India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

khan · Post by **khan** » 13 Jun 2020 20:46

Can someone with knowledge educate me on how big a threat Chinese S-400’s are? Wouldn’t they compensate for the lack of proximate airbases?

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 13 Jun 2020 22:22

^^^^
I’ll have a go, although I’m very far from being an expert. A lot will depend on exactly where they deploy the system. How far away from the border, and the topography of the region. For example, the radar can’t look through a hill. So, fighters can exploit features like valleys to get closer. Once we find out where they are deployed (e.g. with help of satellites or through detection of their radio emissions), a static / slower moving target becomes more vulnerable. Also, they can be attacked by standoff weapons like Brahmos. Happy to hear the views of a real expert.

nam · Post by **nam** » 13 Jun 2020 22:36

khan wrote:Can someone with knowledge educate me on how big a threat Chinese S-400’s are? Wouldn’t they compensate for the lack of proximate airbases?

Chini SAMs S300, 400, HQ9 or all types, I consider as the top tier threat for us. They will try to keep IAF away from the area of action. I am pretty sure along with artillery, the Chinis will throw in SAM like pancakes.

The way I see it, as their BM go towards our airbases, IAF fighters would take off to prevent getting caught. I would expect SAMs coming their along with these BMs.

We have Russian ARMs. But then I doubt we have the numbers. We have our local NGARM, which could be produced in numbers, however as usual things are in trials!

IAF would need to bring out it's best against Chini SAM. ECM, decoys( do we have them?), ARM, low level flying through the valleys etc.

nam · Post by **nam** » 13 Jun 2020 22:36

We could have returned the favor with MRSAM.. but as with everything we do, they are in trials.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Jun 2020 22:48

New Delhi-Beijing border stand-off on agenda in Russia, India and China’s virtual meet

The foreign ministers of Russia, India and China are expected to hold a meeting via video conference on June 22, people familiar with developments said on Saturday, against the backdrop of heightened tensions between New Delhi and Beijing due to a border stand-off.

The meeting of the foreign ministers of the RIC (Russia-India-China) grouping is being convened at the initiative of Moscow and is largely focused on enhancing cooperation to tackle the fallout of the global Covid-19 pandemic, the people cited above said on condition of anonymity.

“The three sides are working on the agenda for the meeting and this is expected to be finalised by early next week,” said a person familiar with planning for the meeting.

..................................

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 13 Jun 2020 22:56

Prasad wrote:For ladakh prime air bases on Chinese side will be Hotan, Ngari and Kashgar. At the max 2+1+2 squadrons can be based there per uneducated guess by a layman. Only issue would be HY bombers from the east. Lhasa & xigatse are quite far to affect Aksai Chin by air meaningfully.

IMO the air battle in in the North will not be a cake walk as some are assuming. Our only fighter base in that area is Leh (which has all the same disadvantages of of airbases in Tibet), apart from that any air cover and support will have to come from bases in J&K or even deeper. Plus this is the place the pakis can be a force multiplier, even if they are not joining the war, they can take AMRAAM pot shots from GB airspace and complicate things for us. Or for example our troops in Siachen would be juicy targets for the Chinese to attack either via air attack or a few CM/BM and let the Pakies on the ground take advantage.

IRC there were plans recently to upgrade Kargil and Nyoma AGLs to handle fighters which would have helped greatly (may be even add Thoise to that list) but I don't know if anything has actually moved on ground to be useful now.

Added: also unlike southern tibet, we have limited ability to control/interdict supplies or new infrastructure getting added in Hotan/Kashgar, Even if they loose a lot of fighters - they can keep sending new ones since they have a deep bench (2X compared to us) in the mainland for attrition warfare, so it will be some what like "unlimited regeneration" (video games) . Also they have shown excellent infrastructure building capability, in a protracted war they could put in more bases in a matter of months.

khan · Post by **khan** » 13 Jun 2020 23:34

nam wrote:We have Russian ARMs. But then I doubt we have the numbers. We have our local NGARM, which could be produced in numbers, however as usual things are in trials!

I wouldn’t scoff at protracted trials. One of the advantages of these is IAF has confidence that what they accept pretty much works. Chinese on the other hand might just have to accept into service whatever their PSU produces.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 Jun 2020 00:21

Ladakh standoff explained: Never seen before maps take a deep dive into India-China faceoff

Rohit Vats

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 14 Jun 2020 07:08

Rohit Vats was on Rahul Kanwal show along with Gokhle and Gen Hussain. Discussion was about this map and latest development in Ladakh .

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 14 Jun 2020 09:09

abhik wrote:IMO the air battle in in the North will not be a cake walk as some are assuming. Our only fighter base in that area is Leh (which has all the same disadvantages of of airbases in Tibet), apart from that any air cover and support will have to come from bases in J&K or even deeper. Plus this is the place the pakis can be a force multiplier, even if they are not joining the war, they can take AMRAAM pot shots from GB airspace and complicate things for us. Or for example our troops in Siachen would be juicy targets for the Chinese to attack either via air attack or a few CM/BM and let the Pakies on the ground take advantage.

IRC there were plans recently to upgrade Kargil and Nyoma AGLs to handle fighters which would have helped greatly (may be even add Thoise to that list) but I don't know if anything has actually moved on ground to be useful now.

If Leh has altitude restrictions, how would Kargil or Nyoma be better? ALGs cannot serve as bases, except to refuel and undertake basic repairs, as their primary role is to supply land forces. To that extent, they can act as force multipliers, but they'll also suffer from altitude restrictions.

Yes, the pakis can cause some problems by posturing, but we are not solely dependent on Leh. There are plenty of other options like Srinagar, Avantipora, Pathankot, Ambala, etc., to name a few, where we have stationed longer ranged aircraft and have enough assets to deal with both fronts. The Rafales are coming to Ambala for this reason - they have the legs to cover eastern Ladakh/Aksai Chin area (as well as swing to take on the pakis if needed).

Whereas, the PLAAF's bases, except Hotan perhaps, all suffer from altitude restrictions. They have to take off from locations deep in Xinjiang in order to use their full load, but then have a long haul from Kashgar/Aksu in the open, where they can be spotted by AWACS well inside Indian airspace. Whereas, our side could use the mountain cover to fly low and evade detection as and when needed.

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 14 Jun 2020 09:50

abhik wrote: IMO the air battle in in the North will not be a cake walk as some are assuming. Our only fighter base in that area is Leh (which has all the same disadvantages of of airbases in Tibet), apart from that any air cover and support will have to come from bases in J&K or even deeper. Plus this is the place the pakis can be a force multiplier, even if they are not joining the war, they can take AMRAAM pot shots from GB airspace and complicate things for us. Or for example our troops in Siachen would be juicy targets for the Chinese to attack either via air attack or a few CM/BM and let the Pakies on the ground take advantage.

IRC there were plans recently to upgrade Kargil and Nyoma AGLs to handle fighters which would have helped greatly (may be even add Thoise to that list) but I don't know if anything has actually moved on ground to be useful now.

Added: also unlike southern tibet, we have limited ability to control/interdict supplies or new infrastructure getting added in Hotan/Kashgar, Even if they loose a lot of fighters - they can keep sending new ones since they have a deep bench (2X compared to us) in the mainland for attrition warfare, so it will be some what like "unlimited regeneration" (video games) . Also they have shown excellent infrastructure building capability, in a protracted war they could put in more bases in a matter of months.

While the air battle will be no cakewalk, we have the advantage of having many more bases and at lower altitudes. The furthest most of our sorties will go is to interdict the G-19 highway parallel to the LAC, through which ALL Chinese supplies have to pass. All our bases in the North and North East can be used for that. If bridges on the Lhasa-G219 route or Hotan-G219 route are taken out, that further affects their supplies. Unlike us, they do not stockpile supplies near the LAC, everything, incl. water, has to be brought up from literally thousands of km away. While flying towards the G219, the Himalayas can mask the approach of our aircraft, until 5 minutes before they strike. Also, attacking our targets - entrenched in rugged terrain, is a lot more difficult than hitting targets in the flat featureless Tibetan plateau.

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 14 Jun 2020 11:04

Deans, read your book, a thoroughly enjoyable and educative read. Great research that has gone into it makes it very credible and realistic. Some of the incidents in the book are prescient to current developments. Kudos !

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 14 Jun 2020 11:42

While watching LAC, don't loose focus on LOC

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 366657.cms

First this threat needs to be neutralised.

schinnas · Post by **schinnas** » 14 Jun 2020 13:07

Lets take a step back and think this through.

Though the border is very long between India and Cheen, there are a few natural passes or locations that offer tactical advantage or provide strategic value and makes it easy for logistics.

Chinese have encroached into 4 of such locations in 3 areas of Ladakh of which they seem to be going back fully or partially on 2 areas but have fortified their occupation in the fingers 4 to 8 of the lake region. They also have proactively stationed troops all over the border including the Eastern regions to thwart any counter intrusions / occupations. Meanwhile have used their proxies in Nepal to create border tension and put pressure on our army given the Gurkha's emotional connect with Nepal.

They seem to have games three scenarios (probably much more, but these three are realistic).
1. Expect India to be cowed down and suck it up like during UPA times. Given Covid, LoC and Nepal situation and quietly swallow it.

2. If India shows public push back, there needs to be a honorable way out and hence be ready to give up occupations in other regions partially (or fully based on how strongly India stands up) but make their occupation of fingers 4 to 8 a fait accompli. And even for this partial rollback demand concessions from India.

3. India may take a 56" Naya India stance and counter occupies other critical areas. Cheen troop buildup in Eastern sector and Instigation of Nepal is primarily to counter this. Quite a few Nepali politicians should have been honey trapped and generously bribed for this to happen.

4. India is willing to fight a limited conventional war to push back. This is highly unlikely and either party cannot allow a major loss of face and hence this is bound to escalate. Cheen should have games that India wouldn't take this gamble in the middle of the pandemic esp if they are dismantling their occupations in other areas. Just prolong the dialogue and make occupation of the finger regions in the lake shore a fait accompli.

This leaves India with only one pragmatic option - a determined and clever means to implement option 3. Despite Cheen troop buildup, with patience and cleverness, India can occupy few other areas and build concrete bunkers and trenches and permanent structures for troops and station heavy artillery there with some active ALG nearby for air support if needed.

If the HK or Taiwan situation heats up or if there is an internal rebellion in one of Cheen's restive provinces, Cheen's ability to thward #3 will be hampered. India should work closely with allies to make it happen and occupy 5x such strategically critical regions than the finger areas near the lake and should make them the new LAC even if Cheen offers to go back to pre April levels.

Going back to pre April levels after this grave provocation wouldn't be a good outcome for India. China has pushed India into a corner and India needs to now teach Cheen a strong lession (including considering option #4 if allies can provide material INT and weapons support and naval cooperation to enforce a maritime blockade in malaca straights).

nam · Post by **nam** » 14 Jun 2020 17:10

We will continue talking to the Chinese, as long as they are willing to talk and ultimately go back to status quo.

If they don't want status quo, then let them know we will evict by force. Up to the Chinese if they want to get in to a firefight.

It is simple. If the Chini are ready for a firefight, they would have intruded by force. Why would anything think that we will let them change the status quo without firing a bullet?

There can be only two outcome. Either the Chini go back to status quo, without force or they go back to status quo, with force.

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 14 Jun 2020 17:35

Chinese daily Global Times is giving a very optimistic spin, sometimes saying its resolved and other times saying its being resolve

We havent heard anything from official Indian spokespersons yet.

They seem to be anxious about India-US rapprochement and India-Australia defence cooperation.

Eased border tensions bring China-India economic relations back to crossroads
https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1191358.shtml

Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying said on Wednesday that China and India have taken actions to ease tensions along the border in accordance with the consensus reached between the two sides. Some observers hailed the official statement as a clear sign that the recent border standoff between China and India is de-escalating.

To a certain extent, the relaxed border situation will give both countries greater flexibility on future economic and trade exchanges, which is in line with the interests of both sides. If the tensions persist or even escalate into a conflict in a worst-case scenario, there would be little room for maneuver in China-India relations. And considering the impact of politics on the economy and business circles, bilateral trade would inevitably suffer amid rising anti-China sentiment in India.

So far, it seems everything is moving toward a positive direction, pointing to the increasing possibility of de-escalation in the border situation. That means the room for bilateral economic and trade cooperation will be expanded in the future, which will offer much-need breathing space to the already crippling Indian economy.

More than ever, the Indian government needs to focus its attention on its domestic issues such as the ongoing coronavirus pandemic and locust attacks. Failing to contain the spread of the virus, weeks of nationwide lockdown have stagnated the country's economy. The unemployment rate in urban India hit 27 percent in mid-May, according to the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development even estimated in a Wednesday report that the Indian economy could contract by as much as 7.3 percent in fiscal year 2021. Moreover, further locust swarms are likely to attack India in the near future, which are expected to put extra pressure on food supply and need to be taken seriously by the Indian government.

When the border dispute is eased between China and India, bilateral economic and trade ties are expected to return to normal. However, it is worth noting that the global geopolitical situation has become more complex as China-US relations are on the brink of a new Cold War and Australia and India have just formed a comprehensive strategic partnership. At this juncture, India faces increased geopolitical pressure and temptation. India has long adhered to the non-alignment principle in its foreign policy. It remains to be seen whether India will continue to maintain its diplomatic independence or lean toward the US-led allies amid the changeable geopolitical environment.

If the Modi government chooses to make friends with China, then China-India economic ties will surely see more growth potential. But if India joins the US in confronting China, China will not hesitate to protect its own interests, whether political or economic. And the cost of losing China's friendship will be too high for India to bear.

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 14 Jun 2020 18:52

somdev wrote:Economic ties with China are not necessarily bad particularly for infrastructure. India can benefit from such joint projects. The Kunming - Kolkata high speed rail link could be considered and fast-tracked. US is a strategic partner but that does not mean we have to belong to a camp.

Yes, they can be quite welcome to build infrastructure along our border, extend loans at preferential rates of interest, take a minority stake in
companies, contribute to PM cares etc.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 14 Jun 2020 19:44

There are now 3 USN carriers in the pacific pointed towards the cheenis. I wonder if it is a case of piling on the pressure when it is conducive for them right now. Especially given PLAAF flights towards Taiwan recently as well as SCS d!ckbaggery by PLAN against Vietnamese fishing boats.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 14 Jun 2020 20:11

Prasad wrote:There are now 3 USN carriers in the pacific pointed towards the cheenis. I wonder if it is a case of piling on the pressure when it is conducive for them right now. Especially given PLAAF flights towards Taiwan recently as well as SCS d!ckbaggery by PLAN against Vietnamese fishing boats.

With all that is going on around the world, with Covid-19, and the economic disruption, there is fear that the CPC will pounce on the opportunity and attempt to disrupt the status quo that currently exists in the region (Taiwan and elsewhere). This is why readiness and presence matters and the USN's 3 carriers, and other L-class ships and bomber patrols in the region are an important signal. It would be interesting to see what the French, British, and others are doing in the region. The biggest thorn in the PLAN's side would be the deployment of the MQ-4C Triton to Guam and the early operational capability that this platform affords. You can set up constant orbits and get high value SIGINT/ELINT and really test out the Chinese communication and operational hygiene in ways that you just couldn't do with either manned platforms (due to endurance) or other smaller, less capable, unmanned platforms. The dynamic bomber deployments also complicate the situation for them. Earlier their calculus was X number of bombers based in Guam for which they could build Y number of IRBM's and hold them at risk. Now, Guam has no bombers and you don't know which air-base, in which country, if an air-base at all, they'll operate from and each can carry 2 dozen 300 nautical mile + LRASM.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 14 Jun 2020 20:16

I saw that gobar times article and it's interesting to see the tone they have taken with respect to the border tensions and trade.

They're on an active cold war with the US, picking fights with Australia and massing troops against India. It'll sure be interesting to see whom they want to trade with in the future.

It'll be a shallow pool between an ageing Europe, volatile Africa, declining middle east.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 14 Jun 2020 21:17

why does the BJP allow people like Gadkari to open their mouths at a time like this? China will read this and conclude that India does not have the stomach for a fight.

India do not want land of China or Pakistan but peace: Nitin Gadkari addresses virtual rally

India is not interested in land of Pakistan or China but wanted peace and amity, Union minister and senior BJP leader Nitin Gadkari said on Sunday.

Addressing virtual 'Jan Samvad' rally of Gujarat BJP from Nagpur in Maharashtra, he said India believed in peace and non-violence and do not want to be strong by becoming an expansionist.

"India do not want land of either Pakistan or China. All India want is peace, amity, love, and (want) to work together (with neighbouring countries)," Gadkari said.

Suresh S · Post by **Suresh S** » 14 Jun 2020 21:19

Terrific interview of his holiness Dalai lama by Nitin Gokhale

https://youtu.be/ZbKEbPojtXA

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 14 Jun 2020 21:29

guys why cant we give chini a road thru india in return for GB and POK ?? what are the pros cons??

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 14 Jun 2020 21:30

amar_p wrote:They seem to be anxious about India-US rapprochement and India-Australia defence cooperation.

They will pile up everything and try to get maximum mileage.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 14 Jun 2020 21:55

arshyam wrote:
abhik wrote:IMO the air battle in in the North will not be a cake walk as some are assuming. Our only fighter base in that area is Leh (which has all the same disadvantages of of airbases in Tibet), apart from that any air cover and support will have to come from bases in J&K or even deeper. Plus this is the place the pakis can be a force multiplier, even if they are not joining the war, they can take AMRAAM pot shots from GB airspace and complicate things for us. Or for example our troops in Siachen would be juicy targets for the Chinese to attack either via air attack or a few CM/BM and let the Pakies on the ground take advantage.

IRC there were plans recently to upgrade Kargil and Nyoma AGLs to handle fighters which would have helped greatly (may be even add Thoise to that list) but I don't know if anything has actually moved on ground to be useful now.
If Leh has altitude restrictions, how would Kargil or Nyoma be better? ALGs cannot serve as bases, except to refuel and undertake basic repairs, as their primary role is to supply land forces. To that extent, they can act as force multipliers, but they'll also suffer from altitude restrictions.

Yes, the pakis can cause some problems by posturing, but we are not solely dependent on Leh. There are plenty of other options like Srinagar, Avantipora, Pathankot, Ambala, etc., to name a few, where we have stationed longer ranged aircraft and have enough assets to deal with both fronts. The Rafales are coming to Ambala for this reason - they have the legs to cover eastern Ladakh/Aksai Chin area (as well as swing to take on the pakis if needed).

Whereas, the PLAAF's bases, except Hotan perhaps, all suffer from altitude restrictions. They have to take off from locations deep in Xinjiang in order to use their full load, but then have a long haul from Kashgar/Aksu in the open, where they can be spotted by AWACS well inside Indian airspace. Whereas, our side could use the mountain cover to fly low and evade detection as and when needed.

Kargil and Nyoma AGLs may not be useful for strike but will be useful for air to air missions - I believe most fighters can takeoff with full fuel (internal at least) and A2A weapons compliment. It seemed to be on the plan (wish list maybe with the fund crunch) for IAF but lets see how it pans out.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 14 Jun 2020 21:58

manjgu wrote:guys why cant we give chini a road thru india in return for GB and POK ?? what are the pros cons??

Which road are you talking about? Also who has made this offer?

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 14 Jun 2020 22:16

nooo... i am asking is it a good idea to give china a transit route thru india ( on payment basis) ...and we try to retake POK , GB ... in lieu of CPEC?? just for discussing pros/cons...

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 14 Jun 2020 22:31

manjgu wrote:guys why cant we give chini a road thru india in return for GB and POK ?? what are the pros cons??

My thinking is that after India takes back POK+GB, CPEC is moot. At that point China will be given access thro India in exchange for finalizing border and return of Aksai Chin. Aksai Chin will be negotiated, not fought over, once the baki angle is out of the equation.

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 14 Jun 2020 23:09

I agree with Guddu ji here. This whole drama is to get India to the negotiating table when they can play the Pakistan card while it is available - this is their last chance. Once GB is taken over by India - they have lost all leverage.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Jun 2020 23:10

The border issue is a sideshow to what is really China's masterplan,domination of the IOR by its navy which in 2 decades will possess 450 warships and over 110 subs of which 16 will be SSBNs,according to some analysts. They also say that China will build more than the 6 CVs to match the USN,one for one.Just watch how its naval bases in the IOR are coming up ,Gwada/ Jiwanir,Djibouti,a possible base in the Maldives ,Burma and the Hambantota port at the very least a key logistic hub. If the Chins get the huge hinterland,part of the port deal, huge industries supporting its military will be set up there plus a suspected undersea oil pipeline to Burma either from H'tota or Trinco,where old WW2 tank farm infra still exists.

The GOI must not get attention diverted by the Himalayan stand-off.The Chins know that they cannot invade India inthe mountains and hold onto significant territory.Their key worry in the mountains is the link to Pak,essential for their OBOR strategy.It is the IOR where their greatest ambitions lie,to control energy supplies from the Gulf and the Red Sea,protect their trade to the IOR littoral and beyond,threaten India's very own energy supplies and sea-borne trade in the bargain.

We cannot match China's warship and sub- building rates,but the unsinkable mega-carrier,UNS India,which can carry thousands of aircraft ,missiles,etc., must be leveraged.First,a string of naval bases/ stations on both seaboards.Those closest to Pak to have dozens of small,inexpensive,fast missile craft and corvettes which as in '71 can saturate the Paki coastline with hundreds of anti-ship and land attack missiles.Forward naval bases at Okha,Porbandar,etc. should be further strengthened so that at v.short notice offensive ops to destroy the Paki fleet can commence, first off the block.The greatest threat will be the large number of subs of both China and Pak combined.At least 2 dozen subs will be ranged against India targeting our principal naval bases using stand-off missiles with ranges of at least 300km .Increasing the number of bases/ base facilities along both coasts will hugely assist in operating IN and CG ASW vessels against the Sino- Paki fleet.

We will need around 36 to 48 subs both nuclear and AIP/ conventional as a minimum force to counter them. But what will be the clinching factor ,the easiest way in which we can counter the huge imbalance in numbers of warships and subs is the essential requirement for supersonic maritime strike aircraft like Backfires/ Blackjacks.We do not have a stealth bomber programme like Russia's PAK-DA,but should initiate one asap,more useful than the LCA MK-2 or any fighter type. It would be used both for the IN and IAF allowing us to strike anywhere in Tibet and beyond too,apart from sanitising the IOR and operating from the ANC even conducting ops in the Indo-China Sea.The Russian use of its atrategic bombing fleet of Blackjacks,Backfires and venerable Bears in Syria, launching hundreds of missiles at ISIS strongholds,as well as Kalibir missiles launched by corvettes and Kilo subs from 2000km away, turned the tide of the ground war greatly assisting in its defeat.

The GOI should review its strategy against China in the light of the recent incursions and occupancy of Indian territory,esp. its military options.
"Fortune favours the bold",is an old saying. Seizing a few fully-loaded Chin tankers and MVs in the IOR in the south if they continue to occupy Indian territory in the north,will be the equivalent of a swordfish up XI's bunghole. We have the rindod of opportunity right now to exercise that assymetric option.A decade hence,it may not be possible.

For the moment though, a wall of steel should be thrown up against China in the Himalayas to deter it from further chicanery. A diplomatic and economic offensive must accompany the military resolve. The two " T" cards should come into play.Recognising Taiwan as a separate Chinese state and declaring Tibet as COT,the equiv. of POK ,as well as it being an Indian protectorate being the birthplace of the " Enlightened one".

nam · Post by **nam** » 15 Jun 2020 00:15

manjgu wrote:nooo... i am asking is it a good idea to give china a transit route thru india ( on payment basis) ...and we try to retake POK , GB ... in lieu of CPEC?? just for discussing pros/cons...

Why would we want to give our adversary an opportunity to make money?

The power of a nation is driven by it's economical wealth. The Soviets sank, because they ran out of money.

Our objective to try to make the Chinese run out of money.

Similarly we should be trying to sink the Pak economy. If Pak doesn't have money, how can it defend GB or PoK?

nam · Post by **nam** » 15 Jun 2020 00:20

But then what will we do with GB/PoK where people anyways don't like us!

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 15 Jun 2020 00:34

manjgu wrote:nooo... i am asking is it a good idea to give china a transit route thru india ( on payment basis) ...and we try to retake POK , GB ... in lieu of CPEC?? just for discussing pros/cons...

China does not need that road for CPEC, it's more symbolic, maybe even strategic but it does not make economic sense - a road link that is 1000's of miles long, single lane for most of it, passing through some of of the most inhospitable places on earth, with blizzards, rock slides, avalanches etc + constant insurgent attacks - you are not really going to be able to move much through in the larger scheme of things. Almost all of its trade with Pak will be conducted via the sea route anyways.

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 15 Jun 2020 00:48

The moment we try to strike a deal with chinese for Pok, GB etc what's stopping the americans from swooping in and give pakis F15s/F21 and couple hundreds AIM120D at "fighting terrorists" prices. I don't think either China or US wants us to solve our mess on the border so the moment we cozy up to one, the other will balance it out.

The only way we solve this is by our own might. And for that we need economical wealth. And by the time we're a 20T economy, I don't think pakis would dare such shenanigans on the border anyway.

kit · Post by **kit** » 15 Jun 2020 00:51

m_saini wrote:The moment we try to strike a deal with chinese for Pok, GB etc what's stopping the americans from swooping in and give pakis F15s/F21 and couple hundreds AIM120D at "fighting terrorists" prices. I don't think either China or US wants us to solve our mess on the border so the moment we cozy up to one, the other will balance it out.

The only way we solve this is by our own might. And for that we need economical wealth. And by the time we're a 20T economy, I don't think pakis would dare such shenanigans on the border anyway.

where do you think China America etc will be when India becomes 20 T economy.. as someone said "tomorrow never comes"

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 15 Jun 2020 01:06

kit wrote:
where do you think China America etc will be when India becomes 20 T economy.. as someone said "tomorrow never comes"

When we become a 20T (x10 present day) economy, I don't think US or China would grow proportionately to 200T or 140T.

Besides my post was about whether or not we should get chinese permission take GB or POK in return of road access. The moment we get their persmission, US would rescind theirs, if it ever becomes available. Nobody is going to let us take territories and keep them if we're not powerful on our own.

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 15 Jun 2020 01:13

Will India overtake the size of Chinese economy in the next 2 decades?
Unlikely given their head start and dictatorial regime, unless there is a democratic revolution which leads to the balkanisation of China.

What we should realistically aim for is to find an acceptable equilibrium where we will not be easily coerced or needled.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Jun 2020 04:34

We should treat our 1.3 billion population as our captive market,which the PM has his " make in India " goal.During the freedom struggle it was known as " Swadeshi". Achieving this will have a huge boost to the economy and its growth.Any export revenue obtained can be treated as a bonus. Who needs the damn Chinese for jobs in N.India? Any road/ rail link with China will facilitate massive dumping of cheap Chinese goods destroying our economy! Haven't we today a $70 B trade deficit?
If we stop buying Chinese goods we deny China $ 70B,money which it is pouring into its defence industry.In fact it is India which is helping fund the Chinese military machine!

Let us invest in our infrastructure along our northern borders for quick movement of troops,plus local development,more ports,expansion of existing ports on both seaboards which will increase coastal shipping ,passenger ro-ro ferries, spurring local development other than only fishing,increase domestic tourism,etc. Take a look as to how efficiently Europe,the UK have developed their merchant fleet,ferries,etc. They understood the value of maritime power centuries ago,and their navies sailed all over the world colonising the globe ,Asia in particular for 500 years! China is attempting reverse colonisation on the 21st. century and only the Indian Navy can scuttle its plans for global domination through control of the seas.Remember the famous words of maritime strategist Adm. Alfred Thayer Mahan who said,
" whoever controls the Indian Ocean will dominate Asia, the destiny of the world will be decided on its waters".

The PRC is taking Mahan's words very seriously giving its navy the highest priority of all,with such a massive ship and sub building programme not seen since WW2. Is the GOI however taking Mahan's advice at all? Giving the IN the smallest share of the defence budget with our obsession with Pak a deliberate ploy by China, cutting its requirements down in number repeatedly, shows that it has not. It has like an ostrich stuck its head into the ground,refusing to see the wider picture.China was very worried about the modernisation of the IN and its steady growth despite budgetary restraints.It fears India ganging up with a US-led navsl alliance. Hence the Himalayan mischief to deliberately lead us astray as to its true intentions.

Some years ago, I think it was Gen.Rodrigues ghe then army chirf who famously said, " Pakistan is only an irritation,it is China our greatest danger", or words to that effect.He was pilloried by the politico- babu establishment for supposedly speaking out of turn.
Today he would be hailed by the nation as a true hero,a prophet for saying what he did! But is the govt. and establishment reading the tea leaves correctly and understanding the full dimensions of China's diabolic plans for the globe and India in particular?
Sadly,some think that if an agreement on de- escalation is reached we can return relations to " normal", where we commit economic suicide by buying Chinese goods again ,and yet again fawningly greet fuhrer XI like a vassal state paying tribute to the visiting Caesar!

chola · Post by **chola** » 15 Jun 2020 05:43

amar_p wrote:Will India overtake the size of Chinese economy in the next 2 decades?
Unlikely given their head start and dictatorial regime, unless there is a democratic revolution which leads to the balkanisation of China.

Erh, all of the great economic powers are democracies.

Cheen in per capita terms is upper turd world at most. The democractic chini-type states -- Taiwan, Korea, Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong -- are first world in per capita income. Only dictatorial Cheen and North Korea are turd world in East Asia.

I've seen this strange argument before and it makes no sense whatsoever. Are US, UK, France, etc. not democracies? Democracy and freedom enhance wealth creation. Communism and lack of freedom depress it.

m_saini · Post by **m_saini** » 15 Jun 2020 07:04

Tbh China's economic rise is phenomenal and it does raise the question whether democracy is the best solution for lifting a state out of poverty or is it dictatorial regimes like China. No doubt that democracy is better for wealth creation and overall wellbeing of the public but i feel that it's more suited for a well-educated and well-fed population that can make responsible decisions like electing head of states.

For poor states where populations are much more susceptible to foreign interference, a dictatorial regime, if "governed" by able people, is a much better and much faster way to become prosperous. The problem is the inevitable transition to a democracy.

It's pretty much a given that chinese will fight a war rather sooner than later. Now if they win, then all iz well. But if they lose, it'll be magnitudes more bloody than a democracy when people come for CCP. And no one wins forever.