Is India Capable Of Defending Itself?

[aviator 3]

While India's defence budget for fiscal 2008-09 has been hiked by only five per cent in real terms to Rs 105,000 crore ($26.4 billion), China's People's Liberation Army has been given a 17.6 per cent increase in planned defence expenditure to Yuan 417.77 billion (58.79 billion). China's defence expenditure has grown at between 12 and 15 per cent annually in real terms over the last decade.

Chinese analysts have sought to pass off the rather steep hike in the defence outlay as having been "caused by the sharp increase in the wages, living expenses and pensions of 2.3 million-strong PLA officers, civilian personnel, soldiers and army retirees". However, the world is sceptical. Defence analysts look at the spectacular anti-satellite test successfully conducted by China in January 2007, recent pictures of an aircraft carrier under construction, the acquisition of SU-30 fighter-bombers and air-to-air refuelling capability, the drive towards acquiring re-entry vehicle technology to equip China's ICBMs with MIRVs (Multiple Independently-targeted Re-entry Vehicle), and a growing footprint in the South China Sea. They cannot help wonder whether a 21st century arms race has well and truly begun.

In the 2004 White Paper on National Defence, the Chinese government admitted that additional funds were needed for modernisation of the PLA, even though these were classified as 'moderate'. In the 2006 paper this reason has been mentioned only in passing. The allocation of additional funds for force re-structuring and a qualitative increase in the levels of training is emphasised in both White Papers, as also rising inflation as a cause of increased defence expenditure. However, nothing in the White Papers of 2004 and 2006 fully explains the double-digit inflation-adjusted growth in the annual defence expenditure. It is this lack of transparency that has fuelled speculation about an arms race.

On certain parameters, China's defence expenditure compares favourably with the other major powers. China's defence expenditure overtook that of Japan ($42 billion) and Germany ($37.5 billion) in 2007, but still lagged behind the United Kingdom ($62.38 billion) and France ($50.78 billion) whose economies are now much smaller than that of China. It is, of course a small fraction -- less than one-tenth -- of the United States' defence budget of $532.8 billion, not counting the supplementary grants sought by the Pentagon later in the year.

The United States spends almost half (48 per cent) of the total defence budget of the world. China, France, Japan and the United Kingdom each spend four to five per cent.

Complete transparency in defence spending has seldom been a strong point even among countries that take pride in being liberal democracies. Air Commodore Jasjit Singh has written, 'All countries try and protect what they consider to be crucial information about their defence capability for understandable reasons; and defence expenditures are obviously part of that information except where democratic states practice greater transparency as part of their liberal ethos, domestic obligations and public oversight, and well established procedures of accountability..."

Totalitarian regimes like the one in China also lack egalitarian accounting practices and do not have a real grip on all the details of what they actually spend.

David Shambaugh, a well known China analyst, finds China's defence budget the most difficult aspect of the country's armed forces to research. In his view, "Few areas of China's military affairs are more opaque and difficult to research than the revenue/expenditure and budget/finance domains -- but perhaps none is more important to understand." Clearly, China's estimated military expenditure is far higher than the officially published figure. In response to international calls for greater openness, one Chinese military official countered that 'transparency is a tool of the strong to be used against the weak'.

Shambaugh lists several items of expenditure that do not figure in China's list: "China's official defence budget does not appear to include all funds for (1) Chinese-made weapons and equipment production (as distinct from procurement); (2) some RDT&E (Research, Development, Test & Engineering) costs; (3) the paramilitary People's Armed Police; (4) funds for special large weapons purchases from abroad; (5) funds directly allocated to military factories under the control of the GAD and funds for defence industry conversion; and (6) military aid."

Defence analysts Ted Galen Carpenter and Justin Logan point out that greater transparency would be in China's interest: "China needs to recognise that it gains little from opacity in comparison to what it loses… Any respectable observer of the PLA knows about China's growing capabilities. We know about the Sovremenny destroyers, the Sunburn missiles and the Kilo submarines. We know about the Sukhoi 30s and the new F-10 fighter. Large-scale hardware acquisition and development is hard to hide."

China's military aims and modernisation strategy have been enunciated in the Defence White Paper of December 2006. The strategy is "…a three-step development strategy in modernising China's national defence and armed forces, in accordance with the state's overall plan to realise modernisation. The first step is to lay a solid foundation by 2010, the second is to make major progress around 2020, and the third is to basically reach the strategic goal of building informationised armed forces and being capable of winning informationised wars by the mid-21st century."

Compared with China, India's budgetary transparency is indeed noteworthy -- even though many Indian analysts are of the view that the government does not disclose sufficient details in the annually published Defence Services Estimates. Except in the last two years, the annual increase in India's defence budget has barely kept pace with inflation. India's defence budget is less than half of China's officially claimed figure and is between one-fourth and one-third of China's actual defence expenditure.

Due to China's vigorous military modernisation drive, the military gap between India and China is growing every year. With the improved logistics infrastructure in Tibet, including the Gormo-Lhasa all-weather railway line, improved road axes with good laterals linking them and many new air strips, the Chinese are now capable of inducting large numbers of troops into Tibet in a time frame that is likely to unhinge Indian war plans.

India needs to invest more in improving the logistics infrastructure along the border with Tibet, in hi-tech intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems for early warning and in generating land- and air-based firepower asymmetries to counter China's numerical superiority. India also needs to raise and suitably equip four to six mountain strike divisions to carry the fight into Chinese territory if it ever becomes necessary. All of these capabilities will require a large infusion of fresh capital. India's growing economy can easily sustain a 0.5 to 1 per cent hike in the defence budget over a period of three to five years, especially if the government simultaneously shows the courage to reduce wasteful subsidies.

The weaponaries - A quick comparison

In 2006 India's active military personell numbered over 1,325,000 while China was significantly higher at 2,255,000. In air defence, China's PLA (People's Liberation Army) Air Force has 9,218 aircrafts of which about 2300 are combat aircrafts, operating from its 489+ air bases. The Indian Air Force has 3382 aircrafts which includes 1335 combat aircrafts operating from 334+ bases and its sole aircraft carrier INS Viraat. The air superiority in China's PLAAF is maintained by its fleet of Russian Su-30 MK and indigenously built J-10 fighters. Indian Air Force, on the other hand has French built Dassault Mirage 2000s and Russian Su-30 MKI as the best aircrafts in its combat fleet (no indigenous fighters or aircrafts have been deployed by India so far). Indian Navy is the world's eighth largest navy with a with a fleet of 145 vessels consisting of missile-capable warships, advanced submarines, the latest naval aircrafts and an aircraft carrier in its inventory. It is experienced both in combat and rescue operations during wartime and peace as seen from its wars with Pakistan in 1971, the December 2004 Tsunami, etc. In comparison, China's PLA Navy with its fleet of 284 vessels is quantitatively larger but lacking in actual war experience, which could undermine its strategic capability. As of 2007, China has no aircraft carriers in its naval fleet but is slated to build and induct an aircraft carrier by 2010.

In strategic nuclear defence and delivery systems, China's PLA is miles ahead of India's nuclear forces. The PLA's stockpile is estimated to have 200-400 active nuclear warheads. In comparison, India's strategic nuclear force is estimated to have stockpiled about 50-70 nuclear warheads. The most powerful warhead tested by India had an yield of 0.05 megatons which is quite small compared to China's highest yield of 4 megatons. India's nuclear delivery system consists of bombers, supersonic cruise missiles and medium range ballistic missiles. Agni 2, India's longest range deployed ballistic missile is capable of a range of 2500 km, carrying a single nuclear warhead of ~1000 kg. In stark contrast, China's nuclear delivery system is far more capable with multiple warhead (MIRV) ICBMs like DF-5A [12000+ km] and DF-4 [7500+ km]. It also fields submarine launched SLBMs like JL-2 [8500+ km] and strategic fighter bombers like Su-27 Flanker in its nuclear delivery arsenal.

Economic theory teaches us that incentives drive decision making by a nation or an individual. In case of India, a democracy with no serious military adversary, its militarisation drive is often overshadowed by internal militancy issues and political struggles. In case of a communist China, it has a powerful military adversary in United States; the conflicts over Taiwan give China a strong incentive to beef up its military defence to counter the US military might. The situation is much similar to that of USSR vs USA Cold War, albeit on a much smaller scale. The end result is China walking far ahead of India in military might with overpowering superiority if both conventional and nuclear forces are taken into account.

With the increaing china's intrusion, what are the option that we have??

[rajat8676 0]

India has been a toothless tiger after 1971. War is definitely not a choice, but what would you do if someone keeps intruding in your home and kills your family members - whether it be Pakistan or China. We cannot keep talking to murderers indefinitely. There needs to be a point when brave actions are taken, intelligence, deception, treachery, politics, covert operations and resources are put to use, whatever be the cost.

We need to send militants into Pakistan (It already has enoughs stock of its own but our men would be more specific in targets) and start the process of destabilising China with the help of US (US woulde be more than happy). Direct confrontation should be the last option. In a war, there are no morals - only victory or defeat / life or death

We owe it not to ourselves but to our children - to give them a safe land to live in.

Jai Hind

[Sadikk 301]

World cant afford war between 2 biggies.. its just a intentional panic created for political gains..

Relax.. Only the dad have seen end of war...

Why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is not right???

[lostjournal 7]

World cant afford war between 2 biggies.. its just a intentional panic created for political gains..

Relax.. Only the dad have seen end of war...

Why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is not right???

I fully agree with you @Sadikk Bhai.

[city02 63]

China can take over Sikkim in a few days and Arunachal in a few weeks by demolishing any Indian resistance.

Their armed forces can completely neutralise ours as they out-man, out-gun, and out-spend our military.

Literally the only thing holding them back is the international outrage/condemnation and uniting of countries against their aggression.

They face virtually NO tactical barriers to defeat us like they did before.

Their soldiers are better trained, better equipped, and better paid than ours.

I wish it were not so one sided but its unfortunately true.

[KumaarShah 143]

I think if push comes to shove, India can fully depend on USA and thats why China has not so far dared to show their skills against India.

Like what Sadikk says, let us not fantasize, nothing as such will happen. But that does not mean we must become complacent. We will have to shore up our defence budgets to a great extent, maybe at the cost of development. Or increase taxes drastically to finance military and defence budgets. But even here, our netas have cornered a lot of the budget and stashed it away in Swiss Banks. What our country has got after all these years are weapons which are useless. Even the last Pokhran nuclear tests, it now appears were dud ones. This is really alarming, not to say the least. If indeed it is true, then I fear we cannot face even Pakistan. I pray God that I am wrong in my assumptions....

[aviator 3]

'Nervous' China may attack India by 2012: Defence expert

A leading defence expert has projected that China will attack India by 2012 to divert the attention of its own people from "unprecedented" internal dissent, growing unemployment and financial problems that are threatening the hold of Communists in that country. "China will launch an attack on India before 2012. There are multiple reasons for a desperate Beijing to teach India the final lesson, thereby ensuring Chinese supremacy in Asia in this century," Bharat Verma, Editor of the Indian Defence Review, has said.

He said the recession has "shut the Chinese exports shop", creating an "unprecedented internal social unrest" which in turn, was severely threatening the grip of the Communists over the society. Among other reasons for this assessment were rising unemployment, flight of capital worth billions of dollars, depletion of its foreign exchange reserves and growing internal dissent, Verma said in an editorial in the forthcoming issue of the premier defence journal.

In addition to this, "The growing irrelevance of Pakistan, their right hand that operates against India on their behest, is increasing the Chinese nervousness," he said, adding that US President Barak Obama's Af-Pak policy was primarily Pak-Af policy that has "intelligently set the thief to catch the thief".

Verma said Beijing was "already rattled, with its proxy Pakistan now literally embroiled in a civil war, losing its sheen against India." "Above all, it is worried over the growing alliance of India with the US and the West, because the alliance has the potential to create a technologically superior counterpoise. "All these three concerns of Chinese Communists are best addressed by waging a war against pacifist India to achieve multiple strategic objectives," he said.

While China "covertly allowed" North Korea to test underground nuclear explosion and carry out missile trials, it was also "increasing its naval presence in South China Sea to coerce into submission those opposing its claim on the Sprately Islands," the defence expert said. He said it would be "unwise" at this point of time for a recession-hit China to move against the Western interests, including Japan. "Therefore, the most attractive option is to attack a soft target like India and forcibly occupy its territory in the Northeast," Verma said.

But India is "least prepared" on ground to face the Chinese threat, he says and asks a series of questions on how will India respond to repulse the Chinese game plan or whether Indian leadership would be able to "take the heat of war". "Is Indian military equipped to face the two-front wars by Beijing and Islamabad? Is the Indian civil administration geared to meet the internal security challenges that the external actors will sponsor simultaneously through their doctrine of unrestricted warfare? "The answers are an unequivocal 'no'. Pacifist India is not ready by a long shot either on the internal or the external front," the defence journal editor says.

In view of the "imminent threat" posed by China, "the quickest way to swing out of pacifism to a state of assertion is by injecting military thinking in the civil administration to build the sinews. That will enormously increase the deliverables on ground -- from Lalgarh to Tawang," he says.

[aviator 3]

I think if push comes to shove, India can fully depend on USA and thats why China has not so far dared to show their skills against India.

Bro,

Dependence on U.S cannot be a reliable option. U.S has now started targeting pakistan, its base for terror against LET.

They can offer a diplomatic support but definately not militia support. The only ally of trust can be Russia maybe...

Like what Sadikk says, let us not fantasize, nothing as such will happen.

The biggest element of a war is 'Surprise'. If germany would have known that allies will land on normandy, they would have defeated them. Its the element of surprise that's one of the prominent winning feactor. The opposition wants you to exactly feel that nothing will happen. Imagine a scenerio wherein the enemy attacks first and destroy all your important bases. I am not disaggreing that it will end up in a nuclear holocaust, but the early bird do catches the worm.

M not a expert on the war strategy, but moves like Israel do help. To counter that, we should not be defensive.

"Aggression is the best form of defence". I think its high time we wake up, allocate atleast 30-40% of budget to defences, bring up a few ICBMs ( Which drdo can never produce..)

and strengthen ourselves.

Nevertheless, the privatisation of defence arms and ammunations, similar to what U.S. did long back may help in talking us ahead. Sarkari babus can do nothing except for their sixth pay commision and bribes.

[Sadikk 301]

China is getting aggressive just because of USA is aggressive on Pakistan.. If india cordinate and solve its own problems directly.. these things will never happen..

China is old time buddy of Pakistan.. and here is the catch..

well in this monetary policies world... where world is run by 10% of elite business houses.. and War is always bad for businesses except those in defense..

Its interesting to see.. how they are creating this issues now...

BJP hit many defense deals to protect INDIA from Pakistan.. now Congress will do same to save it from Chinese.. No war.. Pure Business..

Defense business houses are biggest culprits of all time.. They killed JFK just not to stop war with Vietnam..

Hope god gives lil brain opener to our netas to understand how important its to pump money in Health care and not in defense... I wonder how they dont understand small things like war is no benefit for either of us... just sit across the table and talk peace... Period...

PEACE

[Mufaddal 678]

u cannot sit across the table and talk peace

see what response pakistan and china have been giving to our peace talks

we have tried a lot to resolve these issues with peace talks but nothing has happened

we need to step up and take military action against pakistan , its a big insult to our country considering the way in which we are sending evidence of 26\11 to pakistan and the way they are making fun of it

i know war is never good option , innocent people die , and people who are in government continue their bakwas , but then do we have any other choice ??

the proxy war with pakistan will continue , they dont give a f**ck abt our peace talks unless we step up and take a stern military action against them .

the biggest problem of india is corruption , from arms deal to military deployement everywhere there is corruption , no bloody neta thinks abt our soldiers and abt us , they know they are always safe in their z level security its the common man who is at risk

i liked the eg of israel , when it was created it was been looked down by neighbouring arabic countries , they decided to wage a war and we all know the results , since then no one has dared to look down on israel as a weak nation

the point is the proxy war will always continue , thats y its called proxy war , but atleast we need to teach cilprits a lesson rather than taking bull**** after bull**** from them , its an insult to our dignity and our nation

these are just my views on situation

whether china attacks or not i dont know , but i know one thing we shud step up and stop taking insults from other countries

[aviator 3]

Total people killed in acts of terror across India in 2007-08 = 2016

This is around 6 people per day.

It is justified that we have around 15 lakh army personell and still our 6 nationals are killed everyday.

What happens wen an american dies in an act of terror or is kidnapped? The whole world gathers just for that single fellow.

Acts of terror implant fear in the minds of the civilians.

If parliament is attacked, we just watch and everytime we search for a diplomat way.......

Does a setback in economy due to war so fearful that we are letting our citizens die?

Will pakistan leave kashmir (the epicentre of Indo Pak disagreement), the piece of land it has been claiming for 20 years now, by mere talking???

The politics in PAK revolves around kashmir and their Netas are no better than ours........

Pak itself is going to dogs with political and economic instability, its just a matter of time when it will be taken over by men of terror. If it can be prez a few years back, why it can't be a JeM leader a few years ahead. What if they then lay their hands on nukes which they are so desperate to get since inception.

Its high time India should act. Either sweep the terror out of Pak (by specific targetting) or sweep it out of the world map.

Edited September 18, 2009 by aviator

[Sadikk 301]

Total people killed in acts of terror across India in 2007-08 = 2016

More than 700 People die daily to hunger... anyone cares??

More than 1000 people die every year just because of drinking dirty water... anyone cares??

more than 1000s raped, several thousand murders, even more drunk drive accidents.. anyone cares??

Why its just people get emotional when it comes to terrorism??? or cross border fire ETC..???

Dont worry this tension between India and china is just because USA and Israel wants to sell missile Defense systems to us.. Once we buy it.. DOne.. Peace and economic boom will prevail and we will go busy with lives as usual...

Guys its all my personal opinion and point of view...

[kshah 452]

I think we should have very simplistic view of cross border situation nor very critical.

Westerners are known to create tensions between any countries where their interests are involved. Iran - Iraq war, attack on terrorism and subsequent attack on afghanistan and iraq. Creation of Israel and even first and second world wars. Which were not initiated by Germany, yet Germany was blamed for both. We will never be out of problem till we stop thinking with western brains

China can never be friend of India because it has very big ambitions, i.e. to be in league of US and Russia. India has very confused ambition where they look at US for economic model and Russia for social model. We have very little indegenious thinking for our own solutions.

Terrorism is out come of poor Indian politics then cross border issue. It was year 1948 and subsequent years where Mr. Nehru made mistakes and terrorism was born. Even after India never took concrete steps to curb terrorism, even after so many years of independence we are yet to have agreement on type of laws we should have for anti social activities like terrorism, adulteration in food etc. In my view point terrorism is no worst than one who sells adultrated food or chemical factories polluting underground water - all done with full knowledge.

the biggest problem of india is corruption , from arms deal to military deployement everywhere there is corruption , no bloody neta thinks abt our soldiers and abt us , they know they are always safe in their z level security its the common man who is at risk

This demoralizes our otherwise capable armed forces.

i liked the eg of israel , when it was created it was been looked down by neighbouring arabic countries , they decided to wage a war and we all know the results , since then no one has dared to look down on israel as a weak nation

Even if you look at iisrael, they initially depended on westerners to get arm and technology support, now they are least dependennt of westerners. We have not created any thing off our own.

We Indians has typical mentality of "I AM POOR". I laugh when I read articles in news paper stating that India wasted Rs. 400 crore on partially failed moon mission or when they mention about few tens of crore missile fails. Unless we come out of this mentality, we can never develop any thing of our own, as new ideas cost lots of money. Even old ideas cost lots of money - initially - when we do not have any manufacturing abilities..

There are articles on India, US and China that by year so and so,, US will be devided in 25 parts, India in X number of parts and blah blah. They just add fuel to our insecurities and give politicians a chance to spend huge money on arms deal and there by corruption.

Before few years, I visited one DRDO fair and exhibiton, where they called Indian Industry to paticipate in Indignation of various parts and stores needed by defense, I was surprised when I saw articles like wiper, nuts, bolts, rubber bellow to be indigenised. It shows what they did for so many years. I don't see fault of DRDO officials or scientist in this, I see fault of our politicians who never allowed them to put efforts to do what is needed.

Our priorities should be like this:

1. To give best of the salaries to Defense personnel.

2. Defense deals should not pass through all red tapes its passing right now and even defense accounts should be audited - so corruption decreases and yield increases.

3. Should have uniform law and special judiciary for Anti Social activities like terrorism, adulteration, willful spoilage of natural resources.

4. Uniform foreign policy, which do not change with governments. (In US no president can change foreign policies, they can just make statements about changing policies..)

[Sadikk 301]

^^^

100% Agreed... Very well said..