China Military Watch

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Jun 2008 21:37

rediff

Chinese transgress into Sikkim again

June 18, 2008 21:05 IST

In yet another incident of Chinese transgressions into Indian territory, the People's Liberation Army personnel entered Indian territory in Sikkim and returned after spending some time.

The transgression took place recently in the Finger Area, which came to limelight in the wake of Chinese claims over the 2.1 sq km of land in north Sikkim.

The recent move of the PLA seems like an effort on the Chinese part to assert their claims over the area. Seeking to downplay the incident, Indian Army sources said these transgressions were "a routine affair" in which the PLA personnel violate India's perception of the 4,057-km long Line of Actual Control with China. There have been at least 65 incidents of transgressions reported in the last six months by PLA personnel into the Finger Area of the State, sources said. (mine : man they must practically be living there)

During the recent visit of India's External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee to Beijing [Images], the Chinese reportedly stunned him by raising the issue of Finger Area.

However, Defence Minister A K Antony and the Indian Army establishment have been repeatedly downplaying the transgressions as "misconception over the LAC" on the part of China.

"Just as the Chinese keep transgressing into the Indian territory as per their perception of LAC, Indian Army too
keeps patrolling the areas under its control along the LAC," Antony had said recently.

Though ITBP claimed that the present transgression took place in an area that was not under their control, officials
said they were not in a position to confirm or deny the incident.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 19 Jun 2008 11:09

Chinese forces drive light motor vehicles one kilometer inside Sikkim before withdrawing

New Delhi: In yet another incident of Chinese transgressions into Indian territory, the People's Liberation Army (PLA) personnel entered up to a kilometre of Indian territory in Sikkim and returned to their territory after spending some time there.

The transgression took place recently in the Finger Area, which came to limelight in the wake of Chinese claims over the 2.1 sq km of land in north Sikkim, sources said on Wednesday.

The recent move of the PLA seems like an effort on the Chinese part to assert their claims over the area.

Seeking to downplay the incident, Indian Army sources said these transgressions were "a routine affair" in which the PLA personnel violate India's perception of the 4,057-km long Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China.

The PLA men drove light motor vehicles and later returned to Chinese territory, sources said.

Maybe this is the time to get some of our own light armor in there perhaps?

parshuram · Post by **parshuram** » 19 Jun 2008 12:27

i guess if they confront armed personnel next time , they should be fired upon without any warnin . There are intruders and time to deal with e'em like one . This will ive a strong message that enough is enough , better stay in your chinki land

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 19 Jun 2008 13:38

I agree, shoot em all

parshuram · Post by **parshuram** » 19 Jun 2008 14:01

This is from TOI

India to raise Sikkim incursions with China
19 Jun 2008, 1329 hrs IST,PTI

NEW DELHI: India has said it will take up with China at the "appropriate highest level" the issue of recent incursions by the People's Liberation Army (PLA) into its territory along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). ( Watch )

"The issue of incursions will be raised at the next flag meeting (between Indian Army and PLA) and also discussed at appropriate highest level. As two responsible neighbours, we will sort it out," Union Minister of State for Defence M M Pallam Raju said here.

Raju's comments come in the wake of frequent incursions into Indian territory along the LAC by the PLA. There have been 65 transgressions into Finger Area in Sikkim in the last six months and on June 16, PLA men entered the region in light vehicles and later returned to their territory.

"It is unfortunate that these (incursions in Finger Area) have happened and it (the issue of Sikkim) is being raised again...Sikkim is a closed chapter as far as we are concerned," Raju said here on the sidelines of a seminar on 'Indian ways of war fighting' organised by Centre for Joint Warfare Studies (CENJOWS).

On whether India would lodge a formal protest over the PLA's recent incursions, Raju said the issue "will be taken up at an appropriate level".

shetty · Post by **shetty** » 19 Jun 2008 16:15

I don't understand something. Why did we not start doing a fence border project once we had an agreement with China and they accepted that Sikkim was no longer a border issue? We absolutely should not trust them and as soon as we get any kind of agreement on any of the border issue, seal it off, fence it like we do in Pak and Bangla border. If we build it and they disagree later, screw them, atleast they won't be able to trangress into our region again. I know its an inhospitable region in many cases but I can't see any other solution with China.

Anantz · Post by **Anantz** » 19 Jun 2008 19:32

shetty wrote:I don't understand something. Why did we not start doing a fence border project once we had an agreement with China and they accepted that Sikkim was no longer a border issue? We absolutely should not trust them and as soon as we get any kind of agreement on any of the border issue, seal it off, fence it like we do in Pak and Bangla border. If we build it and they disagree later, screw them, atleast they won't be able to trangress into our region again. I know its an inhospitable region in many cases but I can't see any other solution with China.

Well, what you are saying is next to impossible. The terrain doesnt allow fencing to be done. What you are calling a border is nothing but razor sharp ridges of mountains. I am from Sikkim and I can tell you one thing, there is not a single stretch of land longer than 1 km in the whole of Sikkim, on top of that if U visit Nathu la you can only see ridges, where one ridge is occupied by the chinese and the same ridge after a distance belongs to India, add to that the whole thing is above 14000 ft aboves msl. So it cannot even be contemplated. Apart from that there maybe few areas in where the terrain is lill bit flat, but overall that is very scarce, except for the extreme North Sikkim, where this current incursion is happening!

sevoke · Post by **sevoke** » 19 Jun 2008 20:59

where exactly is this finger area..is it in north sikkim or east sikkim? if its beyond Lachen in NS then it has to be a very inhospitable terrain. does anyone know if IA actively patrols the area or has posts like in Nathu La? Btw Anantz where in Sikkim are you from? I grew up in Gtk.

parshuram · Post by **parshuram** » 20 Jun 2008 11:30

Anantz wrote:
shetty wrote:I don't understand something. Why did we not start doing a fence border project once we had an agreement with China and they accepted that Sikkim was no longer a border issue? We absolutely should not trust them and as soon as we get any kind of agreement on any of the border issue, seal it off, fence it like we do in Pak and Bangla border. If we build it and they disagree later, screw them, atleast they won't be able to trangress into our region again. I know its an inhospitable region in many cases but I can't see any other solution with China.

Well, what you are saying is next to impossible. The terrain doesnt allow fencing to be done. What you are calling a border is nothing but razor sharp ridges of mountains. I am from Sikkim and I can tell you one thing, there is not a single stretch of land longer than 1 km in the whole of Sikkim, on top of that if U visit Nathu la you can only see ridges, where one ridge is occupied by the chinese and the same ridge after a distance belongs to India, add to that the whole thing is above 14000 ft aboves msl. So it cannot even be contemplated. Apart from that there maybe few areas in where the terrain is lill bit flat, but overall that is very scarce, except for the extreme North Sikkim, where this current incursion is happening!

Even If somehow we brave terrain , we cannot fence . problem is That China in 2003 has aggreed that sikkim is a part of india , but has not officially stamped it,the political maps of borders are different untill two countries reach to mutual agreement .

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 20 Jun 2008 11:35

If we cannot fence then can we mine the area without posing a danger to the civilian population?

Anantz · Post by **Anantz** » 20 Jun 2008 13:32

sevoke wrote:where exactly is this finger area..is it in north sikkim or east sikkim? if its beyond Lachen in NS then it has to be a very inhospitable terrain. does anyone know if IA actively patrols the area or has posts like in Nathu La? Btw Anantz where in Sikkim are you from? I grew up in Gtk.

I think the finger area is in North sikkim beyond lachung, north east of Gurudomgar lake. There the terrain is pretty much flat as it lies on the tibetan plateau. And also i guess this is one area from where the Indian army can field battle tanks and cut off Chinese supply to the Nathula pass. Thats the reason why Chinese want that place so much. I remember when I was in school, I had seen tanks been transported on the trailers. I guess the only place in Sikkim where those tanks could be fielded was North Sikkim, but the road to NS is horrible especially in the monsoons, and we had seen during kargil even the Bofors gun were shipped out of Sikkim. I wonder whether they have been shipped back.....

An btw sevoke, I am from Rangpo.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 20 Jun 2008 13:37

Vivek K wrote:If we cannot fence then can we mine the area without posing a danger to the civilian population?

not just civilians, but also wildlife and domestic cattle... with only a few paths and trails they will also be vulnerable to mines. and no one wants to see images of little Sikkimese herdboys with missing feet...

i would vote for more surveillance and aerial counterstrike

the MRCA is going to be critical - particularly for a PGM strike role

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Jun 2008 14:03

China olympic training run with military kamandu precision
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 84#p502384

shetty · Post by **shetty** » 20 Jun 2008 15:53

Anantz wrote: Well, what you are saying is next to impossible. The terrain doesnt allow fencing to be done. What you are calling a border is nothing but razor sharp ridges of mountains. I am from Sikkim and I can tell you one thing, there is not a single stretch of land longer than 1 km in the whole of Sikkim, on top of that if U visit Nathu la you can only see ridges, where one ridge is occupied by the chinese and the same ridge after a distance belongs to India, add to that the whole thing is above 14000 ft aboves msl. So it cannot even be contemplated. Apart from that there maybe few areas in where the terrain is lill bit flat, but overall that is very scarce, except for the extreme North Sikkim, where this current incursion is happening!

Ok then we fence what we can fence. Point is once we get any kind of agreement with them, they always go back on it. If not a fence, wherever we can build multiple concrete pillar markers, we should do it. Something, Anything to show that we agreed and this is the point. Difficult to see without a detailed map, but whatever we can we should.

Anantz · Post by **Anantz** » 20 Jun 2008 16:22

Well I dont think the Chinese and Indian governments have actually sat down and demarcated the border even for Sikkim. The Chinese simply accepted that Sikkim was part of India, and the Indian side simply accepted that since the Chinese accepted Sikkim as part of India the issue was automatically fixed. Problem is the Sino Sikkim border even before Sikkim's merger with India was disputed by China (as is proved by the 1967 Chola incident). Add to that the fact that India and China didnt technically sit down and demarcate the border in that region, ( Sikkim) and China gives the Chinese the excuse to violate it, simply by saying that the border hasnt been officially defined. So the whole argument of going back on there words dont stand. Because what the Indian gov should have done is when the Chinese accepted Sikkim's merger with India, at that moment itself all border demarcations along that border should have been sorted out, and proper surveyed maps exchanged between the two.

rajrang · Post by **rajrang** » 22 Jun 2008 03:50

I am cross-posting from another thread since I think this is an important development regarding Sikkim and of interest to the audience in this thread. Thanks.

The last 8/9 months has seen growing indian toughness towards china (examples: reopening air bases in Ladakh, AP, moving Su-30s to Tezpur and elsewhere in AP, plans for two new offensive mountain divs, relocating mountain div from Kashmir to Sikkim, plans to invest in border roads and infrastructure, massive naval exercises in the bay of bengal with key asian countries but excluding china). Is this causing the dragon to back off a bit and soften their attitude? See link below:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 152541.cms

To my knowledge this is the first time in many years that a relatively important chinese government official (Consul General in Kolkata) has stated with clarity that Sikkim belongs to India. He has even reassured India by giving proof for this - treaty signed in 1890 - suggesting that China had no choice but to accept this fact!

Maybe the dragon only understand toughness.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 22 Jun 2008 09:48

While India is just posturing, China is building infrastructure. 1962 can easily happen again if we keep on sitting on our @sses

sevoke · Post by **sevoke** » 26 Jun 2008 09:09

BBC reports:
Two air force jets have crashed in northern China after colliding in mid-air, Chinese state media report.
The Jian-8 fighters collided above the suburbs of Hohhot city in Inner Mongolia during a training mission, said news agency Xinhua.
Both pilots are said to have ejected and parachuted to safety, and suffered only minor injuries.
The agency says both planes crashed in inhabited areas, but gives no word on casualties on the ground.
The crash occurred just before 0900 (0100 GMT) on Wednesday, Xinhua said, in Qingshuihe County in the suburbs of Hohhot.
The agency said one plane had exploded in Wulipo, Jiucai township, leaving only the tail intact.
It said the other caught fire in a village, and both crash sites had been cordoned off.:

Heres the link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7472973.stm

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 26 Jun 2008 15:30

The agency says both planes crashed in inhabited areas, but gives no word on casualties on the ground.

about the only reason we came to hear of this incident.

skganji · Post by **skganji** » 26 Jun 2008 21:57

Typical Chinitos. Will publish what is favorable to them and reject any thing that criticizes them .

rajrang · Post by **rajrang** » 29 Jun 2008 08:32

Another news article about the barbarians who have occupied Tibet:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JF27Df01.html

Here is a worrisome quote:

Will the Chinese go to war with India over Tawang? Mohan Malik, an expert on Sino-Indian relations and professor of Security Studies at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu writes:
Although the probability of an all-out conflict is extremely low, the prospect that some of India's road building projects in disputed areas could lead to tensions, clashes and skirmishes with Chinese border patrols cannot be completely ruled out. Should a conflict break out, the PLA's [People's Liberation Army] contingency plans emphasize a "short and swift localized" conflict (confined to the Tawang region, along the lines of the 1999 Kargil conflict) with the following objectives in mind: capture the Tawang tract; give India's military a bloody nose; and deliver a knockout punch that punctures India's ambitions to be China's equal or peer competitor once and for all.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 03 Jul 2008 20:37

Mohan Malik doesn't appear to be very realistic.

Apparently, he is not aware of the ground position.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 03 Jul 2008 21:37

Is the situation on the ground better than he describes it to be? Or worse?

As i look at it, the Chinese would be chasing a pipedream.

It is no 1962.

Sanju · Post by **Sanju** » 03 Jul 2008 21:53

ASPuar, I read that as a positive statement. Meaning in our favour.

Ray sir, Please correct me if I am wrong. Mighty glad to read that statement from you.

It is best to keep the Pandas thinking that they can give the IA a bloody nose, the effect will be double when their nose is bloodied and trousers soiled.

Like I mentioned earlier, beating unarmed civilians (or even civilians with stones and sticks) is "slightly" different from facing a professional army that is experienced in combat.

skganji · Post by **skganji** » 03 Jul 2008 22:03

India cannot let China occupy and control Tawang under any circumstances. The Indian government should take a tough stand against PLA to keep Tawang part of India. If a military action is required against PLA, India shouldn't hesitate to take it. It is high time , Indian armed forces teach this arrogant dragon a big lesson . To win a war against the dragon, India should not hesitate to spend money on defence. China has already claimed Tawang several times and the ground situation from severl news reports clearly indicate of chinese intentions to occupy Tawang by force . Indian government cannot remain a passive spectator . Ofcourse, the Indian communists are going to spoil the game for India.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 03 Jul 2008 23:13

skganji

There is a mismatch in the govt's approach and the IA's approach.

Be rest assured that you are safe and snug!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Jul 2008 23:17

if the wikimapia posted in other thread is correct. tawang region esp Se La pass has the
thickest concentration of strongpoints and gun emplacements in the eastern hemisphere (western
hemisphere being rural texas). it may be tough to defend Tawang town itself but we seem to
have prepared to ensure nobody stays alive in that belt if they walk in

skganji · Post by **skganji** » 03 Jul 2008 23:32

Yes, the Kargil Incident clearly proves that there is a mismatch betwen IA and Indian government . However, is the IA ready to take action against PLA incase of an incident like the Tiger Hill occupation by Pakistani Intruders. Is the Indian government let the PLA take over the Tawang like what it did with Aksai Chin ?. Just like Nehru misguided the nation about Aksai Chin are we going to be misguided again by Congress leaders about Tawang. These are the serious matters and we need utmost transparency from the government rather than misguiding Indian public.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 03 Jul 2008 23:42

India should be wary of China's military modernisation : Army
Rediff India

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 04 Jul 2008 02:42

China Troop Build-up, Tibet Upgrade Impact our Security : Army Chief
Indian Express

skganji · Post by **skganji** » 04 Jul 2008 06:47

Why is to so hard for the Indian government to understand the threat from PLA on Tawang in Particular ?. Do they need another 1962 to understand the threat ?. The Indian government should shet the mindset of denial and help the IA pursue its designs to protect the Indian border. It is pathetic to see the surrender of the Indian politicians to various anti-national elements.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 04 Jul 2008 07:15

skganji,

The PLA has to reach Tawang town to threaten it.

Aksai Chin happened since there was no troops there. There are troops ahead and elsewhere.

narayana · Post by **narayana** » 04 Jul 2008 16:57

Anantz wrote:Well I dont think the Chinese and Indian governments have actually sat down and demarcated the border even for Sikkim. The Chinese simply accepted that Sikkim was part of India

Did India and china sit and demarcate border along Tibet,if not why dont we allow IA do similar adventures intrude into tibet for 2-3 kms sit with locals have tea and smoke a bit and return.right under chinese noses

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 04 Jul 2008 20:33

Actually these incursions have been happening for a long time.

When i went to Chungthang (North Sikkim) in 1999, chinkies were doing these incursions back then too.

There we have bunkers on border, that are evacuated during winter time due to extreme low temperature.

During these periods, PLA patrols come and occupy these bunkers for 2/3 month duration. After that they leave the area. When i asked an officer there that do we take similar actions (like go and occupy their bunker), answer was no.

PLA actually do not consider that area as international border and intentionally crosses that line on regular basis.

I wonder what made our media cry foul, when these things are happening for so long now.

Rishi · Post by **Rishi** » 04 Jul 2008 20:39

Sid wrote:I wonder what made our media cry foul, when these things are happening for so long now.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 04 Jul 2008 21:31

Sid wrote:Actually these incursions have been happening for a long time.

When i went to Chungthang (North Sikkim) in 1999, chinkies were doing these incursions back then too.

There we have bunkers on border, that are evacuated during winter time due to extreme low temperature.

During these periods, PLA patrols come and occupy these bunkers for 2/3 month duration. After that they leave the area. When i asked an officer there that do we take similar actions (like go and occupy their bunker), answer was no.

PLA actually do not consider that area as international border and intentionally crosses that line on regular basis.

I wonder what made our media cry foul, when these things are happening for so long now.

Could you let us know where are bunkers on the border evacuated in Sikkim?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jul 2008 22:05

how come we evacuate due to cold and they are able to survive this cold
and sit around a campfire for months ? they must have a special fatty
regiment of people fed on whale and seal flesh or dropouts from sumo
school or what?

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 04 Jul 2008 22:15

We must be sissies to do this on borders with Pak and China. Wasn't Kargil enough of a lesson?

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 04 Jul 2008 22:23

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORC ... Chola.html

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Jul 2008 22:48

http://www.strategycenter.net/research/ ... detail.asp

Almaz S-300 – China's “Offensive” Air Defense

by Dr. Carlo Kopp
Published on February 25th, 2006
.....

China and the S-300PMU

Russian sources claim that the PLA now operates 12 batteries of S-300PMU, eight delivered during the 1990s and four very recently. A deal for an additional four to eight batteries was being negotiated in 2003, ostensibly to cover sites facing Taiwan, with earlier buys providing cover for Beijing and Shanghai. Available photographs suggest a mix of S-300PMU-1 and PMU-2, the configuration of the latest buy is unknown.

It is unclear just how many of these missiles China is buying, but for Russia, a battery may contain 36 to 48 missiles. If the PLA is replicating Russia’s battery structure, then it could be buying 700 to over 1,000 of these missiles, assuming that spare and practice missiles will be part of the total.
..........

Janes claim that China is manufacturing an SA-10 variant under the designation HQ-15, but do not specify the configuration or variant of the weapon system. More is known about the HQ-12 or FT-2000, which appears to be a derivative of the SA-10 design.

The HQ-12/FT-2000 was developed to destroy Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance assets with active radar systems such as the E-3 AWACS, E-8 JSTARS and E-2C Hawkeye.

It employs a broadband passive anti-radiation seeker with coverage cited between 2 GHz and 18 GHz, with inertial midcourse guidance and memory capability to retain the location of an emitter which shuts down. CPMIEC released images of the antenna array, which used a two axis gimbal and platform with multiple antenna elements, a technique also used in the Russian Kh-31P missile's L-111E passive seeker. The seeker is claimed to include a home-on-jam capability.

Mockups of the missile show the addition of strakes to increase glide range and turn rate during terminal homing. Missiles are carried on an 8x8 WS2400 TEL, and a battery uses four vehicles with ESM receivers used to triangulate the target.

What the S-300PMU and HQ-12 provide the PLA with is the capability to deny airspace to most regional air forces, including that of Taiwan, and to present the US Navy with genuine difficulty in penetrating Chinese airspace. The S-300PMU series is less than effective when confronted with highly stealthy types like the US Air Force B-2A and F-22A Raptor, the latter expected to be used extensively for lethal suppression of S-300PMU based air defences.
.........
The high mobility of the SA-10/20 and their high jam resistance force engagement techniques using stealthy fighters and hard kill weapons, as conventional SEAD and EW techniques become exceptionally risky.

In conclusion, the PLA now has a significant air defence capability in its regiments of SA-10 systems, sufficient to effectively deny Chinese airspace to the Taiwanese and indeed other regional air forces. Should it deploy later variants such as the S-400, it will gain further breadth, depth and capabilities.