I'd like to bring something to your attention here:
For all the Congress apologists protesting that there was really "no difference" between how the UPA handled Chinese incursions and how the current administration is handling them, a little attention to the facts will go a long way.
The latest Chinese incursion needs to be seen in terms of developments that began at least as early as April-May 2013.
At that time the PLA had advanced 19km in the vicinity of Depsang (black marker) which is in close proximity to our advanced landing ground in Daulat Beg Oldi (blue marker) and also only about 50 km east-southeast of the Siachen ALS (green marker).
The incursion was "resolved" on May 5th when, according to http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 995992.cms
India dismantled what it called ``a tin shed'' at Chumar and the PLA troops simultaneously withdrew from Depsang. ``Chumar is one of the few sectors in Ladakh where our positions and supply lines are much more advantageous than the PLA,'' said an officer.
Our relatively poor infrastructure along the entire LAC is well known to anyone who has carried out even a modicum of analysis. Chumar (red marker) was ONE place along the LAC where India actually HAD some advantageous defense infrastructure:
The Chumar post on the Ladakh-Himachal Pradesh border was the bone of contention even during the 21-day military face-off in April-May, which saw the two rival armies pitching tents and indulging in banner drills after PLA troops intruded 19 km into the Indian territory in the Depsang Bulge area of the Daulat Beg Oldi (DBO) sector.
In fact, the main pre-condition laid down by the PLA to withdraw from Depsang during the face-off was that India should dismantle the temporary bunkers it had constructed in Chumar.
Though Chumar is some 250-km south of DBO, Indian observation posts and surveillance cameras there have for long irked the PLA since they can ``look'' into Chinese territory and track troop movements there.
So there you have it. In response to the PLA's Depsang incursion, AK Antony and Manmohan Singh (whom we are not supposed to call traitors ) were quick to placate the Chinese by dismantling some of IA's valuable observational infrastructure at Chumar.
This was obviously a cue for the PLA to walk right into Chumar and vandalize more IA property there:
The June 17 incursion saw the PLA patrol cross over into what India perceives to be its side of the LAC and slash the wires of the cameras installed there, which fed live images to the Indian post some 5-km to the rear. On noticing the PLA activity, a joint Army-ITBP patrol also rushed to the area but by then, the PLA patrol had withdrawn with the dismantled camera.
And now, of course, the PLA has intruded into Chumar with more than a 1000 soldiers, building semi-permanent structures, in a move timed to coincide with the visit of Xi Jinping to New Delhi.
I don't think the picture could be more clear. The Sonia-MMS regime bartered away scarce and valuable infrastructural advantages along the LAC by dismantling our observational structures in Chumar, because they could think of no better way to remove the PLA from Depsang in April-May 2013. The effect was to wilfully blind the few eyes that the IA had available on the LAC.
This may be briefly recapitulated by the following analogy:
1) Your neighbour occupies a space on your lawn.
2) The best way you can think of to make your neighbour depart from your lawn is to promise him you will board up all the windows in your house that overlook his house.
3) Your neighbour shows up in your daughter's bedroom.
Would the PLA have been able to surprise IA with a 1000+ personnel incursion in Chumar sector if our observational infrastructure in the area had still been intact and functioning? Or is this incursion something else for which we must thank the Sonia-MMS regime's utter contempt for national security and the men who put their lives on the line to defend it?