India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 25 Jun 2020 07:44

There are three kinds of defence:

Frontier Defence means put forts and bases near the frontier to defend

Defence in Depth: Put Defence areas away from frontier at place that can be defended

Fortress Defence: Put many troops in an are to prevent it from falling to opponents.

Offensive Defence Go to you opponent and destroy their bases.

Note I said 3 types but listed 4.

Each depends on your opponent and your capability.

Being adamant results in 1962.

vsunder · Post by **vsunder** » 25 Jun 2020 08:02

^^^ The dictum of that old wily Prussian von Moltke the elder, (there was a younger, his nephew) is admirably illustrated by Galwan. No battle plan survives first contact with an enemy. It is then the individual ability to seize the situation and rapidly evolve alternative plans by the commander and the troops becomes paramount. I have a suspicion that the training of Chinese troops does not allow much for individual initiatives and that is what happened. Once the opening moves hit a roadblock, confusion ranged in the ranks and none could seize the initiative and change plans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmuth_v ... _the_Elder

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 25 Jun 2020 08:05

sum wrote:
Larry Walker wrote:There are so many naive assumptions - like Chinese will walk down the ravine and we will have turkey shoot and they will run away with their tails tucked. Chinese will line up in Depsang plain and we will blow them and they will loose face and go back home. But thankfully our Indian armed forces are professional and understand the threat. From our perspective - we should not make mockery of their effort of doing the biggest mobilisation to date (as per veterans who have seen good and bad times). If Chinese were turkey shoot, then why is there such a massive buildup required - if Chinese will fold away and run at the sound of 1st shot, then let's do some live fire demonstrations and scare them away. Jingoism is fine - but let's not go to level of Pakis who dream that Hindu baniya will just run away at then sight of a Paki punjabi soldier. We don't need to invite their fate of 65/71/99 upon us please.
100% agree on this.

No idea where this thought of Chinese just being weakling waiting to start shivering once brave Indian comes at them is coming from and they will be attacked at teir weak points without opening 100 other fronts coming from.
They are no 10 feet monsters who cant be challenged for sure but they are not some 2 foot walkover too ( esp with all the infra and MIC at hand, whatever be the quality)
No different than the Paki SDRE thought process in my opinion

Better to be realistic and plan and act accordingly which i believe the armed forces are doing now

That is what the army does. However on BRF there have been so many khayali pulao’s either on the nature of ops, tactical options open to us or Chinese postures.
There is a reason that people who could really add to the discussion stay away...

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 25 Jun 2020 08:10

Regarding DBO and Depsang Plains, a very useful map in this article by Shiv Aroor on the developing situation in SSN:

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/c ... 2020-06-24

In particular, this map:

On Google maps (at least in USA) the LAC is shown as passing roughly North to South, in most parts parallel and only a few kms to the east of the road shown in the map. That implies that the Chinese control about half of the Depsang plains, and visually may be conveying that DBO is a lot more vulnerable than it actually is. A close inspection in Google reveals roads from the east leading to Chinese posts up to Chip Chap river (i.e. the top edge of the triangle). This actually means that the Chinese posts are only up to the edge of Depsang Plains, and atleast about 20+ kms away from the N-S road leading to DBO airstrip. There are only a few openings leading into the Depsang Plains from the east, and one of them is called "Bottle Neck". No idea where that is, but a very likely candidate is just west of the Chinese post shown in Shiv Aroor's map. Other approaches are along Raki Nalla, whose location is actually a huge mystery but another Indian Defense Forum puts it to the north of Chip Chap and feeding into it.

Google also shows a well developed Indian base smack in the middle of Depsang plains (close to the loop in the road above), and given that the plains don't need roads to get around, armour units located there can rapidly reach the access points to Depsang plains from the east. KKP and another pass to the north are also major access points, but the DBO airstrip and associated base cover that axis adequately. Other approaches to the south (including Qizil Langar, the bottom vertex of the triangle in the map) are all under Indian control and sheltered by mountains, glaciers and ravines to their east.

In summary, for a right sized formation, it is much easier to defend Depsang Plains from inside than it is to break in from the outside. Likewise, much easier to break out of the Plains than it is to break in because the access points can be approached from multiple directions from the west or south, but only through a few access points from the north or east.

In 1962, this whole area was defended by one company armed with only light weapons. It was attacked by a battalion sized force from the north (KKP) and east, and had to retreat via the Shyok river valley and Saser La. That situation does not obtain any more.

Added later:

Hats off to the other Indian defense forum (and poster pmaitra over there) for some painstaking groundwork for locating Raki Nalla. The work was done during the 2013 Depsang Plains incursion, and the location they arrived at is:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/35%C2 ... 9434?hl=en

Keep this in mind. It may come up again now.

KL Dubey · Post by **KL Dubey** » 25 Jun 2020 09:00

^^Great post. I am learning a lot by poring over these maps.

I guess the lone working-day "perk" for personnel serving in these areas is the breathtaking natural beauty. Unlike Banditji who derided the lack of grass growing here, I am certain the real Indians will be ready to defend every inch of these wonderful lands from chincommies and other barbarians.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 25 Jun 2020 09:06

KL Dubey wrote:^^Great post. I am learning a lot by poring over these maps.

I guess the lone working-day "perk" for personnel serving in these areas is the breathtaking natural beauty. Unlike Banditji who derided the lack of grass growing here, I am certain the real Indians will be ready to defend every inch of these wonderful lands from chincommies and other barbarians.

Dubey Ji,

It is breathtaking and breathtakingly harsh and at times bleak.

parashara · Post by **parashara** » 25 Jun 2020 09:08

ramana wrote:Rahul ShivShankar on TimesNow has a very good explanation of all the new pink structures on the Chinese side. Most are hospital tents.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PBvL1zssiA

Lt. Gen. Syed Ata Hasnain clearly states that IA uses pink colored medium arctic tents.
Nathan Ruser’s image classification appears to be incorrect.

https://twitter.com/atahasnain53/status ... 32384?s=21

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 25 Jun 2020 09:15

China is back at Galwan and opening up other fronts to keep the pressure upon us.We need to do the same with them,putting pressure at key areas where they are weak. The build up just 20+ km on DBO indicates that the presence of this key airstrip so close to the LAC is a thorn in the shoe for the Chins,as operating from here we can and are reportedly pouring in reinforcements ,extra arty.,armour,etc.plus the ability to operate strike aircraft at such a close distance to the LAC which could be decisive in a future shooting match. The Israeli Iron Dome anti-mortar ,arty. system could be v.useful here.

To give Banditji some slack,and he was anything but a bandit otherwise we wouldn't have lost so much territory,is that he was an "idealist ",great for the Freedom Struggle,etc.,mobilising people to throw out the British,but it was a peaceful system that Gandhi used not like the "realist",Netaji who took up arms against a sea of troubles. For Netaji it was his " to be or not to be" moment in life and the fate of India.His decision to take up the sword haunted the British who had sleepless nights afeared of another " mutiny" while they unesasily slept, realised that the game was up and vamoosed at quick step after the war was over. "Dandy-ji",rose in buttonhole,et al,fondly imagined that his rhetoric would keep the Chins in their place.Sadly for such a great historian,he little studied how Mao won the war for China defeating Chiang Kai-Shek thrice in battle and war would be his reply to Dandy-ji's words. Dandy-ji got Mao's bayonet up his bunghole and that great betrayal destroyed his health and ultimate demise. Emperor XI wants to emulate Mao and leave behind a similar legacy when he departs.He has picked India and Modi as his target.

KL Dubey · Post by **KL Dubey** » 25 Jun 2020 09:26

Philip wrote:To give Banditji some slack,and he was anything but a bandit otherwise we wouldn't have lost so much territory

Please check the forum lore. As the originator of the "Banditji" term on this fine forum some years ago, I had explained the grounds for this nomenclature... i.e. propensity to steal any possible limelight and political advantage from others for his personal/family interest, and equally a sharp instinct to raid any available "kitty" no matter whether already "owned" or not. I'm sorry for any appearance of sexism, but that was truly the "bare-azzed" truth of Banditji.

AshishA · Post by **AshishA** » 25 Jun 2020 09:43

A great account of how one of the most revered generals in Indian Army handled the Chinaman. This was written during the Doklam crisis and is very relevant in the present context. Here's the link to the original blog-
https://karansinghrathore17.blogspot.co ... singh.html

Hanut Tales: How General Hanut Singh Handled The Chinese in Sikkim
There is much talk of the Chinese intrusion in Doklam plateau in Bhutan since June 2017, where Indian soldiers and the Chinamen stand nose to nose and toe to toe with neither side willing to budge.
'Tis an old bullying habit of the Chinese. They push countries that they perceive are weaker. They are blatant, boorish and couldn't care about international norms and such like things. These are to be called upon only when it suits the Chinaman.

So in 1982, Maj General Hanut Singh, MVC, the doyen of armoured warfare in the South Asian region and hero of 1971 war Battle of Basantar, was posted by Indian Army MS Branch to command 17 Mountain Division in Sikkim. The armour general protested and demanded that he be given command of an armoured division, as it rightfully and logically be done in view of his deep insight of armoured warfare and the opportunity to pass it on to his subordinates. However, the DNA of all MS Branches across all armies, is such that they are given to convoluted line of thought and Indian Army MS Branch is no exception to the lot. So they informed the good general that he was being posted to command 17 Mountain Division so that he could improve his service profile. In summer of 1982 General Hanut Singhji took over the division and I was posted as his ADC in autumn the same year.

The Chinaman then was no different than he is now. At will and at different geographical locations, he would intrude into our territory sending the troops and commanders on ground into a tiffy and the staff would be running around like headless chicken in trying to manage the intrusion. North and East Sikkim was their playground. The Sino Indian border at Sikkim is supposed to be a settled and delineated one, however the Chinaman was not given to respect such niceties, being a bully.
This sort of situation prevailed till warrior Hanut of the armoured corps, the one who had been sent by MS Branch to improve his profile, arrived as GOC 17 Mountain Division.

On taking over, General Hanut Singhji visited all Brigades and forward posts of his formation and took stock of the situation on the ground.Those days most journeys to forward brigades was in a Jonga and move to forward posts on ponies or on foot. For some very good reasons 33 Corps at Sukna, was tightfisted in allotting helicopters for movement of GOC 17 Mountain Division. You will get a good hint if you read my earlier post on General Hanut 'The Call'.
As the general would mention later in his conversations, after his familiarisation recce, he asked of the Corps Commander as to what were the instructions in case the Chinese were to intrude. He did not get a clear reply. When General Hanut persisted, the Corps Commander told him, ' Hanut, you are a mature person, handle the situation in a mature manner.' or words to that effect.

With instructions received Gen Hanut decided to take things in hand and resolve the prevailing situation pertaining to Chinese intrusions. In those days and as it remains to date, the drill on a Chinese intrusion happening was well laid down and very passive. It involved a small officer led unarmed body of troops, usually section or platoon strength, moving towards the Chinese, and unfurling a banner with Chinese characters printed on it which read that you are in Indian territory and requested to go back.
Meanwhile, the only Chinese language interpreter in the brigade would come huffing and puffing and try to speak to the Chinese in the language they understood. The Chinese on the other hand would be nonchalant. Carrying on with what they were doing, map reading or even having their lunch while we stood there with our banners, watching.

General Hanut Singh the warrior, introduced a new language to the Chinaman, Hindi. In those days there used to be three mountain brigades deployed in Sikkim in defense of the State, under 17 Mountain Division. General Hanut visited all Brigades personally and held a Sainik Sammelan or durbar in each brigade. He insisted that maximum troops be present for his address and he addressed the gathering in hindi as such.

The General informed the gathering that the boundary of Sikkim is as what is our understanding of the boundary. In case the Chinaman has a doubt then he can talk to Delhi but he should certainly not violate the border as we understand, hold and defend. He then went on to lay down a new drill in case the Chinese were to intrude.

As per the new drill, in case of a Chinese intrusion, the unit or formation concerned, would tactically deploy a company or more in vicinity of the Chinese and warn them thrice in hindi that they have intruded into Indian territory. In case the Chinese did not withdraw, the senior officer present should order opening fire on the Chinese till such time they vacated Indian territory. The General also empowered NCOs to order opening fire in case a situation was developing that warranted opening fire.

General Hanut laid down one caveat while giving out these instructions to his command. He said under no circumstance, will the enemy be allowed to open fire first because our hesitation in opening fire on earlier occasions, had always resulted in high casualties to our troops. 17 Mountain Division will fire first and inflict maximum damage on the enemy in case our territory was violated. He also went on to state that in case the Chinese opened fire first and inflicted casualties on our troops and it was established that the senior officer present had hesitated in ordering fire, he would court martial that person for cowardice. Brigade commanders were authorized to order opening up of Artillery fire. General Hanut was not going to wait for instructions from a dithering and hesitant political and military hierarchy.

And thus kameraden in that year 1982 new orders for dealing with Chinese intrusions were personally given out by the GOC General Hanut Singh to his command. I had the privilege of being present in each of the three durbars that the General addressed in the Mountain Brigades. His staff was also instructed accordingly so that the entire formation was on one wavelength and the GOC's intent was clear to all.

The message went out loud and clear to the Chinese that a new General has arrived who has a different take on their activities. It also manifested in greater confidence and changed body language of our units and troops and the shrewd Chinaman was quick to note that. In the year plus that General Hanut spent as GOC 17 Mountain Division before moving to take over 1 Armoured Division at Ambala, there were no Chinese intrusions. The Chinaman had got the message that a warrior has arrived.

General Hanut's decision to personally address the troops of the three brigades, is an example of leadership of the highest order. He gave out some very tough instructions, the officers and men heard him loud and clear and there was no doubt in their mind as to how intrusions will be dealt from now on. Responsibility and accountability at all levels was clearly laid down. The General was ultimately accountable for everything. For once clear rules of engagement had been laid down by a Commanding General and the results were there to be seen.

The steely resolve that we get to see in the personality of this great warrior, is that what had carried his Regiment The Poona Horse across an uncleared minefield at Basantar in December 1971 and the subsequent destruction of Pak 8 Armoured brigade by The Poona Horse. That same steely resolve we were to witness in the grey mountains of Sikkim.
Indian army and schools of instruction would do well to study the personality and teachings of this great warrior. They would learn much and their leaders would be better leaders, imbibed with the spirit of Hanut Steel.

Davidrock · Post by **Davidrock** » 25 Jun 2020 10:24

parashara wrote:
ramana wrote:Rahul ShivShankar on TimesNow has a very good explanation of all the new pink structures on the Chinese side. Most are hospital tents.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PBvL1zssiA
Lt. Gen. Syed Ata Hasnain clearly states that IA uses pink colored medium arctic tents.
Nathan Ruser’s image classification appears to be incorrect.

https://twitter.com/atahasnain53/status ... 32384?s=21

Saw that, however, if you see Nathan Rusers other images of tents well within India, they are green.
It as clear as muddy water !

But if you see the pattern of construction in the triangle bank on our side of LAC but eastern bank, it resembles with the pattern on their side of the LAC.

parashara · Post by **parashara** » 25 Jun 2020 10:36

^^^ yeah but that isn’t sufficient data to conclude that pink arctic tents cannot be ours. I am beginning to realize that sat images are tricky and apart from a trained eye one also needs background info.

Sanju · Post by **Sanju** » 25 Jun 2020 11:01

Davidrock wrote:
parashara wrote:
Lt. Gen. Syed Ata Hasnain clearly states that IA uses pink colored medium arctic tents.
Nathan Ruser’s image classification appears to be incorrect.

https://twitter.com/atahasnain53/status ... 32384?s=21
Saw that, however, if you see Nathan Rusers other images of tents well within India, they are green.
It as clear as muddy water !

But if you see the pattern of construction in the triangle bank on our side of LAC but eastern bank, it resembles with the pattern on their side of the LAC.

I would take Lt. Gen. Hasnain's words over Ruser's anyday.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 25 Jun 2020 11:28

rkirankr wrote:I think I once mentioned earlier, are we , the common citizens, the jingos ready for war. The Govt, Defense forces might be, are we. One or two rockets on population centers, would we still be jingos

This is the kind of 'fear scenario' that we had better not create. I really mean it.

If PLARF are involved, that means the conflict has escalated to a war. Then we too fight it that way. What is there to be afraid of? We will fight with whatever we have. Why are you making the Chinese look like they are immensely tall?

vimal · Post by **vimal** » 25 Jun 2020 11:31

The Supreme Hero Of Galwan - The Eastern Link

Honestly , it is very difficult for an emotional Bengali like me , also a military school product, to hold back tears as I write the amazing story of ‘chotaphai Gurtej’.As the fierce 3rd ‘Ghataks’ and the Sikh gunners of Medium Arty regiment rushed into the fight with very little time to plan and prepare on that Monday evening in the picturesque but blooded Galwan Valley , they were only carrying their customary kirpan and an assortments of sticks, rods and sharp knives.

Fellow fighters recall Gurtej being attacked by four Chinese soldiers. The strong Sikh, shouting his ‘Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal’ war cries in a thunderous roar, swung round two of them and as two others tried to pin him down, he dragged all four of them towards the cliff.

“All four Chinese were flung to death but Gurtej lost his balance and also slipped , but was stuck in a boulder , hence avoiding a free fall. Badly injured in the neck and head, Gurtej rewrapped his turban and in an inhuman effort pulled himself back into the fight,” said a military source quoting a fellow fighter. Gurtej slashed some Chinese with his kirpan before he could snatch a sharp weapon from a Chinese soldier. "Not only that one but seven other Chinese soldiers perished at the hands of Gurtej before one stabbed him from behind. Even as he went down , he slashed his killer with his kirpan," said the military source.

This story brings a question to mind, apart from Gurkhas and Sikhs who else wields melee weapons?

Mollick.R · Post by **Mollick.R** » 25 Jun 2020 11:32

Few pointers & questions to all here.........

1. Why we publicly declare about visit of Service chiefs to Forward locations ? In last week or so first it was mentioned for IAF chief than now for Army chief. Is it necessary to tell this information before the visit concludes ? During WW-II, Americans shot down transport aircraft of Admiral Yamamoto & killed him while he was visiting Solomon Islands area (pacific theater). Ok that was between two adversaries under full fledged war on going, understood , but still...........

2. Can some gurus here throw some light about our advantage/disadvantages vis-a-vis China for other theater like in Arunachal Preadesh/Tawang, Sikkim, Uttarakhand & Himachal Preadsh. What if Chinese are doing Laddakh/Depsang area buildup as smoke screen and may be planning a Blitzkrieg in Tawang or Sikkim ???
Do we have any hints from OSINT about such possible moves ?

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 25 Jun 2020 11:49

Mollick.R wrote:Few pointers & questions to all here.........

1. Why we publicly declare about visit of Service chiefs to Forward locations ? In last week or so first it was mentioned for IAF chief than now for Army chief. Is it necessary to tell this information before the visit concludes ? During WW-II, Americans shot down transport aircraft of Admiral Yamamoto & killed him while he was visiting Solomon Islands area (pacific theater). Ok that was between two adversaries under full fledged war on going, understood , but still...........

2. Can some gurus here throw some light about our advantage/disadvantages vis-a-vis China for other theater like in Arunachal Preadesh/Tawang, Sikkim, Uttarakhand & Himachal Preadsh. What if Chinese are doing Laddakh/Depsang area buildup as smoke screen and may be planning a Blitzkrieg in Tawang or Sikkim ???
Do we have any hints from OSINT about such possible moves ?

Mollick please read this to get an idea of the Eastern Command AOR.

https://vatsrohit.blogspot.com/2017/10/ ... stand.html

The article is about Doklam but primarily but there is lots of other information available.

Regards

s

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 25 Jun 2020 11:51

Mollick.R wrote:Few pointers & questions to all here.........

1. Why we publicly declare about visit of Service chiefs to Forward locations ? In last week or so first it was mentioned for IAF chief than now for Army chief. Is it necessary to tell this information before the visit concludes ? During WW-II, Americans shot down transport aircraft of Admiral Yamamoto & killed him while he was visiting Solomon Islands area (pacific theater). Ok that was between two adversaries under full fledged war on going, understood , but still...........

That would be act of war.
Two can play the game.
And in a professional army where chiefs retire, no one is irreplaceable.

2. Can some gurus here throw some light about our advantage/disadvantages vis-a-vis China for other theater like in Arunachal Preadesh/Tawang, Sikkim, Uttarakhand & Himachal Preadsh. What if Chinese are doing Laddakh/Depsang area buildup as smoke screen and may be planning a Blitzkrieg in Tawang or Sikkim ???
Do we have any hints from OSINT about such possible moves ?

Why do you think Indian and other intel assets are not tracking those movements? Especially when the alert has been sounded.

India has a bigger standing army than China.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 25 Jun 2020 11:51

Not that we on BRF did not expect it, TOI breaking news states "PLA opens new front in Depsang Bulge"

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Jun 2020 12:07

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 615857.cms

The satellite images on Wednesday showed that Chinese troops have come back in larger numbers to the “Patrolling Point-14 (PP-14)” area in the Galwan Valley region, the site of the brutal skirmish on June 15. This time, PLA appears to have set up a large camp with gun positions at the site near the “Y-junction” of the Shyok and Galwan rivers, which is slightly over a kilometre below PP-14, a reference point that marks the Indian side of the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

PLA has virtually opened up a new front in the Depsang Bulge area, a table-top plateau to the north of Galwan, with a huge deployment of troops and heavy weapons to threaten the Burtse camp and Raki Nala areas of India.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 25 Jun 2020 12:10

Note: We get to hear where the Chinese have intruded and IF they have or haven't been pushed back. This is normal.

What we don't hear or will not hear till it is very late is IF Indian army has take any counter action in a sector/area of its choosing. Such things are not announced because it is a violation of the LAC and the border management agreements and India/IA claim they never violate them.

nam · Post by **nam** » 25 Jun 2020 12:14

AshishAcharya wrote:A great account of how one of the most revered generals in Indian Army handled the Chinaman. This was written during the Doklam crisis and is very relevant in the present context. Here's the link to the original blog-
https://karansinghrathore17.blogspot.co ... singh.html

Repeated quote of Gen Hanut Singh by people. The difference is that the PLA used firearms during this incident. We responded in kind.

If the Chinese had used firearms/artillery this time as well, they would get the same response.

It is not as if brave men were born only during 1967.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Jun 2020 12:18

As an FYI, there are companies - like https://www.spymesat.com/ - that sell real-time sat pictures. Cost depends on the resolution. But seems very affordable - max I have come across is around $50 for a meter res. I suppose supply-demand equations apply.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 25 Jun 2020 12:19

NRao wrote:https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 615857.cms
PLA has virtually opened up a new front in the Depsang Bulge area, a table-top plateau to the north of Galwan, with a huge deployment of troops and heavy weapons to threaten the Burtse camp and Raki Nala areas of India.

May be one reason why Tank/Artillery was airlifted to Ladakh though their exact destination wasn't clear.

Note too, they may or may not have crossed the LAC in the area. It is just that they have assembled in unusually high numbers to catch the attention of the Indian and raise concern.

My "guess" is that Raki Nala ~6.5 km NE of Burtse camp on the LAC. The Chinese may have assembled around the Raki Nala area.

nam · Post by **nam** » 25 Jun 2020 12:20

Y I Patel wrote:

I think this is one example of where the Chini would want to use Type 15. Not to do armor battle, but use it's good speed to dash through and block such chokepoints and prevent Indian armor from breaking through.

Hold the point until Type 96/99 arrive.

Interesting is that the Type 15 is always shown as infantry support vehicle, while attacking dug in position, not part of armor formation.

Chinis have hardly shown any propaganda video of Type 96/99 in Tibet.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Jun 2020 12:24

I would be very surprised if the PLA crossed the LAC anywhere where there is IA presence directly opposite - no matter what Type they field. PP14 and Pagong Tso had no IA presence and in true Why Agra moment they occupied them - in both cases, the ball is in IA's court. The IA has yet to deliver a response. Ruko to sahi.

nam · Post by **nam** » 25 Jun 2020 12:33

PP14 is not a major concern. It would be stupid to hold such a position across a river bank. Availability of satellite images creates two situation. It makes public Chinese aggression, but at the same allows people to question forces, why was it left empty.

Tactically it has no value.

rkirankr · Post by **rkirankr** » 25 Jun 2020 12:35

It has been more than a month, since this thing is going. China can play this game for a long time. India might also be able too. The thing is , if the firing starts, it is not going to be short sharp war, my feeling. Navy has to be used well. coco islands and the Hambantota , should be considered fair target as well.Of course Gwadar too. Depend on no one. No "quad" will fight for us. We have to do it ourselves. I think we will give a far more better performance, in fact stupendous performance than 1962. We may win at some and lose at few. However the Galwan battle gives us the confidence a boost.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 25 Jun 2020 12:46

So far the area the Chinese are occupying is something which is hard for the IA to defend. The traingular area in Galwan or the Fingers 5-8 are hard to reach for India.

The challenge for IA is that the longer the waiting game goes, the more reinforcements the Chinese will be able to bring in, weakening the logistic edge IA may have.

On the Indian side the goal is to diffuse and deescalate. And the PLA is pressing on that.

The question is how far they can push before thy cross some red lines, and India is forced to act. The PLA can continue creeping one ridge at a time.

I hope Indian leadership is gaming this. If a military stand has to be taken, the longer you wait, the tougher it gets.

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 25 Jun 2020 12:49

nam wrote:The funny thing in all these is that PLA has NO artillery which can fire at high angle and deploy-able in the mountains. It's towed artillery are field guns like our M46! It doesn't have high angle.

Then all other artillery types are SPH. It can only be deployed on flat location.

The point is: we can deploy our towed artillery on reverse slope and fire at high angle. And Chinis have no way to do counter battery (other than PLAAF).

Edit: They do have one of their ULH. However the numbers are not similar to our towed guns. They are primarily SP army.

Yes. This is not widely known. The current artillery composition of both sides, gives the defender an advantage, because we can use the reverse slope.
Also, we have the advantage of decades of preparation to build defensive positions, using the rugged terrain, which are difficult to hit. That's why it took so much of an artillery bombardment (followed by hand to hand fighting) to dislodge a few hundred Pakis at Kargil.
In contrast, the area where the Chinese mechanised forces have to form up (for e.g. in the Depsang plain) is relatively flat. We have a far higher chance of hitting something than do the Chinese.

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 25 Jun 2020 12:52

VikramS wrote:So far the area the Chinese are occupying is something which is hard for the IA to defend. The traingular area in Galwan or the Fingers 5-8 are hard to reach for India.

The challenge for IA is that the longer the waiting game goes, the more reinforcements the Chinese will be able to bring in, weakening the logistic edge IA may have.
On the Indian side the goal is to diffuse and deescalate. And the PLA is pressing on that.
The question is how far they can push before thy cross some red lines, and India is forced to act. The PLA can continue creeping one ridge at a time.
I hope Indian leadership is gaming this. If a military stand has to be taken, the longer you wait, the tougher it gets.

We have more men than the Chinese. The additional units we can deploy are closer to the front, than are the Chinese.
We are also more accustomed to waiting it out at high altitude and the cold. It is a game of patience. The first side that gets tired of waiting will either lose, or start a shooting war.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 25 Jun 2020 12:56

Deans wrote: We have more men than the Chinese. The additional units we can deploy are closer to the front, than are the Chinese.
We are also more accustomed to waiting it out at high altitude and the cold. It is a game of patience. The first side that gets tired of waiting will either lose, or start a shooting war.

The longer the build up goes on the more men the Chinese will be able to bring in. Our major advantage had always been that we had more troops deployed forward and all of them were acclimatized unlike the Chinese. What the Chinese have done is use the long month long face-off with multiple hours long discussions to steadily bring in more men and get them acclimatized.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 25 Jun 2020 13:01

rkirankr wrote:It has been more than a month, since this thing is going. China can play this game for a long time. India might also be able too. The thing is , if the firing starts, it is not going to be short sharp war, my feeling. Navy has to be used well. coco islands and the Hambantota , should be considered fair target as well.Of course Gwadar too. Depend on no one. No "quad" will fight for us. We have to do it ourselves. I think we will give a far more better performance, in fact stupendous performance than 1962. We may win at some and lose at few. However the Galwan battle gives us the confidence a boost.

The Navy would come into play ONLY when the game has shifted to IOR region by China! India is not going to hammer Hambantota or Gwadar just because Chinese have intruded in Galwan valley or have occupied areas between figure 4 & 8 in the Pangang Tso area.

On odd days we become pessimistic and imagine Ballistic missiles raining on Delhi and on even days we become totally opposite and imagine taking the fight to the Chinese @ Hambantota and Gwadar. It does not work like that.

IFFFF either of the scenarios where to be come to pass it would means that we are in a fight to finish game with China and I don't see that happening on a minor infractions at the LAC.

Most likely scenario is that we try evicting the Chinese forcefully if necessary and/or doing a counter *forward* deployment.

parashara · Post by **parashara** » 25 Jun 2020 13:04

Lt. Gen. Hasnain has clarified that he wasn’t referring to the pink tents in the left photo but the round ones in the left half of the right photo. Back to square one.

https://twitter.com/atahasnain53/status ... 41569?s=21

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Jun 2020 13:06

This TV show is getting to be funny.

China Ups Rhetoric, Warns India of 'Severe Consequences' for Violent Clash

Even as China’s defence and foreign ministries reiterated their claim over the Galwan valley and warned New Delhi of “severe consequences” for the June 15 incident, Indian and Chinese diplomats held a video conference and agreed to implement the consensus on a phased disengagement that was reached during military talks.

Following the deadliest clash at the India-China border in 45 years on June 15, the two countries have remained in touch in order to find ways of resolving the stand-off at the border.

Twenty Indian soldiers lost their lives in the clash. While China also reportedly suffered casualties, the country has not confirmed it.

After the foreign ministers spoke on the phone, India and China held the second round of Corp commanders meeting on June 22, who apparently worked out an outline for ‘dis-engagement’ in their 11 hour-long meeting.

The agreement reached by the 14 Corps commander Lieutenant General Harinder Singh and South Xinjiang Military Region’s Major General Liu Lin, was on Wednesday endorsed and affirmed by diplomats from both sides at the virtual meeting of the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on China-India Border Affairs (WMCC).

While the diplomatic talks were being held, the rhetoric in Beijing was turned up a notch. China’s defence and foreign ministries issued long statements that reiterated their claim over the Galwan valley in eastern Ladakh.

“The Indian side promised that they would not cross the estuary of the Galwan River to patrol or build facilities, and the two sides would discuss and decide phased withdrawal of troops through the meetings between commanders on the ground,” said Chinese defence ministry spokesperson, senior colonel Wu Qian at a press conference in Beijing.

His counterpart in the Chinese foreign ministry, Zhao Lijian also provided an identical timeline. The Chinese language transcript of his statement says that after the stand-off began in early May, India had “agreed to and withdrew its cross-border personnel in the Galvan Valley and dismantled the crossing facilities in accordance with China’s request”.

However, the English transcript of Zhao’s remarks uploaded by the foreign ministry is differently phrased. “In the presence of China’s diplomatic representations and military pressure, India originally agreed to withdraw its personnel who crossed the LAC and dismantled the facilities it built across the line as China demanded,” said Zhao.

This is the first time that China has claimed that India had removed its structures in Galwan before the first corps commander-level meeting on June 6.

Restating that India had agreed to the limit of Galwan estuary during military talks, Zhao claimed that India “attacked us first” on the night of June 15. He described Indian soldiers as having attacked in an “abrupt and violent manner, which led to fierce physical confrontations and casualties”.

Earlier this week, India had accused China of misrepresenting the understanding reached on June 6.

The Chinese foreign ministry accused the Indian army’s “adventurous acts” to have seriously violated bilateral agreements and breached the “basic norms governing international relations”.

In unusually strong words – even during the current tensions, Zhao warned, “They are of a vile nature and have severe consequences”.

China also called for India to “severely punish” and “strictly discipline” its frontline troops – a demand which had been first made by the Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi in his phone conversation with his Indian counterpart S. Jaishankar on June 17.

While China issued these strong statements on Wednesday, the WMCC also met for the first time, led by MEA joint secretary (east) Naveen Srivastava and the Chinese foreign ministry’s director general, Department of Boundary and Oceanic Affairs, Hong Liang.

The two sides issued separate press notes. Both the read-outs had some common points: taking note and agreeing to implement the understandings reached at the two rounds of corp commander-level military talks on June 6 and 22.

The Indian statement said that the two delegations agreed that “implementation of this understanding expeditiously, in accordance with the bilateral agreements and protocols, would help ensure peace and tranquillity in border areas and the development of broader relationship between the two countries”.

In a similar strain, the Chinese read-out also noted that the two sides “agreed to strictly abide by the important consensus reached by the leaders of the two countries and a series of agreements signed by the two sides, further strengthen confidence-building measures in the military field and jointly safeguard peace and tranquillity in the border areas”.

Besides, the MEA statements asserted that it was “emphasised that both sides should strictly respect and observe the line of actual control”.

.....................................

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Jun 2020 13:16

nachiket wrote:
Deans wrote: We have more men than the Chinese. The additional units we can deploy are closer to the front, than are the Chinese.
We are also more accustomed to waiting it out at high altitude and the cold. It is a game of patience. The first side that gets tired of waiting will either lose, or start a shooting war.
The longer the build up goes on the more men the Chinese will be able to bring in. Our major advantage had always been that we had more troops deployed forward and all of them were acclimatized unlike the Chinese. What the Chinese have done is use the long month long face-off with multiple hours long discussions to steadily bring in more men and get them acclimatized.

Does it really matter? The attacker needs around 10 times the number of men than the defender. Every time China brings X, all IA needs to do is bring X.

I would suggest Indian MEA keep issuing readouts after readouts.

Unless India has designs of regaining territory lost in previous lives.

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 25 Jun 2020 13:19

ks_sachin wrote: Mollick please read this to get an idea of the Eastern Command AOR.

https://vatsrohit.blogspot.com/2017/10/ ... stand.html

The article is about Doklam but primarily but there is lots of other information available.
Regards

s

For newbies - I find Rohit Vats blog to be the best source of info, not only on the formations of the IA, but AOR and how they can be deployed.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 25 Jun 2020 13:20

Agree with Nachiket. This is my biggest concern with our status-quoist approach. We had the upper hand (still do) in terms of acclimatized personnel & more troops.

Every day we delay and not capture some other part of the LAC (or evict the Chinese from their encroachments) is a day that the enemy eats away at our advantage. We have a pattern of such behavior:

1962: didn't use our Air Force
1999: didn't cross LOC

Our leadership (both civilian and military) repeatedly constrains ourselves & makes it harder for the average jawan. Its almost as if we don't want to fight a war where we have an advantage.

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 25 Jun 2020 13:21

k Prasad ji,

Agree with the many points you make. As we know, the Galwan nallah is about 4-5 kms long from the bend to its meeting point with Shyok. There are at least 3 points of reported Indian structures on this stretch, and that IA has recently built bailey bridges etc. The surrounding heights on either side of the nallan are on the Indian side of the LAC. Indian troops could amass along the nallah, and climb up the ridges or be heli dropped on top of them.

If the situation goes kinetic, PLA has to send waves upon waves of attackers, and be ready to take heavy losses until they eliminate our troops on the heights and along the nallah. Their mechanised vehicles can bring reinforcements only up to the bend since they have put up narrow roads until there, but even one vehicle breaking down or destroyed could cause a log jam and leave their forward troops unaided. If IA troops are forced to retreat along the nallah, they can set off charges on the slopes on either side and the resulting rock fall can once again block the Chinese.

Of course, if they are willing to send more men than IA has bullets, anything is possible.

But IA has many options to change the game and heli drop more troops and supplies on the ridges, our attack helIs can fire ATGMs up the Galwan bend, our AF can drop precision bombs with troops on the heights painting the Chinese positions. We can fire artillery from across the Shyok and even if that doesn't hit Chinese troops, could still destroy what they have built and cause land slides that will bog them down beyond the bend. And if PLA overcomes all that by paying a heavy price in men and materials and manages to reach the Shyok, they will once again be facing more Indian defences than before. It will never get any easier.

Like you said the Galwan plan can work only if IA is slumbering like Kumbhakarna and PLA is able to thread through the Galwan needle unopposed and put a huge force on banks of the Shyok, totally surprising the IA. And all the while preserving its supply lines which will be stretching thinner and thinner. Any attack plan that assumes the enemy to be totally oblivious despite more than a month of standoffs doesn't stand to scrutiny.

If PLA was serious about this, whey would have pounded IA positions in the nallah and across the Shyok using artillery or air strikes first and THEN moved their troops though the Galwan river bed.

For all the talk I hear about the Chinese being inspired by the Americans in the Gulf war, they don't appear to have learned much about shocking and softening the enemy before putting boots on hostile ground.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 25 Jun 2020 13:21

Jarita wrote:So are you all saying you do not believe the Indian Army and Indian government when they say that there is no encroachment of territory. I am very perturbed by this second guessing. Of course the malicious media arms are responsible for this but facts will be facts and in a month or so the truth will be out. The government has nothing to gain from blatant lies and this group is called Bharat Rakshak OK.
Again, coming back to this group after a long time and it's very troubling to see the perverse sense of "government is lying", "army is bluffing". You can clearly see the divide. There is also a perverse sense of I told you so. Who are these newbies?
In the midst of all this, RaviB's posts are a real pleasure to read.

When Modi made that statement it was true. The Chinese have come in after that.

BTW, My only point of doubt on the question of the satellite image is the disorderly nature of the camp at PP-14.

Chinese camp are usually neat and symmetric arraigned when compared to "mostly" chaotic Indian camps and this is the most disordered camp that I have seen on the LAC.

Just check Demchok where both have established on the opposite banks of a rivulet to see the difference.