Don’t miss the latest developments in business and finance.

A disproportionate imbalance

Who would win the battle between China and India? An interesting proposition to explore

Image
Devangshu Datta
4 min read Last Updated : Jul 22 2017 | 12:10 AM IST
Who would win if Dumbledore took on Gandalf in a magical duel? Some Youtube channels promote fantasy fights like this. Someone dreams up the contest, puts down relevant data — for example, Dumbledore uses a wand while Gandalf uses a staff — and asks viewers to pick a winner.

It might be interesting to try this format, for India versus China. Start with the history. Circa 1962, the two nations were at approximately the same level of development. Per capita income and GDP were much the same. At that time, India spent less on defence than China, both in nominal terms and in terms of percentage of GDP.

Neither nation manufactured its own weapons. Neither had nuclear weapons. There was little infrastructure in Tibet. Hence, China couldn’t bring airpower or armour to bear in 1962. India chose not to use airpower in an offensive role.

In diplomatic terms, the USA helped India materially and seemed prepared to do more. The Soviet Union remained officially neutral. However, the USSR is said to have cautioned the Chinese in private, and by the end of 1962, the USSR was making public statements supporting India. 

This was the first time the USSR did not wholeheartedly support its ideological brethren in a conflict. By the late 1960s, the USSR and China had fought an undeclared war. From then on, until 1991, India could count on Soviet support against China. 

The Chinese won a comprehensive victory, took large chunks of territory, and imposed a unilateral ceasefire when they had achieved their ends. The 1962 defeat set off shockwaves. Defence allocations in the Budget were doubled. India raised new mountain divisions and reviewed military doctrine. Lt. General Thomas Brian Henderson-Brooks and Brigadier (later Lt. Gen) Preminder Singh Bhagat were commissioned to analyse the conflict.

That report has never officially been declassified. But lessons were learnt. In 1967, in clashes on the Sikkim-Tibet border, the Indians, by all accounts, gave as good as they got. The Chinese pulled back and there was no escalation.

Fast Forward to 2017. Both sides have nuclear weapons. China has far more nukes. It also has missiles and nuclear-armed submarines, which could hit Kochi or Port Blair. Both sides have massive standing armies. The Indian army has seen much more action. But China has the larger force.

China also has a larger air force, which is indigenous. This means that it does not have issues about sourcing spares in a conflict. It has built excellent infrastructure in Tibet. This means it can easily transport troops, heavy artillery, and armour. It also has airfields in Tibet though India has better air force infrastructure close to the border.

India makes some of its weapons and equipment but also needs to import stuff, including spares and ammo, on a large scale. China makes all its own weapons, equipment, and ammunition, and exports quite a lot. 

Circa 2017, China’s GDP and per capita are almost five times those of India. The trade balance is actually an embarrassing imbalance. In 2016-17, China imported $10 billion from India and exported $61 billion to India. India’s defence allocation of $53.5 billion equivalent in 2017-18 amounts to about 1.6 per cent of GDP and this is about the same as it was in 1962, in percentage terms. China will spend over $150 billion officially on defence this year and analysts claim that it may actually spend quite a lot more concealed under other items. Oh Yes! China also has a full time defence minister in General Chang Wanquan.

In theory, India could interdict key shipping routes from West Asia to China and, thus, impede China’s crude oil and gas imports. In practice, it’s unlikely that any serious conflict will last long enough for this to matter. In diplomatic terms, the USA could do nothing much really. The Russians don’t have a great deal of influence on either nation. Nor would they want to get involved.

Confucius or Chanakya?
Twitter: @devangshudatta

Topics :India China tension

Next Story