Lessons from the Yom Kippur war - Broadsword by Ajai Shukla - Strategy. Economics. Stuff.

Home Top Ad

Advertisement
Advertisement
ad-placeholder

Breaking

Desktop%2BWeb%2BBanner
MOBILE-300X200

Thursday, 3 September 2020

Lessons from the Yom Kippur war

Avoiding the hard choices in Ladakh only postpones the inevitable reckoning (Photo: Pangong Lake)

 

By Ajai Shukla

Business Standard, 4th Sept 20

 

China’s violations of the Line of Actual Control (LAC) at multiple locations in eastern Ladakh, its blocking of Indian troops from territory that our jawans have patrolled for decades and its almost contemptuous rejection of India’s calls for a return to the positions of April, underlines the disdain in which Beijing holds New Delhi. India’s political leaders – with their cynical focus on domestic politics – have repeatedly chorused Beijing’s assertion that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has not captured any Indian territory and that the dispute is all about “differing perceptions of the LAC.” Chinese officials will be rightly wondering what, in these circumstances, there is to negotiate.

 

With the Indian military confined to blocking further ingress rather than evicting the PLA from the territory it has captured, there is little pressure on Beijing to restore the status-quo-ante. With China having earlier secured its claim lines of 1956 and 1960 by conquest in 1962, a new claim line of 2020 is coming into being. As this happens, senior Chinese officials are counselling patience. Beijing’s ambassador to India, Sun Weidong, last week recited the boilerplate formulation that the boundary question was “left over from history” and should be “handled with patience”. On Sunday, State Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi declared in France that China would never be the first to escalate the situation. All this is said with a straight face even though the PLA’s violent forays into Indian-claimed territory have effectively abrogated the four agreements Beijing and Delhi created together to keep the border peaceful. And with China refusing to even tell India where its claimed LAC runs, it is messaging that it cares little if the border remains unsettled since it pays no cost.

 

In the circumstances, there seems to be little choice but to make China pay a cost, even if the cost we pay is higher. New Delhi would remember how Egypt imposed upon a far more powerful Israel a cost for its enmity, even fighting a limited war to bring Tel Aviv to the table. Israel’s crushing defeat of the combined Arab armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan in the Six-Day War of 1967, coming soon after its victory in the 1948 War, had engendered a widespread impression of Israeli invincibility and Arab impotence. Egyptian President Anwar Sadat realized that the development of his country was held hostage by the no-war-no-peace situation that existed with Israel. Knowing that an acceptable and sustainable peace settlement with Israel required Tel Aviv to be equally convinced of its benefits, Sadat ordered his military to prepare for a war with clear strategic aims. Even if it did not end in victory, Sadat realistically aimed at damaging Israel’s military, demonstrating that Arab military power could not be disregarded and that the Israeli people’s long-term security would be furthered by a stable peace with Egypt. In October 1973, the combined Egyptian-Syrian armies launched a surprise offensive into Israel on Yom Kippur day, a holy day for Jews, capturing parts of the Sinai Peninsula and Golan Heights. In the 20 days that followed, Israel recovered from these setbacks, eventually recapturing the territory. But the realisation that enduring enmity with the Arabs entailed a price brought Israel to the peace table. Sadat paid a historic visit to Israel in 1977, Egypt recognised it as a country and Cairo and Tel Aviv eventually normalised relations with the Camp David Accords in 1978. 

 

It is nobody’s case that India lightly takes on China in a war for peace. However, like Sadat’s Egypt, New Delhi must clearly demonstrate to Beijing that China will pay a price for its relentless strategic undermining of India, while it would benefit from ensuring that the unresolved boundary does not trigger conflict. In the medium-to-long term, that would require a mutually agreed delineation of the LAC; a verifiable freezing of the status quo, and finally the give and take needed to agree on the new boundary.

 

For this, India must do what is necessary – including the use of military power – to enforce a PLA withdrawal to its side of the LAC. If China insists in the negotiations upon retaining its territorial gains, it must also feel the pain. This is feasible, now that India’s military has built up its numbers and neutralised the PLA’s head start. The army has moved over a division worth of Special Forces to Ladakh, which can operate between Chinese positions and occupy tactically important heights to isolate them. The air force, despite its shortfalls in fighter aircraft and force multipliers such as airborne warning and control aircraft and mid-air refuellers, enjoys significant advantages over the PLA Air Force, whose aircraft would suffer major performance degradation from operating from the oxygen-starved, high-altitude airbases in Tibet. Unlike in 1962, Indian ground troops would benefit from close air support. Meanwhile the Indian Navy is well placed to put pressure on Chinese shipping at a time where the PLA Navy is already preoccupied with confronting the US Navy in the South China Sea. It is not necessary to start a full-scale war; the military must be allowed to create its own escalation ladder, escalating in a calibrated manner, both geographically and in the application of force. If the PLA rushes to escalate and Indian forces are getting overwhelmed by China’s over-hyped military – which has not been tested in combat since 1979, and it failed that test – India can threaten use of its painstakingly created nuclear triad. To win, India needs only not to lose, while steadily imposing costs on China.

 

New Delhi could also signal it is considering abandoning its equidistance from Beijing and the US-led, anti-China coalition. It is unclear why Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whose Bharatiya Janata Party has left no stone unturned in criticising the policies and achievements of his predecessor, Jawaharlal Nehru, continues its unconvincing embrace of Nehruvian non-alignment. This would be directed towards shaping an ongoing debate in Chinese strategic circles over whether India is already in the US camp and is playing a double game by pretending equidistance; or whether New Delhi marches to its own drum. The latter school argues that escalation by China would transform India into a full-scale strategic adversary and create an openly hostile neighbour, just as Mao Zedong’s decision to invade India did in 1962.

 

Military action by India would be painful, but would discourage future trans-LAC incursions by the PLA. If that threat is not nipped in the bud, the already bloated 1.3 million-strong Indian Army would need to add even more personnel, completely derailing its modernisation plans. On the other hand, compelling China into a mutually beneficial border agreement would enable the army to reduce its personnel by 300,000-400,000 men, transforming the financial calculus of defence spending. For this, lives would once again have to be laid down today by a military that is too often taken for granted. But nations pay such prices for safeguarding sovereignty and moulding their strategic environment beneficially. Avoiding these hard choices only postpones the inevitable moment of reckoning.




58 comments:

  1. Very aptly written. India hesitates to take decisive hard actions. China is taking advantage of such behavior by India. We had to pay huge costs for Covid, and will recover. Similarly India should as pointed out in the article wage a limited war, no matter the costs to send a strong messsage to China. And India should abandon the policy of non-alignment, whatever remains of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brilliantly listed. Agree with this assessment of Ajay Shukla implicitly.

      Delete
  2. Its simple. India doesn't have the political will or the stomach to do anything offensive to china. From Modi's POV it is land nobody cares about and why risk political goals in case things go south.

    Cujo

    ReplyDelete
  3. Excellent views Sir...I hope Indian government incorporate your advice and views in their dealings with China.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "It is unclear why Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whose Bharatiya Janata Party has left no stone unturned in criticising the policies and achievements of his predecessor, Jawaharlal Nehru, continues its unconvincing embrace of Nehruvian non-alignment."

    wasn't it one of the more famous practitioners of realpolitik, kissinger, then the foreign minister of US of america who famously declared - “America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests”

    ReplyDelete
  5. The talk of paying a price and exacting a price from PLA is not only fool hardy but inviting total destruction of India.

    The Colonel forgets or chooses to ignore PLA's War Fighting Doctrine. PLA and China possess a capability which India woefully Lacks. AI and Communication Domination. PLA knows what Indian Military is planning, they are waiting for Indian kinetic operations, PLA has programmed it and is ready to mount the response with overwhelming force.
    Play Chinese Poker?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are wrong peace dove never work with Chinese communist. I m afraid our India friend is falling into the Chinese deception habit, what my is fact on the ground and what your we can negotiate. While we negotiate is I continue to push, grab and create new fact. After that there s nothing to negotiate here let us start negotiate what s still your. Well with thousands years the Vietnamese people dealing with Chinese, there is no real negotiation until you willing to impose a serious cost for every step the Chinese decision maker took. Remember PLA is one child army there is a huge social, political and morale cost for chinese decision maker when they soldier return in body bag and worse mass disable. That s what happened to 1978 adventure war with Vietnam and to these day PLA and it's decision maker Don t even want to have it mention in text book. Remember the disadvantage the Chinese communist have compare to the indian gov is in the eye of the public that put the bill for war casualty, the Chinese communist is an illegitimate regime with no love from majority of the Chinese public. So use that to poke the regime where it hurt them.

      Delete
    2. Looks like a statist and modi.motivatee reply. Ha ha ha. We take our chances Charlie.

      Delete
  6. Though agree what you say.But are we ready to pay the price of this conflict at this junctur.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You say - 'In the medium-to-long term, that would require a ----'. But Modi doesn't think that way. He views of only one term i.e. proximity to the next elections. He will NOT do anything,till the election bugles are sounded. The Chinese know it and will laugh all the way up to 2023-24.
    Also, our Generals lack the ability to see the larger picture. In the TV interview with Vishnu Shom of NDTV ( Left, Right & Centre), Gens Ved Malik and Bikram Singh were seen trivializing the questions seeking the larger picture, by repeating that 'Our boys are well motivated''They are ready and doing a wonderful job'. Vishu Shom,too, proved his incompetence as an anchor. Only the civilian analyst, Brahma Chellani, added some value.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The article is well-written. It rightly shows with examples from history how it is high time India decided to impose a cost on China by waging a limited war, if necessary. But that requires guts which present-day leadership seems to lack at least vis-a-vis China. China has already occupied an eight km long stretch of Indian territory between Finger-4 and Finger-8. It has transgressed into Galwan valley and Gogra by 2km and 1km respectively. It has been consistently fortifying its position in these areas and until some decisive steps are taken, it will become almost impossible for India to dislodge China from there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. China’s violations of the Line of Actual Control (LAC) at multiple locations in eastern Ladakh, its blocking of Indian troops from territory that our jawans have patrolled for decades and its almost contemptuous rejection of India’s calls for a return to the positions of April, underlines the disdain in which Beijing holds New Delhi. India’s political leaders – with their cynical focus on domestic politics – have repeatedly chorused Beijing’s assertion that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has not captured any Indian territory and that the dispute is all about “differing perceptions of the LAC.” Chinese officials will be rightly wondering what, in these circumstances, there is to negotiate.



      With the Indian military confined to blocking further ingress rather than evicting the PLA from the territory it has captured, there is little pressure on Beijing to restore the status-quo-ante. With China having earlier secured its claim lines of 1956 and 1960 by conquest in 1962, a new claim line of 2020 is coming into being. As this happens, senior Chinese officials are counselling patience. Beijing’s ambassador to India, Sun Weidong, last week recited the boilerplate formulation that the boundary question was “left over from history” and should be “handled with patience”

      Delete
  9. Very perceptive opinion piece. When everyone around is peddling the same news, it is refreshing to read a this-is-the-bottomline, tell-it-like-it-is take like this.

    I differ though on whether an overt embrace with the US will do any tangible good other than perhaps increased logistical and intelligence support. The limited war, if it comes to that, will be fought by India alone as other writers have previously pointed in the past few weeks. Furthermore, a deepened partnership might not sit so well with our all-weather friend Russia, whose arms supplies and recent re-assurance of not selling military equipment to Pakistan to assuage India's concerns was a welcome reminder that that relationship still stands the test of time.

    While the thought of having to sacrifice men now to keep long-term sovereignty intact is scary, and might well be called reckless, it perhaps may be the only option left if the '56/'60 fiasco is not to be repeated.

    This is especially so because the line is shifting creepingly to the west with time and the day might not far when it may directly meet Pakistani territory to the east of Karakoram Pass causing all hell to break loose if a 2-front war does comes to pass.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hey Mr Shukla
    Fan of the Yom Kippur war, you should have stuck to driving tanks, that’s your forte and interest. You could have been the Army Chief
    As a man who looks at the larger scenario I
    Should you not comment
    that madman Modi has presided over reduction of GDP by 23%
    The Chinese gdp has increased by 3%
    The gap widens
    And keeping the equivalent of three extra divisions in Ladakh
    With no more money towards the defence kitty will pull our modernisation down
    We are being left with a few divisions worth of well equipped and trained special forces
    A few armoured, artillery and mechanised divisions
    And the rest consisting a million infantry, which is a world war 2 militia.
    A rag tag Indian army
    The Chinese don’t trust the Indians
    The Chinese henceforth will take the Indians very seriously, they will fortify the area


    ReplyDelete
  11. With India increasingly playing to USA and allies anti- China objective, China has more to lose by playing soft to India. So i don't think this strategy will work with PLA.

    ReplyDelete
  12. India already showed it's williness to join Quad and host meeting , already advanced into Chinese's hold territories , has overturned Chinese peace gestures these are public and many might be under stated .

    ReplyDelete
  13. China awaiting first bullet fired by India to translate into her retaliation. India can’t move UNSC after the blunder of 5Aug2019, abrogations of 370/35A

    ReplyDelete
  14. Sir ....militarily we r strong enough to deal with China
    But political will is where we r lacking

    Solidarity in Political decision is where India is suffering the most
    And India will have to pay heavy price to China because Indian Government still believes in negotiations rather than kicking Chinese out of Indian territory

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think this is the time to strike. Indian Army can inflict sufficient cost to the Chinese, provided planned well and executed well, for them to realize their need to come to the table with genuine will for peace.

      Delete
  15. I broadly agree that India will need to resort to some sort of limited military action against China, if only to salvage some national pride. However, I do not agree that India should abandon its "ts unconvincing embrace of Nehruvian non-alignment". If India moves explicitly into the US-NATO camp, that would annoy Russia, which has already supplied its S-400 missile system to China. Imagine India's discomfiture if Russia refuses to support India in a war with China, and even worse, supplies its latest military hardware to China.

    ReplyDelete
  16. You people should check meaning of AI from dictionary. Total destruction? Kindly worry about your nation, we are more than capable to take care of our issues

    ReplyDelete
  17. I don't think war is inevitable because the gap in relative national power will keep widening. As is well known China has an economy 5x larger than India in 2019.

    2019
    China: $14 trillion
    India: $3 trillion

    This is highly impressive when you consider the GDP of China and India in 1989 were both roughly $300 billion. Most Indians like to believe that by 2040 or earlier the nation will gain the moxy it didn't have before and close the gap or overtake China. However, this is wishful thinking. And it is also widespread among educated Indians. I think wishful thinking about India's future economic trajectory is a fundamental reason for why strategic minded Indians including the author believe there will be a future clash. The thinking goes that if India develops and becomes another sub-superpower then it will mean an inevitable clash.

    Growth in China continues to be robust and the economy is following Korea's trajectory. India's growth over the last decade was weak considering the current development level. Taking into account this date I predict by 2040 the gap will widen to about 7x. (For reference US GDP will probably be $35 trillion in 2040.)

    2040
    China: $60-70 trillion
    India: $9-10 trillion

    The relative national power of China will grow and I predict this will be a major contributor leading India to stand down and compromise in a deal favoring (but not completely favoring China). The author says conflict is inevitable which is wrong. I suspect like some other aging military men he looks forward to see the war he has talked about so much occur before he leaves this vale of tears.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chinese economy is export oriented. In case of a total war with India, Chinese economy will fell like never before. Impose a navel blockage on Indian Ocean, and that will cut off China from 80% of its oil import and European markets.


      If the war last for 6 months, Chinese economy will collapse like never before. The whole Chinese deal of "Chinese century" will end and US will be in a position of even more strength

      Delete
  18. India can do it but does modi want to do it?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Your reporting and analysis of matter are impeccable

    ReplyDelete
  20. War will be not only with China but with Pakistan as well. So whatever preparation make it double

    ReplyDelete
  21. India needs to shed the fear it has developed of the PLA since the defeat it faced in 1962.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I humbly disagree in entirety. Defeatist mindset that assumes we are at the backfoot at the moment. This is a game of chess between two ancient civilizations. No one is in any hurry. The war should be decisive and not a plan for an Indian defeat to earn some respect from the adversary. China already respects us. Immensely.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So your recommendation .Is let it stretch. Let's estimate the cost of loosing an army in the harsh winters there as well please whennyiu factor innthe tradeoffs. To decide on the time line of engagement. ..yes ultimately. We are all dead for sure.

      Delete
  23. how was Foreman defeated by Ali "in Zaire"

    ReplyDelete
  24. I think you have got some parts right.. some wrong...The war basically did 2 things:
    1 it assuaged Arab pride which was dented by the 6 day war....
    2 It actually created the room for arab states to try and settle the disputes with israel because they saw even with improved weapons tactics and the initiative on their side they had failed to defeat Israel. It created the conditions whereby the Arab states having repaired their image could actually talk peace. What egyptian rulers more than any understood was that they would never defeat Israel.....You have viewed it in a way that lets you somehow show the present dispensation in a bad light....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is only because USA supports Israel so of course Egypt cannot defeat Israel. Thanks god now they are in peace

      Delete
  25. The reason why Modi has developed cold feet is that he cannot afford a military set back at this point in time when he has made a mess of covid and the economy. That would dent his image, which is the only thing going for him now since his claim to be an able administrator is in tatters. He has to preserve that image at all costs, and we are paying that cost in Ladakh. He will not give our military a free hand- it is more important to win elections in Bihar and Bengal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Substantially true. He's selfish streak was always evident. Deep inside he's a coward

      Delete
  26. Never try on China , its hard win victory.calculation is right India is even not ready 2 hv dialogue wd india as Latter is not have a dialogue wd pk.

    ReplyDelete
  27. But Egypt didn't have Pakistan type neighbour then...so wrong comparison.Using "N"word makes India look like pakis or the Kim's. Fighting war for no win has no "Josh" or motivation.I think small stealthy wins like south Pangong incidents are important to us.Armed conflict is definitely No No ...we don't want innocent Tibetans, Indian s or chinese to die on both side of Lac.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Very well written and thought article. The calculus here is simple, India will have to pay a price to get China out of it's territory and prevent future incursions, it can be little or huge, only time can tell that. But the question that we need to ask ourselves is whether we've the will to pay that price or not?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Never underestimate yourself and overestimate your enemy.. Col Shukla has given an apt logic..
    How it is implemented is the question. The bully needs to be stopped and we hav to pay a price so be it. Long term strategy for India's rise in the comity of nations demands a price.

    ReplyDelete
  30. We who sit comfortably in front of our computers, find it very easy to mouth such macho sentiments as - "Military action by India would be painful," and other such words of wisdom as if we really knew the pain. Because we are sure it will not be the least bit "painful" for us or any of our own family members. It is always easy to be brave - with somebody else's life, somebody else's sole breadwinner.

    ReplyDelete
  31. This is about the most foolish recommendation I have read in a long time.

    There is zero upside for India and huge risk. It is one thing for our Govt to ban some mobile apps and fool Indians into think it has any power, vision or plan vis-a-vis China. But in a real war, India has 350 million people within 800km of the border with China. Chinese cities are 3,000-5,000km from the border, we cannot hope to get anywhere close to them. Guess who wins? There is only one answer.

    The terrible habit of getting offended easily and then doing stupid things just to vent your anger and protect your ego, never served anyone well. It is also the most un-Indian and un-Hindu way to behave. I hope Mr Modi, who knows he can talk and bully his way out of his small foolish actions, knows that he cant mess around with China. They will play the long game while he is worried about the next election. India will not know what hit it.

    And perhaps you would like to use the lessons you have learnt about Yom Kippur War to actually lead our army across the LAC?

    ReplyDelete
  32. This is the best opportunity that China can wish for at the moment; even if China losses the initial war with India, it is still worth the try, learn from its mistakes, then improve and be ready for future bigger and stronger adversaries – practice makes perfect. If India wants to engage, and it looks like they are, China should take the initiative and run with it. This may sound terrible, but China desperately needs the experience; India is as good a place as any...

    ReplyDelete
  33. Aptly pointed out the projected course of action.Offensive-Defence is the key, to stall their land grab.

    ReplyDelete
  34. If BJP/RSS cannot squeeze the Chinese by their balls, we need another party which can. It is high time the Chinese need to be humbled. If BJP/Modi is not up to the Job, find someone who can deliver. Modi by now should know that he was made a fool of by Xi. What is Modi going to do now with Xi and China? Make China loose more than India will loose in this war! And since its the nuclear age, go nuclear in the first strike itself, before they target our satellites. If anyone from Congress or CPM opposes this, send them to the front line in Ladakh with our troops. Let our troops give them a feel for what it means to be Indian.

    ReplyDelete
  35. This is the only option left for India. Talks from 1993 till date is too much. Let's change the strategy.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Article on Brasstacks of Indian Military leadership published in a Pakistani newspaper is interesting:https://tribune.com.pk/story/2262377/brasstacks-of-indian-military-leadership
    While dust was beginning to settle on the Depsang Plains in Eastern Ladakh, there are more reports of Indo-China tensions, especially south of Pangong Lake. Godi media went berserk and started projecting as if the Indian Army has conquered the entire Tibet autonomous region. Meanwhile a report published in a prestigious Indian newspaper, The Hindu, indicated that the Indian army had lost 1,000 square kilometres of area in Ladakh. However, the Godi media trolls were found to be paddling the narrative on social media that the loss of the area had actually taken place during the time of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government and PM Modi should be absolved of this responsibility as India lost a few hundred square kilometres during the current standoff with China and bulk of the blame should be put on the previous government that was led by Congress. Yes, Modi, the great leader with a 56-inch broad chest, should be given all the credit for the Indian Army capturing a knoll of one square km south of Pangong Lake.

    These reports may be good for media discourse, but they also indicate the way the Indian military leadership is quietly, but deliberately, left off the hook for military disasters. Sane and honest Indian defence and security experts have raised the issue of the failure of Indian military leadership and intelligence head honchos in a number of articles and talk-shows in Indian media.

    Our June 19 article published in these columns after the Galwan debacle had highlighted the factor of accountability of the Indian military leadership and how Indian mainstream media was covering it. Indian defence analysts like Col Ajai Shukla and Pravin Sawhney have been criticising Indian leadership for the loss of face. While India was boasting about attacking G-B and AJK, it got a slap in the face from the Chinese Dragon. Today the Indian Army is demoralised and there is a growing call for Rajnath Singh, CDS General Bipin Rawat, Ajit Doval, the Army Chief, the Commander Northern Command and the Commander 14 Corps to step down, as they failed to appreciate the Chinese intent and prepare a contingency plan.

    So, when Indian Godi media blames the UPA and deflects the attention away from intelligence and military failure, one must realise that it is the failure of RAW and Indian military who gobbles 71 billion dollars every year and fails to defend the territorial integrity of the Indian Union while the 800 million poor Indians live on 1kg Daal and 5kg rice per person per month doled out to it by Mr Modi.

    Published in The Express Tribune, September 4th, 2020.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The sole purpose of this article is to criticize and criticize the Modi government. There is nothing important in this. once I got confused whether I am reading a trash paper from the Chinese government mouthpiece Global Times. Writer dance to Chinese tunes a lot. there is nothing substantial in this article, it should be ignored, a complete waste of time reading this garbage.

      Delete
    2. Well of we can read your garbage amarjeet ...this is superior garbage for sure. ..don't need a ignoranus to pass judgement here. We can take our own decisions. Don't worry

      Delete
  37. How does one judge the threshold for the adversary?conflict in the ladakh sector will definitely have ramifications on the rest of the country. Armed conflict is not an IPL game where 22 players battle it out and the rest of the country watches in comfort. There is nothing to suggest that as a nation, we are prepared for conflict with China. There is no national consensus.public is too engrossed with Corona and the curious case of late SSR.war cannot be imposed on the nation like demonetization or lock down.
    Before we suggest formal armed conflict,think ten times. There are no fixed boundaries in war unlike cricket.
    The saner option is the one chosen by Pakistan. Bleed the enemy by a thousand cuts in a no war, no peace scenario. In this option, life will continue as usual in the rest of the country while the adversary can be bled continuously, yet remaining within the threshold of a formal war.

    ReplyDelete
  38. All this talk of this invisible Chinese military might and armed forces asymmetry is just weak talk. What matters most is political will and capable generals to carry out that will.Unfortunately both are missing.History is full of examples Vietnam against a true super power USA, now that is military asymmetry but the former still managed to come on top. Now here we have Modi who is nothing but a marketing gimmick masquerading as a PM. On the other hand we have yes sir men like Bipin Rawat, and the whole top brass who don't have the minerals to speak up. Now if we had someone like
    Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw, or Lieutenant General Harbaksh Singh men with moral courage things could have be very different. I do not fear the Chinese I fear the Armed forces top brass and without question the most frightening is the political top brass.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Who will pay the price of war? The soldiers and their families from both sides.

    ReplyDelete
  40. this is worst piece from your side, war mongering!

    ReplyDelete
  41. No comparison as outhere we are trying to reinforce our perceived LAC against a glamorous invasion by meek looking Sadat.

    Are we able to keep our house in order? Where is Unified command and what are the 17 lakh para military and police Battalion s accountable to.

    Determine the stakeholder value correctly before you boost the morale of the Army It is all policeraj in cohoots with political bosses and Bureaucrats .
    No strategies from sofa seaters please

    ReplyDelete
  42. Egyptian guy here. In case of Egypt, the whole country stood still until we get our taken land back. Israel gave no options rather than war for the country to move on. The good thing president Sadat did is that he knew when to start the war and when to stop it. War was the intuitive for a sustainable peace. Our land and pride are back. By the way Egyptians are not arab but only in language. In case of India things and time are different as India is not standig still because of this issue. Also China is not Israel. In my opinion taken land doesn't worse that fight and the blood that will be taken from both sides. At a certain point I think Indea by diplomatic way and economic influence can bring China to the table for negotiation.

    ReplyDelete
  43. The Sino-Indian tension seems to be getting further heightened due to aggressive posture of china. Col ajai shukla diagnosis of a limited war to show intent seems to be a popular thought process among indian strategic thinkers, however to think that any war will remain a controlled event is not a practical possibility. It could further escalate to a full scale war hence any decision need to facotr it in while taking any decisive decision. The domestic compulsions should not shape the security and sovereign questions of the nation. Govt should take a decision devoid of domestic considerations and to safeguard the wellbeing of the Nation

    ReplyDelete
  44. The PRC must suffer pain,and defeat at least tactically.We must give no quarter to the invader-aggressors,merciless with them.
    All meaningless talks should be stopped immediately.Send XI a message," QUIT INDIA".

    Failure to withdraw and save some yellow backside,should see the IN involved too in the action seizing Chinko tankers and MVs as war prizes,interdicting MVs suspected of sailing to PRC ports,and exterminating any PLAN warships or subs in the IOR and beyond.The two PLAN carriers must be prime targets for destruction. Our sub fleet must be immediately expanded with more interim leases of available subs from both western and Russian sources,and operate off PRC waters waiting for the balloon to go up and let go.

    ReplyDelete

Recent Posts

Size_%2B300%2BX%2B200
Untitled%2Bdesign
Untitled%2Bdesign
Page 1 of 10412345...104Next >>Last
ad-placeholder
ad-placeholder