Indian Army warns Rs 40,000 crore Arunachal border road could be a liability if tensions break out

[SamantK]

@Joe Shearer Sir you are better off answering @Dungeness than replying to someone who is enjoying all the attention.

 

[SQ8]

@Joe Shearer @danger007
Please do not engage people with parenting issues. Report, put on the ignore list and move on.
Thanks

 

[Joe Shearer]

Joe, thank you very much for your long write up, and I have to admit I am actually flattered for you good words, as you are one of only few PDF members who's posts I will read carefully with respect. You left PDF a while ago for the treatment you received from your countrymen, maybe for the very same reasons that I respect you, intelligent, cultivated, well read, and not being a Hindu Chauvinist.

I do not hesitate to admit that I have engaged in many emotional discussions with many Indian members, including some usually more level-headed Elite members in the last few day since this NSG fiasco broke out , and I am not always cool and calm. Sometimes I use the same fault logic of my opponent to shoot back.

I understand perfectly India's desire to be in the so called "elite club" of NSG, and I also understand Indian members angry towards China, the only evil in the eyes of many your countrymen. What I can not comprehend is why Indians got this sense of Entitlement while asking for an unprecedented exception to the existing rules. Through NSG issue really did not come to hot topic in various Chinese forums, it is a very big deal in India society and on PDF. Reading those endless UNIFORM China bashing, I feel the desire to voice my view and ask questions to our Indian friends. Unfortunately, besides abusive language, I have not got any straight answer from Indian members, including some with elite title.

While you are pointing finger at me, would you also exam your own countrymen's behaviors and their reasoning in the last few days? This time, I failed to hear your dissenting voice in this fiasco

Let us talk about the NSG.

Yes, India has asked for an unprecedented exception to the existing rules. There are good reasons for that - excellent reasons, in fact.

First, consider India's policies in general, and, specifically, her policies regarding proliferation of nuclear technology and of missile technology respectively, on the one hand, and her foreign policy and record of interactions with neighbouring countries on the other hand.

I put it to you that India has gained access to both nuclear technology and to missile technology without a sponsor or a big brother, and has scrupulously refrained from clandestine sharing of these technologies with others, even though there was as little possibility of a bar on doing so as there was for other proliferators. Look at how Pakistan acquired both technologies, through a combination of industrial larceny and surreptitious assistance by her sponsors in the two communities.

Does that not make a difference? Or would you be thinking that it was through lack of opportunity that we held back?

Second, her foreign policy and record of interactions.

Let me list Indian involvement first:

• Goa, 1961
• China, 1962
• Pakistan, 1965
• China, 1967
• Pakistan, 1971
• Sikkim, 1975
• Pakistan, 1984
• Sri Lanka, 1987
• Pakistan, 1999

In 69 years of existence, India has had nine incidences of conflict with its neighbours, an average of once every eight years. On the other hand, when neighbours were flinging themselves into the arms of the west, India stayed aloof and had no truck with either democratic groupings or people's democracy groupings.

Does that not make a difference?

I have more, much more to say, but will await gladly your reactions, and those of others from China, on what I have put in front of you.

 

[SQ8]

I put it to you that India has gained access to both nuclear technology and to missile technology without a sponsor or a big brother, and has scrupulously refrained from clandestine sharing of these technologies with others, even though there was as little possibility of a bar on doing so as there was for other proliferators. Look at how Pakistan acquired both technologies, through a combination of industrial larceny and surreptitious assistance by her sponsors in the two communities.

I would vehemently disagree. A long list can be compiled of foreign assistance and interest in the development of India's nuclear and missile systems. While you could say that India did not purchase anything that violated treaties like the MTCR; entire teams of advisors and assistants have traveled to India to help kick start its missile and nuclear programs.

Various establishments in the UAE are testament to both Indian and Pakistani representatives sitting the same waiting room of the Arms dealer for restricted tech; both trying to guess what the other is there for.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I would vehemently disagree. A long list can be compiled of foreign assistance and interest in the development of India's nuclear and missile systems. While you could say that India did not purchase anything that violated treaties like the MTCR; entire teams of advisors and assistants have traveled to India to help kick start its missile and nuclear programs.

Various establishments in the UAE are testament to both Indian and Pakistani representatives sitting the same waiting room of the Arms dealer for restricted tech; both trying to guess what the other is there for.

Well, it is quite true that we didn't develop everything from the ground up, in terms of missile technology. The roots of the booster rocket adoption, modification and enhancement are, after all, part of the record in every single confidential brirefing about our scientist-President, but we didn't get them through favours from one big brother, any member of the MTCR. If you look at the record, we shopped for technology, individual bits and pieces, nothing even at a system level, and put things together ourselves. The exception was the cryogenic engine and the nuclear power plant for submersibles.

 

[SQ8]

Well, it is quite true that we didn't develop everything from the ground up, in terms of missile technology. The roots of the booster rocket adoption, modification and enhancement are, after all, part of the record in every single confidential brirefing about our scientist-President, but we didn't get them through favours from one big brother, any member of the MTCR. If you look at the record, we shopped for technology, individual bits and pieces, nothing even at a system level, and put things together ourselves. The exception was the cryogenic engine and the nuclear power plant for submersibles.

Again, that essentially only implies that India tried its best to avoid violating any treaties. However, lots of bits and pieces that go into each of those major systems came from various blackmarket folks and so did the technical support.
Sure, unlike our good ol Dr AQ or as I like to call him "Heere is a Rolex fer yau" went ahead and purchased the Nodong.. the Shaheen series is despite all naysayers very much an adapted in house effort. Point being, sometimes the burden of cautious bureaucracy can be a problem rather than a blessing. Take A.Q Khan out of it, and every other accusation on Pakistan for violations of proliferation have no track record to hold a grip on.

After all, it is Indian bureucracy that is the hold for so many strategic lackings of India; is it not?
Or rather.. the proverbial "stamp chaap" babus both in and out of uniform?

 

[Abingdonboy]

High time Army should discard this stupid strategy



Agreed, high time this strategy is junked

your thoughts @Abingdonboy

It's an unbeleivably stupid strategy that has held back the NE for decades, thankfully this GoI has seen the light and is investing heavily in developing that region. The economic security and development of India will not be sacrificed because of this pathetic attitude of the IA, it is their job to defend every square inch of Indian territory, not b!tch and moan.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Again, that essentially only implies that India tried its best to avoid violating any treaties. However, lots of bits and pieces that go into each of those major systems came from various blackmarket folks and so did the technical support.
Sure, unlike our good ol Dr AQ or as I like to call him "Heere is a Rolex fer yau" went ahead and purchased the Nodong.. the Shaheen series is despite all naysayers very much an adapted in house effort. Point being, sometimes the burden of cautious bureaucracy can be a problem rather than a blessing. Take A.Q Khan out of it, and every other accusation on Pakistan for violations of proliferation have no track record to hold a grip on.

After all, it is Indian bureucracy that is the hold for so many strategic lackings of India; is it not?
Or rather.. the proverbial "stamp chaap" babus both in and out of uniform?

Let me step back and try to say what I want to say.

Yes, we found bits and pieces that needed to be found, both as components and as knowledge - technology leakage, rather than transfer - but we found out by ourselves, not through one large transaction. I think you got the impression that I was pointing to the Pakistani example of proliferation and making my case; if you look at the context, I was trying to point out to the Chinese members that we have a far better record of keeping these secrets to ourselves than they have of doing the same thing.

My argument is more about what we did AFTER we put together the whole jigsaw puzzle than about what we did BEFORE. It is more about China's actions in comparison with ours than about Pakistan's.

This is because my argument effectively is that they do not come to law with clean hands; they do not have a sound position to deny or block Indian membership of the NCG.

Incidentally, I intend to add to whatever I am saying here to the other development, with the membership of MTCR. It is obviously absurd to block one and allow goals to be scored past the blocking effort on the other. It becomes then a small-minded act of petty spite, which will annoy the very personally fixated leadership that we have right now, without achieving anything in the medium term.

There was no comparison with Pakistan intended. If China had not helped Pakistan massively (in the case of missiles, not in the case of nuclear technology) I doubt that Pakistan would have got the boost needed for the precociously early development that she managed. But your pointing out similarities between the Indian and Pakistani efforts blindsided me, because the supply of the Nodong as a big blob of technology was as much a Chinese-through-the-North-Koreans act as it was a Pakistani act, and I was looking at the giving out, not at the taking in.

I will argue separately about the direct case of comparison with Pakistan.

[An addition] Consider this sentence from an earlier post:

Look at how Pakistan acquired both technologies, through a combination of industrial larceny and surreptitious assistance by her sponsors in the two communities.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/indian-a...ensions-break-out.437091/page-4#ixzz4D6lirBHX

through a combination of industrial larceny and surreptitious assistance by her sponsors in the two communities.

I was pointing at the portion in red. However, from a Pakistani point of view, it seems to be quite the other way around. Wrongly so.

Again, that essentially only implies that India tried its best to avoid violating any treaties. However, lots of bits and pieces that go into each of those major systems came from various blackmarket folks and so did the technical support.
Sure, unlike our good ol Dr AQ or as I like to call him "Heere is a Rolex fer yau" went ahead and purchased the Nodong.. the Shaheen series is despite all naysayers very much an adapted in house effort. Point being, sometimes the burden of cautious bureaucracy can be a problem rather than a blessing. Take A.Q Khan out of it, and every other accusation on Pakistan for violations of proliferation have no track record to hold a grip on.

After all, it is Indian bureucracy that is the hold for so many strategic lackings of India; is it not?
Or rather.. the proverbial "stamp chaap" babus both in and out of uniform?

It is necessary to take some time about the elements that go into our general attitude of 'strategic restraint', what you have rather uncharitably called India's 'strategic lackings' (!!).

I think the babus, in and out of uniform, were our saviours in some ways. Our politicians were, in the collective, a very useful organism to be found in the bowels of democracy, a necessary organism, even. But as individuals, I doubt that they, any one of them, had the morality of even a Messalina. Left to them, from what insiders tell me, bits and pieces of secret stuff would have been available from a sleazy individual in a grubby raincoat on a Benghazi street corner.

This reference is to the civilian babus; you will probably be astonished to learn how little the military had to do with the development of either missiles or the bomb. It was AFTER these were developed, not just at the conceptual level, but at the prototype level, that the military were brought in (fully - information kept going out to them) and asked to include them in their strategic planning. Then a phase of dialogue between civil and military followed, and that phase is now in its post-mature part of the life-cycle.

It is possible to be much more informative, but I hesitate, for obvious reasons.

Going back to the influence of the babus, there is a parallel of the Pakistani experience here, in India, since you have made the point about Pakistan and about the similarities with Pakistan. That parallel is that there is a tussle between the civil and the military administrations about what is to be done. In Pakistan, apparently, it goes on until a point when the military guillotines the matter; in India, the discussion goes on until the civilians guillotine the matter.

Except for the acquisition of the nuclear propelled submarine, much of our work in building technology - almost all the work - has been achieved by the civilian side.

 

[cirr]

The IA doesn't want to fight the PLA, again.

Everything else is just an excuse.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It's an unbeleivably stupid strategy that has held back the NE for decades, thankfully this GoI has seen the light and is investing heavily in developing that region. The economic security and development of India will not be sacrificed because of this pathetic attitude of the IA, it is their job to defend every square inch of Indian territory, not b!tch and moan.

To get back to the original theme of the discussion, I disagree sharply. Owing to several losses of replies this night, it seems better to save one paragraph at a time. <more>

The IA doesn't want to fight the PLA, again.

Everything else is just an excuse.

The IA will not fight the PLA on the PLA's terms. That is the reality. There are very practical difficulties facing the Army, and there is no apparent understanding about these among either the bureaucracy or the political sections. Before you come to these absurd conclusions, please take a detailed topographical map relating to the area of the McMahon Line and study it closely. That might prevent you from making unfounded statements.

 

[SQ8]

My argument is more about what we did AFTER we put together the whole jigsaw puzzle than about what we did BEFORE. It is more about China's actions in comparison with ours than about Pakistan's.

..

It is necessary to take some time about the elements that go into our general attitude of 'strategic restraint', what you have rather uncharitably called India's 'strategic lackings' (!!).

I think the babus, in and out of uniform, were our saviours in some ways. Our politicians were, in the collective, a very useful organism to be found in the bowels of democracy, a necessary organism, even. But as individuals, I doubt that they, any one of them, had the morality of even a Messalina. Left to them, from what insiders tell me, bits and pieces of secret stuff would have been available from a sleazy individual in a grubby raincoat on a Benghazi street corner.

This reference is to the civilian babus; you will probably be astonished to learn how little the military had to do with the development of either missiles or the bomb. It was AFTER these were developed, not just at the conceptual level, but at the prototype level, that the military were brought in (fully - information kept going out to them) and asked to include them in their strategic planning. Then a phase of dialogue between civil and military followed, and that phase is now in its post-mature part of the life-cycle.

It is possible to be much more informative, but I hesitate, for obvious reasons.

Going back to the influence of the babus, there is a parallel of the Pakistani experience here, in India, since you have made the point about Pakistan and about the similarities with Pakistan. That parallel is that there is a tussle between the civil and the military administrations about what is to be done. In Pakistan, apparently, it goes on until a point when the military guillotines the matter; in India, the discussion goes on until the civilians guillotine the matter.

Except for the acquisition of the nuclear propelled submarine, much of our work in building technology - almost all the work - has been achieved by the civilian side.

The Chinese would simply argue that those that formed the MTCR in the first place were some of the most prolific violators of the principles they supposedly now champion. The same can be said of the NPT and other laws.

As for the babus, yes the bureaucracy has also had its positive effects in restraint that has not led to India being overly aggressive in certain areas; but certain programs are good examples of why they have also stymied development projects by treating them as step children in lieu of this caution.

 

[DesiGuy1403]

As for the babus, yes the bureaucracy has also had its positive effects in restraint that has not led to India being overly aggressive in certain areas; but certain programs are good examples of why they have also stymied development projects by treating them as step children in lieu of this caution.

I am not 100% sure about that, at least looking at what the same bureaucracy was able to achieve in last 2 years.

Are Indian babus a representation of the efficiency of the political masters?
It certainly looks so.

when the political masters pushed, the same babus were able to deliver. so, attributing everything, either success or failure to one section may not be that logical.

Coming to the restraint on proliferation by India, Yes, some of it could very well be attributed to babus since they are the ones trained and educated and in turn are expected to educate their political masters.
Point may be that political masters who listen to babus being in power in India, may be the reason.

Some countries have failed at this because their military is much stronger than their civil counter parts, which means a lesser understanding of impact of their actions in long term geo political scenarios.