Comparison of military strength between China and India

Militarily, look at military technology first. Indian missile technology is similar to that of China in 1970s and 1980s, with a gap of more than 20 years. The level of Indian Agni missile can't reach the level of China Julang 1. At that time, China already had intercontinental missiles and nuclear submarines, while India did not have the ability to independently develop these two technologies. The blue sky air defense missile developed by India originated from Sam 6 of the former Soviet Union. Trident low-altitude missile has serious technical problems, and its performance is not as good as that of Red 7 developed by China in 1980s. At that time, China's high-altitude air defense had developed a TMD "counterattack".

Aviation technology is the military technology field with the smallest gap between India and China. Because China is dominated by missiles, it has less investment in aviation technology, and its autonomous capability is worse than that of missiles and aerospace technology. The technology blockade from abroad has given China's aviation industry a very valuable independent development capability. India's aviation industry has always relied on foreign technical assistance and production licenses of foreign products to produce advanced fighters. Therefore, although India's fighter equipment was more advanced than China's for a period of time, India never acquired complete aviation technical capabilities. With the support of foreign advanced technology after opening up, the rapid development of aviation technology in China in recent years has left India far behind. This is the gap between comprehensive national strength and comprehensive technology industrial capacity. China's FC- 1 exported to Pakistan has been continuously upgraded in recent two years, which makes its technology completely surpass that of Indian LCA light fighter, and it is superior to LCA in aerodynamic design, engine and airborne weapons, and becomes a high-performance medium-range fighter.

In terms of naval equipment, India has no strong shipbuilding industry at all, so India's powerful navy can only be a building on the beach. Indian domestic warships must rely on foreign countries to provide all technologies, including design, hull materials and construction technology, power, weapons, radar and general. Once foreign technical assistance is lost, India will be at a loss immediately. For example, the nuclear submarine is the equipment that India has always dreamed of, but due to the restrictions of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, foreign countries cannot provide India with technical assistance. India has to wait for decades for this. Although India has licensed the production of advanced submarines such as German 209 class and Russian "K" class. But now India still relies on foreign aid to build submarines. China nuclear submarine launched 197 1. At present, the technical level of China's naval vessels has basically reached the European level, surpassing that of Russia. At present, it is the level of basic industry that affects the level of military technology in China.

Not to mention the technical aspects of the army, India can't produce 155 mm heavy artillery until now, and its own tank army doesn't want it. Import heavy artillery and shells. In short, India still has no independent production capacity in low-tech army weapons and equipment.

Generally speaking, India's military technology mainly depends on imports. Only in some aspects, such as computers, we can produce our own products and of course import IC.

India's military capability depends on imported equipment and technology, and India has always maintained military technology and equipment equivalent to that of China. Because it is impossible and unnecessary for China's huge army to quickly replace all the new equipment. However, India's military development is extremely uneven. About one third of China's military expenditure is spent on equipment procurement, personnel expenditure, training and equipment maintenance. Western developed countries have invested more in personnel, training and equipment maintenance. India's military expenditure is mainly headcount and equipment procurement, while the proportion of training and equipment maintenance is unreasonable. The naval carrier fleet is basically a fleet stationed in Hong Kong, and the accident rate of air force aircraft remains high, and the intact rate of equipment such as army tanks is extremely low, which is the embodiment of this situation. India's equipment system is very chaotic, showing a lack of military management capabilities. The bullets of Indian light rifles are 7.7mm, NATO 7.62x5 1mm, Russian 7.62X54, 7.62X39, 5.56mm and so on. Moreover, after the troops were equipped with 5.56 mm rifles, no bullet production was arranged. I have to buy tens of millions of bullets on the international market.

Historically, India always snapped up ammunition and weapon parts in the international arms market before the start of the war, in order to improve the equipment readiness rate and combat readiness rate. This situation makes it difficult for India to deal with sudden large-scale military conflicts. The conflict in Lower Cargill is an example. In such a small-scale border conflict, India's opponents were still Muslim armed forces, and almost used up the large-caliber artillery shells in stock, and rushed to purchase in the international market after the war. Judging from this situation, although the Indian army is relatively advanced in equipment, its logistics and management are very backward, which has been shown in the border conflict with China in 1963. But there is no obvious improvement now, which is the weakness of the Indian army. The Indian army cannot carry out large-scale local wars, such as the scale of the Korean War, or even the scale of the Battle of Shangganling. The US troops in Shangganling consumed 1.3 million shells, and the volunteers consumed 400,000 shells. The fighting lasted for more than 40 days.

It seems that India's strategy is to carry out a pre-prepared low-and medium-scale high-tech war under the conditions set by India, that is, under the conditions of the battlefield, time and war scale selected by India. For example, Japan raided China in the Sino-Japanese War, and the Russian Far East Fleet in the Russo-Japanese War. Take pre-emptive measures to win a decisive victory at the beginning of the war, and then obtain the greatest political and economic benefits through negotiation and international mediation according to the favorable battlefield situation. Therefore, India is bound to adopt elitism. Judging from the confrontation exercises between India and the United States, the elite of the Indian Air Force has a fighting capacity that cannot be ignored. But this strategy has a fatal disadvantage, that is, if the opponent does not play according to India's ideas, India lacks the preparation and ability to deal with it. This happened in the conflict between India and China on 1963. China's reaction exceeded India's estimate, and the Indian army was defeated.

From the above analysis, there is a big gap between Indian hard power and China, especially in the long-term competitive potential. The technical gap between the two sides in local conflicts is not obvious. However, there is still a big gap between the available tactical and logistical capabilities.