengdu, where the J-10 was designed and built. Documents in Hebrew on the Israel Aircraft Industries jet also were observed by Russian engineers, the magazine stated.

The Lavi was developed with $1.8 billion in U.S. aid to Israel. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld in 2005 sharply restricted U.S. military technology sharing with Israel over concerns about Israeli-Chinese military cooperation.

The Israeli-Chinese J-10 cooperation involved "decades"-long exchanges between Russian, Israeli and Chinese aircraft developers, the magazine stated, quoting Russians involved in the program. The cooperation included extensive design and performance modeling, wind-tunnel testing and advanced aerodynamic design input.

Richard Fisher, a specialist on China's military with the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said the J-10-Lavi cooperation "confirms the need for continued American vigilance to prevent military technology sales to China from Israel or any other ally."

"This is now a tragedy for the people of Israel and the United States, given the high chances that China will sell the J-10 to Iran," he said, adding that Israel should fully disclose the Extent of Military Cooperation with China, "a country that Aids the Enemies of Israel, and Threatens America and many of its Allies."

An Israeli Embassy spokesman said he is checking the report. A Chinese Embassy spokesman could not be reached.

Chinese and Israeli officials in the past have denied any links between the J-10 and the Lavi.

[svinayak]

>>Hint atleast??

Think Yugoslavia

Think Embassy

Think cruise missiles

That's 3 hints

This timeline was created few years ago. This gives the details of the Embassy bombing.

KARGIL TIMELINE

1998

JUNE 1998 - FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANT WARNING WAS A JUNE 2, 1998 NOTE, PERSONALLY SIGNED BY THE THEN INTELLIGENCE BUREAU DIRECTOR, SHYAMAL DATTA
IN JUNE 1998 THE KARGIL BRIGADE INTELLIGENCE TEAM (BIT) REPORTED THAT AMMUNITION SUPPLIES WERE BEING DUMPED AND THAT TERRORISTS HAD BEEN SEEN IN SKARDU, WARCHA AND MAROL AWAITING INFILTRATION THROUGH THE KARGIL SECTOR.


JULY 1998 - JULY, INTELLIGENCE BUREAU INFORMANTS REPORTED THE DEPLOYMENT OF M-11 MISSILES ON THE DEOSAI PLAINS AND NEW MINE-LAYING ACTIVITIES.

AUG 1998 - IN AUGUST, THE BIT AND THE INTELLIGENCE AND FIELD SECURITY UNIT REPORTED THE PRESENCE OF TERRORISTS PREPARING TO CROSS THE LOC. PAKISTANI ARTILLERY FLOWED IN AS WINTER APPROACHED, A REVERSAL OF THE NORMAL PRACTICE.

OCT 1998 - PERVEZ MUSHARAFF APPOINTED COAS
BY OCTOBER, RAW WAS SUFFICIENTLY CONCERNED ABOUT DEVELOPMENTS TO ISSUE AN EXPRESS WARNING ABOUT THE PROSPECT OF A "LIMITED SWIFT OFFENSIVE", POINTING IN PARTICULAR TO THE "CONSTANT INDUCTION OF MORE TROOPS FROM PEACETIME LOCATIONS LIKE MANGLA, LAHORE, GUJRANWALA AND OKARA INTO PAKISTAN-OCCUPIED KASHMIR." ITS ASSERTION THAT A WAR WAS POSSIBLE PROVOKED AN IMMEDIATE CHALLENGE BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF MILITARY INTELLIGENCE, AND AN INCONCLUSIVE VERBAL DISCUSSION FOLLOWED.

NOV 1998 - NORTHERN COMMAND, IN ITS OWN INTERNAL ASSESSMENTS, RECORDED THAT NOVEMBER 1998 SAW A THREE-FOLD INCREASE IN PAKISTANI TROOP MOVEMENT IN THE KARGIL SECTOR WHEN COMPARED WITH NOVEMBER 1997. VEHICULAR MOVEMENT DOUBLED, WHILE PACK-ANIMAL MOVEMENT INCREASED NINE-FOLD. AS LATE AS NOVEMBER 1998, THE INTELLIGENCE BUREAU'S LEH STATION ISSUED WARNINGS THAT PAKISTAN WAS "TRAINING TALIBAN TROOPS WHO WERE UNDERGOING MILITARY TRAINING AS WELL AS LEARNING THE BALTI AND LADAKHI LANGUAGE." THESE IRREGULARS, THE WARNING STATED, WERE LIKELY TO BE INDUCTED INTO THE KARGIL SECTOR DURING APRIL 1999.


1999


FEB 1999 - ON FEBRUARY 9, 1999, TROOPS OF THE 5 PARA REGIMENT SPOTTED MOVEMENT ON THE TOP OF POINT 5770, A STRATEGIC HEIGHT IN THE SOUTHERN SIACHEN AREA ON THE INDIAN SIDE OF THE LOC.

FEB 1999 - THE LAHORE DECLARATION WAS A HISTORIC DECLARATION SIGNED BY THE INDIAN PRIME MINISTER, MR. A. B. VAJPAYEE, AND THE PAKISTAN PRIME MINISTER, MR. NAWAZ SHARIF, IN LAHORE ON FEBRUARY 21, 1999.

MAR 1999 - AGAIN, ON MARCH 4, BETWEEN EIGHT AND TEN PAKISTANI SOLDIERS WERE SEEN REMOVING SNOW FROM A CONCRETE BUNKER TO THE WEST OF THE SUMMIT OF POINT 5770. THAT EVENING, FIRE WAS EXCHANGED OVER THE AREA.

STRANGELY, THE SIACHEN-BASED 102 INFANTRY BRIGADE REMOVED THE OFFICER WHO HAD REPORTED THE INTRUSION, MAJOR MANISH BHATNAGAR, NOT THE PAKISTANI TROOPS WHO HAD OCCUPIED THE POSITION. ON THE EVE OF PRIME MINISTER ATAL BIHARI VAJPAYEE'S VISIT TO PAKISTAN, IT IS LIKELY THAT INDIA HAD NO DESIRE TO INITIATE A BRUISING EXCHANGE OF FIRE ON SIACHEN. THE 121 BRIGADE, WHICH OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT PAKISTAN TROOPS HAD DEMONSTRATED AGGRESSIVE INTENT IN AN ADJOINING AREA, WAS NOT EVEN INFORMED OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

FOR ONE, DESPITE BOTH THE FLOW OF INTELLIGENCE ON POSSIBLE INFILTRATION IN THE KARGIL SECTOR, TROOPS WERE ACTUALLY PULLED OUT FROM FRONTLINE POSITIONS. SOON AFTER THE LOSS OF POINT 5770, 9 MAHAR REGIMENT WAS REMOVED FROM ITS DEFENSIVE POSITIONS ALONG THE YALDOR LANGPA STREAM AND STATIONED AT A REAR POSITION NEAR LEH. THE 26 MARATHA LIGHT INFANTRY, WHICH PROTECTED THE CRUCIAL INFILTRATION ROUTE FROM MASHKOH TO DRAS, WAS ALSO PULLED OFF FORWARD DUTIES.

DESPITE THE SUMMARY REMOVAL OF APPROXIMATELY A QUARTER OF ITS TROOPS, THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT 121 BRIGADE DID ACT. TROOPS WERE WITHDRAWN FROM THE MASHKOH AREA FOR JUST 80 DAYS IN THE WINTER OF 1999, DOWN FROM 177 DAYS IN 1997 AND 116 DAYS IN 1998. YALDOR WAS LEFT UNDEFENDED FOR 64 DAYS FROM FEBRUARY TO APRIL, WHERE TROOPS HAD BEEN WITHDRAWN FOR 120 DAYS IN 1997 AND 119 DAYS IN 1998. KAKSAR, ANOTHER KEY AREA, WAS UNDEFENDED FOR JUST 38 DAYS, WHERE IT WAS LEFT OPEN FOR OVER 200 DAYS IN PREVIOUS YEARS.


APRIL 1999

APRIL 11 - INDIA SAYS IT HAS SUCCESSFULLY TEST-FIRED A LONGER-RANGE MODEL OF ITS AGNI BALLISTIC MISSILE.

APRIL 14 - THE AIADMK WITHDRAWS SUPPORT FROM THE RULING COALITION. PRESIDENT K.R. NARAYANAN ASKS THE GOVERNMENT TO SEEK A CONFIDENCE VOTE IN PARLIAMENT.

APRIL 17 - INDIA'S 13-MONTH-OLD BJP-LED GOVERNMENT FALLS AFTER LOSING A CONFIDENCE MOTION BY JUST ONE VOTE. THIS MAY HAVE BEEN A TRIGGER FOR PAKISTAN TO BE AGGRESSIVE IN KARGIL

APRIL 26 - INDIA'S PARLIAMENT IS DISSOLVED AND EARLY ELECTIONS ARE CALLED. THIS MAY BE ONE OF MAJOR REASON FOR THE PAKISTAN MILITARY TO START THE AGGRESSIVE OPERATION IN KARGIL.

WHY WAS IT THAT COMMANDERS IN LEH AND SRINAGAR WERE SO SLOW TO RESPOND NOT JUST TO THE INTELLIGENCE WARNINGS THAT WERE AVAILABLE, BUT TO THE GROWING WORRIES OF THEIR OWN SUBORDINATES?

GENERAL MALIK ARGUED THAT NO TROOPS WERE WITHDRAWN BY XV CORPS FROM 3 INFANTRY DIVISION'S AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY. THIS IS, WITHOUT DISPUTE, TRUE, SINCE 9 MAHAR AND 26 MARATHA BATTALIONS REMAINED AROUND LEH. YET, GENERAL MALIK'S LETTER DOES NOT EXPLAIN WHY GENERAL BUDHWAR CHOSE TO PULL BACK SOLDIERS NEEDED TO GUARD THE LOC TO REAR POSITIONS WHEN BOTH INTELLIGENCE WARNINGS AND FIELD COMMANDERS BELIEVED THREAT LEVELS WERE ESCALATING.

GENERAL MALIK ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE HEADQUARTERS OF 70 INFANTRY BRIGADE WAS INDUCTED INTO THE DRAS AREA IN OCTOBER 1998, SUGGESTING THAT THE ARMY WAS INDEED TAKING THE WARNINGS IT RECEIVED SERIOUSLY. HOWEVER, HE OMITTED TO MENTION THE CRITICAL FACT THAT ONLY ITS HEADQUARTERS' STAFF, NOT THE FIGHTING FORCE, HAD BEEN DEPLOYED WHEN FIGHTING BROKE OUT IN MAY 1999.

WITH A DISSOLVED PARLIAMENT CONFRONTATION IN THE BORDER IS USAULLY AVOIDED.


MAY 1999

MAY 1999 - CHINESE MOVES IN LAC LADHAK
"CHINESE HAD INDUCTED ONE COMPANY IN THE AREA OPPOSITE CHANTZE, WITH THE REST OF THE BATTALION WAITING IN THE WINGS," MALIK DISCLOSES IN THE BOOK. HE SAYS IT WAS NOT ONLY AT KAMENG, BUT THE CHINESE ARMY ENHANCED ITS LEVEL OF ACTIVITY ALONG THE LINE OF ACTUAL CONTROL (LAC) IN LADAKH AS WELL FROM WHERE SOME OF THE FORCES HAD BEEN THINNED DOWN TO BE REDEPLOYED IN KARGIL.

"THIS ENHANCEMENT IN PLA ACTIVITIES ALONG THE LAC COINCIDED WITH THE START OF THE CONFLICT IN KARGIL" MALIK SAYS WHICH AT MILITARY LEVEL, INDICATED A DEMONSTRATIVE SUPPORT TO PAKISTAN. MALIK SAYS THIS RAN CONTRARY TO BEIJING'S ASSERTIONS IN RECENT YEARS THAT IT WAS PURSUING AN INDEPENDENT FOREIGN POLICY AND THAT ITS RELATIONS WITH PAKISTAN WOULD NOT BE AT THE COST OF INDIA. THE CHINESE FORCES ALSO MADE A SHOW OF FORCE IN DEMCHOK, IN EASTERN LADAKH, CONSTRUCTED A TRACK FROM SPANGGUR TO SOUTH END OF PANGONG LAKE AND A TRACK IN TRIGG HEIGHTS. HE SAYS INDIA ALSO RECEIVED INTELLIGENCE REPORTS THAT PLA'S DIRECTOR IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ARMAMENT HAD VISITED ISLAMABAD DURING THE CONFLICT TO HELP PAKISTAN ARMY OVERCOME ITS CRITICAL DEFICIENCIES IN CONVENTIONAL ARMAMENT, AMMUNITION AND EQUIPMENT.

THIS MAY BE ONE OF THE REASON FOR NOT SENDING AGGRESSIVE RESCUE MISSIONS TO BRING BACK CAPTURED INDIAN BATTALIONS. WITH ONLY A CARETAKER GOVERNMENT IN INDIA RUNNING THE SHOW THERE WAS A SERIOUS SITUATION OF CHINA AND PAKISTAN TOGETHER ATTACKING INDIA.

MAY 4 - LT. GEN. KISHEN PAL WAS ON LEAVE IN DELHI ON MAY 3 TO ATTEND TO HIS WIFE'S SURGERY. WHEN HE GOT WORD OF THE SIGHTING OF THE INTRUDERS AT BANJU, HE ORDERED 3 INF DIV. TO REINFORCE 121 (I) BDE AND RETURNED TO SRINAGAR. PATROLS WERE SENT OUT STARTING FROM MAY 4, BUT DUE TO WEATHER CONDITIONS, THEY SIGHTED THE ENEMY ONLY ON MAY 7 AND MADE CONTACT ON MAY 8 AND CAME UNDER HEAVY FIRE. BY THIS TIME, ALL OPERATIONAL COMMANDERS WERE AT THEIR HQ, INCLUDING THE MUCH REVILED (IN THE PRESS) MAJ. GEN. BUDHWAR.


MAY 7 - CHINESE EMBASSY BOMBING IN KOSOVO - CHINA- US RELATIONSHIP PROBLEM. THIS BOMBING AND AN ESCALATION IS UNEXPLAINABLE. THIS EVENT MAY HAVE KEPT CHINESE FROM ENTERING THE WAR IN KARGIL LOOKING AT THE INTERNATIONAL PUBLICITY GIVEN TO CHINESE REACTION.

MAY 11 - BY MAY 11, THE EXTENT OF INTRUSIONS WERE BECOMING CLEAR EVEN IN THE DRAS SECTOR FURTHER SOUTH. BY MAY 12, THE NUMBER OF BATTALIONS IN CONTACT WITH THE ENEMY WERE MORE THAN 5 AND CASUALTIES WERE ALREADY TAKEN. LT. KALIA'S PATROL WENT OUT ON 14 MAY IN THE KAKSAR SUBSECTOR AND WAS CAPTURED ON MAY 15.

MAY 16 - 6 CHOOPERS DISCOVERED IN KARGIL SECTOR

MAY 24 - FIRST REPORT OF INFILTERATORS.AT A MEETING OF THE UNIFIED HEADQUARTERS IN SRINAGAR ON MAY 24, 1999, GENERAL PAL INSISTED THAT THERE "WERE NO CONCENTRATION OF TROOPS ON THE PAKISTANI SIDE AND NO BATTLE INDICATORS OF WAR OR EVEN LIMITED SKIRMISHES."

MAY 26 - INDIA UNLEASHES TWO WAVES OF AIR STRIKES TO FLUSH OUT GUERRILLAS ON ITS SIDE OF A KASHMIR CEASEFIRE LINE, SHARPLY RAISING TEMPERATURES IN THE REGION. THE NEXT DAY INDIA CONFIRMS IT HAS LOST TWO FIGHTER JETS WHICH PAKISTAN SAYS THEY SHOT DOWN.

MAY 28 - IN KASHMIR, A STINGER MISSILE BRINGS DOWN AN INDIAN HELICOPTER KILLING ALL ON BOARD. LT. GEN. KISHAN PAL, GOC 15 CORPS, HAD ACCOMPLISHED THE TASK OF INDUCTING 3 BDE HQ, 19 INF. BATTALIONS, 4 REGTS OF FIELD ARTY, 2 REGTS OF MEDIUM ARTY INTO THE SECTORS WITHIN A SPAN OF 26 DAYS.


JUNE 1999

JUNE 12 - INDIA AND PAKISTAN HOLD "BUSINESSLIKE" TALKS OVER THEIR KASHMIR DISPUTE BUT FAIL TO RESOLVE IT; INDIA SAYS PAKISTAN TRIED TO INFILTRATE THE TURTUK SECTOR AND PUTS THE DEATH TOLL AT 267 PAKISTANIS AND 86 INDIANS.

JUNE 16, 1999 -THE EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTER, MR. JASWANT SINGH HAS SAID HIS VISIT TO BEIJING HAS LED TO BETTER UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN INDIA AND CHINA ON REGIONAL AND GLOBAL ISSUES, INCLUDING THE SECURITY PERCEPTIONS OF THE TWO COUNTRIES. SPEAKING TO NEWSPERSONS IN BEIJING AT THE END OF HIS TWO DAY VISIT, HE SAID NEW INITIATIVES ARE ALREADY ON THE ANVIL.


JULY 1999

JULY 4 - INDIA SAYS IT HAS RECAPTURED THE STRATEGIC TIGER HILL ON ITS SIDE OF A MILITARY LINE OF CONTROL IN KASHMIR.

JULY 9 - IN KASHMIR, THE INDIAN ARMY REPORTS THAT IT HAS ALL BUT OUSTED THE INFILTRATORS FROM THE BATALIK ZONE ON INDIA'S SIDE OF THE CEASEFIRE LINE.

JULY 17 - INDIA SIGNALS THE END OF THE FLARE-UP WITH PAKISTAN BY ANNOUNCING THAT ALL INFILTRATORS HAVE WITHDRAWN FROM INDIAN-HELD KASHMIR.

JULY 26 - INDIA SAYS ITS TROOPS HAVE CLEARED ALL INFILTRATORS FROM THEIR SIDE OF THE LINE OF CONTROL THAT DIVIDES KASHMIR.

[abhischekcc]

Well, it looks like I was careful/paranoid for no reason.

[derkonig]

Another 6.0 scale earthquake has struck Sichuan.

[Juggi G]

While India Sleeps, Chinese Threat Grows
Rediff India

While India Sleeps, Chinese Threat Grows
Bharat Verma
May 26, 2008

New Delhi's portrayal of the humiliating defeat at the hands of Chinese in 1962 as 'betrayal' and 'surprise' is untrue. The pacifist Indian leadership that was crying hoarse from rooftops for friendship at any cost remained blind to Communist China's repeated claims on Tibet [Images] and large part of Indian territories. Mao termed Tibet as the palm of a hand with its five fingers as Ladakh, Sikkim, Nepal, Bhutan, and North East Frontier Agency. He claimed that these were Chinese territories that needed to be 'liberated'. Tibet was 'liberated' by force while New Delhi slept.

The historical characteristics of the Chinese and the statements issued by the Communists from time to time clearly exposed their expansionist ambitions in Asia that spelt out a direct threat to India's well being. Despite such overt indications, if we could not prepare ourselves to meet those challenges, the fault lies with us. Instead of pretending to be surprised or betrayed, it is time we face the truth for the fiasco in 1962 and prepare our military for the serious threat posed by the Chinese.

To Mao and the Chinese what singularly mattered was achieving the final goal. The means whether fair or foul to win were irrelevant. If New Delhi had deciphered what Mao was advocating in 1946 and studied the historical Chinese characteristics, alarm bells should have clearly rung in the South Block.

Mao repeatedly said from 1950 onwards that Taiwan, Tibet, and Hainan Islands were Chinese territories and they will be re-possessed. The predominant trait in this claim is the Chinese attraction for acquiring new territories. On the take over of China by the Communists, maps depicting large parts of Korea, Indo-China, Mongolia, Burma, Malaysia, Eastern Turkestan, India, Tibet, Nepal, Sikkim, and Bhutan as Chinese territories were produced. Despite such demands, New Delhi always overlooked the basic fact that Communists inherited both, the traditional Chinese expansionism as well as imperialism.

Tibet and China that were part of Mongolian Empire at one point in history now became part of the Chinese Empire under Mao, in reverse order. Strangely, from this it follows that since Tawang or Sikkim which have been closely related to Tibet in the past, needed to be 'liberated' and made part of the new Chinese empire. If the leadership of independent India had bothered to study and understand the British mantle that was inherited, Chinese aims would become crystal clear -- Mao the great strategist, always announced his goals publicly and never wavered.

Further Mao often quoted a famous Chinese saying, "�If the east wind does not prevail over the west wind, then east wind will prevail over the east wind." This clearly indicates another trait of the Han Chinese of their obsession to dominate other nations in their vicinity. If Nepal in history paid tribute ever as a vassal state to the Chinese Emperor, than whenever the regime in Beijing [Images] was powerful, it would ensure Nepal accepts its orbit of influence. With Maoists taking over Nepal, the designs of the Communists in China have succeeded and pacifists in New Delhi stand compromised on our geo-political interests.

While Indians were bending backwards to force their friendship in the last 58 years, China was busy consolidating its hold on Tibet and other occupied territories. It extended its influence in Asia through economic and military power, unprecedented development of logistic infrastructure and demographic invasion. By 1987 it poured in 75 million Han Chinese into Manchuria, 7 million in Eastern Turkestan (Xinjiang), 8.5 million into Inner Mongolia, and 7.5 million into Tibet. Similarly it bolstered itself against India militarily by building roads up to the borders in Tibet and connecting its Sinkiang province by cutting a road through Indian Territory Aksai Chin. Yet we were not alarmed as a nation and continue to swim in the euphoria of five principals of Indo-Chinese friendship termed Panchsheel!

Historically Indian and Chinese influences in Asia have coexisted. However, possibly for the first time in history, India and China were rising almost simultaneously. This produced two contenders for the leadership of Asia. On the chessboard, while Nehru took the initiative to lead Asia -- without developing military sinews and powerful international alliances -- through The Asian Relations Conference in 1947 and a second Conference on Indonesia in 1949, a year later, Mao's army executed the liberation of Tibet in one masterstroke.

Mao, thus demonstrated to the world that China was the actual leader of Asia and India merely a paper tiger, good for holding conferences but incapable of defending a small country in its vicinity. He also understood strategic importance of Tibet, which provided the base in the Himalayas, from where a large part of Asia could be engulfed in its sphere of influence.

Despite the invasion of Tibet, New Delhi did not understand the significance of the Chinese Communists growing up as a military organisation, unlike other movements. Their core competency lay in the Peoples Liberation Army and military virtues were promoted throughout the cadres. If China today dares to claim Arunachal Pradesh and piece of Sikkim, it is primarily based on its military prowess. On the other hand, the fine Indian military machine built by the British continues to be degraded and demoralised by the Indian civil leadership � it's like axing the branch one sits on.

Traditionally Chinese leadership leans on teachings of Master Sun Tzu. Mao in particular was highly influenced by Sun Tzu, who said, "�To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."

Therefore, a willing proxy was found in Pakistan. For the first time in history, nuclear weapons and missile technology were transferred to countervail and further boost its hatred against India. Of course, we all know how preoccupied Pakistan has kept our national security managers and resources, while Chinese developed a free run in Asia.

Similarly Maoists in Nepal supported clandestinely by the Chinese are in cahoots with the Indian Maoists who now control 40 percent of India's territory. If you think that's not smart enough for warriors of Sun Tzu, than take a look at the borders from north to east --Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar are under the spell of Beijing, shrinking India's influence in its vicinity without recourse to war. It's a matter of time before the Chinese upstage Bhutan and Sri Lanka [Images] due to our inaptitude.

China, over a period of time, has cleverly managed to deploy two authoritarian streams of threats against India to break its will and the territorial integrity. Foremost is the Communist threat that originates from Beijing and the second is the Islamic fundamentalist threat from its proxies. Besides other threats like Nepal Maoists or getting the Indo-US Nuclear deal blocked by their comrades in India.

Today for China to threaten Arunachal Pradesh and demand a slice of Sikkim after assured of its vice-like grip on India, is a natural progression even as New Delhi continues its slumber.

In 1999 the Dalai Lama [Images] in hindsight admitted, " When Tibet was free, we took our freedom for granted� In former times Tibetans were a war-like nation whose influence spread far and wide. With the advent of Buddhism our military prowess declined�" The Dalai Lama could easily have said the same for India.

Pacifist philosophies may be good for the individual's soul but are definitely bad for nation's security.

The Writer is Editor, Indian Defence Review.
His email: bharat.verma@indiandefencereview.com

[Vick]

Some unconventional Chinese ships

Chinese spacecraft and missile tracking ships

Chinese hospital ship

Note that with the 071 LPD and this hospital ship, the Chinese will be in a very good position to offer sustained out of area humanitarian aid. They are going to be pushing the 'hearts and minds' aspect of diplomacy in a big way in the years to come.

[wesley]

It is being reported that China is preparing its 2nd Regiment at Chifeng Air Base to become its 4th J-10 squadron:
http://www.upi.com/International_Securi ... rt_1/4208/

This report is based on satellite photographs, which appear to to suggest that the Chifeng air base has been undergoing renovations similar to the other, confirmed J-10 air bases at Luliang in the southern Yunnan Province (132nd Regiment), Changxing in the eastern province of Zhejiang (8th Regiment), and Guilin in the southeast province of Guangxi (5th Regiment). Each operational regiment is believed to be equipped with 28 fighters, bringing the total number of operational J-10 warplanes to 112 this year.

Although these four air bases are widely dispersed, none of them is currently within the immediate sphere of the India-China border. The 132nd Regiment at Luliang would be the closest air base to India.

[MN Kumar]

Some unconventional Chinese ships

Chinese spacecraft and missile tracking ships

Chinese hospital ship

Note that with the 071 LPD and this hospital ship, the Chinese will be in a very good position to offer sustained out of area humanitarian aid. They are going to be pushing the 'hearts and minds' aspect of diplomacy in a big way in the years to come.

Is it really necessary to have these specialised space tracking ships? We have conducted so many satellite and missile launches and it was our regular Naval vessels that have been doing the tracking.

[Sanjay M]

Is China's Space Program Armed for Apollo 2.0?
At a next-gen conference on the future of exploration, PM columnist and Instapundit blogger Glenn Reynolds looks at how little we still know about the Chinese antisatellite test—but how far the country's out-of-this-world activity has come.

[skganji]

The only way out of this Mess , would to elect an anti-communist party in the center. Unfortunately, the communist cadres are even challenging the democratic process and rigging the elections and winning them. Look at the election process in recent panchayat elections in Bengal.
Until Congress is there, we cannot make an progress in containing the communist rogues from taking Indian territory and giving it to China. Congress will be gladly willing to give Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh to please their communist alliance and to stay in Power. Congress is a big burden to India. It was foolish Nehru who took a long time to learn the lesson from the Chinese aggression and after loosing the war in 1962, and it will take another decade for Manmohan/Sonia/Congress to learn the same lesson from the chinese aggression.

[Rahul Shukla]

Indian Nuclear C&C Dilemma

PG thesis Naval Post graduate school.

From page 15 & 16;

According to an estimate, in 2006 China deploys approximately 130 nuclear warheads for delivery by land-based missiles, sea-based missiles and bombers and additional warheads to be in storage, for a total stockpile of approximately 200 warheads. The estimates of the Chinese nuclear warheads by the same authors in 2003 were 400. These estimates indicate that there is a decline in the number of Chinese warheads. The basis for the decline in estimates has not been declared as all these estimates are based on current intelligence inputs.

[ramana]

China’s Military Modernisation: A Perspective

[Juggi G]

Don't Lose Sight of China's Potential for Rivalry
Rediff India

To start with, a trend directly naming India as an emerging threat to China began as early as mid-March, almost coinciding with the beginning of the unrest in Tibet. Authoritative articles have then alleged that India is strengthening its border troops taking China as the enemy, that India views China as the greatest obstacle to realising its global power ambitions, and that New Delhi is colluding with Washington in containing China (Reference Article No 2650 in www.southasiaanalysis.org and Article No 136 in www.c3sindia.org, dated March 28, by the same writer).

Continuing the trend, a very recent article on the China Defence Science and Technology information web site (Chinese language, May 29, 2008) has alleged that in order to 'resist' China, India is forcefully implementing a programme to augment its naval and nuclear strength. The journal Military Outlook (Junshi Liaowang, Chinese, May 31, 2008) has elaborated on the theme further; making a reference to India's Agni IV missile programme, and has accused India of nurturing ambitions to become an ICBM (Inter Continental Ballistic Missile) power, capable of threatening not only the Asia-Pacific region, but also other parts of the world.

Pointing out that at present there are only five countries in the world possessing ICBM capabilities � the US, Russia, China, the UK and France [Images] -- it also said Japan, another nation in China's neighbourhood, has the potentials to make and deploy ICBMs. The Chinese media also covered the Sikkim 'finger area' controversy; a Global Times despatch (Chinese, May 31, 2008) quoted Indian press reports as saying that India will talk to China on any issue arising out of the border survey activities being carried out in Sikkim by the Survey of India.

The first stage of China's modernisation plan is expected to be complete in 2020 through realisation of the target of quadrupling the GDP. In 2050, China plans to gain the status of a medium developed nation. At some point of time, therefore, the 'peaceful periphery' prerequisite for modernisation may become irrelevant for China. This will have implications for the future of PRC's 'harmonious world' external policy.

[Arun_S]

Extensive missile site in China revealed by satellite: analyst

File image.
by Staff Writers
Washington (AFP) May 15, 2008
Commercial satellite imagery has revealed an extensive nuclear missile site in central China with nearly sixty launch pads for medium-range missiles capable of striking Russia or India, a researcher said Thursday.

The images from Google Earth show different types of launch pads, command and control facilities, and missile deployment equipment at a large facility in downtown Delingha, said Hans Kristensen, a researcher with the Federation of American Scientists.

"The US government often highlights China's deployment of new mobile missiles as a concern but keeps the details secret, so the discovery of the deployment area provides the first opportunity for the public to better understand how China operates its mobile ballistic missiles," he wrote.

The find comes only two weeks after the discovery of a secret Chinese nuclear submarine base on Hainan Island in South China Sea, also using commercial satellite imagery and published by Jane's Intelligence Review.

The latest images were posted along with Kristensen's analysis on the website of the Federation of American Scientists.

Kristensen said the imagery revealed missile launch sites along a 275-kilometer (170 miles) stretch of highway leading from the city of Delingha through Da Qaidam to Mahai in the northern part of Qinghai province.

Thirty-six launch pads were arrayed in three strings extending north of the highway and west of Delingha.

Another 22 launch pads were detected in an area running west of Da Qaidam to Mahai, according to Kristensen's analysis.

"From these launch pads DF-21 missiles would be within range of southern Russia and northern India (including New Delhi), but not Japan, Taiwan or Guam," he wrote.

DF-21s are medium range solid fuel missiles that have been replacing China's older DF-3 and DF-4 liquid fuel missiles.

Kristensen said the imagery shows what appear to be a buried command and control bunker marked by antenas at each of the deployment area.

In downtown Delingha, images show what appear to be the headquarters of a missile brigade base with tentlike structures of identical size and design as structures previously detected on DF-21 launch pads.

An open area near the base contained what appeared to be camouflaged nets over unidentified vehicles, he said.

[Juggi G]

India, China Compete in Indian Ocean
International Herald Tribune

"Each pearl in the string is a link in a chain of the Chinese maritime presence," India's navy chief, Adm. Sureesh Mehta, said in a speech in January, expressing concern that naval forces operating out of ports established by the Chinese could " Take Control Over the World Energy Jugular."

"It is a Pincer Movement," said Rahul Bedi, a South Asia analyst with London-based Jane's Defense Weekly. "That, together with the slap India got in 1962, keeps them awake at night." {This bedi needs to mind his Language when talking about his own Country with Foreigners}

[shetty]

In China, Pranab pitches for pan-Asian grouping

BEIJING/NEW DELHI: India on Friday proposed a new security architecture for Asia, but ran out of steam by failing to define it with any confidence.

At an address to Peking University, foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee said, "We will need to evolve a security architecture which takes into account the conditions prevailing in Asia."

Arguing for "an open and inclusive architecture", Mukherjee said it should not merely transplant ideas from the West.

"Nor should we seek to create such sub-regional security arrangements that are narrow and ultimately ineffective," Mukherjee told his audience at the university.

In this, India is obliquely echoing the US distaste for a China-driven East Asian security order. Instead, India plumped for a pan-Asian security vision which stretches from Central Asia to East Asia. India cited the Asean Regional Forum (ARF), Comprehensive International Cooperative Association (CICA) and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) as organizations that could be the bedrock for such an arrangement.

Mukherjee said, "As two major countries in Asia, India and China should try to work together to evolve a new framework from these basic building blocks." India is merely an observer at SCO with slim hopes of ever becoming a member.

In the ARF, it is one among the 20-odd members of the organization, which is clearly not very effective. In East and South-East Asia, China's presence is overwhelming. But, India hesitated to provide an alternate vision.

China has resolutely opposed India's presence in any relevant Asian security architecture. It blocked India in the ASEAN+3, which prompted India to go for the East Asia Summit. It has been livid about the idea of a 'quadrilateral' among India, US, Japan and Australia, and protested loudly against the 2007 Malabar exercises which included all these countries.

India's proposal fails to even provide an overview of the new architecture that it envisages. There is no definition of what the new grouping is expected to accomplish. Protecting the sea lanes of communication (SLOCs) has been done by India and other states anyway and certainly cannot be the prime driver for a security architecture.

On Wednesday, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd proposed his version of a security architecture which includes India and China and proposes to solve problems as diverse as Taiwan and Kashmir. Over the weekend, US defence secretary Robert Gates outlined the US vision for Asian security at the IISS Shangri-La — which involves US' regional security alliances.

"The US notes the stirrings of a new regionalism, a pan-Asian search for new frameworks," he said but added that it "should not be a zero-sum game, should not exclude any country".

[clay]

China takes on the US — in space

[quote]Since successfully shooting down an obsolete weather satellite with a missile in outer orbit in January 2007, the Chinese armed forces have been operating from a position of relative strength

LAHORE: Chinese military experts believe a confrontation in space, probably with the United States, is inevitable. What they haven’t said is whether they expect to win.

According to a report published in Asia Times, two disarmament officials with the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) this week accused Washington in an assessment of the global weapons buildup of fueling an arms race aimed at controlling “the commanding heightsâ€

[VinodTK]

Emerging giants India, China jostle for influence over vital Indian Ocean shipping lanes

[Singha]

very worrying indeed. I hope BDL is running 3 shifts to pump up the prithvi
and mlrs rocket production and we have purchased up addl stocks of shells
and grad rockets from local and foreign sources. its better to pay regular
prices now than hiked up for emergency shipments later.

[Nitesh]

China's navy shores up defences with long-range YJ-62C missile

Ted Parsons, JDW Correspondent

Key Points
China is deploying a new long-range anti-ship missile at bases in Fujian

The US BGM-109 Tomahawk and Russian Kh-55 are believed to have informed the missile's development


China's People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has been upgrading its coastal defence units with a new version of the YJ-62 long-range anti-ship missile called the YJ-62C, Asian military officials revealed to Jane's at the beginning of June.

First unveiled in 2005, the YJ-62 is the PLAN's counterpart to the C-602 export version, which has an advertised range of 280 km. The range of the YJ-62 is said to be considerably longer than that of the C-602.

This cruise missile bears a strong resemblance to the US BGM-109 Tomahawk land-attack cruise missile (LACM): development of the YJ-62 is believed to have benefitted from Tomahawk parts captured in Afghanistan and Iraq and from China's acquisition of Russian Kh-55 LACMs via Ukraine.

The same officials noted that the PLAN has deployed about 120 new YJ-62C anti-ship missiles at bases in Fujian province, which is opposite Taiwan. Previously, PLAN shore defence anti-ship missile units were armed with versions of the 85 km-range HY-1 and 95 km-range HY-2 'Silkworm', derived from Soviet P-15 (SS-N-2A 'Styx') missiles transferred to China in the late 1950s.

It is not known whether coastal defence YJ-62C cruise missiles were counted in the US Department of Defense's 2008 estimate that the PLA has between 85 and 220 LACMs in its inventory. Such questions may become important given indications from Chinese officials during the recent visit to Beijing of Taiwanese Kuomintang (KMT) party leader Wu Poh-hsiung that China may begin to reduce its missile forces aimed at Taiwan.

[rajrang]

I recently came to the impression (while surfing the web) that the Karakoram pass is held by China. Can someone confirm this - if so did India ever control it - in other words did we loose it during the 1962 war?[googlevideo][/googlevideo]

Thanks in advance,
Raj

[Lalmohan]

karakorum pass would have been part of pakistan following partition. so we lost it way before '62

[Singha]

think you are confusing with Haji Pir pass which was won at great cost in 1965 but
given back on negotiating table. but I have read some areas in northern side of
kargil enroute to leh were retained -- Turtuk being one.

[abhischekcc]

karakoram is indeed with the chinese.

Daulat Beg Oldi airbase is very close to the pass, well within artillery range.

That's why the chinese tried to take over DBO 24 times during the kargil conflict.

[abhischekcc]

One thing we need to figure out are the objectives the Chinese would like to achieve thru a quick air war against India.

The following objectives come to mind:
1. Sieze commanding heights/strategic areas
2. Put India under strategic pressure on a long-term basis (something 1962 achieved)
2. Humiliate India in front of the world (repeat of 62)
3. Break the growing entente between India and US
4. Provide morale boosters to anti India forces in Nepal, Pak, Bangladesh, and within India

[Aditya_V]

From the maps I have seen , it seems the Karakoram pass just east of Siachen forms the international border between India and Tibet. The Maps also show the LAC runs to the east of the pass. I think the pass is at the border of Indian and Chinese positions and we hold one side of the pass.

[Mihir.D]

Can we also have a thread or discussion on how we can counter China's intentions militarily and diplomatically ?

[merlin]

karakoram is indeed with the chinese.

Sure? Really sure? Really, really sure?

[abhischekcc]

karakoram is indeed with the chinese.

Sure? Really sure? Really, really sure?

Yes.

Sure. Really sure. Really, really sure

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karakoram_Pass

This pass, on the boundary of territory controlled by India and China, plays a major geographic role in the dispute between Pakistan and India over control of the Siachen Glacier area immediately to the west. It falls along India's border with China's Xinjiang Autonomous Region.

[abhischekcc]

DBO and Karakoram pass:

[satyarthi]

http://www.faqs.org/docs/factbook/appen ... x-f-k.html

CIA world factbook gives the latitude longitude of Karakoram pass as:

Karakoram Pass China, India 35 30 N 77 50 E

In google earth, it can be seen that this coordinate is just within India. Beginning of the pass can be seen close to that position. And from there the pass extends into China.

The pass is within India and China both.

P.S. Even more precise location is given by:
http://toolserver.org/~magnus/geo/geoha ... _23_E_{{{9}}}

Karakoram Pass Coordinate 35° 30′ 48″ N, 77° 49′ 23″ E

map: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=35.51333 ... ,77.823056

[Paul]

Does anyone know how far this pass is from the KKH highway....can a determined thrust thrust from this pass in that direction succeed in cutting off the cord conclusively. I am thinking (taking Ramana's suggestion of targeting e turkestan) that it may be possible to get to Yarkand/Khotan/Kashgar (as it is on the old trade route from Ladakh to turkestan,) if we can position a good sized expeditionary force here.

[Lalmohan]

think about the terrain
how would you approach the pass?
how would you defend the pass?

[vivek_ahuja]

think about the terrain
how would you approach the pass?
how would you defend the pass?

Exactly.

Think also about the time frame required. The war in the Kargil region centered around taking what would be a small percentage of hills as compared to that would be fought for if a border war broke out between India and China. And even then it took a long time to capture with fully dedicated air support and an absent enemy air force. No missiles were used. The Command centres were not hit, and yet it took more weeks.

But somehow it is now being suggested that under a far more adverse condition the IA can not only take control of large number of parallel hill lines in a short time but also go beyond into Tibet and other such suggestions when all indications suggest the IA will be fighting for its life just at the borders!

[satyarthi]

The Karakoram highway is much to the west of Karakoram Pass. It goes through Gilgit, Hunza, Khujerab pass in POK. At Khunjerab Pass it turns almost northwards into China. Then it goes through Tashkurgan (Xinjiang) etc. Direct distance between Khunjerab pass and Karakoram pass is about 160 miles.

The Chinese highway No. 219 (Xinjiang-Tibet highway) goes through Aksai Chin into Tibet and then till Kathmandu. Connectivity of Xinjiang with western Tibet is why China covets Aksai chin.

This is the highway which is accessible through the Karakoram pass.

The following site describes in quite detail this highway. Check their high res map for the actual highway.
http://raize.ch/Reisen/velo-eurasien/pr ... hmandu.htm

[Lalmohan]

The Karakoram highway is much to the west of Karakoram Pass. It goes through Gilgit, Hunza, Khujerab pass in POK. At Khunjerab Pass it turns almost northwards into China. Then it goes through Tashkurgan (Xinjiang) etc. Direct distance between Khunjerab pass and Karakoram pass is about 160 miles.

The Chinese highway No. 219 (Xinjiang-Tibet highway) goes through Aksai Chin into Tibet and then till Kathmandu. Connectivity of Xinjiang with western Tibet is why China covets Aksai chin.

This is the highway which is accessible through the Karakoram pass.

The following site describes in quite detail this highway. Check their high res map for the actual highway.
http://raize.ch/Reisen/velo-eurasien/pr ... hmandu.htm

this is a much better articulation of my point in the 'free tibet' thread, thanks

[Don]

China to renegotiate Russian aircraft deal
By Andrei Chang
Column: Military MightPublished: June 10, 2008

Hong Kong, China — For some time, military cooperation between China and Russia has been stalled over a failed deal involving China’s import of Russian Il-76 transport aircraft. China claims that Russia violated the terms of an agreement involving the sale of 38 aircraft. But Russia says this claim is unfair.

Negotiations on the aircraft deal began seven years ago. By the time the contract was signed in 2005, China had agreed to purchase 30 Il-76 transport aircraft and eight Il-78 air-to-air refueling tankers – at an extremely low price. According to a source in the Russian military industry, China initially offered only US$18 million for each plane. The Russian side proposed $22 million, and eventually the two sides settled on a price tag of $20 million per aircraft.

Such a low price was unprecedented in the international transport aircraft market. By comparison, around the same time Jordan had contracted for a variant of the Il-76 at a price of about US$50 million per aircraft.

For this reason, the deal was controversial from the outset. The discussions began in 2001, the contract was signed in 2005 – but in 2008, not a single Il-76 has been delivered.

The aircraft were to be assembled from Russian parts at the Tashkent Aircraft Production Corp. in the Uzbek capital. Out of the 38 aircraft contracted, 15 were already half finished. The others were to be newly manufactured.

The Tashkent company was facing serious financial difficulties, however, and was unable to produce the aircraft according to schedule. This was made worse by the dramatic fluctuation in the value of the U.S. dollar and escalating inflation in Russia – making the cost of producing the transport aircraft much higher than when the deal was originally signed.

According to the Russian side, the Chinese have been unreasonable in refusing to renegotiate the deal in light of changing circumstances.

The Russian source compared the situation with a similar one faced with India over a 2004 deal involving the refurbishing of the aging Gorshkov aircraft carrier. The Russian side was able to hold frank discussions with the Indian side, the source said, and acknowledged that it had made errors in the initial assessment.

The task was to refit the old aircraft carrier, but after dismantling the vessel, Russian engineers realized that the project was practically equivalent to building a brand new aircraft carrier.

“The Indian experts saw the same situation we did, and as a result the two sides could look at the issue with mutual understanding and find a satisfactory solution to the problem,” the source explained.

But the Chinese have been less understanding and less accommodating. They also insist that they will not sign any major military procurement agreement with Russia until this problem is solved to their satisfaction.

The Russians say they are still willing to carry out the agreement and complete the manufacture and delivery of the Il-76 transport aircraft to China. But considering the current reality in Russia and Uzbekistan, the manufacturer feels it is only fair to readjust the price.

A source from Ilyushin Finance told the author recently that the Il-76 dispute with China has made some recent progress. That is, China is now aware of the reality in Russia and is willing to discuss the possibility of signing a new contract. The China side insists, however, that the specific models of the transport aircraft, production sites and prices will all have to be renegotiated.

The Chinese side has also asked to inspect the aircraft production plant before signing a new official agreement. A more feasible plan is that the Chinese side will first inspect the Ulyanovsk Aircraft Factory, which is now preparing for the production of a brand new version of the Il-76, called the Il-476.

The Il-476 is equipped with a full numerical flight-control system, a glass cockpit, and a new-generation PS-90 engine. China is somewhat familiar with the Ulyanovsk Aircraft Factory, which in the past has produced Tu-204 passenger aircraft for China that proved quite satisfactory in quality.

The factory will need to upgrade its equipment to manufacture the Il-476, as currently only 20 percent of the necessary equipment is ready. Fortunately, money is not a problem at the moment. The Ilyushin Group has sufficient financial capability to organize the production.

Russia recently set up the state-owned United Aircraft Corporation, made up of the Ilyushin Group, Sukhoi and MiG. The Tashkent Aircraft Production Corp. has also decided to join this group, with the final signing ceremony to take place within two months. Once the Tashkent company formally joins the state corporation, it may receive new funding and be able to resume its full production capability.

According to the Russian source, China has already initiated preliminary contact with the United Aircraft Corporation to discuss renegotiating the Il-76 transport aircraft deal, but the whole process will take some time. It is not clear when a new agreement would be signed.

The latest developments with regard to the Il-76 deal are exactly in keeping with this author’s prediction – that China would have no alternative to Russia to produce its military transport aircraft.

The question now is what impact China’s recent creation of the J-11B – an illegal copy of Russia’s Su-27 fighter – will have on its renegotiation of the Il-76 deal with the Russians.

--



Related link: http://upiasiaonline.com/Security/2008/ ... deal/4507/

[Kartik]

I would think its probably in Russia's own interest to renege on this deal with China..given the thieving mentality of the Chinese, it would take them anywhere from between 8-10 years to reverse engineer an IL-76 and name it some H-16 Jing Jang and then stop payments on the remaining IL-76s. they'll then reverse engineer the PS-90, something that would hurt the Russians a great deal.

[Don]

I would think its probably in Russia's own interest to renege on this deal with China..given the thieving mentality of the Chinese, it would take them anywhere from between 8-10 years to reverse engineer an IL-76 and name it some H-16 Jing Jang and then stop payments on the remaining IL-76s. they'll then reverse engineer the PS-90, something that would hurt the Russians a great deal.

Actually the Tashkent factory in Uzbekistan provided the Chinese with the blue print and some personel for the manufacturing of this aircraft just to get even with the Russians. They felt the Russians are elbowing them out of the production of this airplane. SAC guaranteed a domestic version to fly within 5 years (2012) using engine based on WS-10A which is in full production now. I don't fell sorry for the Russians at all look at how much they have cheated over the Gorshkov, Su-30MKI and those other deals.