What's new

India | Preparing for a 'two front war' against China & Pakistan.

ITBP is a paramilitary police force.

What is the major change in Indian armed forces deployment ratio comparison between Pakistan and China. 80% against Pakistan and 20% against China.
Considering your 80/20 ratio to be true - this is the analysis.

There is something called the available width for deployment. For example if you designate an Army of 200000 men to defend a pass, at a time only around 2 regiments will be in use or deployed. The rest will have to remain in reserve. Besides there are supply issues.

Against China the mountainous terrain makes sure that limited forces are kept. Both in Sikkim and the North East the logistical and width is lacking. So fewer troops are required to defend them. Also the depth is present(with paramilitary), ravines, ranges, streams, glaciers etc. Also the threat perception is limited.

Facing Pakistan however is an entirely different scenario. Pakistan is considered unstable or volatile. Also the width is there to deploy troops(on both sides). There are no logistical constraints either. Plus there is a terror threat and requirement to keep the border sealed.
 
@Nassr

Pakistan has 4 wars with India. China one boundary skirmish (that wasnt even a full war).

Also Indian wants to Hold China (defensive position) and also you have the himalayas making difficult to attack India. Thirdly China has huge enemies sitting on other fronts like Russia, Japan and US. So China cannot commit too many forces on Indian front.

Against Pakistan Indian position is offensive as generally both sides trade territories after the war.

According to Indian Army Chiefs and Defence Ministers, all wars fought between India and Pakistan were limited wars. However, according to you, 1962 war with China was a border skirmish, which is a rather odd characterization.

Lets talk about comparative Indian Army deployment in the Himalayas i.e. Kashmir. Whereas India has deployed four corps (14, 15, 16 and 9 Corps) against Pakistan, against China merely some units of paramilitary ITBP battalions and two brigades (70 Brigade and 163 Brigade). And the forces against both Pakistan and China are all defensive forces with no strike corps. A limited strike corps may be raised at some stage though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Considering your 80/20 ratio to be true - this is the analysis.

There is something called the available width for deployment. For example if you designate an Army of 200000 men to defend a pass, at a time only around 2 regiments will be in use or deployed. The rest will have to remain in reserve. Besides there are supply issues.

Against China the mountainous terrain makes sure that limited forces are kept. Both in Sikkim and the North East the logistical and width is lacking. So fewer troops are required to defend them. Also the depth is present(with paramilitary), ravines, ranges, streams, glaciers etc. Also the threat perception is limited.

Facing Pakistan however is an entirely different scenario. Pakistan is considered unstable or volatile. Also the width is there to deploy troops(on both sides). There are no logistical constraints either. Plus there is a terror threat and requirement to keep the border sealed.

In Kashmir, four corps are deployed against Pakistan and only two brigades against China. There is not a major difference in the stretch of Indian border in Kashmir against Pakistan and China in terms of distance. But the strength of deployment is completely lopsided. There is no comparison - this clearly indicates that India does not expect any worthwhile threat from the Chinese. Why would Indian leaders name China as their number one enemy.
 
In Kashmir, four corps are deployed against Pakistan and only two brigades against China. There is not a major difference in the stretch of Indian border in Kashmir against Pakistan and China in terms of distance. But the strength of deployment is completely lopsided. There is no comparison - this clearly indicates that India does not expect any worthwhile threat from the Chinese. Why would Indian leaders name China as their number one enemy.

It is their personal opinion. There are no major troop concentrations on the Chinese side. In any case - you seem to know more about Indian military troop deployments than Indians :D :devil:
 
ITBP is a paramilitary police force.

What is the major change in Indian armed forces deployment ratio comparison between Pakistan and China. 80% against Pakistan and 20% against China.

well Right now we have deployed around 11-12 divisions which is enough to defend our borders along Tibet. In last 2-3 years we have formed 2 mountain divisions which are deployed in Arunach Pradesh. Again we are forming 1 more strike corps(2 divisions) which will be placed in NE too in next 3-4 years. This is sufficient to defend considering our terrain along China(Mountains with Jungles, swamps only). While in Pakistan's case its either plain land or deserts(except Kashmir) so ofcourse we need more troops there.
PS: and we can deploy troops from Jammu and Kashmir and to Leh sector too if required and we have done that in past so they are for dual purpose and not only for Pakistan.
 
i'll be brief.

culture- kshatriya, which is a type of upper caste, form majority of the officer corps in the indian military. they have a war culture since ancient days.


[/B]

Where did you get this one from ?
 
well Right now we have deployed around 11-12 divisions which is enough to defend our borders along Tibet. In last 2-3 years we have formed 2 mountain divisions which are deployed in Arunach Pradesh. Again we are forming 1 more strike corps(2 divisions) which will be placed in NE too in next 3-4 years. This is sufficient to defend considering our terrain along China(Mountains with Jungles, swamps only). While in Pakistan's case its either plain land or deserts(except Kashmir) so ofcourse we need more troops there.
PS: and we can deploy troops from Jammu and Kashmir and to Leh sector too if required and we have done that in past so they are for dual purpose and not only for Pakistan.

Please check the locations of the divisions in NE. With two additional divisions, you now have the capability to deploy along the Burmese border well - please check to see if two divisions have now been deployed along the Burmese border or not.

You are discussing a two front war - I wonder how would you shift forces during an ongoing war on both fronts in the same theater. This can only happen if in one of the sectors, the requirement diminishes - would Pakistan or China allow this to happen so that you can disengage and withdraw your forces for employment elsewhere. I don't think so.
 
It is their personal opinion. There are no major troop concentrations on the Chinese side. In any case - you seem to know more about Indian military troop deployments than Indians :D :devil:

India's defence ministers and chiefs of the army would not officially comment on their personal opinions. These were official statements. Even as early as 1998, when Vajpayee wrote a letter to the world leaders about India's nuclear tests, he cited China as the reason and stated in writing that China is India's major concern.
 
India's defence ministers and chiefs of the army would not officially comment on their personal opinions. These were official statements. Even as early as 1998, when Vajpayee wrote a letter to the world leaders about India's nuclear tests, he cited China as the reason and stated in writing that China is India's major concern.

Okay :coffee:
 
India feels that Pakistan threat is controlled.. but China can cause damage... NOTE the word CAN and not sure. But there is possibility of loosing to China. Therefore China is number 1 concern.

Pakistan now does not pose UNCONTROLLED threat to India.
 
Please check the locations of the divisions in NE. With two additional divisions, you now have the capability to deploy along the Burmese border well - please check to see if two divisions have now been deployed along the Burmese border or not.

You are discussing a two front war - I wonder how would you shift forces during an ongoing war on both fronts in the same theater. This can only happen if in one of the sectors, the requirement diminishes - would Pakistan or China allow this to happen so that you can disengage and withdraw your forces for employment elsewhere. I don't think so.

well we have deployed 12 divisions in NE and Leh sector(there headquarters can be in different states and they are only meant for China) which is more than enough to defend. Again when you are saying that we can't withdraw soldiers from Kashmir and other sectors and deploy in Leh then you are utter wrong. We have deployed 2-3 times troops than Pakistan there because we are offensive force, in 2 front war we can well reduce the strength from western borders and deploy in Leh and NE and still can defend against Pakistan and China.
 
India's defence ministers and chiefs of the army would not officially comment on their personal opinions. These were official statements. Even as early as 1998, when Vajpayee wrote a letter to the world leaders about India's nuclear tests, he cited China as the reason and stated in writing that China is India's major concern.

well I am saying this again, China has only limited offensive capability in NE or Leh because of terrain. 12 divisions(10 mountain+2 infantry) are more than enough to defend our borders there. We have deployed more troops in western borders because we are an offensive force there and Pakistan is defensive but in NE and Leh we are defensive.
 
ITBP is a paramilitary police force.

What is the major change in Indian armed forces deployment ratio comparison between Pakistan and China. 80% against Pakistan and 20% against China.

and why is that? see if you can figure it out
 
Back
Top Bottom