What's new

China And The Indian Ocean Carrier Fleet

Mate India has a free foreign policy and have good relations with the countries you mentioned..and also we are not only using russian weapons we are choosing the best in the world ..

And also I dont think Yanks will interfere in a war with India and China directly..In the event of war we will be our own and we are preparing ourselves for that :)

I thought Australia was pretty racists against the Brahmins? :woot:
 
.
Can we have a Link regarding this sentence, Please!!!!!

And as a faithful person as you are. You can do this for me because It will make my disagreement go away. Thanks!!!!

Sometimes, when things are done covertly, there are no articles.
 
. .
Refuelling is different from carriers in IOR .For carriers in IOR you need a naval base .If Sri Lanka gives a base it means you are asking for LTTE v2.0 with India's assistance to it

You've said it :tup: hails for the terrorist country :yahoo:
 
.
if indian block the sea line in indian ocean and the Straight, IN have to face not only powerful nations in the east including Japan and China but also furious countries the west such as Saudi, UAE and Iran, which means India may have to handle an oil boycott while fighting a war in the east even if it successfully cuts China off from the mid-east oil .

don't worry Gawadar-China road link is under construction- which will effectively insulate China from any threat posed by Indian Navy in Indian Ocean. But China, by establishing a naval base, will effectively be in a position to block Indian Supplies.....
China has acknowledged that Gwadar’s strategic value is no less than that of the Karakoram Highway, which helped cement the China-Pakistan nexus. In addition to Gwadar serving as a potential Chinese naval anchor, Beijing is also interested in turning it into an energy-transport hub by building an oil pipeline from Gwadar into Chinese-ruled Xinjiang. The planned pipeline will carry crude oil sourced from Arab and African states. Such transport by pipeline will cut freight costs and also help insulate the Chinese imports from interdiction by hostile naval forces in case of any major war.
here is the snap
http://www.chinapage.com/transportation/port/gwadar/gwadar-pipeline.jpg
 
.
I thought Australia was pretty racists against the Brahmins? :woot:

Oh.....another India lover.....:smitten:

@topic:
There are two approach as mentioned in the first post. It is yet to be seen which way China heads.
Meanwhile India is also upgrading its navy. All this exercise seems to be raleted to energy/trade routes security. So all the intelligent members who still dream that India will ve conquered, need to wake up. :cheesy:
BTW, Indo-China relation is also getting improved day by day. So chances of any confrontation in future is very less. No matter how much few people cry China and India both will be rising. :yahoo:
 
.
GWADAR: CHINA'S NAVAL OUTPOST ON THE INDIAN OCEAN
Publication: China Brief Volume: 5 Issue: 4
December 31, 1969 05:00 PM Age: 40 yrs
Category: China Brief
By: Tarique Niazi

Four months after the U.S. ordered its troops into Afghanistan to remove the Taliban regime, China and Pakistan joined hands to break ground in building a Deep Sea Port on the Arabian Sea. The project was sited in an obscure fishing village of Gwadar in Pakistan's western province of Baluchistan, bordering Afghanistan to the northwest and Iran to the southwest. Gwadar is nautically bounded by the Persian Gulf in the west and the Gulf of Oman in the southwest.



Although the Gwadar Port project has been under study since May 2001, the U.S. entrée into Kabul provided an added impetus for its speedy execution. Having set up its bases in Central, South, and West Asian countries, the U.S. virtually brought its military forces at the doorstep of China. Beijing was already wary of the strong U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf, which supplies 60% of its energy needs. It was now alarmed to see the U.S. extend its reach into Asian nations that ring western China. Having no blue water navy to speak of, China feels defenseless in the Persian Gulf against any hostile action to choke off its energy supplies. This vulnerability set Beijing scrambling for alternative safe supply routes for its energy shipments. The planned Gwadar Deep Sea Port was one such alternative for which China had flown its Vice Premier, Wu Bangguo, to Gwadar to lay its foundation on March 22, 2002.



Pakistan was interested in the project to seek strategic depth further to the southwest from its major naval base in Karachi that has long been vulnerable to the dominant Indian Navy. In the past, it endured prolonged economic and naval blockades imposed by the Indian Navy. To diversify the site of its naval and commercial assets, Pakistan has already built a naval base at Ormara, the Jinnah Naval Base, which has been in operation since June 2000. It can berth about a dozen ships, submarines and similar harbor craft. The Gwadar port project, however, is billed to crown the Pakistan Navy into a force that can rival regional navies. The government of Pakistan has designated the port area as a "sensitive defense zone." Once completed, the Gwadar port will rank among the world's largest deep-sea ports.



The convergence of Sino-Pakistani strategic interests has put the port project onto a fast track to its early completion. In three years since its inauguration, the first phase of the project is already complete with three functioning berths. The Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao will be on hand to mark the completion of this phase in March this year. Although the total cost of the project is estimated at $1.16 billion USD, China pitched in $198 million and Pakistan $50 million to finance the first phase. China also has invested another $200 million into building a coastal highway that will connect the Gwadar port with Karachi. The second phase, which will cost $526 million, will feature the construction of 9 more berths and terminals and will also be financed by China. To connect western China with Central Asia by land routes, Pakistan is working on building road links to Afghanistan from its border town of Chaman in Baluchistan to Qandahar in Afghanistan. In the northwest, it is building similar road links between Torkham in Pakhtunkhaw (officially known as the Northwest Frontier Province) and Jalalabad in Afghanistan. Eventually, the Gwadar port will be accessible for Chinese imports and exports through overland links that will stretch to and from Karakoram Highway in Pakistan's Northern Areas that border China's Muslim-majority Autonomous Region of Xinjiang. In addition, the port will be complemented with a modern air defense unit, a garrison, and a first-rate international airport capable of handling airbus service.



Pakistan already gives China most favored nation (MFN) status and is now establishing a bilateral Free Trade Area (FTA), which will bring tariffs between the two countries to zero. Over the past two years, the trade volume between the two countries has jumped to $2.5 billion a year, accounting for 20% of China's total trade with South Asia. Informal trade, a euphemism for smuggling, however, is several times the formal trade. The proposed FTA is an implicit acceptance of the unstoppable "informal" trade as a "formal" one. More importantly, Chinese investment in Pakistan has increased to $4 billion, registering a 30% increase just over the past two years since 2003. Chinese companies make up 12% (60) of the foreign firms (500) operating in Pakistan, which employ over 3,000 Chinese nationals.



The growing economic cooperation between Beijing and Islamabad is also solidifying their strategic partnership. Before leaving for his visit to Beijing this past December, Pakistani Prime Minister Aziz told reporters in Islamabad: "Pakistan and China are strategic partners and our relations span many areas." The rhetoric of strategic alignment is duly matched by reality. Last year, China and Pakistan conducted their first-ever joint naval exercises near the Shanghai coast. These exercises, among others, included simulation of an emergency rescue operation. Last December, Pakistan opened a consulate in Shanghai. The Gwadar Port project is the summit of such partnership that will bring the two countries closer in maritime defense as well.



Initially, China was reluctant to finance the Gwadar port project because Pakistan offered the U.S. exclusive access to two of its critical airbases in Jacobabad (Sind) and Pasni (Baluchisntan) during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. According to a Times of India report on February 19, 2002, Gen. Musharraf had to do a lot of explaining for leasing these bases to America. China, the Times of India reported, was also upset with Pakistan for allowing the U.S. to establish listening posts in Pakistan's Northern Areas, which border Xinjiang and Tibet. When China finally agreed to offer financial and technical assistance for the project, it asked for "sovereign guarantees" to use the Port facilities to which Pakistan agreed, despite U.S. unease over it.



In particular, the port project set off alarm bells in India which already feels encircled by China from three sides: Myanmar, Tibet, and Pakistan. To counter Sino-Pak collaboration, India has brought Afghanistan and Iran into an economic and strategic alliance. Iranians are already working on Chabahar port in Sistan-Baluchistan, which will be accessible for Indian imports and exports with road links to Afghanistan and Central Asia. India is helping build a 200-kilometer road that will connect Chabahar with Afghanistan. Once completed, Indians will use this access road to the port for their imports and exports to and from Central Asia. Presently, India is in urgent need of a shorter transit route to quickly get its trade goods to Afghanistan and Central Asia.



These external concerns are stoking internal challenges to the port project. Baluchistan, where the project is located, is once again up in arms against the federal government. The most important reason for armed resistance against the Gwadar port is that Baluch nationalists see it as an attempt to colonize them and their natural resources. Several insurgent groups have sprung up to nip the project in the bud. The three most popular are: the Baluchistan Liberation Army, Baluchistan Liberation Front, and People's Liberation Army. On May 3, 2004, the BLA killed three Chinese engineers working on the port project that employs close to 500 Chinese nationals. On October 9, 2004, two Chinese engineers were kidnapped in South Waziristan in the northwest of Pakistan, one of whom was killed later on October 14 in a botched rescue operation. Pakistan blamed India and Iran for fanning insurgency in Baluchistan.



Moreover, the Chinese in Pakistan are vulnerable because of their tense relationship with the Uighur Muslim majority of Xinjiang. Stretched over an area of 635,833 square miles, Xinjiang is more than twice the size of Pakistan, and one-sixth of China's landmass. However, it dwarfs in demographic size with a population of 19 million people. Beijing is investing 730 billion yuan (roughly $88 billion USD) in western China, including Xinjiang, which opens it up to the six Muslim countries of Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan. Despite this massive investment, displacement of Uighers from Urumqi, Xinjiang's capital, is drawing fire, where the population of mainland Chinese of Han descent has grown from 10% in 1949 to 41% in 2004. In direct proportion, the population of native Uighurs has declined from 90% in 1949 to 47% in 2004. Tens of thousands of displaced Uighurs have found refuge in Pakistan where the majority of them live in its two most populous cities: Lahore and Karachi.



The East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) is fighting against Chinese attempts at so-called "Hanification" of Xinjiang. Pakistan, which along with China and the U.S. lists the ETIM as a terrorist organization, killed the ETIM's head, Hasan Mahsum, in South Waziristan on October 2, 2004. Seven days after, two Chinese were kidnapped from the area, one of whom was killed in a rescue operation. The thousands of Chinese working in Pakistan make tempting targets for violent reprisals by the ETIM or Baluch nationalists.



The realization of economic and strategic objectives of the Gwadar port is largely dependent upon the reduction of separatist violence in Baluchistan and Xinjiang. Chinese response to secessionism is aggressive economic development, which is driving the Gwadar port project also. The port is intended to serve China's threefold economic objective:



First, to integrate Pakistan into the Chinese economy by outsourcing low-tech, labor-absorbing, resource-intensive industrial production to Islamabad, which will transform Pakistan into a giant factory floor for China; Second, to seek access to Central Asian markets for energy imports and Chinese exports by developing road networks and rail links through Afghanistan and Pakistan into Central Asia; Third, to appease restive parts of western China, especially the Muslim-majority autonomous region of Xinjiang, through a massive infusion of development funds and increased economic links with the Central Asian Islamic nations of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.



The port, by design or by default, also provides China a strategic foothold in the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean, although to the alarm of India and the unease of the U.S. sitting opposite the Strait of Hurmoz, through which 80% of the world's energy exports flow, the Gwadar port will enable China to monitor its energy shipments from the Persian Gulf, and offer it, in the case of any hostile interruption in such shipments, a safer alternative passage for its energy imports from Central Asia. Its presence on the Indian Ocean will further increase its strategic influence with major South Asian nations, particularly Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, which would prompt the Indians in turn to re-strengthen their Navy.



Tarique Niazi teaches Environmental Sociology at the University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire. He specializes in Resource-based Conflicts. He may be reached via email: niazit@uwec.edu
 
.
I thought Australia was pretty racists against the Brahmins? :woot:

You are fratting your ignorance all over here.. Not all in India are Brahmins :wave: and also government level relations with Australia is warm and yes we are concrened about the attacks against Indians there and we raised the issues when their PM visted India..
 
.
Can we have a Link regarding this sentence, Please!!!!!

And as a faithful person as you are. You can do this for me because It will make my disagreement go away. Thanks!!!!

Who are you asking?..he is just here to bash India and Indians ..his only intention is to hijack the threads.. dont listen to him..He thinks he knows India better than we do.. if i say there is road in front of my house ..he will argue that its back of my house.. :disagree: and I am boasting about the road :hitwall:
 
Last edited:
.
Who are you asking?..he is just here to bash India and Indians ..his only intention is to hijack the threads.. dont listen to him..He thinks he knows India better than we do.. if i say there is road in front of my house ..he will argue that its back of my house.. :disagree: and I am boasting about the road :hitwall:

I only point out the obvious facts. If you can't accept the facts, I can't help you.
 
.
I only point out the obvious facts. If you can't accept the facts, I can't help you.

No you are not pointing the obvioue facts you are misleading the facts to satisfy your anti Indian ego..already a lot of guys pointed out that the objective of the Indian army is to start massive trust inside the Indian border in 96 hours but you keep on saying that Indians keep on boasting about defeating Chinese in 96 hours and also you said India dont have a ABM counter measure and we tend to boast so much about with imaginary weapons.. members here busted you by giving you ample evidence about Indias ABM ..Then you come with weird logic that US helping India covertly in it..no evidence,no links none..Dont pretend you are not biased and dont try to educate us what we should do and what we dont..Our government knows whats his doing..The policy makers here are one of the best in the world.If you know the procedure of how we select dilplomats you will have the some idea..Not not long ago Indian airforce Sukhois with local and Israeli techs in it defeated US airforce..US considers SU-30 MKI as an worthy opponent against its F-22 along with Eurofighter..

You just came here to spread your lies and people busts you all the time .then you have an excuse that you are helping India.So keep your facts your yourself ..Unless you have credible evidence its just some some one :blah: :blah: who is on high dope
 
.
Didnt Burma recently say that they don't have a Chinese base on one of their islands? Even if China does have a base, it doesnt matter. Our Andaman naval base is more than adequate to handle any Chinese naval threat.

I only point out the obvious facts. If you can't accept the facts, I can't help you.

Your obvious facts are the invention of your imagination. Please provide reputable sources to prove the facts you have stated.
 
.
..Not not long ago Indian airforce Sukhois with local and Israeli techs in it defeated US airforce..US considers SU-30 MKI as an worthy opponent against its F-22 along with Eurofighter..
..Unless you have credible evidence its just some some one :blah: :blah: who is on high dope

Can you find me some credible evidence that US consider SU-30 MKI as an worthy opponent against F-22. From what I read, US pilots regard SU-30 MKI is way below that of F-22. If you find me a credible evidence that support your post, I'll find you one that support mine.

but get real, do you really believe that Su-30 MKI can take on F-22?
 
.
Didnt Burma recently say that they don't have a Chinese base on one of their islands? Even if China does have a base, it doesnt matter. Our Andaman naval base is more than adequate to handle any Chinese naval threat.



Your obvious facts are the invention of your imagination. Please provide reputable sources to prove the facts you have stated.

Sometimes, fact are so obvious that I do not need to provide posting. For instance, do I need to provide a post to state that Su 30-MKI can handle F-22? Only someone from India would require a post to be convince of that statement. Otherwise, I guess you believe that SU-30 MKI can take on a F-22. Talking about being on dope or full of imagination.

I am sorry that I have to dash your hope but even the PAK FA cannot take on F-22, at least the upgrades that F-22 will receive by the time PAK FA is ready to be inducted.

Another question, does any one from India really believe that Russian technology is more advance compare to US technology?
 
.
Can you find me some credible evidence that US consider SU-30 MKI as an worthy opponent against F-22. From what I read, US pilots regard SU-30 MKI is way below that of F-22. If you find me a credible evidence that support your post, I'll find you one that support mine.

but get real, do you really believe that Su-30 MKI can take on F-22?

I am not saying that Su-30 MKIs can take on F-22..I am saying the current situation any aircrafts who can give F-22 some opposisation at any level is Su-30 along with eurofighter ..

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-photos-multimedia/43322-future-dog-fights-d.html

there are some you tube links in it watch it ..now its your turn to find the links that support your claims that India got US help in ABM technology :)
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom