China flexes muscle in Indian Ocean, Indian Navy concerned

Times of India ^ | May 13, 2013, 07.57 PM IST

[DeaconBenjamin]

NEW DELHI: Increasing presence of the Chinese maritime forces in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) and disciplinary issues in the force are expected to be discussed by the top Navy brass in their commanders' conference starting on Tuesday.

The Navy has been concerned over the increasing presence of Chinese navy's submarines and other warships in the IOR. In a recent report submitted to the defence ministry, the Integrated Defence Staff headquarters had informed the government quoting the data by American agencies that 22 encounters of Chinese submarines have taken place outside its territorial waters in the IOR.

China has also been successful in establishing its presence in ports around India including Chittagong in Bangladesh, Sittwe and Coco Island in Myanmar, Hambantota in Sri Lanka and Gwadar in Pakistan, which gives it capability to stay close to Indian waters from all sides in a move known as " string of pearls".

In the conference to be inaugurated by defence minister AK Antony, the Navy will also discuss cases of indiscipline faced by the force.

In recent times, several Navy officers have faced allegations of wife swapping and stealing the affection of brother officer's wife.

One senior officer posted on-board prestigious INS Virat aircraft carrier was dismissed by the force for sending lewd messages to several women using multiple SIM cards and mobile phones.

The top brass of the force is also expected to discuss the delay in the induction of the aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya, which is being retrofitted in Russia and has been delayed due to mishaps in its boiler.

[DoughtyOne]

We created a void when we refused to address Somali piracy. China and a number of other nations swooped in. Now we have nobody to blame but ourselves for Chinese elevated activity in that region.

Who could have seen this coming? Certainly not Obambi... or could he?

[ClearCase_guy]

China has soldiers camping out inside India's borders.
The Chinese Navy is aggressive.
China and Japan are sparring.

The US military posture is shifting decidedly toward Asia.

I expect a hot war within 5 years or less. As the global economy founders, nations will seek power through other means.

[rarestia]

I expect a hot war within 5 years or less. As the global economy founders, nations will seek power through other means.

Agreed. America's enemies smell blood in the water.

[bravo whiskey]

the boiler mishap was the necessity to replace all the bricks in the boiler room because they were made in china and defective.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Must be a language glitch. What modern warship has a boiler?

[JCBreckenridge]

Methinks China’s enemies smell blood in the water.

[0.E.O]

Must be a language glitch. What modern warship has a boiler?

One's that are multi-billion dollar refits of 20 year old Soviet steam powered warships.

[0.E.O]

We created a void when we refused to address Somali piracy.

By not doing what? Invading Somalia?

[DoughtyOne]

We could have made it much more difficult for pirate groups on the high seas. We could also have made strikes against known pirate enclaves on soil.

Bush and then Obama more or less closed their eyes to this issue. Here we are.

[0.E.O]

We could have made it much more difficult for pirate groups on the high seas. We could also have made strikes against known pirate enclaves on soil.

So could India, the U.K, France, Germany, Japan, and other countries more dependent on trade passing through the region. Why didn't they?

Bush and then Obama more or less closed their eyes to this issue. Here we are.

Every pesthole in the world doesn't have to be dealt with using U.S. money and U.S. lives.

[DoughtyOne]

LOL... if you wish to see a world where the U. S. has pulled back and allowed others to jump in, don’t get upset when nations like China fill the void.

[0.E.O]

It’s because the U.S. has been over-eager to jump in that has allowed countries like the U.K, France, Italy, Germany, Japan, etc., etc. to cut their defense spending to the bone and rely on the U.S. to do all the heavy lifting. Shouldn’t they be carrying the burden of their own defense?

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

At this point, China has cultivated so many enemies, that one or more of them has likely considered arranging a Chinese naval accident, resulting in the loss of likely one or more submarines through indeterminate causes, over waters too deep to even bother with recovery.

The first indication that anything was wrong should be when the submarine hits crush depth.

[DoughtyOne]

It’s because the U.S. has been over-eager to jump in that has allowed countries like the U.K, France, Italy, Germany, Japan, etc., etc. to cut their defense spending to the bone and rely on the U.S. to do all the heavy lifting. Shouldn’t they be carrying the burden of their own defense?

How was the cold war won?  Was it won by the U. K., France, Italy, Germany, Japan et al developing world class defense structures?  No.

These nation developed forces enough to defend their own shores, airspace, and borders.  That's about it.  Any heavy lifting was left to the U. S.  We did that on purpose.

What was the track record with regard to armed Japan and Europe?  Did we avoid two world conflicts by limiting our military structure and relying on other nations to take care of themselves?

We developed a peace through strength policy, that saw us more or less guarantee our allies that we would would step in and fix things if they were attacked.  That worked out fairly good actually.

We haven't had to take down Japan again.  We haven't had to put down another major uprising in Europe.  Europe is quite peaceful related to it's history.  Russia even came around for a while there, and then...

Our leaders decided it would be a great idea to spark economic prosperity in the world's last remaining (potentially threatening) collective state.

Then at the same time, those same leaders came up with the idea that it would be a good thing to draw down our armed services.

So then Russia read the tea leaves, and thought that China was the horse to hitch it's wagon to.  We really screwed that pooch.

Nevermind that China made no bones about it's intent to become a world class military power.  All of a sudden, we had two potential major players on the block, the United States and China.  And then we ignored Russia, at times almost insulting it's proud leadership and people.  We played this totally wrong.  We should have nurtured Russia into becoming a close friend.  Instead we ignored them.  Really stupid...

We should applaud other nations developing enough armed forces to protect themselves from normal adventurism.  Their borders should be safe.  Their skies should be save.  Their coastal waters should be safe.

China however is developing a deep water Navy, something they don't need.  Nobody is threatening to attack China.  It's shipping has been unimcumbered.  We can attribute it's need for heightened military powers, to it's own lust for gobbling up land and controling sea lanes.

We should never be happy to see what is taking place in China.  We should never be content to watch elevated R&D at the level China is pushing it.  Sooner or later as this paradigm shift continues, China WILL be developing armaments that will challenge our own.  And if our industrial and military level leaks continue, and we continue to fund China's economy, it will come up with things that will cause us severe damage.

So no, our burden isn't too heavy.  Our military is not sinking us.  Our freeloaders are sinking us.  And as those freeloaders stock up on what they pick us clean for, the Left places the blame squarely on our Military expenditures.

Don't join them.  It isn't true.

As for our current wars, the bad guys are forced to concentrate mostly on their own soil.  I don't see that as a bad thing.

Who were we at war with on 09/11/2001?  How did that work out for us?

[DannyTN]

We should make “Aggression tariffs” part of our trade policy. When China has troops camp out in India’s territory or sends military ships through Japanese territory, we should apply an automatic 50% tariff to Chinese goods for a year for each offense.

This would be in addition to normal trade tariffs which needs to be increased if we had any common sense.

[DannyTN]

We should make “Aggression tariffs” part of our trade policy. When China has troops camp out in India’s territory or sends military ships through Japanese territory, we should apply an automatic 50% tariff to Chinese goods for a year for each offense.

This would be in addition to normal trade tariffs which needs to be increased if we had any common sense.

[0.E.O]

How was the cold war won? Was it won by the U. K., France, Italy, Germany, Japan et al developing world class defense structures? No.

Yes. During the Cold War all those countries supported major NATO defense requirements. Britain had the Army of the Rhine, France had a sizeable army, the Netherlands and Belgium each had a whole corps dedicated to NATO, and Germany had a large army as well. All had air forces and fleets to support their ground forces. Fast forward to now and most of those countries couldn't field a brigade much less a corps. France, Italy and the U.K. couldn't beat Libya without U.S. support. They have all chopped their military establishments way past the bone and why? Because they expect the U.S. to handle the job of defending their interests in Africa, Asia, and elsewhere. And the U.S. is stupid enough to let them.

We should applaud other nations developing enough armed forces to protect themselves from normal adventurism. Their borders should be safe. Their skies should be save. Their coastal waters should be safe.

And the rest of the world is our responsibility, is that it?

So no, our burden isn't too heavy. Our military is not sinking us. Our freeloaders are sinking us. And as those freeloaders stock up on what they pick us clean for, the Left places the blame squarely on our Military expenditures.

I hope you include the most of the world in that 'freeloader' category.

[DoughtyOne]

How was the cold war won? Was it won by the U. K., France, Italy, Germany, Japan et al developing world class defense structures? No.

Yes. During the Cold War all those countries supported major NATO defense requirements. Britain had the Army of the Rhine, France had a sizeable army, the Netherlands and Belgium each had a whole corps dedicated to NATO, and Germany had a large army as well. All had air forces and fleets to support their ground forces. Fast forward to now and most of those countries couldn't field a brigade much less a corps. France, Italy and the U.K. couldn't beat Libya without U.S. support. They have all chopped their military establishments way past the bone and why? Because they expect the U.S. to handle the job of defending their interests in Africa, Asia, and elsewhere. And the U.S. is stupid enough to let them.

I don't think the U. S. should be stupid enough to let those nations to totally disarm.  We should urge them to keep adequate forces.  None of those NATO nations were developing a deep water Navy on the order of our own.  They weren't developing a major air force capability like our own.  Their mechanized devisions and ability to forward project were never what ours were.  None the less, their forces should remain high enough that if a hot war were to start, they would be up to speed and be able to jump in to assist in putting down hot spots around the world.  I don't advocate our allies totally disarm and leave all the heavy lifting to us.  I do advocate our allies allow us to do most of the heavy lifting.  Like it or not, it's better than a nation like Germany, Japan, or even China deciding they are going to conquer the world.

We should applaud other nations developing enough armed forces to protect themselves from normal adventurism. Their borders should be safe. Their skies should be save. Their coastal waters should be safe.

And the rest of the world is our responsibility, is that it?

In some respects, yes.

So no, our burden isn't too heavy. Our military is not sinking us. Our freeloaders are sinking us. And as those freeloaders stock up on what they pick us clean for, the Left places the blame squarely on our Military expenditures.

I hope you include the most of the world in that 'freeloader' category.

If a nation has enough troops to repel or put down it's neighbor's attempts to make a strike on it's sovereign territory, then it has done enough.  We don't need 50 United States level military forces around the world.We need one such force, that is lead by reasoned men.  Then we need other nations to augment as needed.

By leading the world as we did in the latter part of the 20th Century, did we suffer as a productive nation?  Were we inferior to those other nations who didn't spend as much on their military as we did?  Of course not.

Right now our emphasis needs to be on getting our work force back to work, slowly drawing down our funding of China's master plan, and urging our allies to maintain their own reasoned levels of military forces.