Border face-off: China and India each deploy 3,000 troops

[Oracle]

India says China laying cables to bolster communications at border flashpoint

And China wants de-escalation & dis-engagement?

[Double Edge]

Good God, everybody thinks that these chest puffing exercises are actual battles.

From Gordon Chang's op-ed

The May incursions took New Delhi by surprise. As Cleo Paskal of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies tells Newsweek, Moscow in April had assured India that large-scale Chinese maneuvers in its Tibet Autonomous Region were not preparations for a move below the Line.

In China's highly politicized system, the setbacks in Ladakh cannot be perceived as Xi's fault, so he will almost surely purge elements of the military. "PLA leaders begin to see little choice but to undertake offensive military actions to avoid becoming a victim of Xi's internal terror," Fisher says.

"What we are learning in 2020," Fisher notes, "is that Xi wants victories, and as the PLA is judged to have reached requisite levels of strength by rearming and reorganization, Xi is increasingly willing to use the military."

Unfortunately, it looks like China's leader, who had looked invincible, now has something to prove. As a result, he appears absolutely determined to make his point by launching another attempt to break India apart.

So we watch and plan.

[Double Edge]

Interesting combo. Can't say i've seen any of these speakers together before

Dynamics of the conflict changed post Aug 30. The coming conflict will not be about border. It will be about Tibet. Moving away from conventional type of conflict to irregular proxy of the kind of geopolitical game we saw in Kashmir with Pakistan. Whether intentionally or not we are going to open the Tibet card spear headed by the SFF or Vikas regiment.An ethnic territorial fight over the Himalayas pitting Tibetans from both sides against. Chinese academics will now try to show that Ladakh belonged to Tibet. We have to counter them

Wow !

Speculating that China wants to secure its strategic & financial investment in the wider Ladakh area, Aksai Chin, GB, Baltistan, PO J&K ie CPEC. To do this they have to cut off our access to Aksai Chin & Siachen which entails a deep thrust. Not possible unless they intend to go in for a major conflict. Things are currently on a razor's edge.

So that's the strategic win they're looking at.

China thinks they can solve two problems with one stone by deploying Tibetans against us. But they are also anxious that we might have a stronger hold over them. Hehe.

XJP has got himself into a fix, he has started purges in the security sector and ramped up nationalism. If he backs off his detractors will come after him.

India should not be in a hurry to offer XJP a face saver. If we can get him replaced due to his lack of results we'll be doing the region and wider world a favour.

China is telling India to know its place. China is the engine that pulls everybody and India should follow the direction and if that is not acceptable then there will be trouble. This was the plan right from the start when Mao took over. The creation of CPEC implied that Kashmir belongs to Pakistan in China's view. Giving the PA control of large tracts of Kashmir from India will give the PA legitimacy, popularity and self-respect that it is losing over the years. China controls a huge amount of territory throughout the length and breadth of Pakistan besides the entirety of PO J&K.

China wants to control the entire Himalayan ridge land. Current machinations in Nepal is part of the process. They want control over Bhutan either explicitly or implicitly. To recapture Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh. They think the entire himalayan massive belongs to them. Then then will render India entirely dependent on China for its water and makes it impossible for India to be hostile to China.

They want to teach us a lesson, beat us to the ground. Their plan of dominating the Indo Pacific requires a compliant India or neutral India. China wants to humiliate India, destroy its self confidence and above all destroy the confidence of the US that India is worth having as a partner.

We've committed mistakes in the past by handing over large water sources to China. It's not clear how much help the US or UK would have been at the time the thinking is not much which implies India was no position to oppose China's takeover of Tiber. Not retaking PO J&K and ceding control of Tibet.

The ultimate target is the US. If India & the US come together not in some lawyers treaty but a generals treaty or common sense treaty.

Just like the relationship the US had with China in the 80s. There was a lot of abuse back & forth but both ensured the enemy was dealt with. China has never been a treaty ally of the US but the kind of operations that China has done for the US and quite frankly the help US gave China far exceeds what it did for its own treaty allies. Let this be Modi's Deng moment.

India is not Japan
India is not Germany
India is not France
India is not the UK

its a little bigger and more consequential.

China's idea of war isn't necessarily about military hardware, its about dominating the enemy, dominating his mind space and making him do what they want.

China does not want a hot war. They haven't been in one since 1979. The indian army hasn't had a quiet week since 1947.

The US should help India give China what they don't want ie a hot war by keeping the flow of munitions and materiel going.

As Churchil said, give us the tools and we'll finish the job. And this job includes a significant piece of territory without going into more details.

It entails the entire Himalayan massive comes under the control of democracies.

That the entirety of the Indo Pacific comes under the control of the democracies.

That this become a fact of life for the next few generations.

Neither of us can do this alone but together it is possible.

This help needs to come before the Chinese takes us out one by one ie various powers in Asia and leave the US alone with Japan and a mutilated Australia.

Spelt it out and lobbied a bit as well

[Officer of Engineers]

If you want to see actual battle, then put up your collection of Scotch as winners' prize.

Only if you want to see men in kilts ... and pray there's no wind.

From Gordon Chang's op-ed

So we watch and plan.

If you want to see military adventures, look to your other border. This one is nothing more than chest puffing, not even chest thumping.

[Oracle]

^ You mean mercenary force of Jihadis? Everyday they're getting pounded.

[Officer of Engineers]

^ You mean mercenary force of Jihadis? Everyday they're getting pounded.

No I'm a bunch of drunk Scotts showing you their jewels.

[Oracle]

No I'm a bunch of drunk Scotts showing you their jewels.

When Indian, Chinese soldiers fought together

[Double Edge]

If you want to see military adventures, look to your other border. This one is nothing more than chest puffing, not even chest thumping.

Nobody thought China would start a war in 1962 until the very last moment. They were expecting skirmishes. That is why we have to be on our guard.

The risk is not of a conflict but being unprepared for one.

Modi can repeat 1971 and ensure a 1962 in reverse | Sunday Gurdian | Sept 13 2020

In absence of a clear understanding between India and US about mutual security, the Himalayan massif seems to be the option offering a higher chance of a Chinese success in 2021 than clearing South China Sea of foreign navies or an attempted takeover of Taiwan.

Given the high probability of the resumption of 1962-scale hostilities by the PLA in 2021, it is a matter of surprise that till now, no effort seems to have been made to formalise the structure of the Quadrilateral Alliance into a mutual defence treaty. What is needed is for India to indicate clearly what is needed for victory in the event of an attack by China, and to work out what needs to be done to formalise a structure that assures such assistance.

In 1962, India had neither a security treaty with Moscow nor with Washington. The same situation should not be allowed to prevail in the present. Thus far, Russia seems to have succeeded in its mission of keeping India from entering into a mutual security pact that involves the US. Besides helping China by such abstinence on the part of India, persuading Delhi to remain wedded to non-alignment works to the benefit of Moscow, in that a security treaty involving the US would give an advantage to that country’s weapons systems over the offerings of Russia in a market crucial to the health of the armaments industry in that giant country. There are leaders who play a strong hand poorly. Vladimir Putin plays a weak hand with spectacular success.

[Oracle]

Nobody thought China would start a war in 1962 until the very last moment. They were expecting skirmishes. That is why we have to be on our guard.

The risk is not of a conflict but being unprepared for one.

The Colonel doesn't seem to understand this apprehension.

Modi can repeat 1971 and ensure a 1962 in reverse | Sunday Gurdian | Sept 13 2020

Agree with Nalapat. But does being in the Quad mean giving up nukes? The Colonel thinks so. Did UK, France give up nukes to be NATO allies? Btw, I don't agree with the Colonel's assertion.

India's FP w.r.t PRC is shrouded in confusion. That talks will solves issues. Non-Alignment went of the window in 1971, but we act as if it's rooted in our myths. It's Nehruvian stupidology that still exists on South Blocks' mentality. Time to burn the paper on which it was written, be diplomatically nice to Russians, and build another pact with US and other NATO Countries. 6 years, 6 F years of the Modi government and they couldn't even think of the China problem? They can't even solve the Pakistan problem. Why am I even complaining? Stupid, very stupid.

[Oracle]

Is this a propaganda website?

[Double Edge]

Text of Raksha Mantri Shri Rajnath Singh’s Statement in Lok Sabha on September 15 Regarding Situation on Eastern Border in Ladakh

September 15, 2020

"Hon’ble Speaker,

1. I rise today to brief this august House about the development on our eastern borders in Ladakh. You are aware that our Hon’ble Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi ji had visited Ladakh and met our brave soldiers to convey the message of solidarity of the Nation behind their every action. I too have spent some time with our soldiers in Ladakh and I want to tell you that I have felt their indomitable courage, and gallant valor. As you are aware that Col Santosh Babu, along with his 19 brave soldiers, made the supreme sacrifice in the cause of defending the territorial integrity of India. Hon’ble Speaker, this House has paid homage to them by observing two minutes silence yesterday.

2. I would like to take some time first to briefly provide some details of our boundary issue with China. As the House is aware, India and China are yet to resolve their boundary question. China does not accept the customary and traditional alignment of the boundary between India and China. We believe that this alignment is based on well-established geographical principles confirmed by treaties and agreements, as well as historical usage and practice, well-known for centuries to both sides. The Chinese position,however, is that the boundary between the two countries has not been formally delimited, that there exists a traditional customary line formed by the extent of jurisdiction that they claim was exercised historically by each side, and that the two sides have different interpretations of the position of the traditional customary line. The two countries had engaged in discussions during 1950s-60s but these efforts could not yield a mutually acceptable solution.

3. As the House is aware, China continues to be in illegal occupation of approximately 38,000 sq. kms in the Union Territory of Ladakh. In addition, under the so-called Sino-Pakistan 'Boundary Agreement' of 1963, Pakistan illegally ceded 5,180 sq. km. of Indian territory in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir to China. China also claims approximately 90,000 sq. kms. of Indian territory in the Eastern Sector of the India-China boundary in Arunachal Pradesh.

4. Both India and China have formally agreed that the boundary question is a complex issue which requires patience and have committed to seeking a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable solution through dialogue and peaceful negotiations.In the interim, the two sides also agree that maintenance of peace and tranquility in the border areas is an essential basis for the further development of bilateral relations.

5. I would like to mention here that as yet there is no commonly delineated Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the border areas between India and China and there is no common perception of the entire LAC. Therefore, in order to ensure peace and tranquility in the border areas, especially along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the two countries have concluded a number of agreements and protocols.

6. Under these agreements, the two sides have agreed to maintain peace and tranquility along the LAC without prejudice to their respective positions on the alignment of the LAC as well as on the boundary question. It is on this basis, that our overall relations also saw considerable progress since 1988. India’s position is that while bilateral relations can continue to develop in parallel with discussions on resolving the boundary question, any serious disturbance in peace and tranquility along the LAC in the border areas is bound to have implications for the positive direction of our ties.

7. A key element of both the 1993 and the 1996 Agreements is that the two sides will keep their military forces in the areas along the Line of Actual Control to a minimum level. These agreements also mandate that pending an ultimate solution to the boundary question, the two sides shall strictly respect and observe the Line of Actual Control.Furthermore in these agreements, India and China also committed to clarification and confirmation of the Line of Actual Control to reach a common understanding of the alignment. Thus, in late 1990s and upto 2003, the two sides engaged in an exercise to clarify and confirm the LAC. But, thereafter the Chinese side did not show a willingness to pursue the LAC clarification exercise. As a result, there are some areas where the Chinese and Indian perceptions of LAC overlap. In these areas, as also with other sections of the border areas, the various agreements govern the manner in which troops of both sides should operate and deal with situations of face-offs to maintain peace and tranquility.

8. Before I apprise the House of the current developments, let me inform that the Government has an elaborate and time tested coordination mechanism amongst different intelligence agencies including intelligence units of the Central Police Forces and the three armed forces. The technical and human intelligence is continuously gathered in a well coordinated manner. It is shared with the armed forces which help them in taking decisions.

9. Let me now apprise the House of the developments this year. Since April,we had noticed a buildup of troops and armaments by the Chinese side in the border areas adjacent to Eastern Ladakh. In early May, the Chinese side had taken action to hinder the normal, traditional patrolling pattern of our troops in the Galwan Valley area, which resulted in a face-off. Even as this situation was being addressed by the Ground Commanders as per the provisions of our bilateral agreements and protocol, in mid-May the Chinese side made several attempts to transgress the LAC in other parts of the Western Sector. This included Kongka La, Gogra and North Bank of Pangong Lake. These attempts were detected early and consequently responded to appropriately by our armed forces.

10. We made it clear to the Chinese side both through diplomatic and military channels that China was, by such actions,attempting to unilaterally alter the status quo. It was categorically conveyed that this was unacceptable.

11. Given the growing friction along the LAC, the Senior Commanders of the two sides in a meeting on June 6 2020 agreed on a process of disengagement that involved reciprocal actions. Both sides also agreed to respect and abide by the LAC and not undertake any activity to alter the status quo. However in violation of this the Chinese side created a violent face off on June 15th at Galwan. Our brave soldiers laid down their lives and also inflicted costs including casualties on the Chinese side,

12. The conduct of our armed forces throughout these incidents shows that while they maintained "Sayyam” in the face of provocative actions, they also equally displayed "Shaurya” when required to protect the territorial integrity of India.I would like the House to join me in recognizing the courage and valour of our soldiers, who undergo immense hardship in the most difficult conditions to keep us all safe and secure.

13. While no one should doubt our determination to safeguard our borders, India believes that mutual respect and mutual sensitivity are the basis for peaceful relations with neighbours. As we want to resolve the current situation through dialogue, we have maintained diplomatic and military engagement with the Chinese side. In these discussions, we have maintained the three key principles that, determine our approach: (i) both sides should strictly respect and observe the LAC; (ii) neither side should attempt to alter the status quo unilaterally; and (iii) all agreements and understandings between the two sides much be fully abided by in their entirety. The Chinese side, on its part, took the position that the situation should be handled in a responsible manner and ensure peace and tranquility as per bilateral agreements and protocol.

14. Even as these discussions were going on, the Chinese side again engaged in provocative military manoeuvres on the night of 29th and 30th August in an attempt to change the status quo in the South Bank area of Pangong Lake. But yet again, timely and firm actions by our armed forces along the LAC prevented such attempts from succeeding.

15. As is clear from these events, the Chinese actions reflect a disregard of our various bilateral agreements. The amassing of the troops by China goes against the 1993 and 1996 Agreements. Respecting and strictly observing the Line of Actual Control is the basis for peace and tranquility in the border areas and explicitly recognized in both 1993 and 1996 agreements. While our armed forces abide scrupulously by it, this has not been reciprocated by the Chinese side. Their actions have led to face-offs and frictions from time to time along the LAC. As I mentioned earlier, the agreements have detailed procedures and norms to deal with the situation of face-offs. However, in the recent incidents, this year, the violent conduct of Chinese forces has been in complete violation of all mutually agreed norms.

16. As of now, the Chinese side has mobilized a large number of troops and armaments along the LAC as well as in the depth areas. There are several friction areas in Eastern Ladakh including Gogra, Kongka La and North and South Banks of the Pangong Lake. In response to China’s actions, our armed forces have also made appropriate counter deployments in these areas to ensure that India’s security interests are fully protected. The House should have full confidence that our armed forces will always rise to the challenge and do us all proud. This is still an ongoing situation and obviously involves sensitive operational issues. I would, therefore, not be able to give more details in public and I am confident about the understanding of the House in this regard.

17. This rapid deployment by our armed forces including ITBP has taken place in a challenging time of COVID-19. Their efforts need to be appreciated. It has also been made possible by the high importance that the Government has placed for developing border infrastructure in the last few years. The House is aware that over the last many decades, China had undertaken significant infrastructure construction activity that enhanced their deployment capabilities in the border areas. However, in response, our Government too has stepped up the budget for border infrastructure development to about double the previous levels. As a result, more roads and bridges have been completed in the border areas. This has not only provided much needed connectivity to the local population, but has also provided better logistical support for our armed forces, enabling them to be more alert in the border areas and respond more effectively where required. In the coming years too, the Government remains committed to this objective.

Hon’ble Speaker,

18. I would like to emphasize, that India remains committed to resolving the current issues in our border areas through peaceful dialogue and consultations. It was in pursuit of this objective that I met my Chinese counterpart on 4th September in Moscow and had an in-depth discussion with him. I conveyed in clear terms our concerns related to the actions of the Chinese side, including amassing of large number of troops, their aggressive behavior and attempts to unilaterally alter the status quo that were in violation of the bilateral agreements. I also made it clear that even as we wanted to peacefully resolve the issue and would like the Chinese side to work with us, there should also be no doubt about our determination to protect India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. My colleague, Shri Jai Shankar, the External Affairs Minister, has thereafter met the Chinese Foreign Minister in Moscow on 10th September. The two have reached an agreement that, if implemented sincerely and faithfully by the Chinese side, could lead to complete disengagement and restoration of peace and tranquility in the border areas.

19. As the Members are aware, in the past too we have had situations of prolonged stand-offs in our border areas with China which have been resolved peacefully. Even though the situation this year is very different both in terms of scale of troops involved and the number of friction points, we do remain committed to the peaceful resolution of the current situation.At the same time, the House can be assured that we remain prepared to deal with all contingencies.

20. Hon’ble Speaker this House has had a glorious tradition that whenever the country is faced with a challenge, this House has always exhibited its strength and unity towards the resolve and determination of our Armed Forces. This House has also reposed its full confidence in the indomitable spirit, gallantry and bravery of our Armed Forces deployed on our borders.

21. I can assure you that the morale and motivation of our Armed Forces is very high. The reassuring visit by our PM has ensured that our commanders and soldiers understand that the entire nation stands behind them in support of the just cause of defending our territorial integrity. They are accordingly being provisioned with suitable clothing, habitat and the required defence wherewithal. The determination of our troops is praise worthy. They are capable of serving at forbidding altitudes with scarce oxygen and in extremely cold temperatures, something that they have effortlessly done over the last many years on Siachen, and Kargil.

22. I will not hesitate to share with this august House that we are facing a challenge in Ladakh and I urge the House to pass a resolution in support of our Armed Forces who have been defending our motherland at great heights and most inclement weather conditions in Ladakh for our safety and security. This is a time when this august House has to come together and reiterate confidence and faith in the valour of the brave armed forces and support them in the mission that they have undertaken to protect the territorial integrity of our motherland.

Jai Hind.”

New Delhi
September 15, 2020

[Double Edge]

Agree with Nalapat. But does being in the Quad mean giving up nukes? The Colonel thinks so. Did UK, France give up nukes to be NATO allies? Btw, I don't agree with the Colonel's assertion.

Depends on the deal we work out with the Americans. Chinese didn't give up their nukes either.

I'm interested in knowing more those things China did for the US that were so important.

There is splitting Soviet forces on two opposite borders. What else ?

Some links to this would be helpful.

[Double Edge]

The Colonel doesn't seem to understand this apprehension.

ok, so how does he think we should respond in the current situation ?

[Officer of Engineers]

Nobody thought China would start a war in 1962 until the very last moment. They were expecting skirmishes. That is why we have to be on our guard.

If you can't recognize assembly points, someone should be fired.

The risk is not of a conflict but being unprepared for one.

Modi can repeat 1971 and ensure a 1962 in reverse | Sunday Gurdian | Sept 13 2020

If you keep trying to fight the last war, you will lose and lose big. The Indian side is so ignorant of Chinese military adventures that it it's not funny. They keep saying that China didn't fight a war since 1979. Wrong. Their last war was in 1985. If you want to measure Chinese military experience, everyone in Dehli should stop with 1962 and at least use 1985 and I would not even look at that but towards the recent Russo-Sino military exercises. The Russians coined the phrase "Iron Discipline" meaning the Chinese will not be disswayed from their OPOBJs just because of their casualties.

In short, the Chinese have became WWII Soviet Red Army ... and all that it means including C4ISR.

[Double Edge]

If you can't recognize assembly points, someone should be fired.

ASSEMBLY AREA— The area where a command assembles preparatory to making a move

Question ? there's reports that have a big buildup at certain areas.

Why is this not an assembly area for you ? or how long does it take for one to develop from that build up.

Need to get some satellite images of recent developments. Not much is being said about that.

This is from July



There is a simpler reason of course and that is for domestic consumption.

Military & govt are doing a bang up job despite the odds.

If you keep trying to fight the last war, you will lose and lose big. The Indian side is so ignorant of Chinese military adventures that it it's not funny. They keep saying that China didn't fight a war since 1979. Wrong. Their last war was in 1985. If you want to measure Chinese military experience, everyone in Dehli should stop with 1962 and at least use 1985 and I would not even look at that but towards the recent Russo-Sino military exercises. The Russians coined the phrase "Iron Discipline" meaning the Chinese will not be disswayed from their OPOBJs just because of their casualties.

In short, the Chinese have became WWII Soviet Red Army ... and all that it means including C4ISR.

Sounds a lot like us back in 1962 where the order was not to give them an inch. Meaning you held the damn post regardless.

Instead of withdrawing and advancing where necessary.

The funny thing is we're hearing this term 'not an inch' from the Chinese these days.