India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

[Larry Walker]

If the Chinese intent was to do salami slicing - then they have achieved that goal - so what are they building up for now ? Are they suspecting India will use military options to push them back ? If we use military options to push them back then why stop at Apr'22 positions and why not try to push back Chinese all the way out of AC given that we have sector level superiority. Because if we don't have this superiority then pushing back Chinese even to Apr'22 position would not be militarily feasible. So what is the Chinese fear for further buildup ? And what the COC narrative to their people ?? Ours is known to the world as every 'prime time' news channel shouts from rooftop. This further buildup and counter buildup and now Paki buildup in GB is puzzling.

[mahadevbhu]

https://www.livemint.com/companies/news ... 36004.html

https://www.livemint.com/companies/news ... 36004.html

Someone was suggesting inspection of Chinese components. It's being done already.

[hanumadu]

We have to make clear any patrolling by the chinese in our area will invite shooting as part of the withdrawal agreement. This BS has lasted long enough.

[pankajs]

If the Chinese intent was to do salami slicing - then they have achieved that goal - so what are they building up for now ? Are they suspecting India will use military options to push them back ? If we use military options to push them back then why stop at Apr'22 positions and why not try to push back Chinese all the way out of AC given that we have sector level superiority. Because if we don't have this superiority then pushing back Chinese even to Apr'22 position would not be militarily feasible. So what is the Chinese fear for further buildup ? And what the COC narrative to their people ?? Ours is known to the world as every 'prime time' news channel shouts from rooftop. This further buildup and counter buildup and now Paki buildup in GB is puzzling.

1. The communists are backstabbers and they expect other to behave the same way.
2. With Modi rolling the dice in Doklam, they can never be sure now.

We will not push beyond because our objective is status-quo restoration.

[pankajs]

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation ... 726bb94327
‘Lethal’ capability in PM‘s $270bn defence plan

Australia will roll out an anti-ballistic missile defence shield for deployed forces for the first time, as well as land, sea and air-based long-range and hypersonic strike missiles, to project military power to the region and defend against potential “adversaries”.

In the most significant shift in the nation’s military posture in decades, Scott Morrison on Wednesday announced a $270bn 10-year defence plan including “lethal” naval and air warfare capability as well as the first land-based long-range missile defence systems.

It will include the development with the US of a missile defence shield against ballistic missile attack as well as potential long-range missile technology of up to several thousand kilometres to protect shipping lanes across the region.

Anti-submarine warfare, space-based intelligence and battlefield capability and underwater surveillance technology will also be developed.

The plan calls for advanced air-warfare capacity, combat drones, long-range naval missile strike ability, and “sovereign”-owned military satellites with ground-based signals intelligence facilities.

Btw, note .. Mililatry satellite, SIGIntel, space-based intelligence and battlefield capability, underwater surveillance, Ant-Sub capacity, ballistic missile shield and hypersonic strike missiles.

Looks like Australia is getting ready for battle in IOR generally and blocking Sunda strait and Lombak strait specifically. IFF India is able to bottle up Malacca strait, Gilgit Baltisthan becomes the lifeline to sustain Chinese navy in the IOR region. The CEPC road itself may not be as important as the Air-corridor that GB provides PLAN.

Expect some action in India soon on similar lines.

[Larry Walker]

NewsX reporting a alluding to a secret buildup by India for GB-PoK campaign. Not sure how it ties into Porkis deploying 20k additional troops in that area. And Jha's moaning that Chinese are closing all axis of Indian advance in Ladakh region. Maybe GoI is thinking of GB/PoK and in one shot achieve a stated objective and destroy CPEC. Assuming we mount a GB/PoK campaign and in this forum we are very sure that Chinese are not interested in fighting a actual ground war - will they 'attack' us to save GB/PoK ? And if they can't - wouldn't this be a bigger nose-rub than they vacating their intrusion in Ladakh ?

[Aditya_V]

If NewsX is reporting what is so secret about it.

[Larry Walker]

Secret from public domain - not in military domain.

[pankajs]

https://www.hindustantimes.com/analysis ... EHT9J.html
It can no longer be business-as-usual | Analysis

Strategically, what the Chinese are signalling to India and the world is that they are the number one power in Asia and that they will throw their weight around as they wish, whether in the South China Sea or on the India-China border.

They also want India to understand and accept that China’s comprehensive national power far outweighs India’s, and that the nation must acknowledge its place in the pecking order of Asia. India must roll over and play dead. The 21st Century is not an Asian century but a Chinese century.

<snip>

Why? If India was to do that we would be negating the message of our military action on the ground, and, in stark contrast, be conveying to the Chinese that India can live with what its army has done. Therefore, India needs to reinforce and reiterate its military messaging through policy decisions which further underline India’s very clear national consensus not to accept Chinese big brotherly attitudes and plain bullying. It is for this reason that India will have to take measures to indicate that if there is no peace on the border, the rest of the relationship with China will also be negatively impacted. A reassessment and recalibration of India’s China policy are required to make India’s messaging crystal clear.

As I wrote before, the economic strike is not so much about the current profit/loss to India/China BUT a signal that the relationship has altered fundamentally and it will bring economic cost now and in the future when India is a much bigger economy.

[hanumadu]

Interesting take on China's objectives for the border stand off. It wan'ts to condition Indians into not antagonizing China on trade, technology and its world power ambitions. A psychological conditioning that will shackle us into not doing things that we should be doing if we perceive it may anger China.

So far, it seems to be having an opposite effect.

Added Later: I see a link for the tweet has already been posted above by user pushkar.bhatt.

I don't understand this psychology. If someone hurts me I am not supposed to anger him more? And avoid crossing paths with him? Instead of doing everything to pummel that bully down or hurt him innumerable ways? What sort of thinking is this?

Anyway, in case of this incident, I am glad that it's having an opposite effect instead of the psychological conditioning that the Chinese hoped for.

What is there to understand? It's classic bullying. The chinese think they are much stronger than us and India would not want to antagonize them for the fear of them disrupting our economy. Just like they avoided all wars till they reached this point, they would think India would want to do the same too.

If you are a much weak person than your bully, you are expected to shut up and suck up and most people do. It's just that India is not weak and china is not the bully it thinks it is.

[Manish_Sharma]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China

China's GDP in 1962 was 47.21 Billion Dollars
But I can't find India's GDP in 1962, please help me.

[nam]

Nam ji, the longer you wait the less feasible the offensive option becomes. They went from three brigades to adding at least two new mech divisions in Tibet and growing.

Remember, we have the numbers now. It would be different if the numbers were balanced before. Since Doklam, the numbers have been reversing because the chinis had taken advantage of the "no shoot" agreement to go cheap on a the border as a dividend.

That 15T economy will come into greater and greatee affect every year we wait. The idea is to take advantage of the remaining advantages we have now before they dissipates and create pain for them in casualties as the article suggests. They can deny the 43 but can they deny 430 or 4300?

We haven't released pictures of bodies or prisoners yet because Modi seems to want peace. There is no reason not to unless the idea is to allow them space to back down. And that worried me because it plays into their game.

They don't want to fight and take casualties. They want to crowd you out of the disputed zone by making war unlikely.

It is dependent on our objectives. Does anyone of us here truly believe we will take over Aksai Chin? Now or even 10 years later?

If our objective is AC, then yes, lesser the PLA the better. I am not sure India will hold on to Sirjap even if we capture it, forget about AC.

So the way i look at it is we will hold our status quo line. That is the policy of GoI, for good or bad. It wouldn't matter how many PLA are present on the other side. We have to gain the capability to decimate whatever the PLA can throw at our line. For that we need firepower mass. Few hundred Spice, hellifire or some M777 here and there is not going to cut it.

We got have LCH, Helina, ULH, A2G, SAAW, 155MM guns, Astra, MRSAM in numbers to play the real game.

[Larry Walker]

If the Chinese are stopping Indian patrols in Depsang area from going further than the Y-Junction , then isn't that a larger intrusion and more loss of territory and tactical advantage then the Pangong lake diversion? Why does GoI want to keep focus on Pangong lake ?

[nam]

The major problem of any military action by us at this moment is to define the right objective. Chini haven't fully invaded. They moved in to grey areas, on which we never had or never tried having hard control.

This is means unlike Kargil, there is no real reason we can give for action. Because for an action, we also need to tell the world where we intend to stop.

Will we stop after pushing them to Finger 8? or till Sirjap? What happens if the Chini laid down their objective? Even if there is a full fledged war, where do we intend to stop?

What happens after the war ends? How long will we continue defending 3400KM? to prevent future PLA ingress?

There are lot of questions to be answered.

[Manish_Sharma]

TWITTER

@DrApr007:

#BREAKING : Pakistan deployed 20000 additional troops in Pak Occupied North Laddakh to help Chinese aggression in Eastern Laddakh. More than 200 terrorists are waiting at various launchpads opposite Poonch, Rajouri, Baramulla and Kupwara.
Indian Army is on highest level of alert.
https://twitter.com/drapr007/status/127 ... 33696?s=19

[Ambar]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China

China's GDP in 1962 was 47.21 Billion Dollars
But I can't find India's GDP in 1962, please help me.

Around 42 billion but in per capita terms we were either at par or slightly higher than the chinese until 1990. The real divergence in fortunes started from around 1990 where we went from being ~90% of China's GDP to ~20% today.

[Rs_singh]

So, I’ve been contemplating PLA action and intentions for while. Based on everything so far, their end state is to impose a boundary creep westwards on us, FOR NOW. A couple years down the line, they will repeat this process till their stated goal of occupying all territory promised to the Middle Kingdom has been achieved, before 2049. They are willing/able and are fighting across all domains. Diplomatic, economic but so far not military. Based on their buildup and movements, I can surmise two aspects of their ops strategy. Their positions are static with a creep forward and defense in depth posture, inherently relying on and taking advantage of an enemy who is stuck in “not being aggressive and not firing the first shot”.

They will keep creeping forward and building defense in depth with arty and armd support. Why? Because that’s all they have to do. We are letting them ingress to their chosen stoping point, FOR NOW.

Next, this policy of creep forward with defense in depth facing a passive enemy gives one big advantage to the attacking side. they decide the time and place of converting their creep into a strike with well placed defensive positions to fall back on previously established with their creep forward policy.

In essence, what I’m trying to say is, this seemingly slow and meek, “no weapons used” enemy WILL turn kinetic and unleash hell in one fell sweep once we are lulled into a sense of “fall back another 100m”. PLA knows full well, it can neither sustain nor operate in that region for a sustained conflict. Not that it lacks the competence or will to do so but rather a sustained conflict does not suit its interests. It will fight a battle of aggression to achieve its stated goal. To fight a battle of aggression, you need to decide the time and place and deny the enemy the same. PLAs creep forward affords them space to manoeuvre while denying the same to us. Now if only they can time it right. If I was to pick a time, I would chose late October, early November. Fresh snow, low temperatures but still manageable. No significant ice formation to hinder troop or vehicle movement. World gaze fixated on the US election. It’ll give them 2 weeks or so of a sweet window.

I will post a follow up on this evaluating own response, so far, and future options. We are looking at essentially fighting a battle of attrition. And whatever I see so far, I do not like.

[mahadevbhu]

If we want to fight, we need to fight when we can guarantee victory by having decent local MIC. No point going in to war with a 15T economy with imported kit.

If GoI really wants in the next year or two, local MIC can provide the bread & butter of artillery, rockets and A2G weapon. The Chinis are not going anywhere and as long as we don't agreed for status quo and keep the stand off going we will have the opportunity.

Once you are ready, create an incident..

If the Chini attack us first, we throw whatever we have got..

Nam ji, the longer you wait the less feasible the offensive option becomes. They went from three brigades to adding at least two new mech divisions in Tibet and growing.

Remember, we have the numbers now. It would be different if the numbers were balanced before. Since Doklam, the numbers have been reversing because the chinis had taken advantage of the "no shoot" agreement to go cheap on a the border as a dividend.

That 15T economy will come into greater and greatee affect every year we wait. The idea is to take advantage of the remaining advantages we have now before they dissipates and create pain for them in casualties as the article suggests. They can deny the 43 but can they deny 430 or 4300?

We haven't released pictures of bodies or prisoners yet because Modi seems to want peace. There is no reason not to unless the idea is to allow them space to back down. And that worried me because it plays into their game.

They don't want to fight and take casualties. They want to crowd you out of the disputed zone by making war unlikely.

You're egging on a fight saying that chin is pusillanimous. But you can't predict or control the outcome of the fight at all. It could easily spiral into something huge.

[Raveen]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China

China's GDP in 1962 was 47.21 Billion Dollars
But I can't find India's GDP in 1962, please help me.

Around 42 billion but in per capita terms we were either at par or slightly higher than the chinese until 1990. The real divergence in fortunes started from around 1990 where we went from being ~90% of China's GDP to ~20% today.

PPP?

We're trying to wrestle victory in war, not buy it as the highest bidder. Data is good for perspective, but overall, when the balloon goes up, it'll be what's between the ears and legs that counts more than what's in the pocket.

[Sumair]

A very informative and insightful discussion from outside prospective.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEUe7fae0I8

[KL Dubey]

Around 42 billion but in per capita terms we were either at par or slightly higher than the chinese until 1990. The real divergence in fortunes started from around 1990 where we went from being ~90% of China's GDP to ~20% today.

PPP?

We're trying to wrestle victory in war, not buy it as the highest bidder. Data is good for perspective, but overall, when the balloon goes up, it'll be what's between the ears and legs that counts more than what's in the pocket.

India GDP is 10 tn PPP, and China GDP is 21 tn PPP. We are the third largest economy in the world, larger than Japan and Germany combined.

[abhik]

The major problem of any military action by us at this moment is to define the right objective. Chini haven't fully invaded. They moved in to grey areas, on which we never had or never tried having hard control.

This is means unlike Kargil, there is no real reason we can give for action. Because for an action, we also need to tell the world where we intend to stop.

We need to stop saying "grey area", its either ours or theirs - we could have taken the easy way out in Kargil and called it a grey area (after all we not occupying them in winter i.e. half the year no?)

Will we stop after pushing them to Finger 8? or till Sirjap? What happens if the Chini laid down their objective? Even if there is a full fledged war, where do we intend to stop?

What happens after the war ends? How long will we continue defending 3400KM? to prevent future PLA ingress?

There are lot of questions to be answered.

Objective is very simple - destroy PLAs capability to wage war in along our borders, might sound bombastic but that's what need to be done nothing less will do. Once things get kinetic, it will not end at figure 2 or 8 but will end when one side has been so throughly trashed they can't count fingers anymore.

[Prem Kumar]

Comparing our GDP & MIC to China's and using that as an excuse to not fight, is cowardice. History is full of examples of how the "size of the dog in the fight" being the only thing that matters.

1) Vietnam vs France, USA, China
2) China itself staring down Russia & nuke-threatening the U.S
... and many more

If we have a principle that we would fight to protect & retrieve every inch of our Punya-Bhoomi + the fact that Dharma is on our side, then all else is secondary. We will not only win but be on our way to achieving economic/military/cultural superpowerdom. Imagine 1B+ people rowing together!

India should see herself for the mighty elephant that she is. This can be Modi's moment to turbocharge our nation.

[abhik]

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation ... 726bb94327
‘Lethal’ capability in PM‘s $270bn defence plan

Australia will roll out an anti-ballistic missile defence shield for deployed forces for the first time, as well as land, sea and air-based long-range and hypersonic strike missiles, to project military power to the region and defend against potential “adversaries”.

In the most significant shift in the nation’s military posture in decades, Scott Morrison on Wednesday announced a $270bn 10-year defence plan including “lethal” naval and air warfare capability as well as the first land-based long-range missile defence systems.

It will include the development with the US of a missile defence shield against ballistic missile attack as well as potential long-range missile technology of up to several thousand kilometres to protect shipping lanes across the region.

Anti-submarine warfare, space-based intelligence and battlefield capability and underwater surveillance technology will also be developed.

The plan calls for advanced air-warfare capacity, combat drones, long-range naval missile strike ability, and “sovereign”-owned military satellites with ground-based signals intelligence facilities.

Btw, note .. Mililatry satellite, SIGIntel, space-based intelligence and battlefield capability, underwater surveillance, Ant-Sub capacity, ballistic missile shield and hypersonic strike missiles.

Looks like Australia is getting ready for battle in IOR generally and blocking Sunda strait and Lombak strait specifically. IFF India is able to bottle up Malacca strait, Gilgit Baltisthan becomes the lifeline to sustain Chinese navy in the IOR region. The CEPC road itself may not be as important as the Air-corridor that GB provides PLAN.

Expect some action in India soon on similar lines.

The Auzies have been bulking up for some time now, 72 F35s, 12 P8s, 9 large new frigates (in addition to their existing 8 light frigates and 3 Air defence destroyers), 12 large SSKs to name a few. In fact some of their programmes were launched a the same time or afters as ours but they have actually been able to close deals and start getting kit while we are playing acqusition snakes and ladders (MRCA, Tanker, LHD, SSKs).

[Manish_Sharma]

TWITTER

Col DPK Pillay,Shaurya Chakra,PhD (Retd)
@dpkpillay12:

Did you know that India used to send it's planes to ferry Zhou en lai around the world. We also supplied rice to te Chinese in Tibet
Those who don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it. Pl disprove we are mere chest beaters as per Brut video(watch video in the link) :

https://twitter.com/dpkpillay12/status/ ... 2689963010

[fanne]

If you read the news that pakis have moved 20,000 troops (just shy of two divisions) in Ladakh (see map the area around Siachin and below it is in play. Chinese from east and tsp from west. That could be the play (or could be a feint per chinese character) and troops have been getting mobilized because of this. Depsang plains is the place to watch (and not 4-8 fingers, the land there is in contest few sq km, it is a diversion, that public is falling for), if the balloon goes up you will hear Deosai plains as well. They are trying to cut off the North east corner of Ladakh.
A word of caution - What is the issue of so called learned people of India, you very well know Wire, print...ajai shukla (who sold off siachin during MMS times), A news paper anchor whose dad also was in the selling party...why they have credibility? Why are these people stupid? They have an agenda inimical to India (and I am not saying BJP or Hindu, some may argue I am fine with anti-party or anti-religion), it has been proven 100 of times. Why consume their news, they twist everything, even as small as passing gas, to suite their narrative. Then why fall for them?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... or_map.svg
https://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/ladakh ... sical.html

[ldev]

In 1990 India's GDP was $ 321 Billion and China was $ 360 Billion. The divergence started from then on. In 2019 India is at 3.2 trillion and China at 14.1 trillion. GDP PPP India at 11 trillion and GDP PPP China at 27 trillion.

So China's GDP PPP/GDP at nominal prices is 2X, India is at 3.4X. Because >95% of China's arms procurement is domestic it can leverage the benefits of a PPP GDP that is 2X it's nominal amount.

By contrast because India has such a large percentage of imported products in it's procurement list and even the local produced products have very significant imported components, it is not able to leverage the even better 3.4X PPP GDP ratio. In fact the higher the ratio the more expensive on a relative basis an imported product, specially something as gold plated as the Rafale e.g. Not that I am suggesting that in the immediate future India stop imports cold turkey. That will be suicidal for defence preparedness. But these are mathematical facts that have to be put out there.

Finally on a PPP as well as a nominal dollar basis, the cost to make any manufactured product is lower in China. That is the real problem with India. Versus China the manufacturing sector both civilian and military is not competitive on a price/cost basis.

[williams]

Let us put it this way. We know how far we patrolled and where we crossed Chinese perception. Same on the other side. Until we have border talks to merge these two perceptions we should be allowed to patrol those areas and we will allow them to patrol some of our areas. We need to go back to that status now. If not use military means to enforce it and don't worry about consequences.

We have enough capacity to handle any consequences the Chinese can come up with including the use of missiles and nukes. GDP talk is plain BS. We still have enough to inflict enormous and irreversible pain to the enemy and there are others who are itching to inflict more pain all around China including their own citizens. We start it and others will follow as simple as that.

Things we don't need to talk about (I believe GoI is also in sync with this) is the following:

1. The past blunders that lead to the 1962 war and the subsequent appeasement approach.
2. Some grand plans to take Tibet or sinking Chinese aircraft carrier in SCS. These are escalatory steps that will happen based on how much the enemy wants to escalate.
3. Some sort of trade war. It is simply going to take time
4. Building MIC - We need to do that, but we cannot wait for that to happen before dealing with the enemy in my doorstep.

[vijayk]

Deleted ..

[Sanju]

The above article has been posted in the last couple of pages.

[abhik]

So, I’ve been contemplating PLA action and intentions for while. Based on everything so far, their end state is to impose a boundary creep westwards on us, FOR NOW. A couple years down the line, they will repeat this process till their stated goal of occupying all territory promised to the Middle Kingdom has been achieved, before 2049. They are willing/able and are fighting across all domains. Diplomatic, economic but so far not military. Based on their buildup and movements, I can surmise two aspects of their ops strategy. Their positions are static with a creep forward and defense in depth posture, inherently relying on and taking advantage of an enemy who is stuck in “not being aggressive and not firing the first shot”.

They will keep creeping forward and building defense in depth with arty and armd support. Why? Because that’s all they have to do. We are letting them ingress to their chosen stoping point, FOR NOW.

Next, this policy of creep forward with defense in depth facing a passive enemy gives one big advantage to the attacking side. they decide the time and place of converting their creep into a strike with well placed defensive positions to fall back on previously established with their creep forward policy.

In essence, what I’m trying to say is, this seemingly slow and meek, “no weapons used” enemy WILL turn kinetic and unleash hell in one fell sweep once we are lulled into a sense of “fall back another 100m”. PLA knows full well, it can neither sustain nor operate in that region for a sustained conflict. Not that it lacks the competence or will to do so but rather a sustained conflict does not suit its interests. It will fight a battle of aggression to achieve its stated goal. To fight a battle of aggression, you need to decide the time and place and deny the enemy the same. PLAs creep forward affords them space to manoeuvre while denying the same to us. Now if only they can time it right. If I was to pick a time, I would chose late October, early November. Fresh snow, low temperatures but still manageable. No significant ice formation to hinder troop or vehicle movement. World gaze fixated on the US election. It’ll give them 2 weeks or so of a sweet window.

I will post a follow up on this evaluating own response, so far, and future options. We are looking at essentially fighting a battle of attrition. And whatever I see so far, I do not like.

Very well put sir, eagerly waiting for the followup part. The part in bold has been troubling me for the past few weeks, I'm hoping that the political leadership takes the bull by the horns i.e. take the initiative away from the Chinese and not give them the advantage of setting the terms of conflict.

[brar_w]

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation ... 726bb94327
‘Lethal’ capability in PM‘s $270bn defence plan

Btw, note .. Mililatry satellite, SIGIntel, space-based intelligence and battlefield capability, underwater surveillance, Ant-Sub capacity, ballistic missile shield and hypersonic strike missiles.

Looks like Australia is getting ready for battle in IOR generally and blocking Sunda strait and Lombak strait specifically. IFF India is able to bottle up Malacca strait, Gilgit Baltisthan becomes the lifeline to sustain Chinese navy in the IOR region. The CEPC road itself may not be as important as the Air-corridor that GB provides PLAN.

Expect some action in India soon on similar lines.

The Auzies have been bulking up for some time now, 72 F35s, 12 P8s, 9 large new frigates (in addition to their existing 8 light frigates and 3 Air defence destroyers), 12 large SSKs to name a few. In fact some of their programmes were launched a the same time or afters as ours but they have actually been able to close deals and start getting kit while we are playing acqusition snakes and ladders (MRCA, Tanker, LHD, SSKs).

They see the writing on the wall as far as 400-500 ship Chinese Navy, a decade from now, acting like a bully in the region. Likely supported by Aircraft Carriers, legacy and stealth bombers, UCAV's and strike fighters and a layer of intermediate range ballistic missiles for sea denial. As such they've aligned very strongly with the US Navy (EA-18G and Next gen. Jammer program, P-8 and Triton, AEGIS, LRASM, etc.) and are investing some serious cash to recapitalize capability and to create a highly networked force that can create those conventional roadblocks that they'll need. Meanwhile they'll continue to build up organic capability of their own, whether that is networking (Plan Jericho), MUM-T (Airpower Teaming System), long range Over The Horizon radars (JORN) or a hybridized air and missile defense system and hypersonic weapons.

And Chinese propoganda and recent activities vis-a-vis trade are probably driving up political support for a tougher stance on this long term orientation in defense policy and systems -

China calls Australia 'gum stuck to sole of its shoe'

[Larry Walker]

If current Chinese aggression is to remove the threat to G219 - then what would India have to concede on talks table for them to be convinced that the threat is no longer there ?? If they wanted to remove a military threat from India - then just doing some minute shallow incursions and going back status quo is the most stupid thing they can ever do - it just reinforces their vulnerability to India and confirms that what India is going in the right direction. This is ultimate ChunChoo which I am not able to decipher.

[Dilbu]

Also if they are planning for a larger offensive why delay so much so that India gathers maximum amount of resources it can get? It does not make sense to advertise the intent to attack and then twiddle their thumbs until enemy is fully prepared.

[Raveen]

Balloon will go up, how big the balloon is, where it goes up, how long stays up, no one knows, but it will go up. I see no way out without loss of Chinese H&D otherwise which to an ailing GEISHA Xi-nnie the Pooh is unacceptable.

[Larry Walker]

Ok - so can we scratch the 'threat to G219' as a reason for this aggression then ? My intent is to get some consensus on what is their real objective.

[Raveen]

Ok - so can we scratch the 'threat to G219' as a reason for this aggression then ? My intent is to get some consensus on what is their real objective.

Without a doubt.

There are a plethora of random and often contradictory reasons being thrown about - proverbial kitchen sink approach, none of them make any real sense. The possible reason is opportune timing w/r/t US elections and the ability of winter to offer a natural bookend to any conflict, geographic convenience vs other maritime targets, asserting power on the only other regional power, getting military some actual battle experience against a hardened army, priming the military pump for eventual action elsewhere, or who knows what else, but its none of the contradictory BS being tossed around.

[RaviB]

Former NSA K Shivshankar Menon on GEISHA actions

https://www.rediff.com/news/interview/l ... 200630.htm

China expects us to behave the way China would!'And this mirror imaging is the most dangerous thing because it leads to tremendous misunderstandings.'

It is best to be very careful about what we say about this. You know there are lives involved here and we have already lost 20 lives on our side.

This is serious and you know it would be irresponsible for people to go on talking about this. This is not some game, this is a serious business between two serious countries with very large armies.

Why now? Is it because China sees India as a weak country fighting an economic downturn and a pandemic?

My own sense is that, you know, the pandemic has diminished all of us. China included. China will not admit it. It is not in their nature to say so, but the fact is it started there, it has hit them as well, their economy also is suffering and this is true of all the powers.

Some might come out of it quicker; some might be less, but the fact is that it has diminished all of us.

In that situation what we are seeing is an assertive China across the board. It is not only vis a vis India. It is tough on Hong Kong where despite the previous agreements, China has chosen to pass the national security law herself without consulting the Hong Kong institutions which gives her security control and presence within Hong Kong. This is diminishing Hong Kong's autonomy which she was permitted to maintain for fifty years.

China is flying military aircraft in Taiwanese air space, she is also sending submarine ships near Senkaku in the East China Sea which is disputed with Japan.

There is a pattern of Chinese behaviour of assertiveness in the last few months which, I think, is across the board. Therefore, I think what we are seeing is part of a larger pattern.

When China itself is deep in problems, why now? People tend to talk aggressively from a position of strength.

If you look at China's behaviour traditionally, it is an interesting thing. When China had a massive revolt in Tibet from 1959 onwards and a famine, when she was having a dispute with both the Soviet Union and the USA, that's when she went to war with India in 1962.

When you look at China's response to a crisis, she has been willing to take risks abroad. At times she was willing to enter Korea in the Korean War in 1950 when she had still not consolidated even the People's Republic of China, when she had internal enemies, when China was facing the most powerful country on earth.

So, China has a pattern of risk taking behaviour at times of domestic crisis.

I think the leadership probably finds it a useful device to unite people around it, and they have made use of this before.

In 1979 when they attacked Vietnam, it was when (Deng Xiaoping's economic) reform had barely started in December 1978. They attacked Vietnam in February 1979.

It is not necessary that we should judge Chinese behaviour by their actions and to make assumptions that 'Oh, the domestic economy might be in trouble, therefore they want to do this' and so on, I think that is not correct.

This is part of the problem. When we look at China, we expect China to behave the way we would.

China looks at us and expects us to behave the way China would!

Part 2 https://www.rediff.com/news/interview/l ... 200701.htm

This Chinese behaviour we have not seen for a very long time.'
'This sort of build up on the border, this sort of Chinese behaviour, especially the aggression and brutality with which our people were attacked on the 15th of June, this is not something we have seen before.'

Rediff.com » News » 'This Chinese behaviour, aggression and brutality has not been seen for a very long time'
'This Chinese behaviour, aggression and brutality has not been seen for a very long time'
By SHEELA BHATT
Last updated on: July 01, 2020 12:43 IST
Get Rediff News in your Inbox:
email

'This Chinese behaviour we have not seen for a very long time.'
'This sort of build up on the border, this sort of Chinese behaviour, especially the aggression and brutality with which our people were attacked on the 15th of June, this is not something we have seen before.'

IMAGE: Ayush Kumar, son of Havildar Sunil Kumar, who was murdered by the People's Liberation Army in the Galwan Valley in Ladakh on the night of June 15, receives the Tricolour at his father's cremation in Maner, Bihar, June 18, 2020. Photograph: PTI Photo


"I have absolute confidence that the Indian Army can deal with this, that's not the problem. The question is how do you then deal with it politically because this is more than just a military problem, this is diplomatic, political, it's a much broader challenge," Shivshankar Menon, former national security adviser, former foreign secretary and former Indian ambassador to China, tells Rediff.com Senior Contributor Sheela Bhatt in the second part of an eloquent interview.


Can we say that spirit behind the 1993 Agreement on the Maintenance of Peace and Tranquillity at the border has been dumped by China unilaterally?

Well, I think it is about more than the spirit, the agreement works when there are differences. It commits them to withdrawing and discussing it peacefully.

Now, as I said, we don't have full information, but from what I understand China has crossed the LAC (Line of Actual Control) in some places which she is actually required to respect under the 1993 agreement and all the subsequent agreements.

From what I understand, the military build ups are also contrary to the spirit of what these agreements convey, (what) the 1993, 1996, other agreements provide for.

So to build up a force on the border, to cross the LAC, this naturally casts into question China's commitment to the agreements. And that's something we will have to take into account in our own calculus when we decide what to do and how to deal with it
...
Do you think this stand-off will, eventually, fizzle out? What is the level of seriousness you see in this current situation?

This Chinese behaviour we have not seen for a very long time, 40 years, so this sort of build up on the border, this sort of pattern in Chinese behaviour and especially the aggression and brutality with which our people were attacked on the 15th of June, this is not something we have seen before.

But I do think that this is serious and it has all the signs of being much more serious. And it is even more serious because it is a part of a broader Chinese behaviour, not just vis a vis us, but with other people as well.

...
We exchanged maps of the LAC in the Middle Sector. When we exchanged maps of the LAC in the Western Sector, the Chinese pulled back and said they didn't want to go on with this exercise.

They used several reasons, but basically they didn't want to have to commit themselves to respect a line.

Now, you cannot force someone to agree to something if he doesn't want to.

But the fact that there is no agreed LAC in certain areas can work for both sides.

I don't see why we see that only as a one-way threat. That assumes that we are equally passive.

After all, you can't guard every inch of such a long border, you can't have a man standing on every inch of it, so what do you do? You create mutual deterrents to embarrass each other.

And 1988 onwards, that deterrent, that balance on the border, has actually worked.

...
Do you still think, when you look back, that from 1993 to now, India's policy to strive for the status quo was good enough?

I don't think we were striving for the status quo, in fact we made it quite clear from day one, that the status quo is not an acceptable solution and it is not acceptable for us.

We are maintaining the status quo while we negotiate the boundary which we don't think should be the status quo. We have said that. The Chinese also have said that.

In fact, the Chinese excuse for not exchanging maps at the LAC is that it would freeze the status quo and make it the boundary. They don't want that. We don't want that either.

[Larry Walker]

If their plan was to strike a devastating blow just before winter and hide behind snow - then why mobilise in Apr-May and give India a 4 month window to buildup ?? So a quick strike which cannot be escalated to a wider conflict since mountains will snow out also does not seem to the original intent.

[Larry Walker]

NSA K Shivshankar's assertions on Chinese expecting us to behave like a vassal state does not sound strong - because we have shown in Dokalam that we will not back down. When we did not back down even when main incursion was in Bhutan - what would the Chinese be smoking to assume we will back down when incursion is on our own territory.