China-India relations - Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association

A Chinese-Indian Nuclear War Would Ruin the Whole Planet

Kyle Mizokami — Sun, 17 Jan 2021 00:24:24 +0000

The fall out would impact sunlight and crop yields across the globe.

Key point: Even a “small” nuclear war is not so small in its impact. Here is how any such conflict could doom all of humanity, not just the combatants.

A hypothetical war between India and China would be one of the largest and most destructive conflicts in Asia. A war between the two powers would rock the Indo-Pacific region, cause thousands of casualties on both sides and take a significant toll on the global economy. Geography and demographics would play a unique role, limiting the war’s scope and ultimately the conditions of victory.

This first appeared earlier and is being reposted due to reader interest.

India and China border one another in two locations, northern India/western China and eastern India/southern China, with territorial disputes in both areas. China attacked both theaters in October 1962, starting a month-long war that resulted in minor Chinese gains on the ground.

Both countries’ “No First Use” policies regarding nuclear weapons make the outbreak of nuclear war very unlikely. Both countries have such large populations, each over 1.3 billion, that they are essentially unconquerable. Like all modern wars, a war between India and China would be fought over land, sea, and air; geography would limit the scope of the land conflict, while it would be the air conflict, fought with both aircraft and missiles, that would do the most damage to both countries. The trump card, however, may be India’s unique position to dominate a sea conflict, with dire consequences for the Chinese economy.

A war between the two countries would, unlike the 1962 war, involve major air action on both sides. Both countries maintain large tactical air forces capable of flying missions over the area. People’s Liberation Army Air Force units in the Lanzhou Military Region would fly against Punjab, Himchal Pradesh, and Uttarakhand and from the expansive Chengdu Military region against India’s Arunachal Pradesh. The Lanzhou district is home to J-11 and J-11B fighters, two regiments of H-6 strategic bombers, and grab bag of J-7 and J-8 fighters. A lack of forward bases in Xinjiang means the Lanzhou Military Region could probably only support a limited air campaign against northern India. The Chengdu Military Region is home to advanced J-11A and J-10 fighters but there are relatively few military airfields in Tibet anywhere near India.

Still, China does not necessarily need tactical aircraft to do great damage to India. China could supplement its aerial firepower with ballistic missiles from the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Forces. The PLARF overseas both nuclear, conventional, and dual-use ballistic missiles, and could conceivably move up to two thousand short- and medium-range DF-11, DF-15, and DF-21 ballistic missiles into positions adjacent to India. These missiles could be used to blitz Indian strategic targets on the ground, at the cost of making them unavailable for contingencies in the South and East China Seas.

Meanwhile, India’s air forces are in a better position to contest the skies than their Chinese counterparts. While the war would take place on China’s sparsely manned frontier, New Delhi is only 213 miles from the Tibetan frontier. India’s air fleet of 230 Su-30Mk1 Flankers, sixty-nine MiG-29s, and even its Mirage 2000s are competitive with or even better than most of China’s aircraft in theater, at least until the J-20 fighter becomes operational. India likely has enough aircraft to deal with a two-front war, facing off with Pakistan’s Air Force at the same time. India is also fielding the Akash medium-range air defense missile system to protect air bases and other high-value targets.

While India could be reasonably confident of having an air force that deters war, at least in the near term, it has no way of stopping a Chinese ballistic-missile offensive. Chinese missile units, firing from Xinjiang and Tibet, could hit targets across the northern half of India with impunity. India has no ballistic-missile defenses and does not have the combined air- and space-based assets necessary to hunt down and destroy the missile launchers. India’s own ballistic missiles are dedicated to the nuclear mission and would be unavailable for conventional war.

The war on the ground between the Indian and Chinese armies might at first glance seem like the most decisive phase of the war, but it’s actually quite the opposite. Both the western and eastern theaters are in rugged locations with little transportation infrastructure, making it difficult to send a mechanized army through. Massed attacks could be easily stopped with artillery as attacking forces are funneled through well-known valleys and mountain passes. Despite the enormous size of both armies (1.2 million for the Indian Army and 2.2 for the Chinese Army) fighting on the ground would likely be a stalemate with little lost or gained.

The war at sea would be the decisive front in a conflict between the two countries. Sitting astride the Indian Ocean, India lies on China’s jugular vein. The Indian Navy, with its force of submarines, aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya and surface ships could easily curtail the flow of trade between China and Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. It would take the Chinese Navy weeks to assemble and sail a fleet capable of contesting the blockade. Even then, the blockade would be hard to break up, conducted over the thousands of square miles of the Indian Ocean.

Meanwhile, shipping to and from China would be forced to divert through the western Pacific Ocean, where such diversions would be vulnerable to Australian, Japanese, or American naval action. 87 percent of the country’s petroleum needs are imported from abroad, particularly the Middle East and Africa. China’s strategic petroleum reserves, once completed sometime in the 2020s, could stave off a nationwide fuel shortage for up to seventy-seven days—but after that Beijing would have to seek an end to the war however possible.

The second-order effects of the war at sea would be India’s greatest weapon. War jitters, the shock to the global economy, and punitive economic action by India’s allies—including Japan and the United States—could see demands for exports fall, with the potential to throw millions of Chinese laborers out of work. Domestic unrest fueled by economic troubles could become a major problem for the Chinese Communist Party and its hold on the nation. China has no similar lever over India, except in the form of a rain of ballistic missiles with high-explosive warheads on New Delhi and other major cities.

A war between India and China would be nasty, brutal, and short, with far-reaching consequences for the global economy. The balance of power and geographic constraints means a war would almost certainly fail to prove decisive. Both sides have almost certainly concluded this, which is why there hasn’t been a war for more than fifty years. We can only hope it stays that way.

Kyle Mizokami is a defense and national-security writer based in San Francisco who has appeared in the Diplomat, Foreign Policy, War is Boring and the Daily Beast. In 2009 he cofounded the defense and security blog Japan Security Watch. You can follow him on Twitter: @KyleMizokami. This first appeared earlier and is being reposted due to reader interest.

Image: Reuters.

Source: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/chinese-indian-nuclear-war-would-ruin-whole-planet-176573

[Disclaimer]

The post A Chinese-Indian Nuclear War Would Ruin the Whole Planet first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Germany’s Maas urges India, China to ‘deescalate’ border tensions

Deutsche Welle — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 04:32:04 +0000

In a wide-ranging interview with DW, Foreign Minister Heiko Maas urged India and China to “deescalate” their deadly border spat. He also said NATO would endure despite Trump’s plan to trim US troop numbers in Germany.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas on Wednesday called on both China and India to deescalate tensions and peacefully resolve their Himalayan border dispute. “These are two large countries and I don’t want to begin to think about the conflict that could happen if this results in a real military escalation,” Maas told DW. “That’s why we are trying at all levels on both sides to bring about de-escalation.”

Maas said Germany was unlikely to directly involve itself, but added that it was using its influence to dissuade a military clash.

“I don’t think that Germany needs to get involved everywhere as a mediator. But we are sitting on the UN Security Council and we will take on the presidency in July,” he said. “I believe the expectation in the international community is that countries like India and China should not get embroiled in a conflict that would not only affect those two nations, but also the entire region.

“And that’s why we are doing what we can to influence both sides with the clear message to deescalate this conflict and avoid a further escalation, especially a military one.”

Over the past few weeks, Chinese and Indian troops have been locked in aggressive posturing at multiple locations along the two nations’ de facto border, known as Line of Actual Control (LAC), raising tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors.

While a skirmish this week left 20 Indian soldiers dead, China has refused to confirm if it suffered any casualties. The incident, the first deadly clash at the border in decades, dominated Indian news channels and inflamed social media in both countries.

On EU presidency

Germany is due to take over the rotating presidency of the European Council from July 2020. When asked about Germany’s plans for the EU, Maas said Berlin wanted to make sure that member states severely hit by the coronavirus pandemic were “helped to recover quickly.”

“A large export nation like Germany profits when people prosper in Europe. That’s why we want to make sure the countries that have been hit hard by the coronavirus, like Italy and Spain, will be helped to recover quickly from the crisis,” the minister said, adding: “That’s not only good for those countries and Europe. It’s also good for Germany.”

During its presidency in the second half of the year, Germany would also seek to rein in conflicts “between north and south” in the 27-nation bloc, Maas said. “We want to find a solution to that. We’ve made a proposal with France, and I believe it will be the basis for consensus within the European Union.”

When asked about the intra-EU disagreements between “east and west,” Maas said countries in Central and Eastern Europe such as Poland and Baltic nations, had “different political and security concerns” compared to Western Europe. “So yes, Germany can be a bridge in Europe between east and west,” said Maas in support of a strategy to dispel “any impression that they’re second-class members.”

Regarding two EU rule-of-law proceedings against Hungary and Poland, Maas said these would be on the six-month German presidency agenda. “The rule of law is one of our core values and must not become a point of contention in the European Union,” he asserted.

Trans-Atlantic ties ‘complicated’

Maas also touched on the subject of NATO and the state of trans-Atlantic ties. US President Donald Trump on Monday announced a major reduction in American troop strength in Germany, from around 34,500 personnel down to 25,000.

Germany, Trump said, is not meeting its commitment to spend 2% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on defense as required by the NATO alliance. Member nations had pledged to reach the 2% threshold by 2024. Germany has said it hopes to reach the target by 2031.

Trump has long complained that host nations have not been paying their fair share for the US troops and has repeatedly singled out Germany as a major offender. Until Berlin meets the spending target, he said, the US will reduce its deployment in the country.

Trump’s move to reduce US troop numbers in Germany would not leave Europe managing on its own, Maas said. He stressed that Europeans and Americans are united by shared values, namely liberal democracy and freedom, “even if relations are complicated at the moment.”

It was in the United States’ interest to remain closely tied to Europe in terms of foreign and security policy, Maas said, but conceded that “maybe the US will not be the protective shield that it once was for Europe.”

“That will lead to us having to do more for our own security,” he underlined, adding that Europe was “having that discussion” but not to the extent of uncoupling security. “I don’t want Europe to become militarily independent. I want us to realize our security interests as an ally in NATO — with the United States,” Maas said.

“We’ve already taken on a lot of responsibilities, in Africa, for example, both Europe and Germany and France,” he said, referring to Sahel nations such as Mali. Germany was also playing a role in the “intra-Afghan peace process,” said Maas. “It’s always about security, but also diplomacy… because in the end, wars need peace treaties and they need political and not military solutions,” he stressed.

Source: https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-maas-urges-india-china-to-deescalate-border-tensions/a-53852433

[Disclaimer]

The post Germany’s Maas urges India, China to ‘deescalate’ border tensions first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The border spat between India and China is turning into an all-out media war

James Griffiths, CNN — Tue, 09 Jun 2020 13:36:51 +0000

China and India have been engaged in an ongoing border dispute along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the Himalayas.

Hong Kong (CNN) China and India’s latest border dispute may have mainly involved scuffles and troop maneuvers on the ground, but it has been all-out war in the respective countries’ media.

Tensions have been growing in the Himalayas along one of the world’s longest land borders, with New Delhi and Beijing both accusing the other of overstepping the Line of Actual Control (LAC) that separates the two. The territory has long been disputed, erupting into numerous minor conflicts and diplomatic spats since a bloody war between the countries in 1962.

On Saturday, military leaders met at the border to “peacefully resolve the situation in the border areas,” according to a statement from India’s foreign ministry. Even today, just what occurred on the ground in the highly militarized region remains unclear — in part because the main body of this distinctly 21st-century conflict has so far mostly played out through propaganda, strategic leaks, and aggressive posturing in the media.

Ahead of Saturday’s meeting, Chinese broadcasters aired footage of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) maneuvers in the region — complete with planes and trucks full of troops — in what state media described as “demonstrating China’s capability of quickly reinforcing border defenses when necessary.” Unconfirmed — and in some cases, debunked — videos have also circulated on both Chinese and Indian social media purporting to show troop incursions and scuffles between soldiers.

Writing in India’s Hindustan Times, strategic affairs analyst Shishir Gupta said Sunday that Chinese reports on PLA maneuvers were part of a “disinformation campaign” designed to sap Indian resolve, and “overwhelm the enemy into panic so that his capacity to negotiate is weakened.”

Jingoistic rhetoric

Both Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have built public support in large part on nationalism and a promise of future greatness. This often translates into jingoism and aggressive rhetoric, particularly when playing to a domestic audience.

Such an approach was evidenced in Chinese coverage of the PLA maneuvers in the Himalayas. Equally, despite Delhi’s announcement Saturday of easing tensions, leading Indian government figures struck an aggressive tone Monday, with Home Affairs Minister Amit Shah telling a rally of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) that “any intrusion into the borders of India will be punished.”

“Some used to say that US and Israel were the only countries which were willing and capable of avenging every drop of the blood of their soldiers,” Shah said. “(Modi) has added India to that list.”

Defense Minister Rajnath Singh also weighed in Monday, saying: “I would remind everyone, India’s leadership will not let our self-respect suffer. India’s policy is clear, we won’t hurt any country’s integrity and dignity. At the same time, we will not let any country to hurt our integrity.”

Their statements came amid growing pressure from opposition parties to take a stronger line, with the Congress party’s Rahul Gandhi repeating claims that Delhi was downplaying the scale of the Chinese incursion, saying in a tweet “the media is muzzled and terrified. The truth seems dormant.”

BJP@BJP4India

”Under PM Modi’s leadership, any intrusion into the the borders of India will be punished. Some used to say that US and Israel were the only countries which were willing and capable of avenging every drop of the blood of their soldiers. Modi Ji has added India to that list.”

Long-running dispute

In a piece Tuesday published by the Global Times — a nationalist, Chinese state-backed tabloid — and republished by the official website of the PLA, military analysts predicted that “the ongoing standoff is not likely to end immediately, as concrete issues must still be resolved.”

How resolvable those issues actually are is unclear, given they date back decades and are largely fueled by both sides’ refusal to accept the other’s territorial claims. Tensions grew late last month amid accusations both countries had overstepped the LAC and were reinforcing their military position on the de facto border.

“A ‘status quo ante’ will require that Chinese soldiers vacate areas where they have dug in for weeks now. Nothing short of their full withdrawal should satisfy India, which means that more than talks on the ground and by diplomats, there is a need for strong political direction from Beijing to the PLA to do that,” The Hindu, a leading Indian newspaper, noted in an editorial this week.

“Otherwise, India must prepare for a long-drawn stand-off, and manoeuvres aimed at ensuring China’s pull back.”

If China’s propaganda and very public PLA deployments are designed to persuade India to back off, Delhi may be looking for similar influence in emphasizing and building its international ties, linking the border issue to other disputes China has in the wider Asia-Pacific region.

Last week, India and Australia signed two bilateral military agreements in the “first step in deepening of the defense relationship” between the two Indo-Pacific powers. India has also been increasing its defense cooperation with the US, including with the annual Malabar naval exercises, also involving Japan.

This strategy has not gone unnoticed in Beijing. China Daily, another state-run newspaper, said in an editorial that “contrary to the sober-minded stance adopted by China and India, some excitable politicians in the United States seem eager to whip up hostilities between the two giant neighbors.”

“(Washington’s) offer to help may have emboldened some in India to take a tougher stand against China in order to ‘defend its pride’,” the paper added.

Writing late last month, Chinese analyst Long Xingchun warned Delhi to “keep a sober head to not be used as cannon ash by the US.”

“Although China’s relationship with the US is tense, the international environment for China is much better than it was in 1962 when India started and (was) crushingly defeated in a border war with China,” Long wrote. “In 1962, the national strength of China and India were comparable. Today by stark contrast, China’s GDP is about five times that of India.”

For now, outright aggression is confined to the media. But with tensions running hot despite the efforts of military figures Saturday, the likelihood of this problem going away soon seems highly unlikely.

Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/09/asia/india-china-ladakh-border-media-intl-hnk/index.html
[Disclaimer]

The post The border spat between India and China is turning into an all-out media war first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Chinese and Indian troops exchange blows along Sikkim border leaving several soldiers injured

Sanjay Jha — Sun, 10 May 2020 22:38:49 +0000

India and China share a lengthy border. Credit: PA

Several soldiers were injured when hundreds of Chinese and Indian troops reportedly exchanged blows along Nakula border in the northeastern Indian state of Sikkim on Saturday.

“Four Indian soldiers and seven Chinese troops suffered injuries during the confrontation that involved around 150 soldiers,” said one Indian on condition of anonymity.

The aggressive confrontation between the troops happened near the Naku La sector, a pass at a height of more than 5,000 meters.

Sources in the Indian government said: “Temporary and short duration face-offs between border guarding troops do occur as boundaries are not resolved.

“Aggressive behavior by the two sides resulted in minor injuries to troops.

“The two sides disengaged after dialogue and interaction at local level.”

India and China share a border that is almost 4000km long, which has many unresolved boundary issues.

This is not the first time Indian and Chinese soldiers have exchanged blows along the border.

In August 2017, Indian and Chinese soldiers threw stones at each other and also exchanged blows near Pangong Lake in Ladakh, close to the de facto border between the two countries.

The incident took place after Indian soldiers patrolling the area did not heed to objection to their presence in the area by Chinese troops.

After the scuffle, both sides called for reinforcements. However, the face-off ended following delegation-level talks between the two sides.

The clash near the Line of Actual Control (LAC) aggravated bilateral tensions as it happened at a time when the two neighbors when their soldiers began confronting each other at the Doklam plateau where India, China, and Bhutan meet.

India had sent its troops to stop China building a road in the remote, uninhabited territory, which is claimed by both China and Bhutan.

Beijing said India had no role to play in the area, and ordered its troops to withdraw unilaterally or face the prospect of an escalation.

Source: https://www.itv.com/news/2020-05-10/chinese-and-indian-troops-exchange-blows-along-sikkim-border-leaving-several-soldiers-injured/

[Disclaimer]

The post Chinese and Indian troops exchange blows along Sikkim border leaving several soldiers injured first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.