Indian Military News

Re: New Indian Army Strike Corp's to face China

Baibar of Jalat said:

The issues you raised about Indian capability are not set in stone, meaning them problems wont last forever. If you take a medium to long term view, roads and railways can be built up. The PLA due to focus on Tiawan has led to relative neglect, particularly in Tibet area, in terms of military modernisation. India might not have capability to wage a long term war but it has put up a big force along border, resulting in IA having a significant deterence and offensive capability. Overall I suspect CCP and PLA will just watch, instead of deploying more troops in area.

Click to expand...

True, but that was the case since 62, and from that prospective, today is the medium to long-term, and little has improved.

Until the Indians start to seriously invest in infrastructure, talk of medium to long term potential means little.

Personally I would not be holding your breathe, since other far more important parts of India badly needs infrastructure investment a lot more than a relatively unimportant (economically) boarder region.

China has only recently started to invest heavily in its western provinces after the development of its coastal economic and industrial heartland has been largely completed. Still, the coastal areas get a lot more than the inner regions.

If India puts boarder tensions before economic development, then it has a lot bigger problems than the PLA being able to use better roads and railways.

I think you are still not fully grasping how fundamentally important logistics is to war fighting ability.

The Indians may have a far larger standing force at the boarder, but the PLA has the ability to draw up a near infinite supply of reinforcements and supplies that could reach the boarder in hours.

If there was the desire, the PLA could match Indian troop strengths in days and easily surpass them in a matter of weeks at the longest even if India brought up reinforcements as quickly as they could.

And if combat actually takes place, the PLA will be far better supplied, and that's half the battle!

The PLA will not match Indian boarder deployments simply because there is no need for them to do so. All they need to do is ensure the boarder force is strong enough to hold out against an Indian sudden attack long enough for major reinforcements to arrive, and that is a matter of hours to days at most.

Both sides are mainly defensive in their posture, but are adopting two very distinct strategies.

The Indians seem to be castling up with the hope that their strongholds will be enough to blunt any PLA attack, and if those strong holds are broken, the lack of decent infrastructure will serve as a natural hinderance to the speed of the PLA advance to hopefully give them time to mass forces further south in order to turn back the attack.

The Chinese seem to be adapting a far more fluid strategy of building up the bulk of its second tier forces slowly, and focusing their best men and equipment into elite 'fist' divisions which constitute the cream of the PLA's fighting strength that could deploy anywhere within China within a very short time frame to deal with any threat.

Without going too deeply into the minute details of plawolf's post above, my own thinking is not much different.

It is neither in the interest of India, nor China .... to convert the de-facto India-China border into a hot zone of active military engagement.

Progress is possibly only in peace .... and both India and China have huge scope and need to progress economically.

Irrespective of who wins a so-called "limited war", both lose on the global stage. Both lose economically, as well.

However, because of so little information flowing out of China ... there is a deep mistrust, world wide in general. China has a policy of using extreme secrecy to extract strategic value. I agree that prima-facie this policy of "extreme secrecy" does give a benefit (short-term benefit, for sure).

However, it does create a paranoia ..... people start seeing China as a huge demon (simply because of a lack of re-assurance or proof that it does not have any "secret" evil designs)

It is human to have a fear of the unknown.

In response to this "fear of the unknown", people tend to over-prepare. And they tend to over-react. No wonder, you hear more noise about China being "demonised". I do not know if China "secretly" likes being demonised. Likes to instill this "fear of the unknown". Is this true?????

In stories, it is usually villains who like to instill fear in others, not love.

I do think, China needs to do a cost-benefit analysis ... whether this policy of "extreme secrecy" is really good for it or bad. (As I mentioned, it gains a strategic advantage by extreme secrecy. At the same time it inspires ill-feelings when it tries to encourage this "fear of the unknown").

Personally, as a foreigner, I'll be happy to see a democratic China. It's time for political reforms.

However, eventually it's the people of China (residents of China) who need to decide, whether they want to live under the party .... with all the censorship, extreme secrecy etc. or be more open.

I also wonder if overseas Chinese ... having experienced a life in USA, Europe, South-east Asia etc. .... would like to see a democratic China. Or they are just happy that something in cooking inside China (which nobody knows) --- However, possibly, they like to fantasise that something good is cooking inside, unlike developing a "fear of the unknown" which non-chinese are likely to have.

However, because of so little information flowing out of China ... there is a deep mistrust, world wide in general. China has a policy of using extreme secrecy to extract strategic value. I agree that prima-facie this policy of "extreme secrecy" does give a benefit (short-term benefit, for sure).

However, it does create a paranoia ..... people start seeing China as a huge demon (simply because of a lack of re-assurance or proof that it does not have any "secret" evil designs)

Click to expand...

A very quick interjection on the border dispute and without going into opinions of right and wrong and as to pre-empt the posts of others that would want to respond to this and other of Bingo's points.

It is however fair and right to point to facts. In this case if you want to judge the merits and demerits of both sides, simply examine the status of border demarcations with the other countries they border.

One nation has no other land border disputes, the other has unresolved land border disputes with nearly all its adjoining nations. I think this tells its own story.

The other reason for pre-emption is that this thread is now nudging towards the Political, which as we all know is ill-advised.

SampanViking said:

One nation has no other land border disputes, the other has unresolved land border disputes with nearly all its adjoining nations. I think this tells its own story.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're getting at. Both China and India have several active border disputes.

fresh violence has occurred in the volatile region again.

Protests hit Indian Kashmir
SRINAGAR - PRAYERS to mark the end of the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan turned into anti-India demonstrations and rallies on Saturday in Kashmir which has been racked by weeks of unrest.

Tens of thousands of Muslims, mostly young men, chanted, 'Go India, go back!' and 'We want freedom!' after they assembled in the main city of Srinagar to offer prayers on the festival of Eid al-Fitr.

A total of 70 protesters and bystanders - some just children - have been killed, mostly by security forces who have used live ammunition to disperse demonstrators after being pelted with stones.

Government forces have been battling to contain three months of violent demonstrations in the mainly Muslim region by Kashmiris that were ignited by the killing of a 17-year-old student by police on June 11.

Kashmir is in the grip of a 20-year old insurgency against Indian rule that has left more than 47,000 people dead. -- AFP

Click to expand...

Strategic Command to acquire 40 nuclear capable fighters

With an aim of increasing its lethal power, India's tri-services strike force is planning to acquire 40 fighter planes capable of delivering nuclear weapons. The Strategic Forces Command (SFC) has submitted a proposal to the Defence Ministry for setting up two dedicated squadrons of fighter aircraft which will act as "mini-Air Force", ministry sources said.

This will be the first time that SFC, which at present depends on the Indian Air Force for delivering nuclear weapons under its command, will have its own aerial assets, they said.

The SFC does not want untested fighters but the ones which are battle proven and have capabilities to deliver nuclear-tipped missiles, the sources said.

The aircraft planned to be procured are part of efforts to strengthen the nuclear delivery system which right now is based on land-based ballistic missiles such as the Agni and Prithvi and nuclear-capable fighters such as the Mirage 2000, Su-30 MKI and Jaguars.

Created in January 2003, the SFC is part of the Nuclear Command Authority (NCA) and is responsible for the management and administration of the country's tactical and strategic nuclear weapons stockpile.

Attempts are underway to complete the nuclear triad by developing the indigenous Arihant class nuclear submarine and under-sea launched versions of the existing ballistic missile systems.

India's nuclear doctrine envisages building a credible minimum deterrent for maintaining a 'second strike capability' which will be massive and designed to induce unacceptable damage on the enemy.

The SFC is headed by a three-star officer from any of the three services and is responsible for implementing directives of the NCA. At present, the force is headed by Lieutenant General B S Nagal.

The force manages and administers all strategic forces by exercising complete command and control over nuclear assets, and producing all contingency plans as needed to fulfil the required tasks.

The operational missile groups of the Army are armed with the 150-250 km short-range Prithvi missiles and the others with the Agni missiles of ranges above 1,500 km form the nucleus of SFC.

India ready to export reactors

Overseas vendors may be keen to sell India their reactor technology, but the country is ready to export its own pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs).


In India's statement to the 54th General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna, Indian Atomic Energy Commission chairman Srikumar Banerjee said that Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) is "ready to offer Indian PHWRs of 220 MWe or 540 MWe for export." Furthermore, he said, Indian industry is also "on the way" to becoming a competitive supplier of special steels, large size forgings, control instruments, software and other nuclear components and services on the global market.

India was largely excluded from international trade in nuclear plant or materials for over three decades because of its position outside the international Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT). In that time, the country developed an indigenous nuclear power program based around PHWRs but a 2008 decision by the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers' Group in recognition of India's impeccable non-proliferation credentials opened the door to international nuclear trade.

India's long-term nuclear power plans have been for a three-stage program which should enable it eventually to utilise its large reserves of thorium to fuel its reactors. The country is still dedicated to this plan for PHWRs, followed by fast breeder reactors, ultimately followed by advanced heavy water reactors. However, now it has the scope to source both reactors and fuel from overseas, light water reactors are starting to figure in Indian plans as a means to expand its nuclear capacity more rapidly. Two Russian-designed pressurised water reactors are under construction at Kudankulum, with plans for more to follow, and other light-water reactor vendors are also pencilled in among India's nuclear expansion plans.

Meanwhile, work on four indigenous 750 MWe PHWR units - two each at Rawatbhata in Rajastan and Kakrapar in Gujarat - is under way and first concrete is planned for later this year, Banerjee told the IAEA.

The country is also expanding its uranium enrichment capacity, based on already established indigenous technology, to help meet the needs of its light water reactors, Banerjee said. The country has also started engineering activities towards the establishment of an Integrated Nuclear Recycle Plant, with facilities for spent fuel reprocessing and waste management, he added.

No defence visits to China without resolution of visa issues

India today made it clear that defence exchanges with China will remain suspended till Beijing satisfactorily resolved issues such as denial of visa to a senior Indian General from Jammu & Kashmir.

Squarely blaming Beijing for creating a situation when India had to take a relook at its bilateral military exchanges with it, top defence ministry sources said China cannot say an Indian commander from a particular region of the country could not visit their country.

India had officially suspended defence exchanges with China following the denial of visa to northern army commander Lt Gen BS Jaswal, who commands troops in Jammu & Kashmir, for a visit to Beijing, thereby implying that the state did not form part of Indian territory.

"The ministry of external affairs has said that since one of our army commanders had not gone there (China), we will put it (defence exchanges) on hold," the sources said.

But other local level military meetings such as the border personnel conferences "for maintaining peace and tranquility" along the Sino-Indian borders would continue.

"The reasoning is that since Lt Gen Jaswal has not gone, as far as defence exchanges are concerned, they are interrupted now," they said.

Asked what they expected China to do to improve the situation, the sources said: "We want reciprocity. We need a satisfactory resolution. We have not created this situation."

They added, "China has refused the visa (to an Indian General). You cannot say that a particular commander from a particular region of India cannot visit. We are striving for a satisfactory resolution."

Only last week, external affairs minister SM Krishna had made it categorical that bilateral defence exchanges would remain suspended and asked China to respect its sensitivities on issues like Jammu & Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh so that the relationship could be developed further.

Against the backdrop of certain recent Chinese actions that amount to questioning Jammu & Kashmir's integration with India such as denial of visa to Lt Gen Jaswal and stapled visas to civilians from the state, Krishna also urged Beijing to maintain "neutrality" on the affairs related to the state as it has always done.

The defence exchanges with China were put on hold in July following the Lt Gen Jaswal episode.

Regarding China's recent forays into the Indian Ocean and its assertiveness on the maritime front, the defence ministry sources said the giant neighbour had its energy supplies flowing through the seas and hence they had taken the anti-piracy operations as an opportunity to venture into the region.

But, they said India had always desired that the Indian Ocean was its domain of responsibility. "As China's economic and military power grows, they are bound to assert themselves in the region. But we do not expect any conflict in the Indian Ocean. We want it to be a zone of peace," they added.

China has been sending its warships into the Indian Ocean ostensibly to join international anti-piracy efforts in the Gulf of Aden and has been maintaining a limited maritime force there and sustaining it in the last one year.

getready said:

fresh violence has occurred in the volatile region again.

Click to expand...

as we can see, there are no "responses" from the west or human rights group or whatever when the indians punched the protesters hard

now if only this was done by PRC..

airsuperiority said:

as we can see, there are no "responses" from the west or human rights group or whatever when the indians punched the protesters hard

now if only this was done by PRC..

Click to expand...

And we all know why such double standard is in place, because China is still seen as the West's enemy, and India is the proxy of the Western bloc, it just like back in the Cold War, the West hardly say a word when state terror ran amok all over South America, simply because they walk along the US line.

But back to the topic...

At least from the Chinese standpoint, India got really ripped off with their weapons programme, as if the programmes' management and lackluster results weren't bad enough. For all that's worth, both China and India all want to develop their own domestic defense industries, but while China forced to do thing the tough way they made steady progress, India got all the advantage in foreign aid, tech transfer and imports, their products more a "thrown together" work of imported components than not...that's the Singapore's approach and they did it well, meanwhile India with all the effort thrown in, can't get past this supposedly intermediary stage yet...

And their purchase of that aircraft carrier probably topped the "ripped off" chart of all time, they thought they get a bargain-basement deal, but in the end they might be better off build a new one than this rust bucket.