What's new

India Raises its Game vs. China

Bl[i]tZ

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
1,374
Reaction score
0
India Raises its Game vs. China

Army to be enlarged, cruise missiles point over the border, fighter jets on order

march.jpg


The Indian Ministry of Defense’s clearance for a US$13-billion military modernization plan – the country’s most ambitious one-time military expansion ever – is causing ripples in global diplomatic circles.

Described as India’s largest increase in deployment along the China border since the Sino-Indian war in 1962, the plan includes induction into the Indian army of 90,000 more soldiers over the next five years. The expansion package, firmed up last week, will also entail raising four new divisions along the India-Chinese border.

At the same time, the Defence Ministry is in the final throes of choosing between two European bidders to supply 126 fighter jets said to be worth more than US$20 billion. The price of the jets has soared to almost double the original estimate of US$11 billion. The finalists are France’s Dassault and the Eurofighter Typhoon consortium.

The government also recently gave the go-ahead for the positioning of supersonic Brahmos cruise missiles in Arunachal Pradesh, considered a marked shift in Indian military strategy vis-à-vis China from defensive to offensive.

According to reports, the extensive overhaul will involve the upgrade of the army's fire-power and logistical capabilities, investment in new helipads, air strips and last-mile road linkages. New concepts of military transformation will also be pressed into service along with a significant enhancement in the army’s capability to operate in smaller units and providing logistics in an integrated manner.

The staggering scale of the military expansion, analysts say, is surprising at this juncture considering that the beleaguered United Progressive Alliance government has its back against the wall with so many other problems. It is facing public angst over inflation, rebellion from anti-corruption crusaders, intraparty wrangling and threats of withdrawal from its allies from the UPA combine.

The looming elections in India’s largest northern state of Uttar Pradesh, where the government will be pitted against the state’s putative chief minister and dalit leader Mayawati, are giving the UPA additional jitters.

The domestic political situation notwithstanding, strategists feel that New Delhi’s military expansion has to be regarded in the larger context of the regional power contest.

“It is of a piece with a rapidly evolving geopolitical jigsaw,” a senior defense ministry official old Asia Sentinel. The political theatre playing out in Asia, with India and China both aspiring to lead, has embroiled the two in a game of one-upmanship. And military might is an integral part of this picture. What is adding intrigue to the situation is the growing unease of nation states – including the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan – with China which is asserting its “indisputable sovereignty” over the South China Sea and around it.

Harsh V. Pant writes in Yale Global Online that this is indeed a time of great turmoil on the Asian strategic landscape, and India is trying to make itself relevant to the regional states. “With its political and economic rise, Beijing has started dictating the boundaries of acceptable behavior to its neighbors, thereby laying bare the costs of great power politics.”

Beijing’s growing regional heft and muscle-flexing vis-à-vis its neighbors, writes Pant, “have now resulted in a regional balancing effort.” India’s role in the region thus becomes crucial to offset China’s aggressive maneuvering in and around Asia.

With this changed dynamic, most Asian states are keen that India – the world’s largest democracy -- act as a regional counterweight to Beijing’s dramatic rise and maintain stability in the region.

Many of these nations have also made direct overtures to India. Last month, New Delhi hosted two heads of states -- Vietnamese President Truong Tan Sang and Burmese President Thein Sein in quick succession. Both countries currently share a certain amount of antipathy to China.

Tokyo too, has agreed to a substantial increase in bilateral defense engagements with New Delhi. Defense Minister A K Antony, who was in Japan last week, has pushed for the first-ever joint air force and naval exercises between Japan and India next year. India and Japan have also expressed the need for freedom of navigation in international waters and sea lanes of communication.

This is being read as a signal to China to stop exerting undue influence in the South China Sea, which it regards as its own lake. In other words, Beijing’s belligerence will not go unchallenged.

Interestingly, the Indo-Japanese camaraderie is being given a nudge by a Beijing-wary Washington. On her India visit this July, US Secretary of state Hillary Clinton strongly advocated a more active policy initiative from India with reference to its stature and policies in Asia and the East.

Clinton said it was time for India to wield its growing economic and political clout further outside its borders and help "shape the future" of the Asia region and beyond. This was widely interpreted as a US strategic imperative for India to keep China in check.

Washington’s desire for India to play a more forceful role in the East dovetails neatly with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s own foreign-policy thrust on east and Southeast Asia for the coming years. New Delhi’s “Look East” initiative – initiated two decades ago – is seen as a refreshing approach to its earlier foreign policy that was dominated by its obsession with Pakistan. :wave:

On the contrary, New Delhi has till now been playing down its friction with China on its border, careful not to antagonize Beijing. But now it seems India is keen to fortify its diplomatic, economic and military engagement with East Asia where an anti-China sentiment is taking hold.

India is also apprehensive about China's looming presence in the Bay of Bengal and the Indian Ocean. Besides Gwadar in Pakistan, China is building ports at Hambantota in Sri Lanka and at Chittagong in Bangladesh. In Myanmar too, it has upgraded several ports. New Delhi is concerned that Beijing could use these ports for military or strategic purposes.


Indian military officials in the past have expressed unease over the Defense Ministry’s lackadaisical infrastructure development and military modernization. An Army proposal to set up a Mountain Strike Corps for the border has been pending with the Ministry while infrastructural developments such as road and rail links are also lagging behind schedule. However, with the new modernization plan, it is hoped, things will fall into place.

”With its changed assertive approach in the region,” says Anmol Kabra a New Delhi-based security analyst, “India is demonstrating its capability to impact the Asia-Pacific security architecture.” India may not be a key player yet in the region, adds Kabra, but it is increasingly making its voice count in the shaping of the emerging Asian order.

Asia Sentinel - India Raises its Game vs. China
 
.
Besides these meusures India should try talking seriously to resolve all outstanding issues. Military solution is not an option for either country. Theres too much to loose and will play into western hands to hold the neighbourhood back.
 
.
Besides these meusures India should try talking seriously to resolve all outanding issues. Military solution is not an option for either country. Theres too much to loose and will play into western hands to hold the neighboiurhood back.

Agreed! But talking alone isn't sufficient. Like Ronald Reagan said - Peace through Strength! :) Military might is a tool of diplomacy too. It convinces the other party that a military confrontation is counter productive and reinforces that all disputes must be solved on the table.
 
.
Besides these meusures India should try talking seriously to resolve all outanding issues. Military solution is not an option for either country. Theres too much to loose and will play into western hands to hold the neighboiurhood back.

Very valid point

Any form of engagement must be at a postion of equality and mutual deterrence. These are steps towards this.
 
.
Besides these meusures India should try talking seriously to resolve all outanding issues. Military solution is not an option for either country. Theres too much to loose and will play into western hands to hold the neighboiurhood back.

you should try to solve the issues too.You are holding our territory and even china too...
and you allowed chinese troops and you support terror against india as strategic tool.
show as proof something to gain the trust..if not then dont cry if nato comes in region..it was you who brought nato in region.
 
.
Bl[i]tZ;2264006 said:
Agreed! But talking alone isn't sufficient. Like Ronald Reagan said - Peace through Strength! :) Military might is a tool of diplomacy too. It convinces the other party that a military confrontation is counter productive and reinforces that all disputes must be solved on the table.

Well said.
 
.
you should try to solve the issues too.You are holding our territory and even china too...
and you allowed chinese troops and you support terror against india as strategic tool.
show as proof something to gain the trust..if not then dont cry if nato comes in region..it was you who brought nato in region.

I personally advocate peace in our neighbourhood and belive all our countries should resolve problems peacefully. Anyway why are you going off topic. If a nuke goes of in any of our countries it will effect all of us. Not americans and nato countries. For your information I did not invite nato into our neighbourhood. You can hardly suggest that Nato listens to any of us it does what it wants. Back to india by all means build up your defences but I was suggesting that more action needs to be taken on the diplomatic front as well
 
.
you should try to solve the issues too.You are holding our territory and even china too...
and you allowed chinese troops and you support terror against india as strategic tool.
show as proof something to gain the trust..if not then dont cry if nato comes in region..it was you who brought nato in region.
no it was the US who brought NATO is that region after 9/11. You dont know NATO`s policy do you? A attack on any NATO state is a attack on the whole NATO
so shut up about **** you dont know
 
.
no it was the US who brought NATO is that region after 9/11. You dont know NATO`s policy do you? A attack on any NATO state is a attack on the whole NATO
so shut up about **** you dont know

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

who send the supplies and feeding them from 10 years in afghanistan:rofl:,india???
and who was buckled under pressure od america..we will bombard you to stone age..kuch yaad aaya ke nahi??

now its ur turn to shut up...
 
.
no it was the US who brought NATO is that region after 9/11. You dont know NATO`s policy do you? A attack on any NATO state is a attack on the whole NATO
so shut up about **** you dont know

keep fooling yourself USA (epicenter of NATO ) came to pakistan back in 80s for so called Jihad
i will tell you a story all memebers of india and pakistan will understand the language
"mera ek padosee tha . hamari aur uski ladai thi use 2 bete the mere 10 bete the isliye humlog majboot the. usne bagal walee galee k ek badmash se dostee ki jiske 50 bete the . use mere padosee se kaha main tumhe bachane aa raha hu aur usne apne 10 bete bhej diye mere padosee ke ghar rehne ko . aaj main waise hee jee raha hu jaise pehle jee raha tha lekin mera padosee apne hee ghar me daba daba sa rehta hai kyuki bagal wali gali ke badmash ke 10 bete uske yaha rah rahe hai aur jane ka naam nahee le rahe hai ."
hope all u understand what i am trying to say
 
.
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

who send the supplies and feeding them from 10 years in afghanistan:rofl:,india???
and who was buckled under pressure od america..we will bombard you to stone age..kuch yaad aaya ke nahi??

now its ur turn to shut up...

How dare you evil yaindoos :angry:can even think of it.....:rofl:
 
.
keep fooling yourself USA (epicenter of NATO ) came to pakistan back in 80s for so called Jihad
there was no NATO there, it was the USA. after that they left for some decades and then came again. this to to fight the one they supported

---------- Post added at 07:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:59 PM ----------

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

who send the supplies and feeding them from 10 years in afghanistan:rofl:,india???
and who was buckled under pressure od america..we will bombard you to stone age..kuch yaad aaya ke nahi??

now its ur turn to shut up...
if you have seen video of taliban fighting you will see them using the soviet era weapon. and i didnt get the secound line, what do you mean with that stone age crap?
 
.
there was no NATO there, it was the USA. after that they left for some decades and then came again. this to to fight the one they supported

---------- Post added at 07:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:59 PM ----------

so what u are saying is apart from usa there were no western power in pakistan and afganistan to foght russia
go back and check the details again UK was actively involved apart from UK all nato members supported usa for their action in afgan
i really dont understand why u guys are always in denial mode

back on topic with indian economy growing it was expected to increase military strength
if u compare the population vs army size then among india china and pakistan
pakistan is at top then china then comes india at the bottom so the point is if pakistan keeps such strong army and so does china thus india is just following the path
 
.
so what u are saying is apart from usa there were no western power in pakistan and afganistan to foght russia
go back and check the details again UK was actively involved apart from UK all nato members supported usa for their action in afgan
i really dont understand why u guys are always in denial mode
do you know what a proxy war is? go read about it
there were no direct NATO inolvement in afghanistan war. they were just supplying. Soviet union had warsaw pacts support
and stop saying NATO fought soviets in afghanistan. mujahideen has all the credibility and pakistan some of it because we actually sent our pilots there. NATO was involved in the propoganda war
 
.
do you know what a proxy war is? go read about it
there were no direct NATO inolvement in afghanistan war. they were just supplying. Soviet union had warsaw pacts support
and stop saying NATO fought soviets in afghanistan. mujahideen has all the credibility and pakistan some of it because we actually sent our pilots there. NATO was involved in the propoganda war
picture is actually bigger than that everything is not black and white
u are saying that no NATO force came so its not NATO involvement what i say is NATO came and instead of taking direct casualty they hired the killers "hire the army for Jihad" and did intervene in the matter so yes there was no face to face interaction of american and russian in afgan but they staged the whole drama
its just like i can hire some gangster for a murder and i dont have to face the person whom i want dead still i am the key person in the murder
 
.
Back
Top Bottom