In Mid-June, 2020, World War 3 started trending
on Twitter. Again. This time, it was because a border dispute
in the Himalayas between Chinese and Indian forces turned deadly, killing upwards of twenty
people. This is the first time since 1975 that the
two countries have had a fatal conflict, and the most serious skirmish since 1967. Naturally, as the two nations are populous,
militarily powerful, and have nuclear capabilities, the world is biting its nails to see what
happens next. But assuming the whole thing doesn’t end
in diplomacy or a world-consuming mushroom cloud, which country has what it takes to
bring home a final victory? Using a mix of historical precedents of the
prior conflicts between the two countries and our knowledge of their current military
capabilities, we intend to find out exactly whether China or India would win if the two
nations went to war today. After all, we’re not just talking about
dusty hypotheticals here. Relations between India and China have been
extremely strained since the Sino-Indian War of 1962, which occurred over the same stretch
of Himalayan Border that’s causing conflicts today. India had granted the Dalai Lama asylum within
their borders after the fallout of the 1959 Tibetan Uprising, already putting them in
China’s bad books, and with China’s military encroaching on the Line of Actual Control
– the demarcation line that separates Indian and Chinese territory in the Himalayas – a
military skirmish was practically inevitable. The resulting conflict was short lived, lasting
only one month and one day between October and November of 1962. The People’s Liberation Army of China had
a vast numerical superiority over India’s military forces, and India suffered significantly
greater losses, with nearly double China’s deaths, many wounded, and over 3,000 captured. This loss is partly chalked up to the fact
that it’s believed, according to some leaked CIA documents, that India underestimated both
China’s military capabilities and their willingness to escalate the conflict. While India requested military assistance
from the US in the form of 12 squadrons of fighter jets, their pleas were rejected, and
India instead turned to Moscow for assistance. Ultimately, none of it did all that much good,
as China claimed the Eastern Theatre up to the Line of Actual Control before declaring
a unilateral ceasefire. India was left to lick its wounds, and tensions
between the two counties have been high ever since, with conflicts still breaking out well
into the 1970s. Both nations have ramped up militarisation
around the Line of Actual Control as a show of strength, and this has left both with very
little room to manoeuvre. In a sense, the Himalayan Border is a military
powder keg, and lately, we’ve been seeing the sparks. While a past record of military supremacy
definitely works in China’s favour, the Sino-Indian War was also 58 years ago, and
failure is an excellent teacher. India has been engaged in frequent conflicts
since the Sino-Indian War, giving their combatants invaluable battlefield experience. India is widely believed to have won every
conflict they engaged in post Sino-Indian War, with the exception of the Indo-Pakistani
War of 1965, which ended in a ceasefire. China, comparatively, fought its last considerable
conflict against Vietnamese forces in 1979. Once again, experience won out here, as the
Vietnamese – who’d recently honed their skills in battle against the forces of the
United States – are largely considered to have handed China’s asses to them. This is why the value of actual experience
in war can never be overstated. But, let’s take a step back and look at
what these two militaries have to offer in terms of manpower, technology, training, and
resources. First: Soldiers, the bread and butter of any
military. Much like in the Sino-Indian War, China has
numerical superiority – though in India’s defence, seeing as China is ranked as having
the highest number of active military personnel in the world at 2,035,000, China’s military
has numerical superiority over literally everyone. With over 500,000 reserve personnel who could
be easily called into action in a wartime scenario, China is a force to be reckoned
with. India, however, isn’t all that far behind
– with 1,237,117 active personnel and an impressive 960,000 reserve personnel, putting
the differences between their totals in the mere 100,000s. But, here’s the big twist: The numbers here
only pertain to the Indian Army, which is the ground force branch of Indian Armed Forces,
whose total number of active personnel are 1,444,500, second only to the PLA’s total
active personnel. However, the overall numbers of reserve personnel
for the Indian Armed Forces now dwarves China’s – at an astonishing 2,100,000. The Indian Navy boasts 67,252 active personnel
and 55,000 reserves. The Indian Air Force has 139,576 active personnel
and 140,000 reserves. In contrast to India’s three-pronged system,
the PLA consists of five branches: The Ground Force, Navy, Air Force, Rocket Force, and
the Strategic Assault Force. The Ground Force is the Chinese infantry and
land-based operations, with 975,000 active personnel. The PLA Navy has 240,000 active personnel. The Air Force has an even higher 398,000 active
personnel. The People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force
– also known by the pretty funny acronym PLARF – is the branch of the military in
charge of land-based ballistic and nuclear armaments. They have only 100,000 active personnel. And finally, the Strategic Assault Force:
This is the newest branch of the PLA, established officially in 2015, dealing with extremely
modern forms of warfare like space and cyber operations. This division is so new that we don’t even
have an exact number of active personnel, but due to the specialisation of the job and
the fact that the group is only five years old, it’s safe to assume that it’s likely
the smallest branch of the PLA. However, we also have a far wider trend to
consider here: The fact that China and India are two of the most populous nations on earth,
with populations of 1.393 billion and 1.353 billion, respectively, as of 2018. In a situation of all-out war over their shared
border, if both nations introduced conscription, the numerical differences between their armies
would ultimately be nebulous. So, if neither army would have an extreme
numerical edge in the case of another conflict, let’s zoom in and take a look at the average
military service member in each infantry. Specifically, their training, equipment, and
weaponry. Thankfully for India, they’ve grown to invest
in more intensive military training over the years, including joint-operations training
with the British, US, Japanese, French, and Australian militaries as their involvement
in the UN deepened. The Indian Military has also consistently
invested in modernised primary assault rifle systems for their troops, currently working
with a mix of American SiG Sauer 716 assault rifles and Indo-Russian AK-47 203, a modernisation
of the famously reliable and hardy AK-47. As of 2018, Indian infantry troops are fitted
with SMPP ballistic armour even capable of withstanding blasts from the steel-core rounds
fired out of an AK-47. All these factors add up to one formidable
individual soldier. China’s infantry troops don’t have quite
the same thing going for them. Modern Chinese military training has been
criticised for years for its lack of useful applications in real-life combat scenarios,
meaning the average military skills of a Chinese infantryman may leave something to be desired
compared to their Indian counterparts. They’re formidable in the rifle department
with the QBZ-95-1, a reliable Bullpup rifle which performs best at long range. However, despite China being one of the world’s
most prolific exporters of body armour, it hasn’t historically fitted its troops with
that same standard of protection. The PLA is notorious for its light loadout,
often leaving soldiers ill-prepared for taking fire, and giving the Indian infantry troops
a huge comparative advantage. However, this may change in the not-too-distant
future. According to a report from Global Times, China
is investing heavily in updating and modernising its training system, as well as planning on
procuring 1.4 million units of high-quality body armour for the PLA. While this isn’t currently a certainty,
if these plans do go through, any advantages the Indian army may have had on an individual
soldier level would essentially evaporate, leaving them dead even once again. But these days war is far more complex than
a large group of armed men running at each other and fighting down to the last one standing. In modern warfare, technology can give militaries
the crucial edge they need to secure a victory over the enemy. Since 2008, China and India have ranked second
and third, respectively, in global military spending, but the gap between them is still
pretty immense. Last year, China spent an astonishing $261
billion on military development, compared to India’s far smaller $71.1 billion. This disparity becomes a little more natural
when you realise that China’s economy is five times the size of India’s. Let’s take a look at how these numbers actually
translate into vehicles for their armies, navies, and air forces. While China is generally packing more hardware
than India, one exception is in the world of tanks, where India’s over 4,200 stands
at over a thousand units greater than China’s 3,200 plus tanks. However, this doesn’t paint the whole picture
of China’s ground capabilities. If we’re looking at the number of armoured
ground vehicles overall, China’s 33,000 dwarves India’s 8,600, giving them considerable
ground superiority, bolstered by the fact that they have ten times more rocket projectors
than their Indian counterparts. China also holds dominance over the skies
– with 3,210 aircraft compared to India’s 2,123. It also has approximately double the Fighter
and Interceptor jets, and 507 workable airports compared to India’s 346. Once again, sadly for India, this trend continues
into the country’s navies. In terms of total naval assets, China outnumbers
India by 777 to 285. More specifically, it has 74 submarines to
India’s 16, and 36 Destroyers to India’s 11. If wars were decided on equipment alone, it’s
unquestionable that China would take the win here. Of course, while nobody on earth wants the
conflict to escalate to this point for the sake of all human life, we’d be remiss not
to return to the fact that China and India are both nuclear nations. If the war ever did become an exchange of
nuclear force, who would come out on top? Well, for a number of reasons, China has a
clear edge here. Not only did they develop their nuclear capabilities
just over a decade earlier than India in 1964 – New Delhi wouldn’t have its first nuke
until 1975 – but their nuclear arsenal is also over double the size of India’s, with
a far quicker growth rate. China has a stockpile of 320 nuclear warheads,
having grown by 40 in the past year. Compare this to India with only 150 nuclear
warheads, which grew by a mere ten in the past year. Both nations can deploy these warheads via
the nuclear triad of missiles, submarines, and bombers, and thankfully for the human
race, both have a “no first strike” policy. This means the warheads can only be used in
retaliation to another nuclear attack, making it less likely that either country would want
to strike first. Of course, if either did, all of us would
ultimately lose from the resulting radioactive firefight. But, on sheer numbers, China takes the clear
win with regard to nuclear capabilities. One final factor worth considering is one
that’s rarely mentioned in a lot of abstract military planning: Allies. While it’s easy to think of war purely in
terms of enemies, your diplomatic and military friends can also be a make-or-break factor
in determining the outcome of a conflict. While China would largely be working solo
in a war against India with the exception of perhaps Pakistan, a country with fraught
relationships with India to say the least, India itself has been building diplomatic
relationships with a number of extremely valuable allies. These include the United States – a country
with the highest military spending in the world – who, under President Trump, have
gone cold on relations with China, while referring to India as a “major defence partner.” India has also developed strong diplomatic
ties to Japan, France and Australia through performing a number of joint military drills
with all of them. Having these various world powers behind them
gives India a serious combat edge over China, providing these allies came to India’s side
in their time of need. While the US could be India’s greatest ally
in this speculative war, foreign policy under President Trump has been known to be capricious
and unreliable to other allies such as the Kurdish forces in Syria in 2019, so there’s
really no way of telling for sure. So, back to our big question: Who would win
in a modern conflict between India and China? Turns out, it’s a lot more complex than
you may have thought. While a layman might assume that China’s
apparent numerical and monetary advantages hand it an easy win, these advantages can
be neutralised by India’s stronger troops – who are better equipped, better trained,
and more experienced – and its greater network of powerful allies. Then there’s the strategic picture, as while
the Indian Navy is smaller than the Chinese Navy, India is itself situated on the jugular
of Chinese trade- so to speak. Chinese trade ships must pass through the
Indian ocean to reach their destinations, and while China may have a larger fleet, it
is not very well equipped to conduct operations far from its own shores. With only two aircraft carriers with a capacity
of about 24 aircraft between them- and one not even being operational yet- any Chinese
incursion into the Indian ocean to protect its trade fleets would be disastrous, as the
Chinese task force would be brutally pounded by Indian air and naval power. With China receiving the bulk of its oil from
maritime trade routes, a protracted war between the two nations would inevitably cripple the
Chinese military and industry both. India would simply have to fight defensively,
as the terrain separating India and China is extremely difficult and well suited to
defensive warfare. While the Chinese could crush any Indian incursion
into China itself- and there’d be few strategic targets to take close to the Indian border
anyways- a war between the two nations would inevitably see India the winner, as it slowly
strangles Chinese trade to death. Check out “American (USA) Vs Chinese Soldier
– How Do They Compare | Military/Army Comparison” and “Russia Vs United States (USA) – Who
Would Win – Military Comparison 2019” for more compelling military analysis.
Just want to say that China had won in 1962, then India beefed up its military and then the countries fought in 1967
Both countries are much more powerful than in the 60s (not including nukes) and have stuff like satellites or more things. India has the geography advantage I also want to add