Who is best in mountain warfare? India or China?

[p2prada]

the PLA is trying to create an officer corps

IA is planning on creating 3 Mountain corps for the Chinese border, one for strike and 2 for defence. This became public only recently when Army chief announced the separation of the Army into two branches, one against Pakistan and the other against China. Both branches will have their own logistics and command. We are building a capability based force and moving away from an adversary specific force.

IA wants ITBP under it's control, but I doubt that may happen.

 

[p2prada]

The Chinese have two important corps under the PLA's wing, the 2nd Artillery Corps and the 15th Airborne Corps. I don't think we have an equivalent. We have a fledgling strategic forces command and a much smaller transport fleet.

It would be a mess if PLA decides to open a new front using the 15th corps, maybe in Pak.

 

[hit&run]

IA is planning on creating 3 Mountain corps for the Chinese border, one for strike and 2 for defence. This became public only recently when Army chief announced the separation of the Army into two branches, one against Pakistan and the other against China. Both branches will have their own logistics and command. We are building a capability based force and moving away from an adversary specific force.

IA wants ITBP under it's control, but I doubt that may happen.

That is a good news. I remember posting such ''should be'' two years back in two front war thread. Its good to know that they have listened to me .

 

[ace009]

In modern warfare once you defeat them in Air then number of troops on the ground becomes irrelevant. This is what has happened in two Iraq wars, this is what has made Chinese rethink what they were planning before i.e using troops as cannon fodder. Getting Murdered by PLA in Tibet is just an over statement of a mind who thinks InA will be struggling at the Plateau in Isolation. InA chief would be an absent minded if he would do it i.e move in without air cover, and i am sure he is not.
.
My 2 cents.

I would beg to differ. The differences between Iraq and Himalays is in the terrain. Air-strikes over the desert plains of Iraq could cripple any army - without air-support the armor and infantry will be sitting ducks. Compared to that air strikes are not so simple, neither as effective over the mountainous terrains of the Himalayas. Ask the Russians who fought in Chechnya.

Air superiority will be important, and will determine who gets the upper hand, but without boots on the ground, it will be well neigh impossible to defend/ attack through the Himalayas. And boots in the ground means supply lines (including aerial supply), all leading back to air-support.

All in all, a war over the Himalayas in the modern age will be brutal, short and all-pervasive - and any early advantage will be devastating for the opposite side (remember Kargil?).

As for airlift capabilities and air supply capabilities, I am not informed enough to form an opinion. However, if IAF can indeed airlift a whole battalion strength of Mechanized infantry into Tibet and then keep them supplied for 3-4 months, while at the same time provide them with air-defense, then I can agree that opening a second front in Tibet will be a good idea. All in all IA will need a whole division dedicated to Tibet for a new front there.

As for Arunachal, IA should be making fortifications in each and every China-accessible valley, armed with SAMs, Arty batteries, Light tanks and MBRLs. These should be supported by tactical (conventional) SSMs and attack choppers, not to mention air-defense aircraft and air-superiority fighters.

 

[Ray]

Let us look at a few issues.

1. India's roads are terrible in the NE and tracks are few

If that is so, can the Chinese advance into India? Can Chinese artillery be brought up, even if the Chinese infantry captures some area?

With no artillery being able to come forward, what can the Chinese support?

In 1962, the Chinese withdrew from NEFA,which the vociferously now claim is 'South Tibet'. Yet, the did not do so in Aksai Chin.

It is not that the Chinese were magnanimous, it was just a military decision. If they stayed at those places captured, the Chinese would not be able to hold on to it owing to the lack of artillery support as also because of poor logistic support, there being no roads or tracks to bring both forward. On the other hand, the Aksai Chin was a plateau and so it was possible to move war materiel and logistics without any problem.

2. The Chinese indeed has an Airborne Division. However, what task could they carry out? It must be remembered that it is fine to have AB troops, but if there is no link up within a specific period of time, then they will not be able to sustain themselves. It must be also noted that to maintain a favourable air situation, let alone air superiority is no mean task. More so, when the IAF are no pushovers!

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Compared to that air strikes are not so simple, neither as effective over the mountainous terrains of the Himalayas. Ask the Russians who fought in Chechnya.
.

Chechnya is totally different from J&K and N.E, We are talking altitudes over 5045 meters, Their are few mountain passes and access to other side, PLA`s TAR region is heavily supported by Bridges and few Railway life line, Due to Mountain terrain over Arunachal area, Medium and Long range SAMs are not very effective, PLAAF is hampered coz of high altitudes and thin air over TAR, Where as IAF dont have the same from Assam and southern states over N.E, IAF bases are very close to Arunachal and number is some where around 10-15 major bases, IA have advantage coz most heights in the area are under IA..

Both in Air and Ground we have advantage due to geography..
Where for a Offencive planing they are now planned 2 strike crops for strategics locations..

 

[agentperry]

Let us look at a few issues.

1. India's roads are terrible in the NE and tracks are few

If that is so, can the Chinese advance into India? Can Chinese artillery be brought up, even if the Chinese infantry captures some area?

With no artillery being able to come forward, what can the Chinese support?

In 1962, the Chinese withdrew from NEFA,which the vociferously now claim is 'South Tibet'. Yet, the did not do so in Aksai Chin.

It is not that the Chinese were magnanimous, it was just a military decision. If they stayed at those places captured, the Chinese would not be able to hold on to it owing to the lack of artillery support as also because of poor logistic support, there being no roads or tracks to bring both forward. On the other hand, the Aksai Chin was a plateau and so it was possible to move war materiel and logistics without any problem.

The Chinese indeed has an Airborne Division. However, what task could they carry out? It must be remembered that it is fine to have AB troops, but if there is no link up within a specific period of time, then they will not be able to sustain themselves. It must be also noted that to maintain a favourable air situation, let alone air superiority is no mean task. More so, when the IAF are no pushovers!

same was the philosophy of India till late 1990s. in the wake of chinese modernization, the tactic of not developing NE infrastructure so as to limit chinese advancement by not developing our-self but with chinese getting more and more helicopter and transport aircrafts for forward deploying of troops, this tactic is utter failure.

some sources claims that china can deploy 50000 withing 2500 km of chinese borders that too not a minute more than 24 hours means ap and jk are not far away.

good infra is needed to protect NE and JK so as to win a war and not make china vacate the land( by making it vietnam for china in NE)

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Let us look at a few issues.
1. India's roads are terrible in the NE and tracks are few,With no artillery being able to come forward, what can the Chinese support?

2. The Chinese indeed has an Airborne Division. However, what task could they carry out?

@Sir,
PLA do have assets for this specific task, They have small truck mounted Arty pieces both heavy and light, They conducted many experiment and now they have Mech units for this purpose, Indeed unless they cut off Indian Army totally from these areas they can progress which is not possible..

Airborne troop of PLA are can to be dropped strengthen Weak units Or to cut off our supply-lines until the main force behind reaches them, But such chances are rare, though PLA maintain such force in TAR..

 

[p2prada]

As for airlift capabilities and air supply capabilities, I am not informed enough to form an opinion. However, if IAF can indeed airlift a whole battalion strength of Mechanized infantry into Tibet and then keep them supplied for 3-4 months, while at the same time provide them with air-defense, then I can agree that opening a second front in Tibet will be a good idea. All in all IA will need a whole division dedicated to Tibet for a new front there.

Your battalion will end up fighting a million Chinese by the end of the day. Tibet is a no go, there are civilian centres and the entire place is a plateau. In truth, neither India nor China can afford to fight in plains. Keeping a battalion supplied for 3 to 4 months in Tibet, no chance, expect them to be annihilated in the first few days alone.

Anyway a good article,

In future, India could be subject to China's hegemonic attention. Since India would be better prepared by then, China may instead wish to set India back now by a preventive war. This means current day preparedness is as essential as preparation for the future. A [defeat] now will have as severe political costs, internally and externally, as it had back in 1962; for, as then, India is yet again contemplating a global role.

Read more: War-Gaming: Study Contemplates Conflict Between India and China - Global Spin - TIME.com

 

[LETHALFORCE]

The NE is is a very difficult terrain. India is at an advantage fighting from higher ground to lower ground. The use or transport of artillery would be difficult by both sides. Cruise missles(unless used from air) would not be suitable. It would be more of an air and ground assault. Helicopters would be ideal in this terrain.

 

[Ray]

@Sir,
PLA do have assets for this specific task, They have small truck mounted Arty pieces both heavy and light, They conducted many experiment and now they have Mech units for this purpose, Indeed unless they cut off Indian Army totally from these areas they can progress which is not possible..

Airborne troop of PLA are can to be dropped strengthen Weak units Or to cut off our supply-lines until the main force behind reaches them, But such chances are rare, though PLA maintain such force in TAR..

Whatever they have done to move their artillery, can they move across mountains without roads? Or roads that are so bad that even mules find it a problem?

Why do you think it takes days to find out that the Chinese have come into areas, left some marks, and then left?

On the AB Div that is the task of AB troops (theoretical).

Take any sector (I will not discuss it for obvious reasons), can they link up?

If no link up and no airH because of the IAF contesting, how long will they last?

Check out Op Market Garden. It was an easier battle than what the Chinese will face.

Also check the theoretical staff figures for construction/ improvement of mountain roads and tracks with everything favourable!

 

[ace009]

Chechnya is totally different from J&K and N.E, We are talking altitudes over 5045 meters, Their are few mountain passes and access to other side, PLA`s TAR region is heavily supported by Bridges and few Railway life line, Due to Mountain terrain over Arunachal area, Medium and Long range SAMs are not very effective, PLAAF is hampered coz of high altitudes and thin air over TAR, Where as IAF dont have the same from Assam and southern states over N.E, IAF bases are very close to Arunachal and number is some where around 10-15 major bases, IA have advantage coz most heights in the area are under IA..

Both in Air and Ground we have advantage due to geography..
Where for a Offencive planing they are now planned 2 strike crops for strategics locations..

Well, Chechnya was less than half as difficult a terrain as TAR. The Russians did train in IA's HAWS to operate in Chechnya. But going back to TAR, if IA can put 3-4 of it's 12 mountain divisions in TAR within 2 weeks of the start of a PLA attack in Arunachal, then India will have a chance to free a part of Tibet from PRC- Ray and Kunal, do you think it is possible?
The very threat of that will probably make the CCP pull back PLA from Arunachal to bolster TAR. However, IA and IAF also has to hold ground in Arunachal for a month against PLA and PLAAF onslought.

The important thing to remember is that PLA/ PLAAF have the quantitative advantages in terms of troops and support (better infrastructure on the Chinese side). [This is a result of Delhi-based A-holes who think that India's development means development of their individual constituencies and the rest of the country can go to hell. Which is why whether it is Congress or BJP in power, most of development happens in North and Western India. If PLA takes over the oilfileds of Assam, it will serve the Delhi-billies right.]

Qualitiatively (equipment wise) I would say that the two sides are at par, with PLA having an edge over IA while IAF having an edge over PLAAF.

Training wise IA/ IAF is probably better off than PLA/ PLAAF in mountain warfare. So, it will all come down to strategy and better execution.

 

[ace009]

Your battalion will end up fighting a million Chinese by the end of the day. Tibet is a no go, there are civilian centres and the entire place is a plateau. In truth, neither India nor China can afford to fight in plains. Keeping a battalion supplied for 3 to 4 months in Tibet, no chance, expect them to be annihilated in the first few days alone.

Anyway a good article,

I do not believe that PLA can put in a Million strong army in the TAR within a month. However, theoretically they can put in 50,000 men within a month and maybe commit 150,000 in 3-4 months of campaign. Against that IA will need at least 50-60 thousand to hold (A whole corps). But if there is a war going on in Arunachal, then PLA will have to choose between the two fronts - it does not have unlimited forces in TAR/ Yunan. So, you would expect them to send in a division to bolster the division in TAR. IA will need at least a division to counter this.

The first mountain battalion is for strike purposes only. It has to be followed by 2-3 more defensive mountain battalions to hold the areas gained for a month. Eventually IA will need to put in a whole division to bolster the 4 battalions (as I mentioned before). Supplying one battalion for 3 months is tough, imagine supplying a whole division. And remember, for IA, 3-4 months is all they get. After that the passes are closed and the trapped army is on it's own. So, all in all "freeing" TAR is not possible for IA in the short term. Gaining some territory maybe, but the costs will be enormous.

OTOH, giving the Chinese a bloody nose in NE is very possible, but for that IA and MoD has to invest more in the NE, not to mention GoI in general.

 

[hit&run]

I would beg to differ. The differences between Iraq and Himalays is in the terrain. Air-strikes over the desert plains of Iraq could cripple any army - without air-support the armor and infantry will be sitting ducks. Compared to that air strikes are not so simple, neither as effective over the mountainous terrains of the Himalayas. Ask the Russians who fought in Chechnya.

Air superiority will be important, and will determine who gets the upper hand, but without boots on the ground, it will be well neigh impossible to defend/ attack through the Himalayas. And boots in the ground means supply lines (including aerial supply), all leading back to air-support.

All in all, a war over the Himalayas in the modern age will be brutal, short and all-pervasive - and any early advantage will be devastating for the opposite side (remember Kargil?).

As for airlift capabilities and air supply capabilities, I am not informed enough to form an opinion. However, if IAF can indeed airlift a whole battalion strength of Mechanized infantry into Tibet and then keep them supplied for 3-4 months, while at the same time provide them with air-defense, then I can agree that opening a second front in Tibet will be a good idea. All in all IA will need a whole division dedicated to Tibet for a new front there.

As for Arunachal, IA should be making fortifications in each and every China-accessible valley, armed with SAMs, Arty batteries, Light tanks and MBRLs. These should be supported by tactical (conventional) SSMs and attack choppers, not to mention air-defense aircraft and air-superiority fighters.

Well first we have to establish the objective of that war in mountains; otherwise this discussion is going to become full of fictional war scenarios.
.
Tactical targeting in mountainous terrain is comparatively difficult for those who are not practising for it but IAF can boasts of having mastery in it. If in planes it's easier to target it's easier to be targeted by easily deployed SAM, AA guns etc. as well; which is not that easier to deploy in mountains. Furthermore sending infantry units without armoured vehicles and adequate artillery cover would be another misadventure.
.
It's easier for IAF to carry more loads when taking off from our side of air strips. We can cross the hump easier than Chinese above trying the same from thin air and this has been done before during World War II (North East theatre). We do not need boots on grounds to kill Chinese belly crawlers. We do not need troops to capture townships in Tibet when we expect Indigenous population not hostile to us, given we have choked Chinese by Air to Air and Air to ground IAF offences.
.
During Operation Parakram in 2001-2002, almost a complete brigade group was airlifted to Kashmir valley to enhance the reserves available in 15 Corps for offensive operations.
.
Kargil was totally different scenario given Pakistani shameless lies of not admitting the presence of NLI. Eventually we were able to massacre whole NLI which proves that the war in mountains is going to be bloodier for all but not fast enough for Chinese 15th ABC to gain massive lands for them as most of them are claiming here because of sheer numbers they have. I repeat the objective has to be determined before going further.
.
Regards

 

[Iamanidiot]

One thing I learnt in the discussion

1)Our Infra at the Sino-China border is pathetic

2)We need more artillery

 

[agentperry]

One thing I learnt in the discussion

1)Our Infra at the Sino-China border is pathetic

2)We need more artillery

adding to it we need good radars and more uav who can fire missiles+ SAMs

 

[Ray]

As far as TAR is concerned, why do you think that the Chinese are so scared of the Dalai Lama and are forever criticising India for giving him asylum?

They are worried that if there is a synergy between the two, things would be cataclysmic!

 

[Iamanidiot]

Regarding Armour there are two place along the border where one can insert Armour.One is in Sikkim and the other is at Ladakh

 

[Iamanidiot]

As far as TAR is concerned, why do you think that the Chinese are so scared of the Dalai Lama and are forever criticising India for giving him asylum?

They are worried that if there is a synergy between the two, things would be cataclysmic!

Sir,I think it is too late the demographic already changed from what Iam hearing.Once TAR is gone they lose their control over Asean because of Tibetian rivers

 

[Iamanidiot]

adding to it we need good radars and more uav who can fire missiles+ SAMs

UAV's in the Himalayan terrain don't know