Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

phrozenflame

Junior Member
Registered Member
India plans to purchase over 100 French Rafale fighter jets, with the earliest deployment of fifth-generation fighters projected for 2035. Does this provide sufficient justification for China to export the J-35AE to Pakistan?
It's better for India to spend tons of money on Rafales and then J-35s can come and just undo the billions in Indian investment. By that time, PLAAF would have also sorted out all the kinks you find and discover in any new platforms along with maturing of the doctrines etc.
 

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
It's better for India to spend tons of money on Rafales and then J-35s can come and just undo the billions in Indian investment. By that time, PLAAF would have also sorted out all the kinks you find and discover in any new platforms along with maturing of the doctrines etc.
Yeah, it's a bit ironic. Doubling down just to pretend that everything went fine?
May as well buy with PL-15 attached to the tail.
 

GiantPanda

Junior Member
Registered Member
The worse thing you can do is look down on your opponent. The same way the americans and westerners found out before and during WWII against Japan.

No, the worst thing China can do is to actually divert even a significant part of its attention from the East Coast to India. The Himalayas block any real fight there -- and the Indians are an exceptionally vehement type of braggarts whose real danger comes from their propaganda.

Do not deny over their strengths when they have them but do not gloss their incompetencies when those are obvious as well.

Their carriers which are what are in questions here do not deploy at even a faction of China's STOBARs. We know this because as capitol ships showing the flag they are entirely missing from even their home region.
 

_killuminati_

Senior Member
Registered Member
Their priorities are, (1)local unrest, (2)clear trade routes, (3)not fail too much when compared to Pakistan, in this order. Yes, last one is unimpressive, but given that gdp difference is >10 times(i.e. India is much better governed even per capita), anything short of demilitarization sort of works for them.
When Pakistan was an actual threat in 1960-70s, Indians did quite well.
Why Indian military equipment is just 1-2× the size of Pakistan's despite having 10× larger GDP + defense budget? That sounds more like a massive inefficiency.
 

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
Why Indian military equipment is just 1-2× the size of Pakistan's despite having 10× larger GDP + defense budget? That sounds more like a massive inefficiency.
B/c there is no perceived threat. Pakistan isn't really one after the 1971 war, and especially after both nations went nuclear. India is just bigger, and aims higher.
Pakistan is "the enemy", sure...but at the same time, it's more or less a nuisance, from Indian perspective. Which ironically makes losses all the more humiliating, but this is a humiliation that can't reach out to general population.
On a broader scale - Pakistan isn't threat to independence or anything, and whatever indian politicians say - not a single sane one even for a second considers that China is preparing Hannibal-style invasion over the Himalayas. This leads to armed forces being sort of redundant in their "war" role, performing more as a social instutution.

It's the same situation as Russia v Ukraine - with latter being absolute examplary case of utterly bad management in everything other than army (2015-22) - horrible national development and trajectory. But army managed to get quite a lot from the resources it had, because national consensus (including elites) was there.

Pakistan, overall, is similar - and problem isn't just the metrics, it's their trajectory (per capita, reach of education/literacy, etc. in India is now ahead almost universally, even backward states are now ahead of Pakistan. It was worse across the whole nation not even that long time ago).
But ironically, the worse Pakistan is off, the more is push for (already highly prestigious) military to deliver. And since Pakistan does have a rather well established, non-comprador elites, it can pull it off.
 

_killuminati_

Senior Member
Registered Member
....
B/c there is no perceived threat. Pakistan isn't really one after the 1971 war, and especially after both nations went nuclear. India is just bigger, and aims higher.
Pakistan is "the enemy", sure...but at the same time, it's more or less a nuisance, from Indian perspective. Which ironically makes losses all the more humiliating, but this is a humiliation that can't reach out to general population.
On a broader scale - Pakistan isn't threat to independence or anything, and whatever indian politicians say - not a single sane one even for a second considers that China is preparing Hannibal-style invasion over the Himalayas. This leads to armed forces being sort of redundant in their "war" role, performing more as a social instutution.

It's the same situation as Russia v Ukraine - with latter being absolute examplary case of utterly bad management in everything other than army (2015-22) - horrible national development and trajectory. But army managed to get quite a lot from the resources it had, because national consensus (including elites) was there.

Pakistan, overall, is similar - and problem isn't just the metrics, it's their trajectory (per capita, reach of education/literacy, etc. in India is now ahead almost universally, even backward states are now ahead of Pakistan. It was worse across the whole nation not even that long time ago).
But ironically, the worse Pakistan is off, the more is push for (already highly prestigious) military to deliver. And since Pakistan does have a rather well established, non-comprador elites, it can pull it off.
That really doesn't explain much about the size difference.

India's def budget in 2024 was $86b, Pakistan's was $7.6b. Indian 11× higher. In 2014, it was Pak : Ind $7b : $37b. But India's equipment and personnel are not 11× higher, not even 5× higher, neither now nor in 2014. Examples (appr. raw estimates):

Airforce (excl. trainer/uav/heli)
Pak: 461
Ind: 890

Armored vehicles
Pak: 2677
Ind: 3513

Artillery
Pak: 3783
Ind: 5661

Naval surface combat fleet (excl. patrol/aux)
Pak: 30
Ind: 83

Naval aviation (excl trainer/uav)
Pak: 53
Ind: 217

Total active personnel
Pak: 0.66m
Ind: 1.43m

Reserve personnel
Pak: 0.55m
Ind: 1m

Afaik, ~70% of that budget in India goes to salaries/pensions/op readiness/maintenance/infra, while for Pak it is ~55%. The remaining is allocated to R&D and acquisitions.
_____

So where's the 11× higher budget going, even 70% of it?
Certainly not in equipment & personnel.

It looks like an inefficiency, possibly corruption or false inflated figure.
 

GiantPanda

Junior Member
Registered Member
B/c there is no perceived threat. Pakistan isn't really one after the 1971 war, and especially after both nations went nuclear. India is just bigger, and aims higher.
Pakistan is "the enemy", sure...but at the same time, it's more or less a nuisance, from Indian perspective.

A nuisance is what India is to China. The only reason India is even considered a foe by some outsiders is because India's propaganda incessantly claims China as an enemy because they do not want to be paired with Pakistan. They are trying to elevate themselves by creating a rivalry with China.

But there is no profit to China ever fighting a proper war with India and little ability for either side to really do so beyond straighening out the border here or there. That lack of importance is the reason why when there is a border issue, things are kept at the clubs and sticks level.

I have NEVER seen a single picture from either side of an actual intercept or confrontation between Chinese or Indian aircraft and warships unlike those of China's actual rivals where there are countless photos and videos of encounters with the US, Japan, RoC and the rest of the US allies.

Because of this purely propaganda aspect created by the Indian side, it is far better for China to ignore and simply point out their lies as well as their incompetency than to divert any real attention from actual foes to deal with this nuisance.
 

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
A nuisance is what India is to China. The only reason India is even considered a foe by some outsiders is because India's propaganda incessantly claims China as an enemy because they do not want to be paired with Pakistan. They are trying to elevate themselves by creating a rivalry with China.
Well, it goes back to 1960.
And frankly speaking, both sides aren't at their best when it comes to understanding each other.

India treats China as part of Pakistan problem. Very stupid approach the essentially turned uninformed fear into reality.

The bigger issue is, imho, the opposite direction though. The opinion you've just described (that India is 阿三 soft nuisance, and best way to handle it is through occasional beating) is shared widely in China's society, "widely" here meaning very high up. India is indeed sort of despised.

Modi tried fixing China relations early on (spending not insignificant political capital back then, because China is a big red flag in New Delhi), and it went nowhere largely due to China. Nowhere = no special reply.
Why India tried? Oh, it's simple. Just as India is Pakistan's main threat, main threat for India's government is it's own population expectations. They have a billion people in need of basics - water and electricity to homes, infrastructure, basic modern goods. All things that just happen to come from China, or China being best at.

Offtop: btw, strictly speaking, this is something Trump admin seems to miss. Indian modernization in general is far more tied on China than on any western markets regardless of relationship between Beijing and New Delhi. Hard to admit in DC, though.

I am not nowhere near Zhongnanhai, I don't know whether border accidents were intentional, or caused by an overzealous new PLA border commander. The problem was that Beijing decided it's a way to go, and India has nowhere to go anyway.

The result was horrible - arguably, China's largest geopolitical mistake of 2010s, - as India was almost pushed into western fold (something it resists with passion), and it took entire Trump to almost miraculously break it down. And miracles aren't something you rely on in IR.
Just to give you an idea how horrible - imagine Russia collapsing into blue in 2022-23(something light blue India would love the most, as India is traditional friendly to Russia; that's its biggest contradiction going away). That would've been effective strategic encirclement.

Hopefully, it will be fixed this time (China started reflecting that being surrounded by blues isn't exactly a good position starting last year) at least. But at least current Indian admin remembers that going to China may burn hands badly, and very unlikely Chinese giants (ZTE, HUAWEI, etc) will be able to reap that was possible in 2010s.
Yes, perhaps Beijing doesn't want to see itself doing that Soviet Union did for China in the 1950s, paving way for a future superpower to, first, contribute to SU overstretch, collapse, and then outright replacing it . But China of 1950s was 100% red, redder and more irreconcilable with west than Russia itself; Soviet Union had a choice.
India is neutral, and leaning blue. It is fundamental difference.
 
Last edited:

yungho

Junior Member
Registered Member
I am not nowhere near Zhongnanhai, I don't know whether border accidents were intentional, or caused by an overzealous new PLA border commander. The problem was that Beijing decided it's a way to go, and India has nowhere to go anyway.

The result was horrible - arguably, China's largest geopolitical mistake of 2010s, - as India was almost pushed into western fold (something it resists with passion), and it took entire Trump to almost miraculously break it down. And miracles aren't something you rely on in IR.
Just to give you an idea how horrible - imagine Russia collapsing into blue in 2022-23(something light blue India would love the most, as India is traditional friendly to Russia; that's its biggest contradiction going away). That would've been effective strategic encirclement.
Why do you believe the border incidents were Chinese initiated? I see where you are coming from (China won the battle in terms of the border, but lost the war in terms of big picture aftermath), but if India was challenging Chinese sovereignty China better respond. Remember the 1962 war began due to 'probing actions' from the Indian side. The border clashes is the only correct course of action if India was challenging Chinese sovereignty.
 
Top