zraver

from 1947-49 they were nominal allies, and the Indian and Chinese peoples were allies during WW2. But I was referring to the fact that both India and China had been US allies in the past.



Formal- I agree at least for now. But not all alliances are formal.

Political conditions today do not automatically forecast political conditions in 5 or 10 or 20 years. India and the US are not enemies and so it is easy to move from friendly to friend, to ally over time. However more importantly increasing US-Indian ties force China to adjust to the possibility of back room deals.

And thats the elegance of modern US diplomacy in the region. It is not centered on alliances but on friendship and potential economic leverage. All the US has to do is keep the other powers neutral and China lacks any strategic depth in the waters around Asia and thus a massive coast line to defend most of which will never be anything but a drain on China's budget. It's a classic defenders dilemma. As long as South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, India, Pakistan, Australia, Singapore, Phillipines, and Vietnam are or might be (secret) US Allies China has to defend against them all.

Granted the US has other commitments that drain resources. Luckily for the US is the decades long head start to build power projection assets.

Tronic

Yes, in that way, I think India and the US are natural allies. We have the same ideals and pretty much the same enemies. But anything further, like US bases in India, or an Indo-US defense alliance such as the one US shares with its NATO partners, in my opinion, will not happen. India refused to get into such a relationship with even the Soviets, who heavily supported India in the international arena (Indo-portuguese clash at UN, Indo-US fiasco in the Bay of Bengal in '71, and even kept China checked for the most part); so I don't see India changing its stance anytime soon and getting into such major relationships with any country. Like once, the Colonel said something alone the lines of; US does not get into any pacts in which it does not lead, and India does not get into any pacts in which it is under another nation.

All in all, I think the US and India can and will work together shoulder to shoulder, but one where India supports the US in its sphere of influence and where US supports India in its sphere of influence. [Just stay out of each other's backyards as to say]

This, I totally agree with.

__________________
Nabha Sparasham Deeptam
-Touch The Sky With Glory

xinhui

China's budget. It's a classic defenders dilemma. As long as South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, India, Pakistan, Australia, Singapore, Phillipines, and Vietnam are or might be (secret) US Allies China has to defend against them all


sounds like wishful thinking to me.

zraver

Then why is Chinese defense spending trending upward?

Officer of Engineers

Su-27s are a lot more expensive than MiG-19s.

__________________
Chimo

zraver

look at Andi's comment above mine. He denies that China needs to defend the US backed Asian states. If you don't need to defend against them, or more accurately plan a defense against them if needed there would be no reason to buy Su-27's. China is upgrading because she does have security concerns most nations do.

Officer of Engineers

Andy's point is that the Chinese do not have to fight 15 wars at once.

zraver

no they don't, but they do have to spend more than they would simply facing the US or even the old standby the US-Japan-Taiwan. As the other Asian powers arm, China has to reciprocate. The arms race cycle I build so you build, so I build in turn. The US gets caught up in this to an extent but the other Asian states arming dilutes some of China's building as not all assets can be concentrated in such a dynamic enviroment- the defenders dilema.

The hawks go to congress and say yell the Chinese are coming and they get a new destroyer or brigade or a couple more F-22's. The US can concentrate these assets while China's build up is diluted. on top of this if the CCP starts favoring the PLAN or PLAF over the PLA there will be problems so China has to further dilute its spending to keep the ground forces happy. Again the hawks go to congress for more weapons and the US gains a march.

If China tries to match even more rapidly, then the cycle in Asia starts all over again with a fresh round of building that again forces China to dilute its force while giving the US hawks more chances to ask for money.

Blademaster

Zraver, it is a case of you are damned if you do and you are damned if you don't. Generally in these kind of situations, it is better to be damned for what you are doing for no other reason than being proactive and generating some momentum on your own.

zraver

But more a damned if you do, when certain Chinese officers talked big, and certain events took place it started the ball rolling years before it had to. By taking on the US, i assume for domestic reasons while still under an arms embargo and denied access to many critical technologies China set its own interests as laid out by its own thinkers back by years or perhaps decades.

Blademaster

At least they are learning from their mistakes and moving on, which can be more than said for the current crop of Indian leadership.

Officer of Engineers

Z,

The PLA Senior Staff is by no means ready nor willing to take on the US. General Cao, the current Minister of Defence stated without a doubt that he needed 20 years to build a modern officer corps, not a modern army, let alone a modern armed force, but simply a modern officer corps. However, to provide the stimulus for imagination and true modern thinking, you have to give those young officers a challenge ... and what better challenge than the US?

However, that does not mean that they are preparing to take the US head on. All one has to do is to look at which divisions/regiments/brigades are getting new equipment and which are not (same goes for Air Force regiments/divisions and the Naval Fleets). By and large, the army is only modernizing a single brigade within each of the 7 military regions. That brigade more often than not is playing the Blue Force to allow the Red Force to meet and take on (the NTC kind of idea within each military region). The key exception of course are the 38 and 39 Group Armies.

Even if you look at the AF, the best they have are the Su-27MKK and maybe a F-16C equivalent in the J-10 but right now, they're committed to a piece of garbage FC-1/JF-17 just to satisfied the Pakistanis.

So clearly, aside from the issue of Taiwan, the PLA is not in an arms race with anyone.

zraver

OoE, your missing my point the statements by the officers, and certain actions and incidents have given China an arms race if they want it or not. They now have to upgrade just to try and keep the gap from widening. Of course the hawks on the hill will see this as further proof that China's plans and America don't mesh. China gave the Navy and Air Force a perfect red scare. China is just a patsy to blame so the congress keeps the money flowing.

Thanks to threats to nuke LA, ramming an EP-3, stealing nuclear secrets every time China retires a Mig-19 or early J-7 for a more modern air frame, or launches a new more capable hull for thier navy it will be spun as aggressive and provocative. It does not matter if that was China's intent, it does not matter if non of the incidents was sanctioned, the conversation is shaped by these actions and they color American and Asian perceptions of China.

Officer of Engineers

Of course, they've got an arms race but you're also missing my point. They don't see themselves in an arms race. They see themselves in a modernization program and they're behaving as such, at least those who are making the decisions. You will note that all the Generals making comments about nuking the US are nothing more than glorified school principals. They're not field officers, let alone staff officers.

zraver

That might be the public face they are putting on, but to even keep the current balance of power they have to keep matching the US and Asian increases. China has a big economy but not that big. So every time they try to keep the gap from widening the other states are pressured to react and actually increase the gap.