View attachment 47366
A few days back someone called my post emotionally cynic or something, now this is what an emotional post looks like, complete with pseudo-history.
we were soviet lackeys until 1991 which meant bad relations with western world. 1991 economic crisis meant we needed to trade with them. Nukes were tested in 1998. Sanctions again. We needed them if we wanted to get out of economic misery.
That restraint was a very smart move to establish trust with the capitalist countries. When indians boast about $700 Billion forex reserves while looking at Pakistan, remember, it was steps like these(restraint during kargil) that helped us reach here.
Talking about war-fighting over land, Air Force as the main instrument of war has now triumphed over army.
In WW2, Hitler's Airforce was never as capable as UK's but Hitler's Army was superior to its peers - innovation in design & tactics. The result was evident. The lesson here is that airbombing was so inaccurate that it didnt matter if you had good or bad air-force, it just needed to be competent enough as it was your army that decided your fate.
Now, 70+ years later, Air-strikes have become so accurate & economical that its the Air Force that decides your fate in war not your army, case-in-point Russia-Ukraine war. Russia has clear superiority in manpower & armor, doesn't amount to much as their expensive tanks get blown to pieces by $500 drones. Neither side has clear superiority in the air, so its a stalemate. Airpower is determining the course of war here.
Also, including Russia in the comparison with China & western powers is funny now. Russia cant even produce Su-57 without subsystems from european companies. They are becoming technological laggards as time goes on & they wont be able to catch up in air-power. Do you know they are considering buying J-35 as their naval fighters now?? Tables have turned.
You are mixing a lot of things here. There is nothing inherent about india's culture that prevents india from going to war. Democracies generally avoid warfare as its wasteful. People take democracy for granted in this country & dont realise how good we have had it compared to other post colonial countries. Improving standard of living is more important than warfare. We are the fastest growing large economy. The day our growth dampens down & someone else takes our place, then people will realise how important that is.
We are averse to wars as thats the rational thing to do for a poor & under-industrialised country like ours. If you want india's MIC to progress like china's, that would require investment and R&D like china. Its a function of money not culture. Our meager resources are better spent to build-up our economy & industrialisation rather than MIC. MIC can be built up later once we are richer.
Also, our conventional warfighting strength has improved. I dont understand why you think otherwise. We are not spending as much as we can cause we have other priorities. Also, nuclear weapons give us breathing space. It allows us to spend on the much needed infra like roads, rail, ports, etc.
That was true like 15-20 years ago, not today. Everyone now realises that generals are not good rulers. Our people are more educated & wont tolerate military rule as we have living examples in our neighborhood - Pakistan & Myanmar - both Junta ruled, both riddled with ethnic wars, poor, miserable. The theaterisation of our military is a good example of faith in military's intentions.
well, in the short life i have had, i have seen arjun take decades for only 150 to be service. Meanwhile, Zorawar was prototyped & ordered in just 2 years. So, in the end it was all a function of money, R&D, maturity of industry.
This is just
.India's influence into SEA was a result of both conflict & trade. It wasn't as peaceful as you think. Similarly, Islam arrived in the subcontinent through trade & peaceful means. Conflict arrived later on after 10th century. This line you wrote - "This proves our mindset will never be along the invasive way of force projection. When this is ingrained in the basic human characteristics, it also get reflected in how we prepare our deterrence thru conventional force projection." is pure nonsense, case in point 1971.
That military power comes just from the size of our population & imported machinery. If we start spending a lot of money on R&D, that can change, but that shouldnt be our priority. What we can do, is to reorient our spending keeping the future in mind. Reduce the spending on army & increase the spending on air force, as air force is now the determining factor. Days of army openly charging into enemy territory are over. Cheap drones will chew everything up.
The declining share of defence spending in GDP raises critical questions about operational readiness and it’s likely adverse impact on national security.
newsanalytics.in
View attachment 47388
View attachment 47387
View attachment 47389
View attachment 47390
View attachment 47391
timesofindia.indiatimes.com
