Sravan wrote:We had no problems fighting for the British in numerous foreign theaters on wars that weren’t relevant for India. Why can’t we fight for our own nation’s sovereignty and stability? A Tibetan buffer state is hugely beneficial to India. It reinforces the Silliguri Corridor, potentially lead to absorption of Nepal and gets to the Chinese underbelly. Keeping Peace, buying time will lead to defeat long term. Annexing Tibet with everything we got will move the theater, protect the civilization long term, enable securing our water supply interests and creation of a dharmic sphere of influence. This is the natural order of Asia, and we should restore it.
Shoot for the stars, hit the moon.
Logistics. Just like the Chinese cannot hope to supply their troops if they cross the Himalaya into India proper (which was what happened in '62), we cannot build reliable and stable supply lines that would be safe from interdiction. Even if there is not much threat of interdiction by air, weather is a factor - no road through the Himalaya stays open in the winter, despite best efforts. So we'll have to rely on supplies by air, which would be too expensive given the vast theatre. Plus, there are not many points of natural defense between Tibet and China proper (there is no Himalaya protecting Tibet from China), so we'll need an overwhelming amount of force and gear to properly defend Tibet. Also, Tibet's population is not that high to be able to defend their homeland in numbers. So this is easier said than done.
In short, all the disadvantages that prevent Beijing from stationing more troops in Tibet would apply to us, plus the need to cross the Himalaya for our troops to get there.
What we could do, though, is adopt an aggressive posture along the border and do what China does to us, so they are forced to station more and more people in Tibet. It's not easy for them, given the weather and altitude, making them spend more resources to defend from our threat. Having a conscript army would also make their position uncomfortable (single child problem, discontent, health issues, etc.). In the meantime, we should keep salami slicing wherever possible with the aim to interdict their lines of communication. This is not a strategy to take Tibet, but to make our border position unassailable, while making China uncomfortable enough to sue for peace. They are able to get away with a minimal presence now by needling us
and forcing us
to station more troops, let's turn the tables on them.
For a full solution for Tibet, we need to be much more powerful, militarily as well as economically, so as to force some concessions from them for Tibet. It's a long term project and won't be solved for a while, at least while the CCP is running the show. The best opportunity would be their next episode of collapse and civil war, which they tend to get into every few centuries. It's been a while since the last one, so let's see. The next best option is to go to war, but there is no political appetite for that in India as liberating Tibet is not the same as defending our home. That leaves the Chinese to start a war, but I find that unlikely as well, for their position in Tibet today is not challenged, and they are sitting pretty controlling their road routes and all water sources. So there is no reason for them to go to war with us.