What's new

Vietnam Defence Forum

From What I read about Vietnam under the Mongol, No evidence to prove the Mongol soldier number exceed 1 million. The number I think is 200k to 500k in all 3 wars. And the number 1 million only published by Vietnamese historian and I think It is the fake number like the Chinese number in the battle between Vietnamese and Qing regime. In the battle from Vietnamese source, You can search It is 290000 Chinese soldier, but the real number is 70.000- 150.000. No doubt, the number Mongol soldier is too big and giant but the number 1million,uhm I don't believe and any historian doesn't believe on that. In Vietnam, until the day people always compare the "Crowd" with the Mongol soldiers. You know Chinese and Vietnamese usually love number 9th or 10th, so don't be surprised. The reason, It is simple like in Vietnamese - Sino War, Chinese publication would decrease their number casualties and increased Vietnamese casualties. Vietnamese too. Noone knows the exact number. So the debate never ends
Ok history is written by victor. The truth is sometimes in between. Ah a note, in regard of the Mongol Vietnam knew very well the imbalance of power. The Vietnamese people are brave but not stupid. We knew the Mongol possessed an army that was multiple times stronger, not only because they were able to defeat China. Vietnam wanted to negotiate a peace treaty, including accepting the Mongolian ruler as the new master over China. We were ready to give tributes and everything. Including submitted as vassal status. However the Mongolians refused and demanded something Vietnam couldn't accept.

The Mongolian wanted to occupy Vietnam and use it as springboard for invasion of the Kingdom of Champa (the Cham reportedly had gold en masse). invasion and physical confrontation became unavoidable when ultimatum ran out. We were prepared luring the Mongolian army deep into the mainland. The rest of the story is known.
 
Last edited:
Ok history is written by victor. The truth is sometimes in between. Ah a note, in regard of the Mongol Vietnam knew very well the imbalance of power. The Vietnamese people are brave but not stupid. We knew the Mongol possessed an army that was multiple times stronger, not at least they were unable to defeat China. Vietnam wanted to negotiate a peace treaty, including accepting the Mongolian ruler as the new master over China. We were ready to give tributes and everything. Including submitted as vassal status. However the Mongolians refused and demanded something Vietnam couldn't accept.

The Mongolian wanted to occupy Vietnam and use it as springboard for invasion of the Kingdom of Champa (the Cham reportedly had gold en masse). So a physical confrontation became unavoidable. We lured the Mongolian army deep into the mainland. The rest of the story is known.
Agree, Regardless 1 million or 500.000, The Mongol was defeated in Vietnam is unimaginable,
that goes to show that no army is invincible
 
Tran hung Dao, supreme commander of Dai Viet army

IMG_3187.JPG
 
those are Israeli guys work

The original article only says "foreigners", Could be Israelis, but could also be Russians, Ukranians, Belarussians, VN deals with all of them. Difficult to say.

Most likely yes. T54B should be just an intermediate step before going to the expensive T54M3, developed by a Israeli company.

Unlikely, T54M3 was rejected because of been to expensive. VN is doing it on its own now and using a lot of domestic equipment including a domestic fire control system and night vision sensors. They had already decided to keep the 100mm gun. The upgrade that VN is doing is more like the T-54/55AM.

Most likely yes. T54B should be just an intermediate step before going to the expensive T54M3,

T-54B is the original designation of the tank before the upgrade and it goes back to 1955. Its not known yet what the designation of the upgraded version will be.
 
PLA In The Last 50 Years: Just How Strong Is The Dragon?
Rakesh Krishnan Simha

https://swarajyamag.com/defence/-pla-in-the-last-50-years-just-how-strong-is-the-dragon

What has been the PLA’s record in warfare since the 1962 conflict with India?

China’s threat that India would suffer a fate worse than the defeat of 1962 is laughable. For the Chinese have conveniently forgotten that since that conflict nearly 50 years ago, it is Beijing that has suffered defeats – at the hands of India, Russia and Vietnam in that order. In fact, the last time the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) faced off against the Indian Army, it had to endure the ignominy of a humiliating climb down.

But first, a reality check. The 1962 defeat happened because of two reasons. One, the Indian Army wasn’t given the weapons and divisions it had been wanting since the mid-1950s for the defence of the Himalayas. When the Chinese invaded, an entire Indian brigade (of at least 2,000 troops) was equipped with just 100 rounds of ammunition and no grenades. Prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru and his arrogant protégé, defence minister V K Krishna Menon, kept up the pretence that China would not attack.

Second, India’s armed forces were not allowed to fight to their full potential. Ignoring India’s commanders, Nehru conferred with American ambassador John Kenneth Galbraith, who advised the prime minister not to use the Indian Air Force against the Chinese intruders. Before the war, the Nehru-Menon duopoly had ended the career of Korean War hero General Thimayya – who saw the Chinese as a threat to India early. They later promoted Lt General B M Kaul and General Pran Nath Thapar. These officers did not know where the border was.

However, with the exit of both Nehru and Menon, the era of the neglect of the defence forces ended to some extent. The impressive showing of the Indian Army in the 1965 War with Pakistan restored some pride. Russian and American military supplies boosted military strength.

While evaluating the Chinese threat, the thing to note is that the India of 2017 is not the same as the India of 1962. Besides, the Chinese are not exactly known for their fighting skills. The PLA may be the world’s largest army, but it has performed atrociously in a series of major conflicts.. This article examines four of China’s post-1962 conflicts and how the PLA fared against well-armed and professional armies.

Year: 1967

Opponent: India

Conflict: Nathu La and Cho La

Result: Chinese defeat

Casualties: PLA 340, Indian Army 65

On 7 September 1967, a PLA commissar asked the soldiers of 18 Rajput to stop fencing the border at Nathu La – a border pass in Sikkim, which back then was an Indian protectorate. When the soldiers refused, the Chinese launched an artillery attack. Unlike in 1962, the Indian Army was prepared. It had placed howitzers at strategic locations aimed at Chinese military positions. The Indian guns launched a withering counter-attack that stopped only after three days. Indian gunners scored several direct hits on enemy bunkers, including a command post from where the Chinese operations were being directed.

On 13 September, India announced a unilateral ceasefire – a fitting reply to China’s offer almost to the week.

Smarting under their humiliation, the Chinese attacked a second time on 1 October at the nearby Cho La pass. This time it was the men of the Gorkha regiment who engaged in close-quarter combat, killing 40 elite Chinese commandos, resulting in a massive PLA rout. However, the Indian Army withheld fire on their retreating enemy. The defeated Chinese left Sikkim and withdrew three kilometres from the border. Since then, Nathu La and Cho La have been under Indian control, and China has never claimed these passes.

Year: 1969

Opponent: Russia

Conflict: Ussuri river clash

Result: Chinese defeat

Casualties: PLA 800, Soviet Army 61

At 4,380km, the Russia-China land border is the world’s longest. But since Tsarist times, it had been poorly demarcated, with both countries having overlapping claims over it. In the 1960s, following the ideological split between the two Communist allies, the border became a flash point with 658,000 Soviet soldiers facing a million PLA troops. In March 1969, 61 Soviet soldiers died in a Chinese ambush, and their corpses were mutilated. The Russians hit back so hard that, in the words of Robert Gates, Central Intelligence Agency director at the time, from American satellite pictures, the Chinese side of the river bank was pockmarked like a moonscape. The Chinese death toll: over 800, with thousands more injured.

The Chinese stab in the back made the Russians so angry that they seriously considered launching a nuclear attack. Washington secretly wanted someone to eliminate the Chinese for them but decided that a hostile China on Russia’s border would be good to keep Moscow on edge.

China survived, but it was so traumatised by the disproportionate Russian military response that it immediately started looking for a strategic alliance with the United States. The bottom line: the Russia-China border has remained peaceful ever since.

Year: 1979

Opponent: Vietnam

Conflict: Full-scale Chinese invasion

Result: Chinese defeat

Casualties: PLA up to 63,000, Vietnamese army 26,000

In 1978, the battle-hardened Peoples Army of Vietnam (PAVN) – which had only three years ago defeated the mighty Americans – launched an invasion on Cambodia. The invasion ended the genocide being committed by the US and China-backed Pol Pot regime, which had murdered two million of the country’s eight million population.

In order to “teach Hanoi a lesson”, the following year, a 200,000-strong Chinese force invaded Vietnam. (Interestingly, the invasion took place when India’s foreign minister Atal Behari Vajpayee was visiting Beijing.) In the 29-day war that ensued, the highly trained VAPN defeated the PLA, killing up to 63,000 Chinese soldiers and capturing hundreds more.

In his 1985 book, Defending China, Gerald Segal writes that China's 1979 war against Vietnam was a complete failure: “China failed to force a Vietnamese withdrawal from Cambodia, failed to end border clashes, failed to cast doubt on the strength of the Soviet power, failed to dispel the image of China as a paper tiger, and failed to draw the United States into an anti-Soviet coalition.”

After years of unsuccessful negotiations, a border pact was finally signed between the two countries in 1999.

Year: 1986-87

Opponent: India

Conflict: Sumdorong Chu standoff

Result: Chinese pullback

Dead: No casualties

The last time the India-China border came live was in 1986-87, when the cunning Chinese did a Kargil on India in Arunachal Pradesh. In 1984 and 1985, the Indian Army had set up camps in the border areas in summer and returned to the foothills in winter. When they went back in 1986, they found the PLA had crossed the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and set up a military camp in the pasture on the banks of the Sumdorong Chu river in Tawang district. Incidentally, this was close to the Thag La ridge, where the two armies had fought a bloody battle in 1962.

With the Chinese refusing to move back and “supreme leader” Deng Xiaoping declaring his intention to teach India “another lesson”, army chief General Krishnaswami Sundarji launched Operation Falcon, airlifting T-72 tanks and BMP-armoured personnel carriers to the area, occupying the high ridges overlooking the Chinese positions. It was the exact opposite of the 1962 situation when the Chinese had the higher ground. Both armies were eyeball to eyeball for seven years when in August 1995 the Chinese finally blinked. The Chinese knew if the two armies clashed, 1962 would be reversed.

Lonesome dragon

For decades, Beijing has pursued a strategy of boxing up India in South Asia so that New Delhi is unable to compete with it globally. According to strategist Subhash Kapila, “China is a compulsive destabiliser of South Asian regional stability and security, with the end aim of keeping India off-balance.”

China cannot attack India because India’s military is modern, large and highly professional. Plus, a war would kill the market for Chinese goods in India. Beijing will therefore continue to use Pakistan to keep India down. New Delhi’s prime objective therefore should be to weaken Pakistan by supporting independence movements in Balochistan, Sindh and Khyber Pakthunkhwa.

That, more than anything else, would demoralise the Chinese.
 
The original article only says "foreigners", Could be Israelis, but could also be Russians, Ukranians, Belarussians, VN deals with all of them. Difficult to say.



Unlikely, T54M3 was rejected because of been to expensive. VN is doing it on its own now and using a lot of domestic equipment including a domestic fire control system and night vision sensors. They had already decided to keep the 100mm gun. The upgrade that VN is doing is more like the T-54/55AM.



T-54B is the original designation of the tank before the upgrade and it goes back to 1955. Its not known yet what the designation of the upgraded version will be.
Because the Chinese dropped the mask and threaten Vietnam with war, I expect everything we know till yet will be put on the table. That is a new situation. I expect we will accelerate the military buildup even at the cost of economic recovery and put the question mark behind the three no-policy. upgrading to T54M3 is expensive but I am pretty sure we will do it and more.

The army chief Ngo will visit Washington next week. If the report is true, he is one of the few that considers imminent China's attack on Vietnamese bases in the South China Sea as real and not a bluff.

IMG_3202.JPG
 
Because the Chinese dropped the mask and threaten Vietnam with war, I expect everything we know till yet will be put on the table. That is a new situation. I expect we will accelerate the military buildup even at the cost of economic recovery and put the question mark behind the three no-policy. upgrading to T54M3 is expensive but I am pretty sure we will do it and more.

The army chief Ngo will visit Washington next week. If the report is true, he is one of the few that considers imminent China's attack on Vietnamese bases in the South China Sea as real and not a bluff.

View attachment 416155

I would also expect the three no-policy to go, Its no longer relevant at this point, but don't forget that it takes 2 to tango.

The problem with the T54M3 upgrade is that its too expensive and you are still left with a tank that can't face a modern MBT. Its much better to use the money to buy second hand T-72s and upgrade them to the T-72B3 standard. A T-72B3 can take on any tank. You can see them at the Russian tank biathlon. They are rocking.

The upgrade that VN is doing now on the T-54/55 is right for how the tank is been used and its cost effective. Don't forget that the way VN is using those those tanks is for infantry support, essentially they are been used as an IFV. The 100mm gun is fine for that role, no need to do more than what VN is doing now. What is needed is more T-90s (and T-72s).
 
I would also expect the three no-policy to go, Its no longer relevant at this point, but don't forget that it takes 2 to tango.

The problem with the T54M3 upgrade is that its too expensive and you are still left with a tank that can't face a modern MBT. Its much better to use the money to buy second hand T-72s and upgrade them to the T-72B3 standard. A T-72B3 can take on any tank. You can see them at the Russian tank biathlon. They are rocking.

The upgrade that VN is doing now on the T-54/55 is right for how the tank is been used and its cost effective. Don't forget that the way VN is using those those tanks is for infantry support, essentially they are been used as an IFV. The 100mm gun is fine for that role, no need to do more than what VN is doing now. What is needed is more T-90s (and T-72s).
Ha ha ha surely you are right it takes 2 to tango, but if there is a beautiful girl on the dance floor, she will lure a horde of men who want to dance tango with her. Alone. The Baltic states are members of the NATO, however only delusional people believe these Baltic states would contribute valuable military assistance to the United States should America comes under attack. All studies show the Baltic armies could hold max a week against potential Russia onslaughts. So why these states are accepted in the NATO? Saying that I am not telling it is easy for VN to become a member of the military alliance.

In respect to T54/55M3 or other modernization efforts, you are right cost is one of the most important metrics to be considered. I think if we go ahead upgrade the tanks domestically, with imported necessary hardware, overall cost would reduce as we upgrade in large quantity.

We are talking of modernization of 1,000 T54/55 tanks. That is a lot. VN needs lots of T90 tanks too.
 
Vietnam is urging other Southeast Asian nations to take a stronger stand against Chinese expansionism in the South China Sea, as a tense regional security forum in Manila began yesterday with North Korea also under fire over its nuclear program.

Ahead of the launch of the annual gathering of foreign ministers from the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Vietnam made a bold play against China with a draft of suggested changes to a planned joint communiqué.

It set the stage for what was expected to be a fiery few days of diplomacy in Manila, with the top diplomats from China, the US, Russia and North Korea set to join their ASEAN and other Asia-Pacific counterparts for security talks starting today.

The meetings would take place as the UN Security Council votes this weekend on a US-drafted resolution to toughen sanctions against North Korea to punish the isolated regime for its missile and nuclear tests.



The US said it would also seek to build united pressure on North Korea at the Manila event – known as the ASEAN Regional Forum – and Foreign Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano said Pyongyang would receive a strong message.

But on the South China Sea dispute – one of Asia’s other top powder keg issues – there was far less consensus, with Vietnam resisting efforts by the Philippines to placate Beijing, according to diplomats.

Headlines ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1
Vietnam on Friday night sought to insert tough language against China in an ASEAN statement scheduled for release after the Southeast Asian ministers wrapped up their own talks yesterday.

According to a copy of a draft obtained by AFP, Vietnam lobbied for ASEAN to express serious concern over “construction” in the sea, in reference to China’s explosion of artificial island building in the disputed waters in recent years.

Vietnam also wanted ASEAN to insist in the statement that a planned code of conduct with China on the South China Sea be “legally binding,” which Beijing opposes.

The lobbying occurred when the ASEAN foreign ministers held unscheduled and informal talks late on Friday night.

“The discussions were really hard. Vietnam is on its own to have stronger language on the South China Sea. Cambodia and Philippines are not keen to reflect that,” one diplomat involved in the talks told AFP.

“The ministers endorsed the framework of the Code of Conduct for eventual adoption at the ASEAN-China Ministerial Meeting,” Foreign Affairs spokesman Robespierre Bolivar said in a press briefing.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi is set to attend the meeting in Manila.

But Bolivar could not immediately say if there was a discussion of the framework of the COC by the ministers during their retreat yesterday or whether the discussion went smoothly.

China claims nearly all of the strategically vital sea, including waters approaching the coasts of Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei. It has in recent years expanded its presence in the sea by building artificial islands, which are capable of holding military bases.

Vietnam takes lead
Alongside Vietnam, the Philippines used to be the most vocal critic of Beijing’s expansionism.

But under President Duterte, Manila has sought to downplay the dispute with China in return for billions of dollars in Chinese investments and aid.

China has in recent years also successfully lobbied other ASEAN nations, particularly Cambodia and Laos, to support its diplomatic maneuvering in the dispute.

At the ASEAN opening ceremony yesterday morning, Cayetano confirmed there had been strong debates on Friday.

“You have to excuse my voice as my colleagues, we kept each other up until almost midnight last night. In the true ASEAN way we were able to passionately argue our national interests,” Cayetano said.

Various diplomats said that Vietnam was likely to lose its battle to insert the strong language against China, with the Philippines as host of the talks wielding greater influence.

But security analysts point out that the framework comes 15 years after negotiations on the issue first began, and China has used that time to cement its claims with the artificial islands.

The framework aims to “establish a rules-based framework containing a set of norms” to ensure closer cooperation among parties to avoid disputes.

It also calls for a creation of “a favorable environment for the peaceful settlement of the disputes; to ensure maritime security and safety and freedom of navigation and overflight.”

Bolivar explained that the framework could help structure the discussions and negotiations for a Code of Conduct (COC).

“When the negotiation starts then that’s where you see countries putting in the more substantive aspects of the Code. So it’s entirely possible that that issue will be discussed, will be negotiated upon as the code is being negotiated,” he said.

He said Cayetano had articulated the country’s position that a COC be a legally binding instrument.

“The Secretary has mentioned that the Philippines’ preference is for a legally binding (COC),” he added.

ASEAN and China finalized the framework for the COC in the South China Sea and endorsed by senior officials at the meeting in Guiyang, China in May.

In 2002, ASEAN and China committed to a non-binding Declaration of Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) to guide claimants in their actions in the South China Sea. To prevent or reduce tensions, countries with competing maritime claims have committed to observe self-restraint.

Earlier, the US State Department said dropping the South China Sea issue from the ASEAN agenda would be unacceptable to the United States.

Susan Thornton, acting assistant secretary of state for East Asia, said on Thursday that the South China Sea should be a focus of the discussions at the security meet.

Another pressing issue in Manila will be the growing terrorism threat in the region.

The event is taking place as security forces battle Islamic State-aligned gunmen who have since May been occupying parts of Marawi, the nation’s only Islamic city.

http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2...ts-tough-stand-vs-china-philippines-reluctant
 
Despite all deficiencies I think VN is an attractive girl on the dance floor. With the times major military alliance wants VN to be part of. RoK company like Lotte participates in the $2 billion real estate project Saigon smart city.

IMG_3226.JPG


Japan's Sumitomo Group wants to join $4 billion Hanoi smart city project. We just need more times.

IMG_3188.JPG
 
Germany warns Vietnam of consequences for 'Cold-War-style kidnapping'
Germany says it is considering punitive measures against Vietnam over the alleged kidnapping of an oil executive turned asylum seeker in Berlin. Sigmar Gabriel described the case as the stuff of Cold War spy movies.




German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel told a news conference Friday that the alleged abduction in the German capitalwas "something that we will not…and cannot tolerate."

Germany says Vietnamese businessman Trinh Xuan Thanh was captured in July and speedily flown to Vietnam where he is facing charges of corruption and embezzlement - offenses that carry the death penalty. However, Hanoi insists the 51-year-old returned of his own volition.

Speaking in Wolfsburg, Gabriel told reporters the government was considering taking further steps against Vietnam after already ordering a Vietnamese intelligence officer based in Berlin to leave the country.

"We demanded that he leave because we strongly believe he is a person who was involved in kidnapping," Gabriel said. "Everything supports this assumption that he, with the help of the Vietnamese secret service and using his residence in the Vietnamese embassy in Germany, abducted a person who had asked for asylum."

"[Thanh] was taken out of Germany using methods which we believe one sees in thriller films about the Cold War," he added. "And this is something that we cannot accept."


Former oil executive Trinh Xuan Tanh disappeared last month in Berlin before resurfacing in Hanoi

Wanted man

Vietnamese officials had requested earlier this year that Germany extradite Thanh, who is accused of mismanagement at a subsidiary of the state-run oil giant PetroVietnam, resulting in losses of some $150 million (127 million euros). This week, Vietnamese police reported that he had handed himself in on Monday, following a 10-month manhunt.

But Thanh's lawyer in Berlin says that doesn't appear to have been the case at all. She told German newspaper Berliner Zeitung on Friday that she believed Thanh had been kidnapped and then transported via ambulance to a country in eastern Europe before being put on a plane to Vietnam. Witnesses also reported seeing armed men pushing Thanh and a female companion into a car outside the Sheraton hotel in Berlin's Tiergarten district. Both then appeared several days later in Hanoi.







Watch video02:22
Vietnam denies Germany's kidnap claim
Voluntary traveler?

Vietnamese state television on Thursday broadcast images of a tired-looking Thanh with tousled hair. He was quoted as saying he had returned voluntarily.

"I wasn't thinking maturely and decided to hide, and during that time, I realized I need to return to face the truth and ... admit my faults and apologize," he said in a prime-time bulletin on Vietnam Television.

The German government has accused the Vietnamese intelligence service of breaching international law, and has demanded that Thanh be allowed to fly back to Germany to claim asylum. He had been due to appear at a hearing about his asylum request on July 24 - the day after he disappeared.

Thanh was chairman of PetroVietnam Construction Joint Stock Corporation until 2013, when he was appointed to several senior government positions. He was elected to the National Assembly in May 2016, but was dismissed from the Communist-dominated legislature before its first session the following month.

http://www.dw.com/en/germany-warns-vietnam-of-consequences-for-cold-war-style-kidnapping/a-39973835

Germany should care of their problem like immigration and IS than a Vietnamese who even is not a German citizen. I realize the German intelligence is not good although they always face the terrorist situation, the foreign with weapon arrested and moved one alive man in their capital, they only knew this incident after one week when the asylum seeker in Vietnam.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom