What's new

China-India border skirmishes may become a new normal

Global Times: China-India border skirmishes may become a new normal
By Huang Kangrui Source: Globaltimes.cn Published: 2020/9/26 18:04:05

In 2020, China and India have gone through a series of border conflicts. The governments and military officials from both countries have held multiple meetings on different occasions discussing the border crisis. The sixth round of military commander-level meetings between the two sides was held on Monday to further de-escalate border tensions.

Yet, it seems that the two sides have fallen into a circle of standoff — talks — standoff — talks, again and again. Against this backdrop, it is believed that three phenomena in India should be paid attention to.

Firstly, the Indian government has lost its grip on restraining certain forces of the military. Since the conflict first started in May, China and India have held many talks. On June 10, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs noted at a regular press conference that "through diplomatic and military channels, China and India have recently had effective communication and reached agreement on properly handling the situation in the west section of the China-India boundary." However, on June 15, the situation sharply worsened: Indian troops illegally crossed the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and deliberately launched provocative attacks that directly resulted in the bloody brawl of the Galwan Valley. It is hard to imagine that the Indian army's moves did not have the acquiescence or support of high-level officials.

Indian front-line troops' provocative actions obviously violated the consensus reached by the two governments. It should be expected that this force will continue to repeatedly disturb China-India border issues.

Secondly, there are profound divergences over China policy within India. Taking a look at the statements of India's different departments on border-related incidents, it is obvious that their attitudes and positions are quite different. Indeed, different departments have their own interests, so their actions are oftentimes not coordinated. Among them, the stances of the military and ministry of foreign affairs are very different, sometimes even conflicting.

On September 10, the foreign ministers of China and India held a dialogue to cool down border tensions. The meeting in Moscow conveyed the desire of both sides to maintain peace and stability before they reached a five-point consensus.

The next day, however, Bipin Rawat, chief of defense in India, took a very tough attitude and publicly declared that India's armed forces are ready for any eventuality.

Thirdly, external forces are fueling potential China-India border clashes. In May, the White House released the "United States Strategic Approach to the People's Republic of China," stating that "the United States will increase public pressure on the PRC government." It is regarded as one of US' guidelines to comprehensively contain China's development in the future

Due to the different positions of India's departments and the uncontrollable forces within the Indian military, external forces have the opportunity to take advantage of the conflicts on the China-India border.

The divergences among India's different authorities will not disappear any time soon, neither will the uncontrollable forces within the Indian military cease their provocative activities. The border issue is not just influenced by the China-India bilateral relationship, so it will be hard to wipe out border skirmishes quickly. Conflicts could sadly become a new normal along the border.

India's infrastructure and transportation capacity are, however, not strong enough to support a large-scale and long-term military confrontation along the border areas, meaning that the scale of future border clashes will be limited.

For China, we should stay alert to the possible new normal, and prevent India's radical forces from taking more provocations on border issues as an attempt to seek their political interests. Meanwhile, China should proactively conduct dialogues with peace-loving forces in India and strive to jointly control the crisis, as this serves China's core interests.



Chinese incursions into Indian territories have been the new normal for more than a decade now.

China junked LAC and all agreements with India as earlier as 2008.

It was Indian leaders who were in denial since.


China incursions into Indian territory rise, but numbers lower than in 2014
The number has increased to 397 this year from 260 in 2016 but it was almost the same in 2015 (391) and 2013 (401), and much lower than in 2014 (507).
INDIA Updated: Jan 13, 2018 08:14 IST
Shishir Gupta

Shishir Gupta
Hindustan Times, New Delhi
India continues to claim China is in unlawful possession of Namka Chu, Sumdorong Chu and Longju.
India continues to claim China is in unlawful possession of Namka Chu, Sumdorong Chu and Longju.(Reuters File Photo)

The number of recorded incursions by China’s army into Indian territory in 2017 rose to 397 from 260 in
2016, but the number was almost the same in 2015 (391) and 2013 (401), and much lower than in 2014 (507), indicating that last year isn’t what statisticians would call the outlier, but rather a normal year (in terms of Chinese incursions) when seen over a five-year period.
India and China share an uneasy relationship across a 3,488-kilometre Line of Actual Control (LAC) and the two countries were locked in a 73-day-long standoff in Doklam in Bhutan, near the tri-junction of the three countries.
The standoff was resolved in August.
The data on incursions, accessed from security agencies, show that they are almost exclusively concentrated in Pangong Tso, Chumar, Samar Lungpa, Kongka La, Spanggur Gap and Mount Sajum in eastern Ladakh sector, Kaurik in Himachal Pradesh and the so-called finger area in Sikkim.
When India and China exchanged middle sector maps in March 2002, differences in how the two countries saw the LAC was evident in four areas—Kaurik, Shipki La, Pulam Sumda and Barahoti plains. Maps on the western sector were not exchanged (although they were shown).
A comparison of the Chinese and Indian maps showed differences (in how the two countries define the LAC) in 12 areas of the Ladakh sector: Samar Lungpa, Tri Heights and Depsang Bulge, Kongka La, Spanggur Gap, Mount Sajum, Dumchele, Demchok and Chumar.
The Chinese claim 70,000-90,000 kilometers of the eastern sector and maps on the sector were neither shown nor exchanged. However, India continues to claim China is in unlawful possession of Namka Chu, Sumdorong Chu and Longju.
The India-China expert level group identified eight areas in 1995 as mutually disputed: Trig Heights and Dumchele in Ladakh, Barahoti in Uttarakhand, Namka Chu, Somdorong chu, Yangste, Asaphi La and Longju in Arunachal Pradesh. Although the Chinese army conveyed its unhappiness over events leading to the Doklam stand-off, Beijing’s top diplomatic interlocutors have indicated that the resolution of boundary issue is not a top priority for China as it has other pressing issues on the table, according to people familiar with the matter in South Block.
Even during the Special Representative dialogue between the two sides on the boundary issue on December 21, Chinese interlocutor Yang Jiechi told his Indian counterpart Ajit Doval that Beijing is for peace and tranquility on the border and against any aggravation.


 
.
With an unlimited supply chain, close to our population centers vs China
I dont think 2 dry Rotti per day can be considered an unlimited supply chain

Or are you talking about Indian troll posts to cope with your defeats and losses?
 
. .
Most Indians live in tropical jungle and desert.

Even a small cold wave is fatal.
I wish there was as much Tropical jungles.

Most of troops Chinese faces are from our mountain strike corps or ITBP, they come from the border districts to China.
 
.
I wish there was as much Tropical jungles.

Most of troops Chinese faces are from our mountain strike corps or ITBP, they come from the border districts to China.
Jungles would be much less favorable for the Chinese to operate in than the mountains ... wrt to mountain warfare, all it really takes is a lot of skill and very good logistics/supply, along with appropriate mountain equipment. Jungles on the other hand would be much more hellish due to the extremely dense vegetation, which provide extremely good ambush spots. This is why much of mountain warfare fought has been decisive throughout history whereas jungle warfare is a long war of attrition.
 
.
Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping are likely to come face to face soon at the BRICS summit in Russia. The summit, which has been delayed because of the Covid-19 pandemic, is now expected to take place by the end of October. Modi and Xi have met 18 times since 2014. The 19th meeting is going to be a tough one, given the tense border standoff between India and China.

Military commanders from both countries have been holding marathon deliberations, but they have not yet produced any tangible results. The sixth such meeting held on September 21 was also attended by Navin Srivastava, joint secretary in charge of east Asia at the ministry of external affairs. The MEA sent its representative to ensure that the Army and the political leadership were on the same page on the issue. Srivastava, who has been holding border talks with Chinese diplomats, had accompanied External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar during his recent meeting in Moscow with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

India went with a bigger delegation for the sixth round of talks, which was the first one after the Jaishankar-Wang meeting. The team led by Lieutenant General Harinder Singh of the Leh-based 14 Corps consisted of commanders of the two divisions responsible for Ladakh, Major General Abhijit Bapat and Major General Padam Shekhawat. Lieutenant General P.G.K. Menon, who is expected to take over the command of the 14 Corps, was also present. The Indian side said the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) was the aggressor and should withdraw first following the principle of ‘first in, first out’. At the end of the 14-hour-long meeting, the two sides agreed to “stop sending more troops to the frontline” and “refrain from unilaterally changing the situation on ground”.


Lieutenant General Harinder Singh and Major General Liu Lin of the South Xinjiang military district have now spent nearly 75 hours trying to negotiate a way out of the current impasse. “Such long hours indicate that there are too many differences between the two sides. The Indian side needs to change its approach while negotiating with the Chinese military,” said former northern army commander Lieutenant General (retd) D.S. Hooda.

Military planners do not foresee any major breakthrough in the coming days. They are, in fact, apprehensive of further violent skirmishes before winter sets in. General (retd) V.P. Malik, who led the Indian Army during the 1999 Kargil operation, said eyeball-to-eyeball situations can escalate quickly. He mentioned the Nathula crisis of 1967 when an accidental firing by a Chinese soldier while setting up a fence escalated into heavy artillery exchange which lasted for four days. “We need to be on our highest level of alertness and should be prepared for winter,” said Malik. Citing the example of the Indian victory in Kargil, he said a robust defence was needed for diplomacy to succeed.

Military strategists believe that India’s recent tactical gains have made China jittery. Operation Snow Leopard launched on August 29 has given the Indian Army control over the dominating heights in the Chushul region, bringing China’s Moldo garrison under its range of fire.


Major General (retd) S.B. Asthana, an infantry leader with over 40 years of experience, said the PLA’s operational aim was to maximise its territorial gains on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and gain some tactically significant features crucial to India before the onset of winter. “It will exploit the remaining 30 to 45 days before heavy snowfall for the purpose, and will try not to give away any more critical heights,” he said. “We should raise the cost for the PLA for its gross violation of the LAC, even if it requires a long haul on the border and a few more military options.”

He said the five-point agreement between Jaishankar and Wang in Moscow was nothing more than a diplomatic nicety, and was difficult to implement on ground. “We have had 22 rounds of diplomatic talks on border management, but failed to reach any consensus,” said Asthana. As the LAC is not clearly demarcated, there will be incidents of jostling. “Jostling is not a strategic, tactical or operational action. Talks have very little meaning without proper demarcation, but it requires political will on both sides.”

Malik said there was a complete breakdown of trust between the Indian Army and the PLA. “On the ground, they do the exact opposite of what they discuss during talks, like what happened in Galwan. Armies always hit their adversaries at their weak spots. For proactive defence, we need to look for soft spots on the other side. You cannot guard each and every inch of a high altitude mountainous border,” he said. He also warned about areas where India lacked adequate infrastructure and about posts which were thinly guarded.

Indian military planners think that a pullback from the border will be politically costly for Xi. The PLA, therefore, is unlikely to withdraw and may use the time for negotiation to bolster its logistics and beef up infrastructure support for its forward troops.
While India insists on unhindered access to the 15 Patrolling Points in eastern Ladakh currently blocked by China, the PLA wants India to vacate the strategic heights along the south bank of Pangong Tso. But giving up the newly occupied heights will be a strategic disaster for India. “If China does not agree to disengagement, then we should ask the PLA to thin down its troops close to the border. We need to rethink our negotiating position to break the logjam,” said Hooda. Many military strategists are, however, sceptical about the ongoing negotiations. “We should not go for a quick fix solution,” said Asthana. “It will turn into a major handicap in the future.”

 
. . .
All the trolling by global times and the Chinese propaganda machine convinces whom? Here's what does not change.

1. The reality of the Chinese creating this situation, encroaching, being aggressive, and arbitrarily intruding is booked in with 99% nations of the world, and 100% among those that matter
2. The new positions of the Indian army, as verified through several satellite images, checkmating and exposing Chinese positions
3. Chinese credibility remains the same - poor, untrustful to the vast majority of countries. Hiding their soldier's deaths was a low point.
4. The strange case of the Chinese using propaganda that works on their citizenry and imagining it being effective in the outside world.
5. They have land disputes with 24 countries
6. QUAD
 
Last edited:
. .
India has stationed about 100,000 more soldiers in the disputed Himalayan area between the two countries, Wang Hongguang says

Indian troops could easily cross into China within a few hours, he says

Topic | China-India relations





Kristin Huang


Published: 8:15am, 26 Sep, 2020


Updated: 8:15am, 26 Sep, 2020


China should stay on alert for surprise attacks along its disputed Himalayan border with India, a retired Chinese general has warned, claiming that New Delhi has at least doubled its troops in the area.

Retired Chinese lieutenant general Wang Hongguang issued the warning in an article published on Li Jian, a defence-related social media account, on Wednesday.

“India only needs 50,000 soldiers to maintain the Line of Actual Control, but now, instead of withdrawing troops before the winter comes, India has added 100,000 more soldiers in Ladakh,” Wang said, referring to the disputed China-India border.


“India has doubled or tripled its troops near the Line of Actual Control; they are mostly stationed within 50km (31 miles) of Chinese territory, and they could easily cross into China in a few hours.”


29 Jul 2020

Wang is a former deputy commander of the Nanjing Military Region, now part of the Eastern Theatre Command. He did not cite a source for the troop numbers.

He said the danger of a conflict had risen and “incidents” in the Taiwan Strait and the coming US presidential election might give India an opportunity to “do something big”.

He said the Chinese military could not afford to let down their guard before mid-November.

Wang’s assessment came just days after the two countries held a sixth round of talks between military commanders.

In the meeting on Monday, the two sides agreed to implement consensus reached by the leaders, strengthen communication on the ground, avoid misunderstandings, and stop sending more troops to the front line. They also agreed to refrain from unilaterally changing the situation on the ground and avoid any action that might complicate the situation.

Tensions along the border erupted in a series of border skirmishes in the remote Himalayan area of the Galwan Valley in May and June. In mid-June, Chinese and Indian troops armed only with sticks and rocks came to blows, with at least 20 Indian soldiers dead and 76 wounded. The casualties on the Chinese side are not known.

Since August, troops have clashed at least twice more and have even accused each other of firing warning shots in the air, breaking a long-standing agreement to not use firearms within 2km of the LAC.

Both sides have sent reinforcements to the area.

Indian media reported on Thursday that helicopters had been readied to support troops at forward posts throughout winter.

Hong Kong-based military commentator Song Zhongping said China had to tread carefully in relation to the additional Indian troops in the disputed region.

“India always thinks it is in an inferior position and doesn’t accept the so-called Line of Actual Control. So it’s possible that they will initiate attacks to take back the region that Indians see as belonging to them,” Song said.


Zhou Chenming, a Beijing-based military specialist, said rising nationalist sentiment in India and the big difference between the two countries over the need for troops in the area might prompt India to be more adventurous and opportunistic.


“The high nationalistic sentiment in India leaves no room for Indian troops to step back, so I think there is a high possibility of a long-term stand-off,” Zhou said.
 
.
Indian army should attack in winter when temperature falls below -50 deg celcius. PLA has walked straight into the trap and will freeze to death as their weak and poorly trained soldiers cannot bear such extreme weathers while India has experienced troops who have served in Siachin and also Ladakhis who are accustomed to such conditions. Also Chinese cannot match us in mountain warfare.
 
.
Lol.. please attack China now and fought all your way to beijing. India need to show their shupa power. :lol:

End of the day, india is just a small fry. :enjoy:
 
.
Lol.. please attack China now and fought all your way to beijing. India need to show their shupa power. :lol:

End of the day, india is just a small fry. :enjoy:
Looks like you forgot how 600-800 pla were slaughtered in 67 and also dozens in galwan. Have patience your wish shall be granted.
 
.
Lol.. please attack China now and fought all your way to beijing. India need to show their shupa power. :lol:

End of the day, india is just a small fry. :enjoy:
The member you're quoting has about 390 posts and 30 negative ratings. What kind of response were you expecting? :lol:
 
.
Back
Top Bottom