India admits PLA fortified Doklam after IA unilateral retreat

[Joe Shearer]

Joe,

Doka La is essentially located at the fringes of Doklam plateau, you don't need to cross the border to be on Doklam plateau. China already officially announce to the world about your withdrawal back to your side of the border on Doklam plateau.

http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/
t1487932.shtml

Q: Can you confirm that the Indian personnel have already left or they are in the process of leaving?

A: I am pleased to confirm that the Indian border personnel and equipment have all been withdrawn to the Indian side of the border.

There is no point arguing, India chickened out and is trying to paint herself as a hero in front of you gullible Indians through your 'impartial' media. Remember about the cover up of the withdrawal till 40 troops earlier?

Where is the contradiction?

1. A part of the region was disputed between Bhutan and China; other parts were within the control of the respective sides, with Indian troops safeguarding Bhutanese territory.
2. The Chinese started building a road extending through the portion occupied by them into the disputed area.
3. Indian troops crossed into the disputed area and stopped Chinese road-building.
4. An agreement was reached and road-building stopped; Indian troops withdrew to their original positions.
5. Chinese troops stayed where they had been before, outside the disputed part, and, as mentioned earlier, road-building on the disputed part stopped.
6. As far as the part disputed between Bhutan and China is concerned, as with other territories whose borders are disputed between India and China, both sides will patrol up to the point where they believe that their jurisdiction applies, without interfering with the other side's patrols.
7. The Indian side will continue to patrol into the disputed area, as will the Chinese. The withdrawal of Indian troops to their original positions does not indicate withdrawal of Bhutanese claims, and the patrolling keeps the dispute in status quo.
8. No constructions by either side will come up in the disputed area.

Please show me where these indicators and the Chinese spokeswoman's statement contradict each other.

 

[unbiasedopinion]

Good, India stopped taking China seriously in 1962 as well.

It seems to have cost them this time as well, since China is now in possession of Donglang, which India claimed to have been Bhutan's territory and protected by a mutual defence treaty.

Alas||| If dreams were horses I would be flying......

 

[Feng Leng]

Never knew both sides going back 150 meters each is considered possession of territory by you guys

IA going back 150 meters means you are out of Doklam (declared by China government). PLA is still in Doklam even after India demanded so for two months. PLA did not move back at all but built bunkers 150 meters back from the stand off site (reported by Indian media). Bunkers need cement to build, which means motorable roads up to 150 meters from the stand off site is completed. The result is India unilaterally retreats and China fortifies Doklam right up to the border (shy 150 meters).

 

[noksss]

IA going back 150 meters means you are out of Doklam (declared by China government). PLA is still in Doklam even after India demanded so for two months. PLA did not move back at all but built bunkers 150 meters back from the stand off site (reported by Indian media). Bunkers need cement to build, which means motorable roads up to 150 meters from the stand off site is completed. The result is India unilaterally retreats and China fortifies Doklam right up to the border (shy 150 meters).

Both PLA and IA retreated 150 meters and remain in the site which according to you means only India retreating and china fortifying

 

[Dungeness]

This is perverted logic.

There is no indication that Indian troops are not in the disputed area, and that is enough to substantiate the Indian MEA's claim.

Going back further, the Indian Government's silence is not unusual; it is, in fact, recognised in international policy analysis circles as a deliberate policy of strategic restraint, and has been mentioned very often. Conclusions of the sort above, that India "...did not come out with a victory that it wanted Indians to believe it got, so leaving room for individual interpretation and imagination seems to be a good idea to cover the arse" are self-serving. The only arses being covered are of Chinese netizens who expected WWIII and a quick and definitive Chinese victory and a ceasefire dictated in New Delhi.

The public records are ambiguous precisely for that reason, so that neither side loses face. For India to grind it into the PRC that it had to back off would precisely fail for that reason, making the PRC lose face. That allows the PLA to make claims about being present on the location, obscuring the fact that the location is large and ill-defined, allowing for claims to be made without violating reality, which is what is happening. The only people falling prey to this are netizens and nobody else.



You have a point.

You are arguing for the sake of argument. It is silly to continue to spin based on your "imagination".

Indian troops "disengaged" into India side of border, and Chinese troops are staying in Doklam and building new bunkers. Period. Accept the fact, and move on. By the way, Chinese are not the ones who claimed the victory.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You are arguing for the sake of argument. It is silly to continue to spin based on your "imagination".

Indian troops "disengaged" into India side of border, and Chinese troops are staying in Doklam and building new bunkers. Period. Accept the fact, and move on. By the way, Chinese are not the ones who claimed the victory.

Well, arguing for the sake of argument applies to more than one side here, as we can all see. Why are you so desperate to prove that China won, or that it was a false victory declared by India, when even our government releases didn't claim victory, or that Chinese troops stayed where they were (undisputed everywhere - they were prevented in situ), and Indian troops retreated, as if that meant anything sensational, when it was just restoration of the status quo?

The bit about building new bunkers is pure imagination; this is what causes despair among neutral or balanced observers, including Indian ones; the amount of violence possible to be released on the facts, in order to prove a testosterone driven point.

IA going back 150 meters means you are out of Doklam (declared by China government). PLA is still in Doklam even after India demanded so for two months. PLA did not move back at all but built bunkers 150 meters back from the stand off site (reported by Indian media). Bunkers need cement to build, which means motorable roads up to 150 meters from the stand off site is completed. The result is India unilaterally retreats and China fortifies Doklam right up to the border (shy 150 meters).

It simply means that while the extreme Chinese members have got hysterical, as this note shows, even the formerly balanced ones have now lost their balance.

Amazing how much this 150 metres seems to mean to your national self-esteem.

 

[dray / Rain Man]

Looks like the Doklam disaster left deep psychological wounds in Chinese psyche!

Such shrill hourly warnings and threats from Chinese side was definitely a huge strategic mistake, especially when they can't back it up with action. This incident seriously dented the carefully crafted wannabe superpower image of China, and has redrawn the terms of engagement between India and China in any future negotiation or conflict....possibly it will also affect the terms of engagement between China and its other victims of blatant imperialism in other conflict areas including SCS.

End of the day Chinese limitations and weakness got revealed, bad move China.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Where is the contradiction?

1. A part of the region was disputed between Bhutan and China; other parts were within the control of the respective sides, with Indian troops safeguarding Bhutanese territory.
2. The Chinese started building a road extending through the portion occupied by them into the disputed area.
3. Indian troops crossed into the disputed area and stopped Chinese road-building.
4. An agreement was reached and road-building stopped; Indian troops withdrew to their original positions.
5. Chinese troops stayed where they had been before, outside the disputed part, and, as mentioned earlier, road-building on the disputed part stopped.
6. As far as the part disputed between Bhutan and China is concerned, as with other territories whose borders are disputed between India and China, both sides will patrol up to the point where they believe that their jurisdiction applies, without interfering with the other side's patrols.
7. The Indian side will continue to patrol into the disputed area, as will the Chinese. The withdrawal of Indian troops to their original positions does not indicate withdrawal of Bhutanese claims, and the patrolling keeps the dispute in status quo.
8. No constructions by either side will come up in the disputed area.

Please show me where these indicators and the Chinese spokeswoman's statement contradict each other.

Except that neither the Chinese Foreign Ministry nor the Indian MEA said anything about stopping road construction.

All this (mis)information about stopping road construction has come from "unnamed sources" in the Indian media.

According to the actual official statement from the Chinese government, China is now setting up permanent garrisons in Donglang and the road construction is to be completed. That is China's official position.

 

[dray / Rain Man]

Except that neither the Chinese Foreign Ministry nor the Indian MEA said anything about stopping road construction.

All this (mis)information about stopping road construction has come from "unnamed sources" in the Indian media.

According to the actual official statement from the Chinese government, China is now setting up permanent garrisons in Donglang and the road construction is to be completed. That is China's official position.

Don't be so desperate..

We know that China has stopped the road construction in the Bhutanese territory disputed by China and moved out the equipment, for now.

And India has stepped back 150 meters from the Bhutanese territory disputed by China, for now.

China is fortifying their positions there, and so are we.

China might come back to build the road, again, we know that.

And in that case India will come back to stop it, again, you should know that too.

 

[Han Patriot]

Where is the contradiction?

1. A part of the region was disputed between Bhutan and China; other parts were within the control of the respective sides, with Indian troops safeguarding Bhutanese territory.Indian troops were never present in Doklam until recently, that's why there was a standoff. Please show me otherwise?
2. The Chinese started building a road extending through the portion occupied by them into the disputed area.China was upgrading an existing road in Doklam plateau, not building a new road. The upgrading works was completed until Doka La.
3. Indian troops crossed into the disputed area and stopped Chinese road-building. You stopped the construction by obstructing it. Essentially a standoff begun, because we cannot kill unarmed Indian soldiers. We gave warnings to you to retreat and you obliged.
4. An agreement was reached and road-building stopped; Indian troops withdrew to their original positions. We postponed the road construction not stopped the construction. Indian intent was to safeguard Doklam from Chinese occupation not just about a road.
5. Chinese troops stayed where they had been before, outside the disputed part, and, as mentioned earlier, road-building on the disputed part stopped. Chinese troops are still in Doklam my friend. Doka La is 5km deep into Doklam plateau, a 150m buffer line would mean we are still in Doklam as confirmed by our Foreign Ministry, while Indian troops retreated back to their side of the border. If you didn't oblige to our warning, there would have been some roasted chapatis.
6. As far as the part disputed between Bhutan and China is concerned, as with other territories whose borders are disputed between India and China, both sides will patrol up to the point where they believe that their jurisdiction applies, without interfering with the other side's patrols. This is a dispute between China and Bhutan, not with India, if India insist on helping Bhutan, we will start going in Azad Kashmir. You are a weaker state not us, you have no bargaining power in this dispute.
7. The Indian side will continue to patrol into the disputed area, as will the Chinese. The withdrawal of Indian troops to their original positions does not indicate withdrawal of Bhutanese claims, and the patrolling keeps the dispute in status quo. Since when did India even dare patrol in Doklam? The moment you step over that border, it will be full scale war, else why do you think you retreated?
8. No constructions by either side will come up in the disputed area. Sure? Because you are more powerful than China and we need to listen to you? Bunkers are now built there? So? What if we start building air strips? So? No roads right? Just an airstrip? LOL. Naive Indians.

Both PLA and IA retreated 150 meters and remain in the site which according to you means only India retreating and china fortifying

The road is only 100 meters from the Indian border genius.

 

[Joe Shearer]

1. A part of the region was disputed between Bhutan and China; other parts were within the control of the respective sides, with Indian troops safeguarding Bhutanese territory.Indian troops were never present in Doklam until recently, that's why there was a standoff. Please show me otherwise?
   Bhutan never objected to Chinese activity until recently. Does that meet your need for demonstrated fact?
2. The Chinese started building a road extending through the portion occupied by them into the disputed area.China was upgrading an existing road in Doklam plateau, not building a new road. The upgrading works was completed until Doka La.
   Isn't Doka La at one end of the disputed territory? Weren't the Chinese building in disputed territory? Or are you saying that it was about to cross into disputed territory when the activity was stopped?
3. Indian troops crossed into the disputed area and stopped Chinese road-building. You stopped the construction by obstructing it. Essentially a standoff begun, because we cannot kill unarmed Indian soldiers. We gave warnings to you to retreat and you obliged.
   ...AND the road-building stopped.
4. An agreement was reached and road-building stopped; Indian troops withdrew to their original positions. We postponed the road construction not stopped the construction. Indian intent was to safeguard Doklam from Chinese occupation not just about a road.
   Remarkable coincidence, this postponement. But yes, the Indian intent was indeed to safeguard Doka La from Chinese occupation, and did not stop at the road.
5. Chinese troops stayed where they had been before, outside the disputed part, and, as mentioned earlier, road-building on the disputed part stopped. Chinese troops are still in Doklam my friend. Doka La is 5km deep into Doklam plateau, a 150m buffer line would mean we are still in Doklam as confirmed by our Foreign Ministry, while Indian troops retreated back to their side of the border. If you didn't oblige to our warning, there would have been some roasted chapatis.
   I said, "....outside the disputed part." You are using geographical terms, Doklam and Doka La, to obscure the facts, that there was - and is - a disputed territory, that the Chinese started building in it or towards it, that they were obstructed, and that when the offending activity, the road-building stopped, the Indian troops stopped obstructing it. Whether the Chinese remain in their part as they always have been or not is immaterial; what was objected to was stopped. The Chinese warned the Indians not to stay in the disputed territory permanently, the Indians warned the Chinese that road-building was not acceptable. The Chinese did their communications with the full blare of publicity, in high-pitched strident tones, the Indians did their communications with their actions, and with no governmental incitement of its media or its ubiquitous netizens. Chapatis with sweet and sour vegetables? Not a good match.
6. As far as the part disputed between Bhutan and China is concerned, as with other territories whose borders are disputed between India and China, both sides will patrol up to the point where they believe that their jurisdiction applies, without interfering with the other side's patrols. This is a dispute between China and Bhutan, not with India, if India insist on helping Bhutan, we will start going in Azad Kashmir. You are a weaker state not us, you have no bargaining power in this dispute.
   As if China did not know about the Indian security umbrella for the Bhutanese, and as if it is a great surprise to China to learn that India is helping, and will continue to help Bhutan. The threat about Azad Kashmir is empty; China has already gone into Gilgit, so what difference does it make?
7. The Indian side will continue to patrol into the disputed area, as will the Chinese. The withdrawal of Indian troops to their original positions does not indicate withdrawal of Bhutanese claims, and the patrolling keeps the dispute in status quo. Since when did India even dare patrol in Doklam? The moment you step over that border, it will be full scale war, else why do you think you retreated?
   Because the Chinese very reasonably decided that jaw-jaw was better than war-war. Isn't that funny? Calls for a meaningless emoticon, like so Stupid, isn't it? Now you know what it looks like.
8. No constructions by either side will come up in the disputed area. Sure? Because you are more powerful than China and we need to listen to you? Bunkers are now built there? So? What if we start building air strips? So? No roads right? Just an airstrip? LOL. Naive Indians.
   LOL indeed. Why not put your Mars space station there? That would be as outlandish as anything else, and as likely.

The road is only 100 meters from the Indian border genius.

Err, genius? You forgot to mouth your own script. It is the Bhutanese border, not the Indian border. Indian troops are guarding it, but it remains Bhutanese. Second, whether it is a 100 metres or 1 metre doesn't matter; China's attempts to extend the road were stopped. And remain stopped.

What will happen, might happen, could happen, should happen is not known, and unlike you, we don't look into crystal globes and foretell the future.

 

[Feng Leng]

It simply means that while the extreme Chinese members have got hysterical, as this note shows, even the formerly balanced ones have now lost their balance.

Amazing how much this 150 metres seems to mean to your national self-esteem.

LOL it was India who boasted for two months about defending Bhutan territory Doklam from PLA but today only PLA occupy the stand-off site. Chinese governmenrt declared this plainly and Indian side were too cowardly and meek to contradict.

Annexing a 150 meter strip of land abandoned by IA is enough to send a message to Delhi that you are mere a low caste nation not worthy of competing with a real great power like China. If it was up to me, I would have built the bunkers right on the ridge without giving India 150 meters of buffer but it turns out our government is merciful and gave Modi a tiny fig leaf to cover his shame.

 

[Khafee]

LOL it was India who boasted for two months about defending Bhutan territory Doklam from PLA but today only PLA occupy the stand-off site. Annexing a 150 meter strip of land abandoned by IA is enough to send a message to Delhi that you are mere a low caste nation not worthy of competing with a real great power like China. If it was up to me, I would have built the bunkers right on the ridge without giving India 150 meters of buffer but it turns out our government is merciful and gave Modi a tiny fig leaf to cover his shame.

He is shameless.

 

[Feng Leng]

Don't be so desperate..

We know that China has stopped the road construction in the Bhutanese territory disputed by China and moved out the equipment, for now.

And India has stepped back 150 meters from the Bhutanese territory disputed by China, for now.

China is fortifying their positions there, and so are we.

China might come back to build the road, again, we know that.

And in that case India will come back to stop it, again, you should know that too.

LOL then how do you explain...

"Soldiers of the People's Liberation Army continue to remain on the contentious plateau."

Yet the IA is obediently back to your side of the border? And how do you explain the fact that we already built bunkers in Doklam as admitted by the Indian media article? Didn't India claim for two months that the entire Doklam is Bhutan land?

 

[Joe Shearer]

LOL it was India who boasted for two months about defending Bhutan territory Doklam from PLA but today only PLA occupy the stand-off site. Chinese governmenrt declared this plainly and Indian side were too cowardly and meek to contradict.

Annexing a 150 meter strip of land abandoned by IA is enough to send a message to Delhi that you are mere a low caste nation not worthy of competing with a real great power like China. If it was up to me, I would have built the bunkers right on the ridge without giving India 150 meters of buffer but it turns out our government is merciful and gave Modi a tiny fig leaf to cover his shame.

Han Warrior is aggressive but authentic.

Dungeness is authentic but unwilling to see any other point of view.

You? Just a tiny fig leaf.