What's new

Will China and India grow together or grow apart?

India is not an innocent party being used by the West. It is a willing and leading participant in the anti-China coalition.

If that was indeed true, then India would have been a part of the NATO a long time ago,with American bases facing Aksai Chin and Arunachal pradesh border.
 
.
Chinese people talk about West using India to halt China growth, which is double standards, when its China who is using Pakistan to halt India growth.

See guys, what comes around goes around.
 
.
A question for you: can India embrace China if China is unwilling to be embraced?



This is not correct, not yet. Until recently, in fact, even currently, 66% of Indian Army divisions were on the western frontier. Why do you say that India's military is shifted north towards us? What shifts have there been? Have more troops moved in? Have more aircraft moved in? Have railways been built right up to the border? Roads?

Yet all these have been done on the Chinese side.

Who is shifting and who is keeping still?



Of course. As witnessed by the public statements made willingly and in leadership of the anti-China movement, as witnessed by the dogged and continued refusal to work with China to further the objectives of the world outside the western world, as witnessed by the adamant refusal to strengthen economic ties.

Perfectly logical and oh, so factual.

However, the vast majority of PLAAF air bases are facing east, towards US and Japan. Our navy alone also operates 800 planes (larger than the entire Japanese air force), and all of that is facing the US and Japan since our navy has no presence in the highest mountains of the world for obvious reasons. Our ground forces are also primarily facing east, on the North Korean, Russian and Vietnamese borders.

Roads and planes are being moved in on both sides, but as a proportion of China's total military, the few planes being moved are nothing. Railroads are being built to serve the Tibet area. If we do not do this, the Tibetans will accuse us of purposely holding back their economy. The few troops in the Tibet area are for peacekeeping and defense alone. Previously, the Chengdu military district was underequipped; the new equipment is merely to bring it up to the standards of the IAF.
 
.
If that was indeed true, then India would have been a part of the NATO a long time ago,with American bases facing Aksai Chin and Arunachal pradesh border.

That might not go over well with your all-weather friend, the Bear.
Also, there's no point blatantly inflaming tensions.
Military conflict is not the only way to achieve one's goals.

I am not saying India and China are mortal enemies, but they do have competing interests in Asia, and India surely wouldn't mind China cut down a few notches.
 
.
However, the vast majority of PLAAF air bases are facing east, towards US and Japan. Our navy alone also operates 800 planes (larger than the entire Japanese air force), and all of that is facing the US and Japan since our navy has no presence in the highest mountains of the world for obvious reasons. Our ground forces are also primarily facing east, on the North Korean, Russian and Vietnamese borders.

Roads and planes are being moved in on both sides, but as a proportion of China's total military, the few planes being moved are nothing. Railroads are being built to serve the Tibet area. If we do not do this, the Tibetans will accuse us of purposely holding back their economy. The few troops in the Tibet area are for peacekeeping and defense alone. Previously, the Chengdu military district was underequipped; the new equipment is merely to bring it up to the standards of the IAF.

Air forces are fine, but not for the mountains and hills in which there will be confrontations, in which it will always be the infantry, sometimes backed up by artillery, which will win the enemy's positions. So it is relevant to count the

There are exactly ten divisions - ten! - which are tasked to face the PLA, and these are:

  • [*]23rd Infantry Division headquartered at Ranchi (look it up on the map to figure out why it is such a deadly threat to the PLA)
    [*]57th Mountain Division headquartered at Leimakhong
    [*]2nd Mountain Division headquartered at Dibrugarh
    [*]5th Mountain Division headquartered at Bomdila
    [*]21st Mountain Division headquartered at Rangia
    [*]17th Mountain Division headquartered at Gangtok
    [*]20th Mountain Division headquartered at Binnaguri
    [*]27th Mountain Division headquartered at Kalimpong
    [*]?th Artillery brigade
  • 3rd Infantry Division headquartered at Leh
  • 8th Mountain Division headquartered at Dras (again, a disposition which should give the PLA nightmares!
  • ?th Artillery brigade

We can take it that approximately 150,000 are involved. On the other hand, we have the Chengdu Military Region. The International Institute for Strategic Studies attributes the region with some 180,000 troops, in the following formations:

  • Motorised infantry division
  • Motorised infantry division
  • Motorised infantry division
  • Motorised infantry division
  • Motorised infantry division
  • Artillery division
  • Armoured brigade
  • Armoured brigade
  • Artillery brigade
  • Anti-aircraft brigade
  • Anti-aircraft brigade

Those who are members on this forum are presumably all interested in military affairs, and have more than a nodding acquaintance with the natures of various formations and their significance. Against the exclusively light infantry formations of the Indian Army, the PLA has motorised infantry, a lot, one artillery division and an independent artillery brigade against the IA two independent artillery brigades, two armoured brigades, and strong anti-aircraft cover in two independent brigades. Mind you, these are facing not the full 150,000 people the IA has deployed, but those facing Chengdu Military Region troops, marked blue above (115,000 against 180,000).

The point should be clear: lesser in number, exclusively light infantry with defensive roles to play, very little artillery fire-power, compared to strong mechanised infantry units, very mobile and able to go hundreds of kms from their base, substantial artillery back-up, and armour enough to break through anywhere, anytime.

In case the IAF is deployed, although we have not yet got down to defining relative strengths, the PLA has strong AA support lined up already.

I hope you get the picture. If you were to identify the total number of aircraft assigned to Chengdu and to Lanzhow, you might get an annihilating superiority of aircraft in favour of the PLAAF.
 
.
india should not get sucked into a race with china. we need to grow economically. the west will try to use india as counter to china, however it is not advisable for india to start competing with china on military and economic front. we should jus toe a middle path and concentrate on our economic growth.

Why don't you like competition?If India tries to chase China,it will grow at a faster rate,you need a competitor to grow fast.
While China maintains it's offensive stance on AP and Kashmir,why wouldn't India want to equal China's military strength?

You logical is in disarray.
 
.
Prof Kishore Mahbubani

Text of remarks by Professor Kishore Mahbubani, Dean and Professor in the Practice of Public Policy of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore, at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi on January 8

I believe that I have an eminently simple and reasonable argument to put across that can be captured in three simple points. My first point is that one does not have to be a geopolitical genius to predict that the main geopolitical fault line in the next few decades will be the West and China.

When China emerges with the world's largest economy by 2027, or earlier, it will be the first time in over 200 years that at a non-Western power will be the strongest power in the world. It is possible that the West will sit back passively and not try to thwart China's rise. However, it would be wiser for China to make its geopolitical plans on the basis that the West will try, directly or indirectly, to thwart China's rise.

My second point is that when the West tries to thwart the rise of China, it would prefer to do it indirectly rather than directly. The ideal scenario is the one that the West used successfully against the Soviet Union. There the West did not confront the Soviet Union directly. Instead, it unleashed radical Islamic forces in Afghanistan to unhinge the Soviet Union.

That strategy succeeded. Vis- -vis China, the best instrument that the West could find to thwart the rise of China would be the second fastest rising Asian power, namely India. The emergence of a bitter and persistent geopolitical contest between China and India would be an ideal geopolitical outcome for the West.

My third, and I hope most obvious point, is that it does not serve India's interests to be used an as instrument by the West to thwart China's rise. In simple geopolitical logic, the best position for India to take is to maintain a neutral and carefully staked out middle position in the coming struggle between the West and China


The West will try to seduce India by saying that this is not a power struggle but a struggle over virtue and values: democracy versus communist authoritarian systems.

However, the history of the West has shown that geopolitical interests always trump values. This is why the West supported the Saudi-Pakistan axis over India in the Cold War.

Geopolitical seduction is far more dangerous than sexual seduction because the consequences are weightier.

The best way for me to elaborate these three points is to answer three critical questions: Firstly, will the West try to thwart China? Secondly, will the West look for alternative instruments to use against China? Thirdly, is it in India's interests to join the West in thwarting the rise of China?

In trying to answer these questions, please let me admit that the answers will be complex, not simple. We will have to get out of simple back-and-white perspectives in trying to understand the coming struggle between the West and China.

There is, for example, no simple black-and-white answer to the question whether the West will try to thwart the rise of China. Certainly, the West will not launch a simple Soviet-style containment policy. One reason why it cannot do so is that, so far, China has managed its geopolitical rise brilliantly.

Please see pages 219-234 from my book The New Asian Hemisphere. The complex strategy included the following elements: heeding Deng Xiaoping's advice to take a low profile

(Note: the following characters describe Deng's advice: (1) lengjing guancha: observe and analyse [developments] calmly; (2) chenzhuo yingfu: deal [with changes] patiently and confidently; (3) wenzhu zhenjiao: secure [our own] position; (4) taoguang yanghui: conceal [our] capabilities and avoid the limelight; (5) shanyu shouzhuo: be good at keeping a low profile; (6) juebu dangtou: never become a leader; (7) yousuo zuowei: strive to make achievements).

China is using the developing interdependence between the US and China, where the US economy now heavily depends on Chinese purchases of US Treasury Bills and taking full advantage of America's absolutely stupid policies vis- -vis the Islamic world.

Hence, ironically, while the West used the Islamic world to unhinge the Soviet Union, China is now emerging as the prime beneficiary of stupid Western policies in the Islamic world. 9/11 and the Western reaction to it were huge geopolitical gifts to China.

In the geopolitical contest between China and the West, the score is probably 8 for China and 2 for the West. But it would be foolish for China to be complacent.

Indeed, the Chinese believe that they have many reasons to feel distrustful of the West.

This suspicion is well captured in the following poem:

An Awakening Message
When we were the Sick Man of Asia, We were called The Yellow Peril.
When we are billed to be the next Superpower, we are called The Threat.
When we closed our doors, you smuggled opium to open markets.
When we embrace Free Trade, You blame us for taking away your jobs.
When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and wanted your fair share.
When we tried to put the broken pieces back together again, Free Tibet you screamed, it was an Invasion!
When we tried Communism, you hated us for being Communist.
When we embrace Capitalism, you hate us for being Capitalist.
When we have a billion people, you said we were destroying the planet.
When we tried limiting our numbers, you said we abused human rights.
When we were poor, you thought we were dogs.
When we loan you cash, you blame us for your national debts.
When we build our industries, you call us polluters.
When we sell you goods, you blame us for global warming.
When we buy oil, you call it exploitation and genocide.
But when you go to war for oil, you call it liberation.
When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you demanded rules of law.
When we uphold law and order against violence, you call it violating human rights.
When we were silent, you said you wanted us to have free speech.
When we are silent no more, you say we are brainwashed-xenophobics.
Why do you hate us so much, we asked.
No, you answered, we don't hate you.
We don't hate you either,
But, do you understand us?
Of course we do, you said,
We have AFP, CNN and BBC's...
What do you really want from us?
Think hard first, then answer...
Because you only get so many chances.
Enough is Enough, Enough Hypocrisy for This One World.
We want One World, One Dream, and Peace on Earth.
This Big Blue Earth is Big enough for all of Us.

China should make steps for a cooperated growth of India and China.
China should prevent from entering into disputes with India on land and make the relations bitter..
Otherwise,as you agree India will be put against China automatically and the west might succeed in containing China through India.

Gotta say,the future looks very very complicated.
 
.
Definitely China and India are competitors. As the smaller of the two economies, competition with China or trying to catch up with China is surely in India's interests. In trying to catch up with China, we better ourselves. This is competition at its best. China trys to catch up with the US while India trys to catch up with China.

Having said this, it is a fact that India has suffered invasions and humiliation at the hands of the invaders due to its weaknesses in the past. We can afford to be weak no more. China is the only existential threat that India faces today. Therefore, even though, we do not hope to catch up with China in the foreseeable future, we have no choice but to continue to strengthen ourselves to the point that China ceases to play on our psyche as an existential threat. For this, we have to develop a certain parity with China that will deter China from an invasion of India while India itself will present no threat to China. We believe that it is possible to achieve this state of geopolitical equilibrium.

India has its own destiny. In no way is India's destiny linked to that of the west. I totally endorse the professor's views. While India should remain wary of China, we should prevent ourselves from falling in line with the west in its struggle with China. The west has proven again and again that it can not be trusted. If we are wooed by the west, we should use all opportunities to benefit from the technological advances made by the west to improve our industry and our military but at no time should we lose our capacity to make decisions which are in our national interest even if it means that we oppose the west on various issues and side with China.

Some one mentioned Russia. Yes Russia is India's all weather friend. Where does Russia figure in all this? Does Russia fall in line mutely with the west? Highly unlikely. Does Russia become irrelevant to international geopolitics? Not at least for the next 50 years and maybe not even then. In fact, Russia has never been irrelevant to international geopolitics? The posture which Russia takes in this hypothetical conflict between the west and China will have a bearing on India's stance as well. Russia's policy has been fiercely independent for centuries, I do not see her meekly falling in line with one or the other party to the dispute.
 
.
Best article ever I have read on Rediff.com

The article is nothing but peace of bull load. :tdown::tdown:

1.) Its not west but china using pak against India that too for long to thwart our growth and development.

In case of a India-pak nuke war the millions of Indians will die because of the nukes and missiles supplied by china.
china is a enemy beyond doubt.

2.) Its not west but china funding terrorists in north east.

3.) Its china that back stabed us in 1962.

4.) Its china that bully us by not issuing proper visa to kashmir and arunanchal.

5.) Its china that illigaly crosses our border and in the reason like Uttrakhand where we don't have border dispute of any kind. china don't claim Uttrakhand and recognizes it as India's integral part but PLA regularly crosses border at there.

china is a threat to world and its people, Free Tibet & East Turkmenistan.
 
. .
Glad to see the Indian side of the argument. :tup:

Others have tried to contain us before, but the only result is that we grow stronger.

So no complaints here. :wave:

:pakistan:

I beg your pardon!

This is NOT the Indian side of the argument. Only the argument of an Indian, an idiosyncratic Indian.

As for India herself, we can do worse than adopt Deng Xiao-Ping's sage advice; it's so apt, and so ironic that his own country has lost track of the last four points on his agenda!
 
.
Air forces are fine, but not for the mountains and hills in which there will be confrontations, in which it will always be the infantry, sometimes backed up by artillery, which will win the enemy's positions. So it is relevant to count the

There are exactly ten divisions - ten! - which are tasked to face the PLA, and these are:

  • [*]23rd Infantry Division headquartered at Ranchi (look it up on the map to figure out why it is such a deadly threat to the PLA)
    [*]57th Mountain Division headquartered at Leimakhong
    [*]2nd Mountain Division headquartered at Dibrugarh
    [*]5th Mountain Division headquartered at Bomdila
    [*]21st Mountain Division headquartered at Rangia
    [*]17th Mountain Division headquartered at Gangtok
    [*]20th Mountain Division headquartered at Binnaguri
    [*]27th Mountain Division headquartered at Kalimpong
    [*]?th Artillery brigade
  • 3rd Infantry Division headquartered at Leh
  • 8th Mountain Division headquartered at Dras (again, a disposition which should give the PLA nightmares!
  • ?th Artillery brigade

We can take it that approximately 150,000 are involved. On the other hand, we have the Chengdu Military Region. The International Institute for Strategic Studies attributes the region with some 180,000 troops, in the following formations:

  • Motorised infantry division
  • Motorised infantry division
  • Motorised infantry division
  • Motorised infantry division
  • Motorised infantry division
  • Artillery division
  • Armoured brigade
  • Armoured brigade
  • Artillery brigade
  • Anti-aircraft brigade
  • Anti-aircraft brigade

Those who are members on this forum are presumably all interested in military affairs, and have more than a nodding acquaintance with the natures of various formations and their significance. Against the exclusively light infantry formations of the Indian Army, the PLA has motorised infantry, a lot, one artillery division and an independent artillery brigade against the IA two independent artillery brigades, two armoured brigades, and strong anti-aircraft cover in two independent brigades. Mind you, these are facing not the full 150,000 people the IA has deployed, but those facing Chengdu Military Region troops, marked blue above (115,000 against 180,000).

The point should be clear: lesser in number, exclusively light infantry with defensive roles to play, very little artillery fire-power, compared to strong mechanised infantry units, very mobile and able to go hundreds of kms from their base, substantial artillery back-up, and armour enough to break through anywhere, anytime.

In case the IAF is deployed, although we have not yet got down to defining relative strengths, the PLA has strong AA support lined up already.

I hope you get the picture. If you were to identify the total number of aircraft assigned to Chengdu and to Lanzhow, you might get an annihilating superiority of aircraft in favour of the PLAAF.

The point which comes to mind is what are 5 motorised divisions and two armoured brigades doing in a sector where they would be required to fight in a mountainous region. In fact in the world's highest and most rugged mountainous terrain. Even the artillery and the air defense formations need class 9 roads to move. Even light tanks need class 40 roads as obviously they can not move cross country here. I doubt that China can muster up the engineering effort to develop multiple class 40/ class 9 axes across the Himalayas to deploy the force levels enumerated here. Moreover the infantry effort needed to secure these axes in the first place in order to permit the engineering effort to commence would be really stupendous. Airlift/air assault is no answer here if one is talking in terms of airlifting 2/3 armoured brigades and half a dozen motorised divisions plus the allied artillery and air defense. No one on Earth has that kind of air lift capability. Every air head has to be linked up and linked up really fast if the forces airlifted are not to be isolated, contained and annihilated. Which brings us back to the question of establishing multiple class 9/ 40 axes in extremely high mountains. Now are we missing out something here? Or is the Orbat of the said military district designed to deter invasion of Tibet as the composition suggests and not for offensive tasks across the Himalayas.

I am really at a loss here.
 
Last edited:
.
:pakistan:

I beg your pardon!

This is NOT the Indian side of the argument. Only the argument of an Indian, an idiosyncratic Indian.

As for India herself, we can do worse than adopt Deng Xiao-Ping's sage advice; it's so apt, and so ironic that his own country has lost track of the last four points on his agenda!

While I agree with you in principle and content, I am sure that you will find many Indian philosophers and thinkers who would offer similar advice and all of whom predate comrade Deng xiao-Ping. One particular genius of a philosopher who lived a thousand years ago comes to the mind.

A trivial point really.
 
.
Glad to see the Indian side of the argument. :tup:

Others have tried to contain us before, but the only result is that we grow stronger.

So no complaints here. :wave:

Out of the 16 comments made by Indians here,some with good substantial research ,how does this one comment gets chosen by you to become the prized example of the Indian side of the argument ?

Like Sir Leigh Teabing says: It is called scotoma. The mind sees what it wants to see.
 
.
The article is nothing but peace of bull load. :tdown::tdown:

1.) Its not west but china using pak against India that too for long to thwart our growth and development.

Pakistan has other and more important purposes too.Especially connecting to Arab world/Central Asia.


In case of a India-pak nuke war the millions of Indians will die because of the nukes and missiles supplied by china.
china is a enemy beyond doubt.
I don't buy the Indo-Pakistan nuking eachother scenario,given how close we are.Its all about getting yourself a loyal ally.

2.) Its not west but china funding terrorists in north east.

Although ,Some of them do use Chinese weapons,there is no proof as of now That Chinese are directly or indirectly involved,it could be because of arms smugglers from Myanmar.

3.) Its china that back stabed us in 1962.

You need to read Joe's post on 1962 war.

4.) Its china that bully us by not issuing proper visa to kashmir and arunanchal.
They value Pakistan more than India,thats all.

5.) Its china that illigaly crosses our border and in the reason like Uttrakhand where we don't have border dispute of any kind. china don't claim Uttrakhand and recognizes it as India's integral part but PLA regularly crosses border at there.

Its a disciplinary matter,convey it to the respective authorities on the other side,and if it happens next time on an mutually recognized border,we deal with them on how we deal with Pakistani troops.

china is a threat to world and its people, Free Tibet & East Turkmenistan.
Every nation has its skeletons in its closet,one can say the same about NE and Kashmir,however complicated and varying the situation might be.
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom