The Second Indo-Chinese War (2013-2015)

[airuah]

a lot of people have some growing up to do.....

 

[HongWu]

Believe it or not as per the outside world like US.. there are two products.. one is quality product(japan, korea, thailand etc) other is chinese product (Not quality)..

China is weak.. If it is very strong.. it would have taken arunachal from us long back..

China is nowhere near the levels you claim to make such silly statements.

china is strong but so is India. if war breaks out, china will not face an unexperienced army as they faced in 1962 but a experienced army which has lot experience of mountain warfare and has nuclear weapons, strategic bombers and nuclear missiles. US will pace embargo on china. Indian army will defeat pla. Indian navy will sink Chinese cargo ships in Indian oceans and will also destroy ships which supply millions of gallons fuel to china . this will be a huge blow to Chinese economy.PLAN cant challenge Indian navy in bay of Bengal or arebian sea coz its not blue water navy nor it has aircraft carrier. so its better for china to not fight with India.

I am glad you think India is a peer competitor to China.

So the next step is for you to assert your rising superpower with a forward policy on Tibet, right? Don't you just want to get a hold of Tibet for the glorious Hindu empire?

PLA is waiting. Our stealth fighter is waiting. Our nuclear tipped missiles are waiting. C'mon India, stop being such a coward and come show China the 21st century belongs to India.... the biggest most vibrant democracy in the world.

 

[Guynextdoor]

^^^ kids....

 

[kingdurgaking]

I am glad you think India is a peer competitor to China.

So the next step is for you to assert your rising superpower with a forward policy on Tibet, right? Don't you just want to get a hold of Tibet for the glorious Hindu empire?

PLA is waiting. Our stealth fighter is waiting. Our nuclear tipped missiles are waiting. C'mon India, stop being such a coward and come show China the 21st century belongs to India.... the biggest most vibrant democracy in the world.

we will do what we like.. cntrl your emotion....

 

[ksgokul]

You are not a typical Indian. I guess you are not in India or spent time outside of India. So you know that India really is a third world hole, nothing like the Indian media describes.

But the 1+ billion Indians living in India are bombarded every day with propaganda claiming:

(1) They are a rising superpower and almost on par with China.

(2) China is much weaker than it says it is. There is a lot of Chinese boasting.

(3) With the help of the West (like arms sales), India is actually much stronger than China.

(4) The Chinese do not see India as a true equal. It continues to claim arunachal pradesh, mess around with Kashmir and ally with Pakistan.

(5) A rising, powerful India must not accept Chinese arrogance. India must teach China a lesson with another "forward policy" (so much for India is never the aggressor)!

India has deluded itself into a corner. There is no choice now except another forward policy. Then we will see just how great a superpower India really is compared to China.

There are also opinions that China is a much bigger power than India. Indian Navy admiral has gone on record saying that the Indian armed forces cannot be considered equal to China. So in a democracy there will be a lot of opinions on either side. It is upto the governments to act responsibly.

I am perfectly convinced that Chinese government is a very reasonable government even during the days of 1962. I am confident you are not a rising political icon in China, as your views seem to Contradict that of China.

But considering a partner equal need not be only considered based on Military terms.

 

[GareebNawaz]

You are not a typical Indian. I guess you are not in India or spent time outside of India. So you know that India really is a third world hole, nothing like the Indian media describes.

But the 1+ billion Indians living in India are bombarded every day with propaganda claiming:

(1) They are a rising superpower and almost on par with China.

(2) China is much weaker than it says it is. There is a lot of Chinese boasting.

(3) With the help of the West (like arms sales), India is actually much stronger than China.

(4) The Chinese do not see India as a true equal. It continues to claim arunachal pradesh, mess around with Kashmir and ally with Pakistan.

(5) A rising, powerful India must not accept Chinese arrogance. India must teach China a lesson with another "forward policy" (so much for India is never the aggressor)!

India has deluded itself into a corner. There is no choice now except another forward policy. Then we will see just how great a superpower India really is compared to China.

A. You are not typical chinese, either
B. I never said India is third world hole, rather just repeat what you implied.
C. We will never be agressor because us Indians don't believe in fighting.
D. Stop deluding yourself that India itself is deluded.
E.We know what our military is and you know what you are. keep it at that and we will be great friends.
F. i live in USA but i have lived in India most of my life and i know most Indian media is just BS. But i'd rather have BS from public than BS from state controlled media glorifying its nation (no i dont mean that really dont get the wrong idea HongWu). Most chinese that are my friends are very nice and very smart, and overral very good people who know how to make good food. We both believe our gov't's is F***ed up. We HOWEVER never mention nay WAR between our countries.

 

[applesauce]

C. We will never be agressor because us Indians don't believe in fighting.

neither does china, then no problems?

but one of your fellow Indians write the following:


"china is strong but so is India. if war breaks out, china will not face an unexperienced army as they faced in 1962 but a experienced army which has lot experience of mountain warfare and has nuclear weapons, strategic bombers and nuclear missiles. US will pace embargo on china. Indian army will defeat pla. Indian navy will sink Chinese cargo ships in Indian oceans and will also destroy ships which supply millions of gallons fuel to china . this will be a huge blow to Chinese economy.PLAN cant challenge Indian navy in bay of Bengal or arebian sea coz its not blue water navy nor it has aircraft carrier. so its better for china to not fight with India."

1. assumes that india has so much more experience than china

2. forgets that china has bigger and better nukes in greater numbers on superior delivery platforms

3. embargo china? thats is again assuming china invades for no reason which china would not do not to mention this will lead to the collapse of the global economy.

4. indian army will defeat pla? hahahahahahah okay there

5. destroy Chinese ships? that is indeed a major worry hence the large naval build up(including refuel points) and the building of lines from russia and central asia, however there is no way india can enforce fully a naval blockade of the indian ocean and its one carrier is nothing more than a display piece given the inadequate escorts and well you have no planes for it right now.

 

[CardSharp]

Edit: CS I have posted these on the Concentrating forces/62 thread as I believe that thread would be better suited for this discussion than the current one.



I have found that it is almost always a must to verify such claims, regardless of their origin. To merely state what one reads somewhere without verifying the validity of it might lead to such erroneous statements. The officer makes a rather silly claim about Indian military history in that regard. One wonders about his knowledge given such a breathtaking display of ignorance about probably one of the biggest empires in Indian history, and the Only Indian empire to have brought SEA under its rule...in fact according to historians it was one of the preeminent Naval and Military powers during the 11 and 12th centuries in the world.

Either the officer is ignorant about a major part of the military history of India, and/or he conveniently leaves aside such facts in order to push his pet theory. I believe that in reality this was a mixture of both ignorance as well as willful denial of facts just so he could ride his hobby horse of how "South Asians" mostly suck at military matters. An opening chapter like that does not exactly shore up the credentials of the Author.




The Cavalry analogy does fit this particular situation, as my explanations would show later on, in this post. Keep in mind that I explicitly refrained from using the ww2 Blitz analogy as it would certainly not fit this one

Btw, I have read the Thread you had on this issue a couple of months back, when you provided me the link to it. I was hard pressed for time at that time and was not able to reply to it, however I did read through every single page of the pdfs as well as the thread itself.

Quote 1



The part quoted in blue is merely setting the stage for the "story" as told by the writer. Inscrutably Oriental means absolutely nothing except to hark back to the old Kipling-ish notions of the East...and to raise an aura of mystery and suspense..what better way for the writer to rope in some more readers

The part in bold was mostly true.

And the part in Red was not. Here is where I fundamentally Disagree.
Ill expand more on this later.

Quote 2


The above is pure Propaganda to explain away the inevitable(I'm sorry if this sounds blunt, but one has to call a spade a spade). For the simple fact that the PLA could not have held on to the territory taken, let alone take more. Again ill answer this later.

Quote 3


I would not be surprised if Nehru actually was surprised...after all he was clueless when it came to military matters.

Quote 4


This statement is patently wrong. Some "closer examination" indeed.


Now that I have set the template for my post, ill go ahead and address them in detail.


A picture is worth a thousand words, so allow me to provide one of the region where the conflict took place.


The answer to why China Withdrew, is as simple as that ^^. However, lets continue

I reiterate what I posted on my previous post. An army marches on its stomach. Some salient points to note

Point 1:
The conflict was limited to infantry engagements.No tanks, No air force

Point 2:
The Assam plains...as the name implies (and as you can see in the topographical map provided above) are exactly that...plains.

Point 3:
America was sending Airsupport in the form of bombers and fighter aircraft to India, and the first of these units were already on their way when China "Unilaterally" withdrew. Russia on the other hand supported India on this issue as well, and this was the time when China and Russia were at loggerheads.

Point 3.1




Now let us revisit Quotes 1 and 4


Quote 1






Chinese forces, if they ever set foot on the Assam plains would have been walking into certain defeat. Pls refer to the map provided. There is No way for the Chinese military to bring tanks or heavy weapons...While on the other hand, the Indian troops would be able to. Furthermore the Chinese forces would not only have to face heavy weapons with infantry alone, they will also have to suffer under complete air-superiority held by American and Indian air forces. The Heavy bombing the PLA underwent in Korea was not a pleasant experience...but at lest over there they had far far shorter supply and logistics lines to China than they would have in Assam...in fact the Chinese war reserves would be exhausted in days if not weeks of sustained fighting in that region.


This is not mere speculation, but solely based on facts.(You are free to point out any mistakes). Any trickle of supplies that made through nearly 1000km of mountainous terrain would not suffice...not by a long shot


Otoh the Indian forces would be in a far better position, doubly so because their supply lines would be much shorter....would in fact be much more mobile due to American supply airdrops/logistics, and also to the fact that they can and would use heavy weapons/vehicles against an enemy that is made up on infantry units...and is also bingo ammo and supplies!

There is no way for the PLA to do a Hannibal and bring Tanks(instead of elephants) over the mountains into this region.

And no..there is simply no way...especially in 62 that China could have supplied a fighting force in Assam. I distinctly remember reading a Chinese account of the 1962 conflict(I will go over the stuff I have right with me now and see if it was from one of those sources or from some other book)where it is mentioned that mortar/artillery shells and other supplies had to be built up on the Chinese/India border just before the 1962 conflict through backbreaking labor of men and mules....literally...men used to carry mortar shells on their backs...they were the only things that could bring supplies to such a region..and keep in mind that these man-mule supply trains have to be literally hundreds of kms long.Also keep in mind that that there were no rail lines on the Chinese side for hundreds of miles from the border.The Indian side had at least two going right up the Assam plains.(pic provided for reference)


The Indians, backed with American airpower (even without it) would have no trouble defeating a force that is purely infantry and is almost zero ammo/supplies if it sets foot in the Assam plains.Also refer to point 3.1


This is the very same reason that the Allies during ww2 (who had logistical capabilities orders of magnitudes greater than the PLA during 1962) did not try to invade Germany/France through Italy, even though they had invaded and occupied Italy long before the Normandy invasion. Again, the answer is very simple...mountains. And compared to the mountains and logistical challenges the Allies would have faced, the one faced by PLA would have been orders of magnitudes bigger


^^ see the similarity? Hell Invasion of Europe via Italy would have been a cakewalk compared to the logistical challenges faced by the PLA in the Indo China war.

Thus my previous post still stands, notwithstanding some baseless claims made by writers who do not look at the bigger military picture and are more concerned about "sensationalist" proclamations.


Its a "fact" that the PLA HAD to withdraw or face crushing defeat. In military conflicts around the world, entire armies have fallen due to their own weight...due to lack of supplies. Without supplies, an army is not an army anymore than a writer is a writer without a pen. It would be useless.


Thus in conclusion we can see why "QUOTE 2" was nothing but propaganda. I could go into more detail about this, but I believe I have made my points sufficiently well. I am yet to see any evidence or explanation as to how the PLA could have continued on fighting.....Even without American aid the supply lines from Assam plains to the Arunachal Pradesh border is a few hundred kilometers....for the PLA nearly a 1000. They did well initially, but would have definitly lost a protracted war in that region not for lack of "valour" but for the previously stated reasons. They "saved face" by declaring a unilateral withdrawal which resulted in no net gain to China..and in fact benefited the Indian army in more concrete ways over the years. As I pointed out in my previous post, the Chinese withdrawal is simply to cut its losses when it lost the beginners advantage, and would have to face diminishing returns, and eventual defeat if it were to have followed through on its invasion. You have to give it to them for making it seem as it was a "victory" (if one can claim victory if the "victor" vacates the field with no net gains and with the opponent not suing for peace) thanks to some good old propaganda.


I would gladly answer any valid points you have against this course of events which imho would not have been merely possible, but would have been inevitable.(i meant the withdrawal of the PLA lest it wanted to face defeat).I am aware that you do know a bit about lines of communication..supplies and other stuff regarding warfare, so I'm sure you will look at the cold hard facts than quote reporters who are clueless as to to the subject they are dealing with...and are more concerned about sensationalist news items than factual ones.

I'll move the discussion to the other thread as you suggested, but right off...

Point 1:
The conflict was limited to infantry engagements.No tanks, No air force

If you read the order of battle, the IA had two light tank battlions. You can characterize the fighting as you like, but sourced to publications of some sort at least, not just general hearsay.

Point 2:
The Assam plains...as the name implies (and as you can see in the topographical map provided above) are exactly that...plains.

ok?

Point 3:
America was sending Airsupport in the form of bombers and fighter aircraft to India, and the first of these units were already on their way when China "Unilaterally" withdrew. Russia on the other hand supported India on this issue as well, and this was the time when China and Russia were at loggerheads.

Again no sourcing. I see this all the time. From what I've read from the notable historical publications and declassified CIA brief readily available (available here for you and everyone else with a internet connection http://www.foia.cia.gov/CPE/POLO/polo-09.pdf), no such support was offered.

As for the USSR, they declared neutrality in that conflict and such a declaration of neutrality is tantamount to support for China, given the political situation before hand.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1984/CJB.htm













This is another case of the imaginary IA divisions. Members here in a similar discussion made up "two IA divisions" which was poised to come into the battle during 1962 after the Indian collapse and cited this as the reason why China withdrew. Every Indian was very eager in support this claim and cited it over and over, but when I press the originator of the claim for a reference, he had none.

Is this the same shoddy scholarship that I am suppose to accept? All I see is specious reasoning based on general intuition and unintelligible analogies (Hannibal and elephants? PLA tactics and cavalry tactics?) Drawing proper analogies, requires an understanding of what you are describing.

Also, most of your arguments are premised on China wanting a total war against India (including invasion of India proper) and how it was logistically unable. Fine an invasion of India proper would have been untenable (even though military resistance had effective ceased) but the onus is on your to provide evidence that China wanted more than just to rebuff Indian ambitions on its territory.

China was forced to a limited war, It fought a limited war, won a limited war.

 

[faithfulguy]

This is another case of the imaginary IA divisions. Members here in a similar discussion made up "two IA divisions" which was poised to come into the battle during 1962 after the Indian collapse and cited this as the reason why China withdrew. Every Indian was very eager in support this claim and cited it over and over, but when I press the originator of the claim for a reference, he had none.

Is this the same shoddy scholarship that I am suppose to accept? All I see is specious reasoning based on general intuition and unintelligible analogies (Hannibal and elephants? PLA tactics and cavalry tactics?) Drawing proper analogies, requires an understanding of what you are describing.

Also, most of your arguments are premised on China wanting a total war against India (including invasion of India proper) and how it was logistically unable. Fine an invasion of India proper would have been untenable (even though military resistance had effective ceased) but the onus is on your to provide evidence that China wanted more than just to rebuff Indian ambitions on its territory.

China was forced to a limited war, It fought a limited war, won a limited war.

The the reason that China retreat could be attribute to two reason. The biggest reason is the end of the Cuban missile crisis. US sent an aircraft carrier there to Indian ocean to support India. But a bigger reason could be the logistic support of PLA cannot support further advancement or even occupation of the territories taken at least in the Eastern Front. So China choose to retreat.

So its the US and geography that caused China to retreat. Not any imaginary Indian divisions. If US did not get involved and China can support their troops, the North Indian plain was totally wide open to PLA. Delhi was riped for picking. The scenario of the route is similar to German invasion of France in 1940. Germany had the logistics and the French had to open Paris to the Germans to save their city.

 

[CardSharp]

The the reason that China retreat could be attribute to two reason. The biggest reason is the end of the Cuban missile crisis. US sent an aircraft carrier there to Indian ocean to support India. But a bigger reason could be the logistic support of PLA cannot support further advancement or even occupation of the territories taken at least in the Eastern Front. So China choose to retreat.

So its the US and geography that caused China to retreat. Not any imaginary Indian divisions. If US did not get involved and China can support their troops, the North Indian plain was totally wide open to PLA. Delhi was riped for picking. The scenario of the route is similar to German invasion of France in 1940. Germany had the logistics and the French had to open Paris to the Germans to save their city.

You're making the same mistake that these Indians are. China wanted to beat some sense into Nehru, not occupy India. China only sent 80,000 troops (a small force by the manpower reliant PLA standards). It was not meant to be an invasion, it was meant to stop Nehru from pursuing his idiotic forward policy and to bring India to the negoitating table.

India and western observers at the time thought it was a full scale invasion only because of the quick success the PLA had against the Indian Army (Delhi was in a panic, assumed it was a full invasion force). After the 7th brigade (the best in the IA at the time) was routed, and 3 brigades cut off/disintegrated, effective resistance ceased on the whole sector. It was an unexpected victory, that caught the PLA war planners by surprise.

When the time came, as PLA had to decided how to exploit this victory, they realize they gotten as much as they could of it and further military action would jeopardize China's political aims, ie further fight could have escalated the situation into a superpower war and make future settlement with India on matter more difficult.

 

[Pak_Sher]

India should focus on its own development and not try to counter and compete with China in every scenario which I see that India and Indians in general try to do. India will never be able to defeat China militarily.

Though there is not a chance, but if Pakistan saw in a military conflict that China was loosing then Pakistan will have to open another war front with India and there is no way the Indian military can sustain a two-front war.

 

[faithfulguy]

You're making the same mistake that these Indians are. China wanted to beat some sense into Nehru, not occupy India. China only sent 80,000 troops (a small force by the manpower reliant PLA standards). It was not meant to be an invasion, it was meant to stop Nehru from pursuing his idiotic forward policy and to bring India to the negoitating table.

India and western observers at the time thought it was a full scale invasion only because of the quick success the PLA had against the Indian Army (Delhi was in a panic, assumed it was a full invasion force). After the 7th brigade (the best in the IA at the time) was routed, and 3 brigades cut off/disintegrated, effective resistance ceased on the whole sector. It was an unexpected victory, that caught the PLA war planners by surprise.

When the time came, as PLA had to decided how to exploit this victory, they realize they gotten as much as they could of it and further military action would jeopardize China's political aims, ie further fight could have escalated the situation into a superpower war and make future settlement with India on matter more difficult.

Maybe the Chinese leadership had no intension of mouting a full scale invasion of India. However, the opportunity definitely did present itself for such an action after the complete collapse of the Indian army. As you said, because of the quick advancement of the PLA, it appears to many outside observer that PLA intented to thrust into the Indian heartland. But PLA didn't planned and also was not capable of taking advantages of its victories. So the only direction for the PLA was to retreat after it had achieve its objective.

This is a decisive victory as PLA achieve all its objective, not unlike the first gulf war when US was successful at evicting Saddam Hussein from Kuwait without marching onto Bagdad.

 

[CardSharp]

India should focus on its own development and not try to counter and compete with China in every scenario which I see that India and Indians in general try to do.

People often excuse this kind of competing and comparing by saying China should be flattered. We're not...

 

[CardSharp]

Maybe the Chinese leadership had no intension of mouting a full scale invasion of India. However, the opportunity definitely did present itself for such an action after the complete collapse of the Indian army. As you said, because of the quick advancement of the PLA, it appears to many outside observer that PLA intented to thrust into the Indian heartland. But PLA didn't planned and also was not capable of taking advantages of its victories. So the only direction for the PLA was to retreat after it had achieve its objective.

This is a decisive victory as PLA achieve all its objective, not unlike the first gulf war when US was successful at evicting Saddam Hussein from Kuwait without marching onto Bagdad.

There you have it and that is the "evidence" to a facetious argument for the victor of the battle losing the war.

 

[faithfulguy]

There you have it and that is what give "evidence" to Indians who have turned into a facetious argument about the victor of the battle losing the war.

Well, some people cannot handle the fact that their country lost a war. But not everyone is like that.