Border face-off: China and India each deploy 3,000 troops

[Officer of Engineers]

You have got to be kidding me. They supposedly have the world's largest navy but not enough ships to blockade Taiwan ?

Look at actual wars for the numbers needed. China ain't got any numbers close to the IJN nor the Kreigsmarine and both of them did shit all in stopping the Americans and the Brits. Hell, the IJN couldn't stop the Americans from hitting Taiwan and the USN had to travelled a hell of alot further than the Taiwan Straits.

[Officer of Engineers]

PLA tactics changed with Deng. The human wave tactics went away after Mao. Human wave is how poor armies operate.

Misconception about Mao's army. They were not a human wave army. They were an artillery army. The battles between the KMT and the CCP rested on who got the better artillery. Even during the Korean War, the initial Chinese success were due to 4 artillery divisions inside Korea. When the USARMY retreated faster than those guns could keep up, the Chinese had to abandon those guns in the north in order to keep pace with the Americans. As a result, the Chinese got weaker as they got closer to the 38th Parallel while the Americans were getting stronger as they got closer to American firepower.

You've misunderstood what the 2nd Wave is. It's the 2nd invasion attempt and then the 3rd and then the 4th. China can rebuild her invasion forces. Taiwan can't afford to rebuild Taiwan. It would be new ships. New youngsters. New Generals. New admirals. Each and everytime.

[Double Edge]

Couple of promising developments recently

Japan, U.S. draw up plan for any Taiwan emergency -Kyodo | Reuters | Dec 24 2021

Looks like Abe wasn't kidding about Taiwan's defense being Japan's defense

US Marines, under this draft plan, will set up a temporary attack base at the initial stage of a contingency on the Nansei Islands. These islands are a chain stretching southwest from the Japanese prefectures of Kagoshima and Okinawa toward Taiwan. Notably, Okinawa has the bulk of American military installations in Japan.

Japan's Self Defence Forces will support the US military by sending troops to the island nation if a Taiwan contingency appears imminent, the report said citing sources.

The forces of both countries have listed around 40 candidate sites along the Nansei chain. This consist of nearly 200 islands including uninhabited ones.

Japan-Australia pact shows others can move on without India in Quad | The Print | Jan 10 2022

The newly signed Japan-Australia defence agreement should be welcome to New Delhi, but there also ought to be some concerns.

On the one hand, it signals the growing coalescence of a regional counter-hegemonic balancing effort in the Indo-Pacific. This benefits India too because China’s power is as much a problem for India and any effort to counterbalance it should be welcome.

On the other hand, there could also be a warning for New Delhi in these efforts, that others are stitching up formal, institutionalised security cooperation that leave India out.

With two new security treaties now in the region in the space of just a few months—AUKUS being the other—and more potentially on their way,

New Delhi needs to consider seriously whether its continuing scepticism of closer security cooperation with others best serves India’s interest.

Win together or lose together.

Though India and Japan have signed an agreement on ‘reciprocal provision of supplies and services’ between their military forces, it is far more limited when compared to the Japan-Australia agreement. The India-Japan agreement is primarily meant to facilitate military exercises rather than routinise deep military cooperation. The change in Japanese attitude mirrors the change in Australia, which once saw China as an economic and trade partner but now sees it as a clear security threat, forcing Canberra to look for new security arrangements with both regional and external powers.

Though India has signed logistics agreements with the US, Japan & Australia i did not realise the one with Japan was just to facilitate exercises (!)

As satisfactory as it might be to see others balancing against China more vigorously, New Delhi should be careful not to give in to the temptation to free-ride on these efforts and assume that it can relax its own efforts to create a regional balance. While New Delhi is confronting Beijing in the Himalayas, that by itself is not sufficient to create the balance that India needs. Most importantly, while India may be able to hold its own along the LAC today, its situation is likely to worsen as time passes. Even today, it is quite possible that Pakistan may take advantage of any clash across the LAC to make India face a serious two-front problem. Even a joint Chinese-Pakistani venture cannot be ruled out by pragmatic security managers in New Delhi.

There are no free lunches.

i'm sceptical of Pak jumping in. What's in it for them. Nobody has ever come to their help in the past. If ever the Paks join it would be because China forced them.

But even if India can manage a two-front war, it might still end up facing a three-front problem in the next few years. China’s naval expansion is proceeding at a pace that will soon make it a force to reckon with in India’s neighbourhood. Unlike an on-ground confrontation, India simply cannot match China’s naval power, which is based on capital assets that India does not have the money to match. This is especially so when India needs to continue devoting the bulk of its military budget just to hold the line along the Himalayas. And of course, the less said about the continuing mess in India’s defence procurement process, the better.

Have to sign agreements with others to maintain maritime balance. Had a commodore say something similar couple of pages back.

[Double Edge]

And, what does Col. Newsham make of this 'Tainwan contingency' plan between the US & Japan.

The Japan-US Taiwan Contingency Plan: Less Than Meets the Eye | One Korea Network | Jan 04 2022

By Grant Newsham - January 4, 2022

The Kyodo News reported on Dec. 23 that the U.S. and Japanese militaries have written a draft plan for a “Taiwan contingency” and may soon draw up an “official” plan. The uninitiated might think the Americans and the Japanese are finally going to buckle down and develop a real joint operational plan to handle a Taiwan contingency.

<sigh>

However, after spending a few decades of observing the trajectory of Japan’s defensive capabilities, it’s easy to become a “glass half-empty” kind of guy. And a closer look at the plan—something that should have been in place years ago—doesn’t exactly inspire excitement.

The news account is admittedly fragmentary and confusing.

According to the report, the plan would be set in motion once the Japanese government declares the situation around Taiwan to be serious enough to “undermine the peace and security of Japan.”

Once that happens, U.S. Marines are allowed to set up an “attack base” somewhere along the Nansei Shoto—also known as the Ryukyu Islands chain, which includes the island of Okinawa—that stretches from Kyushu almost to Taiwan. This would be a first as the Marines are barely allowed to operate on Okinawa—even in peacetime.

What’s Japan’s role? According to the news story, the Japanese will provide logistical support, including ammunition and fuel. If so, Japan will need to start buying HIMARS missiles of the sort the Marines use. One suspects the Japan Self-Defense Forces (JSDF) hasn’t received that order yet.

MOST READ

So Tokyo permits the Marines to sally forth to do battle with the Chinese threatening Taiwan—when the Japanese decide it is time. And Japan apparently doesn’t have to join the fighting.

Such a deal.


Capabilities, Training, Goals, and Laws


Almost inadvertently, the Kyodo report raises fundamental questions about the impediments to what actually needs to be done for Japan and the United States to defend Taiwan, each other, and themselves.

For example, sending out a U.S. Marine missile battery or two isn’t a contingency plan for dealing with a Chinese move against Taiwan.

Rather, a proper operational plan requires melding the full resources and capabilities of U.S. forces and the JSDF—not just sending out the Marines. And even a detailed plan is still just a plan. If forces don’t train and exercise for the plan, then they might as well not bother.

The U.S. side is well aware of this. Whether the Japanese side is, is another question.

Additionally, one imagines that if and when serious planning takes place, the U.S. and the Japanese militaries may come at the problem from two completely different directions.

Whereas the Americans are interested in stopping the Chinese invasion of Taiwan—and that means killing Chinese troops—the Japanese may be more concerned with defending the Nansei Shoto and Japanese territory, and avoiding as much harm to anyone as possible.

And other reasons not to hold one’s breath about the “plan” having real world effects anytime soon is the Japanese still need to “study” revising laws to permit the Marines to deploy. And then they will have to actually pass the laws.

And Tokyo also needs to study and pass laws and/or regulations that lay out when an event involving Taiwan threatens Japan’s peace and security enough to let the aforementioned laws kick in.

And don’t forget the debating that will take place over all this—slowed by lobbies of all sorts.

To read more, please click here.

Grant Newsham is a retired U.S. Marine officer and a former U.S. diplomat and business executive who lived and worked for many years in the Asia/Pacific region. He served as a reserve head of intelligence for Marine Forces Pacific, and was the U.S. Marine attaché, U.S. Embassy Tokyo on two occasions. He is a senior fellow with the Center for Security Policy.

[Firestorm]

New Delhi needs to consider seriously whether its continuing scepticism of closer security cooperation with others best serves India’s interest.

What skepticism? What is it that India can conceivably do in this scenario? This is why I have always considered the QUAD having any real military implications a fantasy. There is zero chance of India jumping into the conflict if the Chinese invade Taiwan and the US and Japan join in. I'm pretty sure the Aussies would stay away as well. And conversely there is zero chance of any of the other three countries in the QUAD lifting a finger if the Chinese invade Ladakh or Arunachal Pradesh. Maybe the US might help out with Sat imagery. Maybe. That's about it.

[Double Edge]

What is it that India can conceivably do in this scenario? This is why I have always considered the QUAD having any real military implications a fantasy.

I put this down to perception issues on our side. However the Chinese have no illusions.

They see like minded, powerful countries in the region upping defense budgets and then exercising together.

There is a common motive.

There is zero chance of India jumping into the conflict if the Chinese invade Taiwan and the US and Japan join in.

You might want to reconsider.

Who do you think China will come for after ??? Does it make sense then for India to sit and watch from the sidelines.

This is similar to US deciding to join the war in Europe in WW2. Not their war but in they went and so will we should such a contingency arise.


I've been looking for a counter from a credible Indian commentator on that bolded bit and found it couple months back from General Dhruv Katoch.

So here it is in a discussion from Nov.

Q. When it comes to capacity what are the conversations that we should be having in terms of our own calculations of what is a minimum credible deterrence ?

General Dhruv Katoch: If there is a conflict which takes place in the Himalayas, India will have to go it alone.

And if Chinese use the nuclear threat, we now have the Agni 5 to counter. It can reach any point in china so i think that nuclear threat has been deterred, both through our submarine capabilities and through land capability.

As far as the Indo-pacific is concerned, No i think that if a major battle takes place there India will have to join in.

The Americans won't join in the high Himalayas but for India to stay out of an Indo-pacific war will be absolute suicide

We will have to join forces and see the Chinese don't get in

How many PLA divisions can we tie down at the Indo-Tibet border and what can we do in the maritime space

We might not stick to the border but go into Tibet proper. From another discussion in October, General Dhruv Katoch again

Q. China seems to be trying to tell us that enough conversation, it's time for something that we have been preparing for and that is some sort of a posturing, some sort of an optical battle and that is exactly what is ensuing across the border ?

General Dhruv Katoch : I've been following this development in eastern Ladakh very closely and to my mind it looks as if China has once again tried to apply psychological pressure on India.

Now their aim is, if Indians withdraw or they accept Chinese terms then it is a win-win situation for China and of course it will be lose lose for India.

Now I don't think the Indian military or the Indian political leadership is going to go for that. The army chief has made it very clear that we are prepared to spend the winter there and if it comes to a LOC type of full-time deployment over the years then we are prepared for that too.

What has to be seen is whether China is prepared for a full-time deployment ?
Are their troops capable of it and do they wish to go through that or do they wish to go in for a minor conflict ?

Now as to this conflict business I just have one statement to make which i have been making repeatedly.

It is my belief that this conflict will not be confined to land warfare.

If it takes place, the Indian air force will come into play and if the Indian air force comes into play the tank posturing which they are doing really won't make much of a difference because the battle is not going to be fought over the high Himalayas.

The battle will have to be fought over the Tibetan plateau and that is where the key results will lie so China should be prepared for that.

They have moved s400 regiments there to boost their air defense cover but we will see as to how we can negotiate that because ultimately the battle will have to be won and lost over the skies over Tibet.

And if China is ready to go that route, if China is ready to take that risk well she will find that India is ready and more likely than not China will lose this round.

He then goes on to describe what a fight would look like.

It has always been my belief that as far as China is concerned it will only enter into a war with India if it is absolutely certain it will win.

And as of now there is no certainty in the mind of the Chinese leaders that victory is assured. In fact most likely if China were to get into a conflict. China is most likely to lose it as of now.

Many people make the mistake of looking at the total forces which the Chinese have visibly and the total forces which India has but it doesn't work that way.

You've got to see what can be employed by the Chinese over Tibet, in either eastern Ladakh or Arunachal or both of them together.

Ultimately the battle is not going to be fought really by the ground forces, the ground forces are going to come into play at a very late stage.

The initial battle will be psychological which is being played out now, then it will get on to the cyber and space domain.

Then it will come down to where we are looking at missiles and air warfare, then artillery, movement of tanks etc and finally infantry assaults where they will actually try to capture objectives.

I don't think it is going to reach that stage because getting control over the Tibetan airspace is going to be a huge problem for the Chinese.

As of now i don't see them getting it and without getting total control over the airspace they cannot win a land conflict. Period.

They're not going to get into a war and it is important to understand that so long as India is prepared there will be no war.

If you lower your guard, if you lose out psychologically well China's won that game but it's not going to happen now.

That is why the air force continues to remain deployed, the army continues to remain deployed and the political will is not shaken.

I'm pretty sure the Aussies would stay away as well.

I think everyone will be looking at what the US does here. The strategic ambiguity thing has every one guessing, Chinese have their own ambiguity and this has subsequently led to similar ambiguity from America's partners.

(Ambiguity) ³

A lot depends on how long the Taiwanese can hold out.

And conversely there is zero chance of any of the other three countries in the QUAD lifting a finger if the Chinese invade Ladakh or Arunachal Pradesh. Maybe the US might help out with Sat imagery. Maybe. That's about it.

Summer 2020 US had two CBG's in the area. That is the beginnings of a strategy.

[Double Edge]

Want to recognise yet another video by Shiv Shastry. Builds on an earlier video he made to counter opposition claims.

Where is the Arunachal border ? pertinent question when you have opposition commentators saying China is building villages 'inside' Indian territory.

[Officer of Engineers]

You might want to reconsider.

Who do you think China will come for after ??? Does it make sense then for India to sit and watch from the sidelines.

You can't be serious. Taiwan will wreck the Chinese economy for decades to come. Win or lose. They won't be coming after anyone else until they rebuild their war chest. You know, something like replacing all their spent munitions which undoubtly would include all their conventional SSMs, some 2000+ the last time I checked.

This is similar to US deciding to join the war in Europe in WW2. Not their war but in they went and so will we should such a contingency arise.

WWII Europe was very much an American War. No matter how you view the Axis, the simple fact was the Americans could not strategically tolerate anti-American Europe and it would be anti-American simply because of Canada. Canada and the US were each other's largest trading partners and Canada was making American wartime industries rich by supplying Britain. That alone made Hitler anti-American.

Would a Taiwan that is anti-India mean anything to Dehli?

How many PLA divisions can we tie down at the Indo-Tibet border

Not enough. In 1979, China committed 200,000 men to the invasion of Vietnam while keeping a million men to watch the Soviets. The best the Chinese can do is 30,000 men against Taiwan and India ain't the USSR.

and what can we do in the maritime space

Unless you're sending the InN into the Taiwan Straits, didly squat. The USN guarrantees the trade routes, not the China Navy. China can afford not to go into the Indian Ocean and the USN ain't about to allow India to stop all trade going into the Pacific Ocean.

[Officer of Engineers]

I'm pretty sure the Aussies would stay away as well.

Worst case scenario is that Australia would backfill USN patrols to free up American warships for the conflict. Same thing with the NATO countries. Most likely scenario is an Allied task force sitting in between Taiwan and an American carrier group. Any hostile action against the American carrier group would be considered a hostile act against the Allied task force who will then act in self defence. That's how a Canadian Naval Task Group protected American carriers during the Iraq War.

[Albany Rifles]

WWII Europe was very much an American War. No matter how you view the Axis, the simple fact was the Americans could not strategically tolerate anti-American Europe and it would be anti-American simply because of Canada. Canada and the US were each other's largest trading partners and Canada was making American wartime industries rich by supplying Britain. That alone made Hitler anti-American.

Sir, you nailed it. I have said repeatedly that when France fell in 1940 the US was going to be in that war. Congress passed a defense supplemental appropriations bill in late July that year giving the Army more money in one shot than it had received in every budget from 1920 to 1940 combined. US industry, which had been mostly dormant because of the Depression, started to roar to life producing wargoods for the Allies and itself. The US produced over 6,000 military aircraft in 1940...and 28,000 in 1941. Peacetime subscription occurred. The National Guard and all reserves were mobilized. The Navy was sharing escort duties with the RN & RCN in 1941.

The first shots of the war by the US at Pearl Harbor were fired by the USS Ward when it sank a midget Japanese sub off the entrance of Pearl Harbor. The entire crew was made up of Naval Reservists.

If you want to see more about the subject I'd suggest checking out this thread.

https://www.worldaffairsboard.com/fo...es#post1579774

[Double Edge]

You can't be serious.

Very serious. I'm surprised how few Indian commentators even ask that question. Most i've come across say India won't do anything. So it was interesting to hear Gen. Katoch's reply in this regard.

The US - India relationship is asymmetrical in the sense they don't have to help us fight in the mountains but we can't sit out a fight with Taiwan.

The US does not need an alliance with India because India's participation is such a conflict is a given. At least that's how it appears to me.

Good luck getting anything official on this point though. We only get to find out when the balloon goes up.

Taiwan will wreck the Chinese economy for decades to come. Win or lose. They won't be coming after anyone else until they rebuild their war chest. You know, something like replacing all their spent munitions which undoubtly would include all their conventional SSMs, some 2000+ the last time I checked.

This kind of scenario could happen today or a decade ago. It has not because it's not the way China wants to do it.

China isn't looking for a long drawn out fight. They want a soon-ish capitulation by Taiwan.

Now Chinese economy isn't setback decades is it. They can recoup and set their sights further afield and that means an India that is China neutral.

An India that does not have a say or a veto in the affairs of the region.

WWII Europe was very much an American War. No matter how you view the Axis, the simple fact was the Americans could not strategically tolerate anti-American Europe and it would be anti-American simply because of Canada. Canada and the US were each other's largest trading partners and Canada was making American wartime industries rich by supplying Britain. That alone made Hitler anti-American.

Your answer does not make complete sense. If Hitler was making America rich via Canada why does the US have to enter the war in Europe ? they don't.

Strategically not tolerating an anti-American Europe is what i was going for. Like it or not the Americans had to go in.

Just as India isn't going to like an anti-Indian Asia.

Would a Taiwan that is anti-India mean anything to Dehli?

You asked some months back which was worse ? Loss of Taiwan or India. They're both bad.

The way Napapat put it is,

If (Taiwan) falls the entire security architecture of the United States (in Asia) falls to the ground and i can tell you if India is negatively affected in any future conflict as unfortunately happened in 62 but fortunately not in 2020 well then that is the end of a so-called free and open Indo-Pacific.

The Indo-Pacific becomes a Chinese sea and the Eurasian continent becomes a Sino-Russian land mass.

What does the US not want ? dominant powers on either end of the Eurasian land mass.

What does India not want ? dominant power in Asia.

Not enough. In 1979, China committed 200,000 men to the invasion of Vietnam while keeping a million men to watch the Soviets. The best the Chinese can do is 30,000 men against Taiwan and India ain't the USSR.

We can tie up 10-20 of their divisions at the border. There's all sorts of things we can threaten to do there.

Unless you're sending the InN into the Taiwan Straits, didly squat. The USN guarrantees the trade routes, not the China Navy. China can afford not to go into the Indian Ocean and the USN ain't about to allow India to stop all trade going into the Pacific Ocean.

All changes in an Indo-Pacific conflict.

We can interdict their supplies through the Indian Ocean in such an eventuality. Blockades are a slow process.

Whatever is required.

[Officer of Engineers]

Very serious. I'm surprised how few Indian commentators even ask that question. Most i've come across say India won't do anything. So it was interesting to hear Gen. Katoch's reply in this regard.

The US - India relationship is asymmetrical in the sense they don't have to help us fight in the mountains but we can't sit out a fight with Taiwan.

The US does not need an alliance with India because India's participation is such a conflict is a given. At least that's how it appears to me.

Good luck getting anything official on this point though. We only get to find out when the balloon goes up.

You sat out of Afghanistan - TWICE! When your superpower "friend" needed you - TWICE in a country that you have a lot more interest and more effect on you than Taiwan. History tells me Dehli ain't going to do squat.

This kind of scenario could happen today or a decade ago. It has not because it's not the way China wants to do it.

China isn't looking for a long drawn out fight. They want a soon-ish capitulation by Taiwan.

Now Chinese economy isn't setback decades is it. They can recoup and set their sights further afield and that means an India that is China neutral.

An India that does not have a say or a veto in the affairs of the region.

You can't replace 30,000 men, an entire fleet, an airforce, 2000 SSMs that took 20 years to build within months. Never mind the social implications that parents would demand of the CCP why their sons are dead or captured. China would be wrecked just as they were right after Tianamen.

Your answer does not make complete sense. If Hitler was making America rich via Canada why does the US have to enter the war in Europe ? they don't.

It made perfect sense once you understand that the US was anti-Hitler from the start. They were supplying the Brits were war supplies and nevert imagined Hitler winning the way he did. As AR said, once France fell, US entry was bound to happen.

Strategically not tolerating an anti-American Europe is what i was going for. Like it or not the Americans had to go in.

You're contradicting yourself. You first said it wasn't their war. It was from the beginning and I explained how it got there.

Just as India isn't going to like an anti-Indian Asia.

China has a say in that and like it or not, we also cannot allow China to fail. Too much money is tied up in their economic impact across the globe.

You asked some months back which was worse ? Loss of Taiwan or India. They're both bad.

The way Napapat put it is,

What does the US not want ? dominant powers on either end of the Eurasian land mass.

What does India not want ? dominant power in Asia.

You're acting that China is the new USSR. It's not and nowhere close. Taiwan is NOT under threat of an invasion. The ML CANNOT WIN ONE! 38th Group Army ain't going to march down the streets of Taipei NOR Dehli.

We can tie up 10-20 of their divisions at the border. There's all sorts of things we can threaten to do there.

Oh come on! Do the freaking math. You need 3 to 1 attacker to defender ratio, at the very least local superiority. So you want to tie up 10-20 of their divisions. That means at least 20-60 Indian divisions staring at the Tibetan Plateau. Where are the men, machine, and money coming from? And that is assuming the Chinese don't call your bluff and not increase their readiness outside of their local forces.

All changes in an Indo-Pacific conflict.

We can interdict their supplies through the Indian Ocean in such an eventuality. Blockades are a slow process.

Whatever is required.

No, you can't. The US ain't going to allow you. Ships doing trade with China aren't Chinese flagged. You will not be allowed to stop IPhone shipments to Europe or North America and you will not be allowed to stop wheat shipments to China that China paid Western countries for.

[Double Edge]

You sat out of Afghanistan - TWICE! When your superpower "friend" needed you - TWICE in a country that you have a lot more interest and more effect on you than Taiwan. History tells me Dehli ain't going to do squat.

Had you decided to go affter the source of the terror you would not have needed to ask. But that was not and never was the plan.

Man, we broke them in two against Chinese & US pressure inside of two weeks. That was fifty years ago and the Banglas recently celebrated their golden jubliee of that liberation.

No one to date has been able to explain how the US was not able to bend Pakistan to their will.

You can't replace 30,000 men, an entire fleet, an airforce, 2000 SSMs that took 20 years to build within months. Never mind the social implications that parents would demand of the CCP why their sons are dead or captured. China would be wrecked just as they were right after Tianamen.

Tianamen ? what was the fallout from that.

No western arms deals with China. They recovered.

Tianamen is an interesting example. Hong Kong another. Taking Taiwan i would imagine would be in the same vein.

It made perfect sense once you understand that the US was anti-Hitler from the start. They were supplying the Brits were war supplies and nevert imagined Hitler winning the way he did. As AR said, once France fell, US entry was bound to happen.

Because anti-american europe

You're contradicting yourself. You first said it wasn't their war. It was from the beginning and I explained how it got there.

ok but we agree on the main motivation.

When i say not their war, well its hard to ignore when Hitler declares war on the US. That was one of his blunders.

As an aside i got to watch this movie recently. It's rare you get the German side being told by the British. But the pilot escapes from POW camp in the UK, gets shipped to Canada, breaks free again and the rest of the movie is his escape to a neutral US.

China has a say in that and like it or not, we also cannot allow China to fail. Too much money is tied up in their economic impact across the globe.

And ? how does that relate to a Taiwan contingency.

Does the west throw up their hands and say this is China's internal affair. If ever that notion catches on in Beijing then they will get cracking.

You're acting that China is the new USSR. It's not and nowhere close. Taiwan is NOT under threat of an invasion. The ML CANNOT WIN ONE! 38th Group Army ain't going to march down the streets of Taipei NOR Dehli.

Take the long term view. The rhetoric is if China does nothing by 2030 then Taiwan is good ? China has the rest of this century to try and take Taiwan.

They've stated that numerous times already.

China does not need to march to Delhi. They just need an India that is China neutral.

I don't know how they do that. What i can say is the task gets easier after Taiwan.

This is assuming they don't come for India first. Because there are some commentators who make that argument as well.

We're preparing for that eventuality.

Oh come on! Do the freaking math. You need 3 to 1 attacker to defender ratio, at the very least local superiority. So you want to tie up 10-20 of their divisions. That means at least 20-60 Indian divisions staring at the Tibetan Plateau. Where are the men, machine, and money coming from? And that is assuming the Chinese don't call your bluff and not increase their readiness outside of their local forces.

I said threaten. They will call the bluff so it better be a good one.

No, you can't. The US ain't going to allow you. Ships doing trade with China aren't Chinese flagged. You will not be allowed to stop IPhone shipments to Europe or North America and you will not be allowed to stop wheat shipments to China that China paid Western countries for.

You are saying in the event of a Taiwan contingency that China's shipping continues as is ? Interesting

Way i look at it is how eager are the Taiwanese to stay independent. After that and however long China takes will determine what other countries do.

What call the US takes.

I'm putting a contrarian view out there because the mainstream Indian view is what you've said. Let this idea get an airing with more people and we will see how they calculate India's stakes after Taiwan joins China.

[Officer of Engineers]

Had you decided to go affter the source of the terror you would not have needed to ask.

So that was why you've said no to the Soviets? We didn't asked you the first time for help in Afghanistan. Moscow did.

And the source of our terror was an Al Qaeda HQ. Going after Pakistan would leave that HQ free to do another 11 Sept, on what planet does that make strategic sense?

Man, we broke them in two against Chinese &amp;amp;amp; US pressure inside of two weeks. That was fifty years ago and the Banglas recently celebrated their golden jubliee of that liberation.

And you're blaming us for not finishing the job that you started.

No one to date has been able to explain how the US was not able to bend Pakistan to their will.

Damned easy to explain. We had no idea what we wanted. If we don't know what we want, we most certainly get what we don't want. We most certainly are not going abandon Pakistan just to pursue a better relationship with India. That leaves a hell of a lot leadway for them to play. 19thC Afghanistan played Britain against Russia.

Tianamen ? what was the fallout from that.

Collapse of the Chinese economy.

No western arms deals with China.

Western investments disappeared overnight and contracts cancelled.

They recovered.

Bargin basement prices with slave level wages and unsafe working conditions with devastatng environmental impact.

Taking Taiwan i would imagine would be in the same vein.

The thing with your conclusions is that these events were cases when the CCP won. How about choosing a case when the CCP lost. I point to you the 1979 Sino-VN War. 30,000 casualties. Parents of dead soldiers demanding explainations why their sons were dead or capture. Those local CCP cadre who boasted about the rightousness of the war couldn't leave town fast enough. Entire HQs were purge with Generals having to immigrate to work as dishwashers in the West because they lost their pensions. An entire generation of CCP leaders were sent packing leaving DXP well in command. Military budgets were cut (and hence pensions) forcing the PLA to come up with ideas do more with less, hence the start of PLA modernization

ok but we agree on the main motivation.

When i say not their war, well its hard to ignore when Hitler declares war on the US. That was one of his blunders.

As an aside i got to watch this movie recently. It's rare you get the German side being told by the British. But the pilot escapes from POW camp in the UK, gets shipped to Canada, breaks free again and the rest of the movie is his escape to a neutral US.

No. The US getting ready for war against Hitler with or without Hitler declaring war. Shooting between the Kreigsmarine and the USN were already taking place before Pearl Harbour. AR provided the link above. By April at the latest, the US would be full on shooting at Hitler even if he didn't declare war. Ever noticed how the US was full on ready to take on Hitler?

And ? how does that relate to a Taiwan contingency.

This would be a traditional territorial war of old where provinces trade hands between empires. This means we have no intentions of marching to Beijing on India's behalf.

Does the west throw up their hands and say this is China's internal affair. If ever that notion catches on in Beijing then they will get cracking.

No, we'll just make sure any force attacking Taiwan dies. And let Xi explain to dead soldiers' parents why he threw 30,000 men away and cause the economy to go bust.

Take the long term view. The rhetoric is if China does nothing by 2030 then Taiwan is good ? China has the rest of this century to try and take Taiwan.

Sure and can you give me next week's lotto numbers while you're at it? China, India, Arabia, Persia, all the ancient almighty billion moons old civilization are no better at doing the 100 year management than the 200 year old civilizations. Tell me, why isn't the Han Dynasty still in charge? Chinese history proves the 100 year long view is a very much a lie.

They've stated that numerous times already.

China does not need to march to Delhi. They just need an India that is China neutral.

I don't know how they do that. What i can say is the task gets easier after Taiwan.

Yeah sure and Dehli and the Indian Army would be just too scared to stand up to the China Army by reputation alone. The recent kung fu brawls says you have nothing to worry about the InA not having balls.

This is assuming they don't come for India first. Because there are some commentators who make that argument as well.

We're preparing for that eventuality.

What's in it for the Chinese? What possible advantage would they gain over a few rocks?

I said threaten. They will call the bluff so it better be a good one.

So tell me what do you need to bluff 10-20 Chinese divisions.

You are saying in the event of a Taiwan contingency that China's shipping continues as is ? Interesting

What I am saying is that India WILL NOT BE ALLOWED to interfere WITH OUR TRADE. If we want to stop Chinese trade, blockading their ports is a lot easier, requires fewer ships, and DOES NOT interfere with the Freedom of the Seas. Indian Naval actions in the Indian Ocean does squat all in confronting the Chinese and India will NOT be allowed to search and every ship just to determine if they have Chinese cargo. You are reaching big time to justify the QUAD.

Way i look at it is how eager are the Taiwanese to stay independent. After that and however long China takes will determine what other countries do.

What call the US takes.

I'm putting a contrarian view out there because the mainstream Indian view is what you've said. Let this idea get an airing with more people and we will see how they calculate India's stakes after Taiwan joins China.

Until India cares to sail an Indian naval task force into the Taiwan Straits or march an Indian Army north if a Chinese fleets sails east, no one cares what India thinks or does. Not the Chinese. Not the Taiwanese. Not the Americans. Not the Japanese. Not any single one of the American allies. You're reaching to be of participation significance when no one wants Indfia to be, not even Dehli.

Those ARE THE ONLY TWO OPTIONS available to India to be of significance to Taiwan. Sail into the Taiwan Straits or march north. Anything else is just hot air ... AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT.

[Firestorm]

I put this down to perception issues on our side. However the Chinese have no illusions.

They see like minded, powerful countries in the region upping defense budgets and then exercising together.

There is a common motive.

The Chinese aren't stupid enough to equate exercising together with joining up in defense of Taiwan. Even the US hasn't spelled out its position on Taiwan unambiguously, and you expect the QUAD to be a part of it?

You might want to reconsider.

Who do you think China will come for after ??? Does it make sense then for India to sit and watch from the sidelines.

Let me put it this way, if the Chinese go toe-to-toe with the US in an attempt to take Taiwan, I don't think India will have to worry about China militarily for many years in the aftermath of that. If on the other hand the US does not intervene and/or the Chinese can force Taiwan to capitulate before it can, then Taiwan is lost and there is nothing that India can do to prevent it. In either case, India's involvement makes little difference.

I've been looking for a counter from a credible Indian commentator on that bolded bit and found it couple months back from General Dhruv Katoch.

So here it is in a discussion from Nov.



How many PLA divisions can we tie down at the Indo-Tibet border and what can we do in the maritime space

We might not stick to the border but go into Tibet proper. From another discussion in October, General Dhruv Katoch again

He then goes on to describe what a fight would look like.

Like the Colonel mentioned, the total manpower requirement for a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be around 30000 men. Even accounting for reserves that hardly looks like a number which would prompt them to denude Tibet of manpower. They're not going to move their AD assets either since they do not face an aerial threat to the mainland from Taiwan. As for "tying down" their divisions we are already doing that as much as possible. Since 2020 the PLA has heavily deployed to forward areas near the LAC, something they never did previously. Short of going to war there is little we can do to force them to deploy more troops. Bear in mind that this round the year deployment costs the IA a lot of money and eats into our operational budget.