Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Chinese troops transgress Sikkim-Bhutan-Tibet tri-junction sector in Doka La / Dokalam Area

Discussion in 'International Relations' started by Agent_47, Jun 26, 2017.

  1. sangos

    sangos Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2013
    Messages:
    5,137
    Likes Received:
    2,735
    Country Flag:
    India
    Disagree partly. Bose's INA unfurled the independence flag in 'Imperial British India'. IMHO at that wartime is one huge (underplayed)achievement of the man himself. Notwithstanding Bose's extraordinary military skills of organization and forging alliances with (relentlessly demonized and dehumanized by dominant Western media)axis powers of the time.


    For imperial Japan their ways of warfare and treatment of POWs were absolutely legit in their POV(not with western filters of course)

    The original point was Subhash Bose as a military strategist. The man proved himself on that front. Nehru was anyway too weak be a dictator.
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2017
  2. xiyangtubie

    xiyangtubie FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2017
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    9
    Country Flag:
    China
    you are a pakistani ? I know nothing about Afghanistan border issue,please tell me..
     
  3. sangos

    sangos Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2013
    Messages:
    5,137
    Likes Received:
    2,735
    Country Flag:
    India
  4. Darth Marr

    Darth Marr Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2016
    Messages:
    1,371
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Country Flag:
    India
    Doklam is not about a road
    Doklam, like other recent stand-offs in Depsang or Demchok, is not about a road: It is is a message about China’s ire at India building alliances with its adversaries in Asia, and with the US. Beijing seeks, through the threat of force, to instruct India on how countries ought to conduct themselves.
    [​IMG]Beijing and New Delhi must make the effort to engage in a creative dialogue about how a changing Asia’s tensions will be managed — aware that the price of a single misstep can be mass death. (Illustration: C R Sasikumar)
    Europe’s wars of the future, the Spanish general Manuel Fernández Silvestre y Patinga wrote in 1910, “will be concluded in one day’s hard fighting”. He had observed the Japan-Russia war, where armies fighting with new technologies like rapid-fire field guns and repeating small arms had become locked in entrenched, positional warfare. For him, like most contemporaries, the Japanese victory showed élan would overcome the machine: “The officers quit shelter with ringing shouts of Banzai,” wrote an enthused French observer, “wildly echoed by all the rank and file”.

    The general, the millions sent to their death in the First World War showed, had learned the wrong lesson: In fact, Russia had been brought to its knees by economic crisis and political revolution. Even at the battle of Mukden, the collapsing Russians inflicted 70,000 casualties while losing 20,000 to the attacking Japanese.

    Banker and part-time war theorist Jan Bloch, in an 1898 book, had predicted just this: “The future of war”, he wrote, “is not fighting, but famine, not the slaying of men, but the bankruptcy of nations and the breakup of the whole social organisation”.

    This is a good time for strategic communities in India and China, both nuclear-weapons states, to reflect on what Bloch understood and the general didn’t.

    [​IMG]

    Ever since the Doklam crisis began this summer, strategists in India have been hostage to what might be described as a “Little Wars” mindset. For the most part, military debate has centred around the prospects of a limited border war, or a protracted but non-violent stand-off, like the Sumdorong Chu crisis of 1987-88. Defence Minister Arun Jaitley has assured Indians this is not 1962; the Ministry of External Affairs has studiously ignored threats emanating from Beijing, as have India’s melodrama-addicted television anchors.

    To ignore the abyss yawning ahead of the Doklam plateau is a profound mistake. The stand-off might, indeed, end with a negotiated settlement, but there are grimmer prospects, which neither side has considered with care.

    Fear is the key to understanding China’s behaviour: While its neighbours see a fire-breathing dragon, the dragon sees the glint of spears and sabres. China’s aggressive posture on its periphery — the expansion of military bases in the South China seas, the sharpening of territorial disputes with Vietnam and Japan, the enabling of North Korea’s nuclear programme — is not an outcome of the might it harvested during the 1980s. Instead, it is the legacy of Chinese insecurity born of the Sino-Soviet split of the 1960s, which left the country a strategic orphan — an orphan with nuclear weapons.

    Ever since that split, aggression on the peripheries — first delivered against India in 1962 — has been a key tool for China.

    From 1965, the Soviet Union began to mount increasing coercive pressure on China — at one stage, even proposing a joint strike with the United States to cripple its nuclear-weapons programme. From 17 divisions in 1965, Soviet forces facing China in the far-east grew to 27 divisions by 1969. The Chinese estimated that Soviet mechanised forces could overwhelm their defences and reach Beijing inside of two weeks.

    The threat lead China to engage in the second of its post-split border wars, attacking Soviet border guards on Damansky island on the Ussuri river — the first-ever skirmish between troops of nuclear powers. The Soviet Union suffered 58 dead to well over 200 People’s Liberation Army fatalities.

    Yet, the border attack was a strategic success. It persuaded the Soviet Union that ill-equipped as the PLA might be, its sheer numerical force could create havoc. Soviet nuclear could annihilate China, but Beijing’s own rudimentary liquid-fueled nuclear missiles could deliver some devastation too — and victory would yield an ungovernable continent-sized begging-bowl.

    Persuaded — wrongly— that Moscow was certain to attack by 1985, Chinese paramount leader Deng Xiaoping moved to contain Soviet influence in Asia. From 1975, border clashes with Soviet ally Vietnam began to rise sharply— from 439 incidents in 1975 to 1,100 in 1978. The message wasn’t heard: In December 1978, Vietnam overthrew the China-backed Khmer Rouge dictatorship in Cambodia.

    That very month, China’s Central Military Commission drew up plans to punish Vietnam. Fears of counter-attack by Moscow were allayed by intelligence, provided to Deng during a visit to Washington, that two-thirds of the 54 Soviet divisions facing east were undermanned and inadequately equipped.

    Beijing proved unable to evict Hanoi from Cambodia, and fighting dragged on intermittently for a decade. But Deng understood the conflict as a strategic victory. By demonstrating that China’s strategic interests were aligned with the United States in Asia, the scholar Xiaoming Zhang has shown, the war helped build an enduring partnership against the Soviets, yielding vast economic benefits.

    Faced with a second period of strategic isolation — this time, in the form of the breakdown of the Sino-United States alliance — China is again turning to coercion. Doklam, like other recent stand-offs in Depsang or Demchok, is not about a road: It is is a message about China’s ire at India building alliances with its adversaries in Asia, and with the United States. Beijing seeks, through the threat of force, to instruct India on how countries ought to conduct themselves — but, more powerful than they were in the 1970s, countries like India and Vietnam are unwilling to comply.

    No one can know for certain how far China might go to deliver on its warnings, but India needs to be crystal clear about how it might deal with escalation, each step of the way. However, India’s anaemic military modernisation stands in stark contrast with Jaitley’s fighting words.

    Even military preparation, though, isn’t enough. Europe, when Bloch was writing his book, looked a lot like Asia now: Riding a great wave of prosperity, its markets better-integrated than ever before. Like Asia today, though, it was also stage for new, rising powers, acquiring military muscle and old powers pushing back against them.

    “If there is a general war”, the great Prussian leader Otto von Bismarck prophesied in 1888, “it will be over some damn fool thing in the Balkans”. Leaders, convinced that war could be contained, and its fallout calculated, allowed just such a damn fool thing drag their nations to disaster. Ten million soldiers and seven million civilians gave their lives by 1918; millions more in small wars that raged until 1923.

    Beijing and New Delhi must make the effort to engage in a creative dialogue about how a changing Asia’s tensions will be managed — aware that the price of a single misstep can be mass death.
     
    sangos likes this.
  5. sangos

    sangos Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2013
    Messages:
    5,137
    Likes Received:
    2,735
    Country Flag:
    India
    ....and end with a whimper(Of course they still have chance to have some fun before winter. Oh but where are their 'rapid action star wars troopers' near the LAC?!). Big miscalculation. Instead of Darth Vader China looks like Bozo now.
     
    lca-fan and vstol jockey like this.
  6. lca-fan

    lca-fan Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2015
    Messages:
    2,388
    Likes Received:
    4,777
    Country Flag:
    India
    Was Doklam standoff staged by China to appease Pakistan?

    Written By: Vicky Nanjappa

    Updated: Thursday, July 27, 2017, 16:42 [IST]


    China has repeatedly blamed India for the Doklam standoff. The Chinese went on to say that it was the Indians who moved its troops which led to the standoff at Doklam.





    OneIndia discusses with former Research and Analysis Wing officer, Amar Bhushan what led to the sudden aggression by China. Bhushan says that let us one fact straight and that is there will be no escalation from both sides.



    [​IMG]

    He says that the Chinese may have come under pressure from Pakistan to escalate the matter and cause a diversion.


    Sikkim Standoff : Ajit Doval arrives in China to attend BRICS summit | Oneindia News
    Pakistan is under a lot of pressure thanks to the aggressive stand taken by our Army. They are facing major losses and the country is facing the heat like it has never done before.

    In such a scenario, they looked towards their 'all weather friend,' China for support. In my analysis of how the events unfolded at Doklam, it looks like the entire episode was staged to benefit Pakistan.

    Pakistan felt that it needed some breathing space after receiving a beating from India and hence may have requested the Chinese to create a diversion, Bhushan also points out. All these borders, be it with Pakistan or China go quiet during the winter and these issues would automatically be resolved then, the former R&AW officer explains.

    Bhushan says that since this entire Doklam issue looks staged, there is no chance that it would escalate any further. There would be a resolution soon on the issue or matters would just drag till the winter, he also says.
    http://www.oneindia.com/internation...staged-china-to-appease-pakistan-2507351.html
     
    Darth Marr likes this.
  7. mirage

    mirage 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2016
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    105
    Country Flag:
    India
    you will come to know when india reopens border with afganistan causing death to CPEC , ni ke yi zhao naxie zai baidu , yindu yu afu han you bian jie
     
    Angel Eyes likes this.
  8. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    Not just that. There was no silk route out of China till 300AD. India traded with Central Asia and China, at that time, China being a small country, joined Indian Trade routes. The so Called Yuan Dynasty was a Mongolian Dynasty which raped and conquered China. China was a part of Yuan Dynasty and not the other way round. These Chinese need to be taught a lesson about history. We will finish off OBOR and re-establish our own trade routes to Central Asia.
    Every Chinese must accept Mongolia to be their actual nation and dissolve the idea of China altogether if you go by history alone.
     
    mirage and surya kiran like this.
  9. lca-fan

    lca-fan Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2015
    Messages:
    2,388
    Likes Received:
    4,777
    Country Flag:
    India
  10. sangos

    sangos Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2013
    Messages:
    5,137
    Likes Received:
    2,735
    Country Flag:
    India
  11. lca-fan

    lca-fan Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2015
    Messages:
    2,388
    Likes Received:
    4,777
    Country Flag:
    India
    India's Uncompromising Stand Against China in the Himalayas Is Backed Up With Hard Power
    India’s military capabilities at the Himalayas put it in a position to bargain with China.


    By Nitin A. Gokhale
    July 31, 2017

    [​IMG]


    India’s National Security Adviser Ajit Doval is back from Beijing after attending the BRICS national security advisers’ conclave and meeting his Chinese counterpart, Yang Jiechi, but there is no sign yet of the standoff between Indian and Chinese troops at the Dolam (Doklam) plateau ending, almost two months after it began. Both sides have chosen not to comment on outcomes, if any, from the talks that Doval held in Beijing, indicating perhaps that a mutually satisfactory solution still eludes them. Or maybe, Beijing and New Delhi want to consult Bhutan, the third party in this unusual spat, before proceeding further.

    Whatever the reason for the silence, the world is surprised at the turn of events since late-May when the border spat began at a point where the boundaries of India-China and Bhutan meet. For one, the vehemence displayed by Chinese commentators was out of the ordinary and so was the aggressive tone of official statements made by government spokespersons in Beijing, accusing India of trespassing into Chinese territory. More unusually however, the calm assurance and panache with which New Delhi has handled the crisis so far points to a far more confident India, a point that would be noticed and studied across important world capitals.

    What then is the secret behind New Delhi’s polite yet firm stand?

    Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.
    Several factors ranging from India’s better military posture along the contested border to improved economic heft can be cited for the new approach. However, the biggest reason for India to stand up to China ironically is the blatant attempt by President Xi Jinping to force a China-centric order in Asia, a proposition that no government in New Delhi can agree to under any circumstances. Under Narendra Modi, politically the strongest Prime Minister in India for three decades, accepting China’s hegemony was out of the question, given his muscular national security policies. Very early in his tenure Modi had decided to depart from convention on dealing with China. He broke a long standing taboo of not inviting representatives of the Tibetan government-in-exile and that of Taiwan to official functions, lest Beijing feel offended. The Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government-in-exile and Taiwan’s trade representative were among the select invitees to Modi’s oath taking ceremony in the summer of 2014, setting the tone for a more robust policy towards China.

    A border standoff in Ladakh in September 2014—coinciding with President Xi Jinping’s maiden visit to India—witnessed a rare display of India’s new approach of not succumbing to Chinese bullying. After 1,000 Chinese troops intruded into Chumar, a remote border outpost in South-east Ladakh, New Delhi rapidly built up a 9,000-strong force in two days, forcing the PLA to back off. Another similar face-off at Yangtse in Arunachal Pradesh in 2015 with the same result further demonstrated India’s resolve.

    That resolve is being backed up with an improved military posture. Building on the modest beginning made under the previous government to improve infrastructure all along the northern frontier, the current government is quietly building capabilities to counter China militarily. Consider this:

    • India’s indigenously developed missiles—Agni, Akash, and Brahmos—are either ready for induction or already inducted into the armed forces, providing potent weapons for use against China.
    • The development of a family of K-Series of submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM)—although mostly shrouded in secrecy—is in a fairly advanced stage, keeping India on track to complete its nuclear triad.
    • After initial reservation against the proposed Mountain Strike Corps (sanctioned by the previous government), the Modi government has revived its support for the project. Two Mountain Divisions meant for the Strike Corps are about to complete their raising in Northern and Eastern Commands. More air assets are planned for Strike Corps. The eventual aim is to build flexibility in its deployment and allow swift switching of forces from one theatre to another.
    • The formation of a Special Forces Division and a cyber and space agency, as prelude to formation of separate tri-services Special Forces, Cyber and Space Commands, has commenced in recent months.
    Moreover, Ladakh, the scene of two prominent standoffs in 2013 and 2014, now has an additional infantry brigade stationed permanently in the area while more elements of Northern Command’s reserve division—39—now exercise regularly in the high altitude desert. From the initial induction of a regiment of T-72 tanks done in 2013, India now plans to augment its armor strength to a full-fledged tank brigade in Ladakh.

    In the East, the 56 and 71 Mountain Divisions, raised from 2009 onwards, are now firmly placed and deployed on the ground, making more troops available to defense planners.

    The Air Force has also staged forward its assets both in the North and the East by deploying the Sukhoi-30 planes at bases close to the Chinese border. Completion of the project to revamp eight Advanced Landing Grounds (ALGs) in Arunachal Pradesh will mean improved connectivity and increased capacity to insert troops in the high altitude areas. The reported deployment of Brahmos Missile regiments along the northern frontiers in the past couple of years means India now has additional offensive capability.

    Strategically important roads high in the Himalayas, planned almost a decade ago, are now getting a more focussed attention with more tunnels at high altitude passes being built to allow all-weather traffic.

    The Indian Navy, the smallest of the three armed forces, is in the midst of an unprecedented expansion, although the strength of its conventional submarine fleet remains a matter of concern.

    There are of course many weaknesses in India’s higher defense management, its procurement systems, and pace of military modernization. Military leaders have spoken about a high degree of obsolescence across the three forces as a result of years of neglect and apathy in military modernization. The Modi government will have to redouble its efforts to overcome the shortages and restructure the management system of the military expeditiously to meet mounting challenges from China and Pakistan.

    Overall, however, India’s military strength is right now adequate to hold off any Chinese adventurism across the Himalayas, but not strong enough for an offensive posture. Military analysts however argue that a stronger China will think twice before initiating any conflict with India since Indian soldiers are better trained and battle hardened compared to the PLA troops. That said, neither side will gain anything substantial in a possible armed conflict. That perhaps is the only saving grace in the troubled relationship between India and China at the moment.

    http://thediplomat.com/2017/07/indi...n-the-himalayas-is-backed-up-with-hard-power/
     
    sangos likes this.
  12. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,958
    Likes Received:
    5,857
    Country Flag:
    India
  13. lca-fan

    lca-fan Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2015
    Messages:
    2,388
    Likes Received:
    4,777
    Country Flag:
    India
    Make India an enemy and you will lose your lifeline, Chinese experts caution Beijing over Doklam
    By Dipanjan Roy Chaudhury, ET Bureau | Updated: Aug 02, 2017, 09.55 AM IST

    [​IMG]

    NEW DELHI: Apart from raising tensions between India and China, the Doklam standoff could potentially threaten Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Chinese scholars and experts have warned for the first time.

    Macau-based military expert Antony Wong Dong has cautioned that Beijing’s hardball politics are pushing New Delhi further away and could end up making it an enemy.

    “China is playing psychological warfare... but it should realise that even if it defeated India in a war on land, it would be impossible for the PLA navy to break India’s maritime containment,” Wong told Hong Kong-based English daily South China Morning Post (SCMP), pointing to the importance of the Indian Ocean as a commercial lifeline.

    China is largely reliant on imported fuel and, according to figures published by Chinese state media, more than 80% of its oil imports sail through the Indian Ocean or Strait of Malacca.

    “Unlike Southeast Asian countries, India has never succumbed to China’s ‘carrot and stick’ strategies,” Wong said. “India is strategically located at the heart of China’s energy lifeline and the ‘Belt and Road Initiative’, and offending India will only push it into the rival camp, which [Beijing believes] is scheming to contain China by blocking the Malacca Strait and the Indian Ocean.”


    Sun Shihai, an adviser to the Chinese Association for South Asian Studies, expressed similar sentiments. He told SCMP that he was concerned that the worst military stand-off in more than three decades would fuel anti-Chinese sentiment in India, as mistrust and hostility between the two countries run deep.
    “If not properly handled, the border row could have a long-term impact on China’s efforts to expand its diplomatic and economic influence beyond the Asia-Pacific region with its “Belt and Road Initiative”, he said, adding, “India is one of the most important strategic partners for China’s ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ because of its geographic location.”

    “Beijing has been trying to lure India to join ‘Belt and Road’ projects because both countries stand to benefit from them strategically and economically. [But] The latest tensions have soured bilateral ties and the growing mistrust will only make New Delhi more reluctant to make a decision,” Sun claimed.

    It may be recalled that Delhi boycotted the BRI Summit in Beijing in May on the grounds that China-Pak-Eco-Corridor under BRI violates India’s sovereignty and that the initiative lacks transparency.

    Referring to India's position on BRI at the maiden Indo-US Forum here on Monday night, Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj said, "…We have also outlined the principles that should be adhered to in undertaking connectivity initiatives, including ensuring respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

    Zhou Chenming (a military expert with Knowfar Institute for Strategic and Defence Studies, a non-government think tank in Jiangyin, Jiangsu province, China) told SCMP that China was well aware of the futility of an all-out war for a desolate border area that is “frozen for up to eight months of the year.

    Besides the [human] casualties, the logistical cost of a border conflict between China and India would be inestimable.”

    India’s interest in enhancing its naval capabilities, especially its fleet of submarines, is believed to have been prompted by China’s military modernisation and its increased activity in the Indian Ocean and the narrow Malacca Strait, which connects it to the waters of East Asia, according to SCMP. India’s growing focus on submarine warfare was underscored after it was included as part of the joint naval drills in Malabar.
    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...ive-chinese-scholars/articleshow/59870884.cms

    @vstol jockey the very thing about CPEC an OBOR (that it will be rendered useless if India does not join it) you said is being hotly debated in China now..........
     
    surya kiran and Agent_47 like this.
  14. sangos

    sangos Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2013
    Messages:
    5,137
    Likes Received:
    2,735
    Country Flag:
    India
    Dunno why these 'military analysts' cannot see what even a child will not miss:angry:. China has HUUGGEE land border perimeter to defend along with its larger coastline compared to India. Thanks to its outdated middle kingdom mentality even today.........

    Bottom line factor: China has to be full blown military nutjob to withdraw the entire military from the rest of its borders with Mongolia, Central Asia, North Korea and redeploy them solely to take on India at the LAC.
     
    Angel Eyes likes this.
  15. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    Mark my words. This Doka la issue is directly linked to CPEC and the day first shot is fired by China, that day, not only will CPEC be dead, the whole mukhota of China being a superpower will also be off faster than the butter melts on red hot tava. China will lose this game. Forever and India will emerge as the undisputed leader of Asia. I told you guys that Chinese are following Sun Tzu who does not even qualify to be the toilet cleaner of Great Chanakya.
     
    Kalmuahlaunda and Angel Eyes like this.

Share This Page