There is considerable commotion about a statement by India’s Chief of Army Staff (COAS), General Bipin Rawat, that India must be prepared for a two-front war and Western Army Commander Lieutenant-General Surinder Singh saying a two-front war is not such a good idea.
An impression is being created that the western army commander has contradicted the army chief. But a closer examination will reveal there is no contradiction, considering the contexts in which these statements were made.
Speaking at a seminar called “Future Contours and Trends in Warfare,” General Rawat had indicated the possibility of a two-front war, highlighting that differences with Pakistan appear irreconcilable because of its continuing “proxy war.” China, he said, will continue to nibble at India’s territorial claims, testing its threshold of tolerance – situations that could develop into conflicts. Pakistan could take advantage of such a situation and while nuclear weapons are for deterrence, they may not deter war in India’s context.
Whether such conflicts will be confined or limited or whether these could expand into an all-out war along the entire front remains to be seen. But war is very much in realm of reality, and India must be prepared to fight and can ill afford to let its guard down on either the Pakistani or the Chinese front.
War is very much in realm of reality, and India must be prepared to fight and can ill afford to let its guard down on either the Pakistani or the Chinese front
In effect, what Rawat said refers to a heightened proxy war by Pakistan and China’s expansionist status that threatens Indian territory. This is likely to result in a confrontation and possible escalation between the two Asia giants.
This is no different from what Dr Subhash Bhamre, India’s minister of state for defense, said earlier: “At the Line of Actual Control [with China] the situation is sensitive as incidents of patrolling, transgression and standoffs have a potential of escalation,” coupled with Pakistan’s cross-border support to hundreds of terrorists waiting to infiltrate into the Kashmir Valley.
As a result, keeping this reality in mind, can any COAS say anything otherwise? There is a very real possibility that war could be thrust upon India, initiated through a proxy war by Pakistan and/or the “territorial salami-slicing” by China.
General Surinder Singh was speaking at a conference held at Panjab University, arguing for a greater role of military in diplomacy. His mention of a two-front war implied full-scale conventional war, which no one, including the present army chief would consider a smart proposition.
Singh also spoke of the need to improve relations with China to gain leverage over Pakistan, which is desirable. But whether it is feasible or not, and to what extent, remains to be seen given the China-Pakistan relationship.
But Singh’s focus was on military diplomacy, which India has not optimized beyond joint exercises with any country. Joint India-China military exercises have also been conducted in the past. As for Sino-Indian bilateral relations, Home Minister Rajnath Singh recently stated that the two countries shared good relations and if there were any differences on border issues, then talks would be held.
But 20 rounds of talks on the India-China boundary have yielded little and there is a need to address questions of an escalation by Pakistan at China’s behest. This also raises questions about whether Pakistan’s foreign and defense policies are influenced by China. Has Pakistan become a de facto Chinese province with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and Belt and Road Initiative? Dispassionate analyses would conclude that this is a real possibility.
Reports in the Chinese media threaten that the People’s Liberation Army could enter the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir and China could destabilize India’s northeast and separate it from India.
In sum, China and Pakistan are one entity threatening India on multiple fronts.
To believe that China will not seek a conflict because of its economic relations is naive because it doesn’t relate these to strategic and territorial ambitions. Some think India may end its economic relations with China in case of a conflict. But India has not even withdrawn its “Most Favored Nation” status from Pakistan.
China is adept at nibbling territory, and going by the experience of the Doklam crisis, it never seeks direct conflict. It calls an area “disputed,” and then occupies it by proclaiming it as Chinese territory. That is what China is likely to do with India, particularly its northeastern state of Arunachal Pradesh, which is called “Southern Tibet” by China. If there is a confrontation by India, which would be natural, Beijing is likely to blame the escalation on New Delhi.
Why would China do so? Having virtually anointed himself as an emperor for life, Xi Jinping is in a hurry to realize the “China Dream.” The US response to North Korea and China’s militarization of the South China Sea have buoyed Chinese ambitions. A conflagration with India would test the Indo-US strategic partnership, draw India’s neighbors into China’s orbit, and contribute to Beijing’s aim for a China-centric Asia.
Chances are that China is planning to make such a move in between now and 2019 before the general elections in India are due. China and Pakistan have never been very happy about the ascent of the Narendra Modi government. A strategic confrontation aimed at embarrassing it could be a real possibility.
The initial Indian response at Doklam was an unacceptable snub for China that hurt Xi’s aura. The recent jingoism in the Chinese media over Chinese vessels being forced back from Maldives on account of India’s naval presence seems to have hurt the Chinese psyche.
Xi Jinping was a secretary in China’s Defense Ministry when China invaded Vietnam in 1979. He is likely to embarrass India by escalating tensions on multiple fronts. India’s junior defense minister, Dr Bhamre, indicated a likely escalation this summer but it is likely to run through next winter considering the fact that the Chinese PLA intruded in the Tuting area despite a meter of snow.
India must prepare for a two-and-a-half-front war. Its deployments must cover areas where it has traditionally maintained a low presence. It urgently needs to develop its border infrastructure, engaging multiple civil entities through the relevant army commanders, and not only through the Border Roads Organization.
It also needs to establish a comprehensive surveillance grid, and launch multiple small satellites by the Indian Space Research Organization to monitor the Line of Actual Control with China on a 24/7 basis. This means it also needs to centralize its border control of the LAC and put in place systemic measures to control fault lines of its adversaries. This is the biggest strategic challenge the Indian government faces.

There is no evidence of India supporting any terrorists. Seems like the regular pakistan propaganda.
It would be most likely a 3 front war since the Maoists will be included. The Maoists began in the poor Bengali village of Nazalbari and were called "Naxals". Poverty and abuse being so extreme the Naxals had no problem with recruits. India has vast wealth in natural resources but most of those resources lie in States with large Tribal populations. They have no protection and are brutally exploited. Lands are bought off at dirt cheap prices and the Tribals are moved out of their holy ancestral lands. Mega mining companies rip through forest land to mine a series of metals and minerals.
The Naxals changed their name to the Maoists and are hugely popular. They control around eleven Indian states along the eastern border and going into Nepal. That area is nicknamed "the red corridor" for it falls under the control of this militia who want to overthrow the government of New Delhi (not a secessionist movement).
Each year they extort millions of Dollars from these mining companies, In addition to drug sales and prostitution the Maoists earned the most money of any militia group till the arrival of ISIS in the Middle East.
A two front war against New Delhi coming from Pakistan and China will be supported by the Maoists. They are reminiscent of the underground resistance Europe had during world war 2.
Mukhtar Ary Not before India break into pieces.
India is not strong enough to do anything to China.
China is far more powerful than India so there is no chance India can win if it takes on China.If India fights Pakistan and China simultaneously then its good bye India.
Mukhtar Ary says the one who got humiliated by Chinese on 62. Your threats are only for smallest neighbours while you beg for peace with Chinese.
There have been many such empires that have thrown stones at others while sitting in glass houses themselves. The Chinese too would be impressed upon with this fact soon.
Saeed Khan The only right the Kashmiris or more precisely Muslims deserve, is that of liberation from their miserable lives living as Muslims. That is evidently being given to them. As for ‘South Tibet’, it is more important to stress that ‘North Tibet’ which constitutes a larger part of the Kingdom of Tibet, is currently occupied by China. When China ‘liberates’ the Tibetans from the Liberation Army’s Oppression, I think all grounds for India holding on to ‘South Tibet’ would be gone. Until then, we consider ‘South Tibet’ as territory entrusted with India by the Tibetan people.
Godfree Roberts Is that something an American should be concerned about ? Life becomes cheap when there is too much of it. Evidently that is what is happening here. A few million children dying amidst millions more surviving is hardly a bad thing. Who’s gonna pay for all these children?
Pakistan will be wiped out for good.
Simhan Yesyelyen Pacts like the one suggested above are unrealistic. While India – US – Viet Nam flirt with each other, there exists great distrust between India – US & possibly Viet Nam – US too. The others are almost US fiefdoms. More than Nuclear arsenal, political stability is extremely vital. Moderate & Far Leftist parties should be checked through ‘STASI’like intel agencies & some psychological campaign is needed wrt to North East India. Which of course necessitates the resolution of issues there. On the western front, Pakistan needs to be destabilised & Pakistan has to be kept off balance by exploiting fissures there & in Kashmir. As Viet Nam had earlier demonstrated, internal cohesion can help repulsing external threats no matter how strong the adversary.
Better yet, why not give Kashmiris their due right of self determination, as enshrined in multiple UN resolutions and give China their legitimate claim of South Tibet. Then there is no need for any wars, period.
India must deal with Pakistan and China as one because they have very deep common interests between China and Pakistan as well as agreements to deal with India in a United manner
China has in the past a benign attitude towards India. That change with the Doklam incident. India is now viewed with suspicion, a strategic competitor. The Indian has the habits of poking the belly of the dragon. Now India instead of having to deal with Pakistan has to deal with China, a power it could not match. It is not war that frightens China. They are slowly chipping away at your periphery, winning without a fight. A pity India, such a great nation, is being used without it knowing it.
Making Cash more than $18k to $21k every month just by doing simple online work. I have received $18376 last month just by working online. Its an easy and simple job to do from home and its earnings are much better than regular office job. Every person can join this job now just by follow this link……..
HEREᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵwww.sendcash9.comᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵᴵ
just copy and past this…..
Instead of preparing for war, why not spend the money providing toilets and running water for 70% of the Indian people? And, with what’s left over, stop starving 2,000,000 children to death every damn year?
A very good appreciation of ground realities existing on our borders on both fronts. A food for thought and action by the Govt
India will pay the price for supporting terrorists in East Pakistan
It is possible.. by way of ……
A.
Go for a NATO/ WARSAW PACT type 30 years agreement between:-
USA,
Vietnam,
Australia,
Japan,
South Korea
&
India.
B
Last and not least an all out preparation, planning and implementation well publicised MAD Doctrinaire with nukes positioned in all these countries with Red China specific deployments and our quest for punititative response to any and every Red China led overt/ covert/ criminal misadventures and miscalculations.
It means of return of 1946/ 1980 Cold was era, with Red China ina lead dragon role from far eas. An united front against Red China aone can ENSURE and make it possible to monitor, contain and tackle belligerant dragonic Red China gone beserk !
====================
I conclude
I would like some more informed person than me to throw some light on, how we call China as ONE front when there is interse separation of 4057 kms between NE and Ladakh frontiers with china.I feel it will be more approptite to say that we have to prepare to fight on 4 fronts ,two with china,one pakistan and equally if not more important one from within?