India's Border Security with China and Pakistan-2020

[SSridhar]

Gen Ravi Arora in an IMR article on the motivation . . . (sorry, no URL)

In Chumur, China claims 80 sq km and probably wants a straight border from PT-4925 to PT-5318 to bring Tible Mane (stupa) area under its control. For India, holding of Chumur is critical for the safety of the Manali-Leh route. Remember, the PLA demanded removal of India’s fortified positions in Burtse (2013) and Demchok and Chumur (2014) for its retreat.

Overall, the pattern shows the PLA’s desperate design to snatch the lake at Lukung through a three-pronged strategy of attacking from Sirijap in the north, Chuchul in the south and through the lake water from middle. This is the key choke-point from where the Chinese can cut off Indian access to the entire flank of Chip Chap plains, Aksai Chin in the east and Shayok Valley to the north, which means that Indian control is pushed to the west of the Shyok river and south of the Indus river, forcing India to accept both rivers as natural boundaries. And once China gets control of the southern side of the Karakoram it can easily approach Siachen Glacier from the Depsang corridor and meet at Tashkurgan junction from where the CPEC crosses into Gilgit-Baltistan.

That would be disastrous for Indian defence, leaving the strategic Nubra vulnerable, possibly impacting even India’s hold over Siachen. China’s access to Changla-pass through Lukung and Tangtse would threaten the entire Indus Valley. It is quite possible that China is eyeing the waters of the Shyok, Galwan and Chang-Chenmo rivers, to divert them to the arid Aksai Chin and its Ali region.

[pankajs]

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/art ... 808333.cms
Indian Army to place emergency orders for extreme cold weather tents for soldiers on LAC

LEH: With over 30,000 additional troops being deployed in the Ladakh sector to counter the Chinese aggression, the Indian Army is going to place emergency orders for extreme cold weather tents for the soldiers on the borders.

The need for the tents is being felt as the deployment on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) is expected to be prolonged as the senior armed forces officers feel that the stand-off is likely to continue at least till September-October timeframe.


Even if the Chinese withdraw from the locations, we cannot take chances for the future as well. The guard will always have to be up and that is why, we are going to place orders for thousands of tents for extreme cold weather survival in Eastern Ladakh sector, top Army sources told ANI.

"All along the border, apart from weaponry and ammunition, the major focus of our emergency procurement would be on providing for habitat for soldiers," they said.

[vinod]

Me think, it is not a pull back. Galwaan nallah swelled and broke the supply lines, so there are to safer people place temporarily.

Modi did the Sindhu Darshan pooja...

[Aditya_V]

This good they are planning the logistics ahead for additional deployment, well Pakis are screwed as thier Opex will also go up for winter deployment in GB, both our adversaries will now have to deploy in winter just in case. I think over time , it will be proven that the PLA has done a tactically brilliant but strategically stupid escalation.

[pushkar.bhat]

This good they are planning the logistics ahead for additional deployment, well Pakis are screwed as thier Opex will also go up for winter deployment in GB, both our adversaries will now have to deploy in winter just in case. I think over time , it will be proven that the PLA has done a tactically brilliant but strategically stupid escalation.

[p_ram]

Hero Cycle cancels deal of worth 900cr with China.

Chinese cos are banned from Highway Project in India.

only such chinese viruses are wailing and breast beating.

Good to see some patriots not going after the cheap imports.
But O/T if permitted, most of the cycle share companies sourced the cheap cycles from Cheen as they had excess stock.

...snip..snip.. We should have banned several non critical things such as toys, furniture, automobile parts, etc., and then rolled those back. ...snip..snip..

+108, these are the low hanging fruits which will yield in terms of local industries, employment and pollution control.

Edit: Removed some OT stuff

[Mukesh.Kumar]

Is it that impossible for India to impose an nfz in Pok? They have just about 5 brigades in GB. Without air cover,
they'll be hard-pressed.

There are roads from kargil to skardu to gilgit. If we have air cover, can't they be plied by Indian units?

Not too different from say a tangail airdrop....

Slightly OT and longish post (Part I) Alert ON.
Cain-ji, quite some time before, inspired by discussions on BRF, I actually tried to understand and model this exact same thing. While looking for my notes, today I couldn’t find them out. But it isn’t such an easy one. Going from memory, here’s my two cents.

What’s the value of taking over GB?
Economic- GB has an economy size of USD 2.5 bn. Under Indian administration it will easily increase.
Water and Energy- Furthermore, control of the region gives us greater control over the Indus and it’s tributaries. Not only are the water resources exploitable, but also it has potential for close to 30GW of hydroelectric power
Political- With a population of about 1.3 mn, the area is sparsely populated with a mean density of <20 pax per SqKm. Having GB not only allows us to snap Pak –Cheen land connection, but also gives us access to Afghanistan and through it to Tajikistan in Central Asia through the Wakkan Corridor.

So, GB would likely mean for us an annual addition of USD 10 bn to Indian economy. (I am sorry if I come across as a bean counter, but stressing this point is important to show why we have been reticent, and what we need to do overcome this).
Now, let’s explore the land route you proposed. Yes, Kargil to Skardu via the Kharmang valley, there was a historical road. About 150 km between two cities, along the Indus Valley. Today also, this road exists except a 6 km gap on the Indian side leading up to the border from Hardas into Pakistan https://www.google.com/maps/@34.8441561,75.6920576,9z. This very road continues as the Strategic Highway S1 connecting Skardu to Gilgit. Here you can find an article describing the road, and how there’s basically one wall which is mined up that blocks this road.

However, the road is narrow between Skardu and Khanma and dangerous ( see below)


It can easily be mined and even in better stretches is not the safest. Depending on this road alone to supply our troops in GB will not be practical. Also, note that NH1, which connects Ladakh to rest of India is vulnerable to Pakistan artillery assault and is also closed for close to 4 months a year. So taking GB will involve a corps sized airborne assault and an air bridge to resupply. This implies that the IAF will need to have complete air dominance over PAF in the region and our ability to suppress MANPADS around airfields in the region.

There are two further conditions that are necessary to be fulfilled for a successful airborne takeover of GB:
a. Pakistan has the ability to surge troops to the region. As much as possible we need to keep them off-guard and off-balance till the beginning of the airborne invasion. That would mean that we should be able to engage them south in Punjab or Rajasthan to keep them off balance. A thrust to heart of Punjab, seaborne assault on Karachi and Gwadar, and threat of an amphibious assault in the Rann to keep them off-balance. Therefore we need to build the capability of this airborne invasion as additional to fighting a hot war with Pakistan.
b. We need to keep China out of the picture. Difficult as they will see danger to their CPEC investments, and will intervene. Even a few sorties by the PLAAF will put paid to the invasion. So, we need to deter the Chinese.
In short, we need to be able to fight offensively against Pak on Western front, Deter Cheen in the North and the airborne invasion will be our 0.5 front.

Before I go into the details and challenges involved in this, I would like to cite two reasons why lopping off GB has it’s advantages. Airborne occupation, followed by air bridge and logistic channel from Kargil-Skardu-S1 axis is possible. One, Nanga Parbat/ Zanskar range, and its associated chain protect our Southern Flank till Gilgit.
Two, Pakistan can resupply and reinforce through either N 35 or N15 highways (refer figurebelow)




Slightly OT and longish post (Part I) Alert OFF.

[Mukesh.Kumar]

Is it that impossible for India to impose an nfz in Pok? They have just about 5 brigades in GB. Without air cover,
they'll be hard-pressed.

There are roads from kargil to skardu to gilgit. If we have air cover, can't they be plied by Indian units?

Not too different from say a tangail airdrop....

Slightly OT and longish post (Part II) Alert ON.

Ok, now that we have established the conditions under which an airborne assault on GB is likely to be the best way to take back the region short of going through the whole gamut of taking over all of POK, a much more humongous exercise, let’s see what we are up against.
Pak’s ORBAT (and here I will include paramilitary and local police also given their access to arms and potential of creating nuisance in the first few critical hours), comprises of Northern Areas Command of five independent brigades (~15000), Gilgit Baltistan Scouts ~3000, and Gilgit Baltistan Police ~5000. Say, an approximate total of 25,000 troops including auxiliaries and PAF assets at airfields.

A slug fight to defeat these troops is not in our best interest. Our assault needs to shock, decapitate command structures and bewilder the enemy into surrendering. Going out on a limb, I would hypothesize a missile barrage and IAF bombing to take out command centers, communications and eliminate at least 50% of the enemy (mostly the army). In such a context, hypothesizing further an airborne assault by 30,000 troops dropped into GB within a couple of hours (at least taking over airfields and road nodes) focusing on Skardu, Gilgit, Sost, Gajkuch, Danyor, Chilas, Astore. Later troops can spread out to take over rural areas (thankfully, with sparse population, it may be possible to focus on rural areas later). Crucial success factor will be intelligence and having locals friendly to Indian interests (particularly among tribals).

Ok, now that we have defined the magnitude of the problem, let’s look into one aspect to explore further. We calculated 30,000 troops to be airdropped, airlifted to GB. That using Boeing C17’s or C130J’s represent 300 or 500 sorties respectively. Now, I would envision the airborne corps something like the Russian 7th Guards Mountain Air Assault Division, operating in principle like Mechanized infantry who are transported by air (refer herefor why I envision this)

Once we add in equipment, the number of sorties easily doubles to 600 (this is an approximation but I used similar from the Center 2019 Russian exercise numbers to come up with ballpark numbers). So, if we are operating only C-17’s, and assuming that on the first day each aircraft puts in three sorties, you would still need 200 odd aircraft dedicated to this task. This is assuming 100% serviceability, no losses. Just the air transport component would cost USD 44 bn (USD 55 bn for C130J’s). And this is much more than current capability (for comparison we recently carried out ourbiggest airborne exercise for 500 SF personnel) . Where's the planning for this?

Throwing in all other costs, liberation of GB, this way would cost us at least USD 150 bn? I am sure this analysis, in some form or the other would have been presented/ gamed by military and political leadership. And till the time we come out with answers of how this can be done, where a USD 10 billion p.a. asset has to be acquired by spending USD 150 billion are answered, all our talk of freeing GB, much less Tibet, remains just that. Which political leadership or military leadership will plan this? Or commit money and time?

Slightly OT and longish post (Part II) Alert OFF.

[abhik]

https://mobile.twitter.com/akhileshshar ... 9249903618

Don’t trust Chinese

Posting image inline for others' benefit.

[Mukesh.Kumar]

Is it that impossible for India to impose an nfz in Pok? They have just about 5 brigades in GB. Without air cover,
they'll be hard-pressed.

There are roads from kargil to skardu to gilgit. If we have air cover, can't they be plied by Indian units?

Not too different from say a tangail airdrop....

Slightly OT and longish post (Part III) Alert ON.

My concluding part. My objective is not to increase fatalism or dhoti-sibbering. But I want to see realism. I hope to see joint planning by politicians and military. I want us as a nation to be realistic and more people to realize what we need to do. Till we don't measure we can never control.

And yes, for those of you bristling with feeling of what is this bania-giri when it comes to national pride, I am sorry that does not cut it. Remember what happened to the Soviet Union, what’s happening to the US.
Now, that we are over that, let’s figure out how this can be worked out:
First, let’s quantify. Where exact quantification is not possible, let’s make approximations, and debate them rationally. Don’t tell me that terrorist victim’s lives don’t have a value. It can be approximated as a value of the person’s life and the impact on our society’s well being. Obviously, there will be things that cannot be quantified, but at least debate it out. Put a framework for logic. Benefits can be an estimate of a peace dividend which opens up economy to faster growth. Even a 1% up tick on the economy for a USD 3 trillion base can change the numbers substantially.
Second, set this task to the military planners. Now that we have a CDS, put the different services to plan jointly. Select leaders and give them Staff roles. Let them go back and convince their services. In future, only people who have had successful staff roles in joint commands/ planning exercises should be considered for senior level roles.
Third, use these staff planning exercises and integrate MoD, DRDO, HAL, etc into this. Find ways how costs of key weapon systems can be cut down through local development. Fine you want 250 C17’s, localize and cut down costs by 20%. Same thing for towed artillery, MANPADS, IFV's.

I am sorry; this has dragged on for very long. But wanted to get this off my chest. And sorry for making hypothesizes that sound like armchair general, but our strategic community seriously needs to look at this.

Slightly OT and longish post (Part III) Alert OFF.

Sorry took up forum space by typing in three separate parts, but lost this three times today trying to type from memory directly and getting timed out.

Appreciate questions for further analysis and debate

[symontk]

Pakistan's FCNA - which roughly handles the area from Muzaffarabad, upto the Siachen Glacier, has 5 brigades. Against that, we have 28th Inf division in the Gurez area and 8th Mountain Div at Dras. That is the normal ORBAT for both sides. Any extra deployment for either side could not make much sense, as the terrain rules out any offensive operations unless there is overwhelming superiority.

Pakis have brought out reserves (not clear which), see tweet below (5 hours old). Other reports say additional 20,000 soldiers (that they can use somewhere else in the indo pak border). If that is the case (I am just speculating based on news), pakis are upto something big. You make another assumption that it is to help/coordinate with chinese (it could very well be defensive deployment from tsp angle), the two two axis readily available is Kargil Leh and Turtruk Leh. This time attack on Kargil will not be to take height and interdict NH1, but to make a breakthrough and dash to Leh. And they are willing to bet 20,000 additional men to it (meaning they are willing to put up with some 4000-5000 casualty). We have to change our deployment accordingly (of course verified with intelligence, we also do not have infinite troops, some sitting here for nothing means we cannot use them elsewhere). Even if this is TSP plan (I have no idea if this is), it looks very iffy, but good to have it spelt in this thread out.

https://twitter.com/Lone_wolf110/status ... 1418953728
"Pakistan has upgraded its defensive posturing along the Line of Control and has brought it reserve forces, Indian Army is prepared for any action to counter Pak misadventures": Lt Gen BS Raju, GOC of 15 Corps.

Reserves forces brought to border means an attack is planned from Pak side

[pankajs]

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diploma ... rise-india
Did China miscalculate the rise of India?

While Beijing may hope to thwart New Delhi’s efforts to catch up with China on infrastructure construction in border areas, the most challenging part for Beijing is to maintain the pressure without triggering an armed conflict, which would lead to the nightmare of a two-front war with both the US and India.

“Even if China could defeat and contain India through a war, the pay-off for China would remain minimal because it wouldn’t address China’s key external security challenges in the Pacific,” Sun said. “Instead, a breakdown in ties with New Delhi would only further expose Beijing in its primary theatre vis-à-vis the US.”

Even if China wins at LAC the payoff will be minimal negative.

1. China will loose the Indian public/market, the ONLY major market that will grow substantially over the next 20-30 years.

2. China will poke/prod into action its only neighbour that can grow and challenge its dominance in the long-term.

3. China will end up pushing the most pivotal power in Asia into the arms of a waiting America in the short-term.

a. All of the above will lead to a nightmarish scenario for China in the near, medium & long term. Who's bright idea was the latest pinprick?

b. China has to finesse its approach to India to enable it to {teach India a lesson / show India its place / keep India under stress} at the same time not push it far enough for it to walk over to the enemy camp.

c. However, fate had a different plan. The Galwan incident changed the game.

[vijayk]

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diploma ... rise-india
Did China miscalculate the rise of India?

After Beijing was reassured by New Delhi’s hesitation to embrace the Indo-Pacific concept and a proposed quadrilateral coalition with the US, Japan and Australia, Xi personally decided to elevate bilateral ties with India, through two informal summits with Modi in Wuhan in 2018 and in Chennai last year.
Strategically, it is in China’s interest to contain India’s rise by propping up Pakistan and other small nations in South Asia and thwarting Washington’s efforts to lure New Delhi into an anti-China alignment.

China was in no hurry to resolve the border dispute because it could be used as the “leverage to bog down India in the region and undermine its global potential”, she said.
.

[shaun]

My apologies if posted earlier

Retired and hurt PLA veterans could become a force against the Chinese Communist Party regime

By Jianli Yang - - Monday, June 29, 2020
ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian, during a regular press conference on June 22, was asked to confirm the number of casualties China had suffered in the recent clash (with India) in the Galwan Valley. Far from giving out the exact figure, he did not even acknowledge that there were casualties on the Chinese side, saying “I have no information to offer.”

Yet again, when the question was posed the next day (June 23), Mr. Zhao avoided giving any details from the Chinese side, but was quick to retort that Indian media reports claiming that at least 40 Chinese soldiers were killed was “false information.”

Incidentally, it was the same spokesman who gave (June 19) a detailed “step-by-step account of the Galwan clash (the Chinese version, of course) and China’s position on settling this incident.”

Even a week after the incident China has refused to publicly admit that there had been casualties on its side, while India paid last homage to its martyrs with full state honors.

What country does not even acknowledge the martyrdom of its uniformed soldiers at its borders, let alone pay them a respectable last homage? It is China, which reels under the fear that the admittance that it had lost troops, that too more in number than its opponent, could lead to such major trouble and domestic unrest, that the very regime of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) could be put at stake.

At the root of this fear is the simmering resentment running in the hearts and minds of 57 million veterans of China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

If this is the treatment meted out by the CCP regime to the martyrs of today, imagine the plight of PLA veterans, many of whom had participated in the bloody 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War or the Korean War. They have been holding frequent mass protests across China for years now, hoping to shame the government into recognizing its obligation toward those who battled along the country’s borders in the past.

All they seek is better health care, pensions and jobs, as a mark of due gratitude for their service to the nation. Shockingly however, the country which has the world’s largest army, does not have a central agency to administer pensions and other benefits to its veterans. Resultantly, they are forced to depend on local governments for pensions, medical care and other basic benefits

However, due to wide disparity in the financial standings of the local governments, there is no standard or uniformity in what the veterans receive. After having given their youth and shed blood for the country, the veterans find themselves left by the CCP to the mercy of often corrupt local officials, making them feel like “donkeys slaughtered after they are too old to work a grindstone.”

The ever-increasing veterans’ protests across the country alerted the CCP’s central leadership to take note and adopt corrective measures, lest it leads to widespread organized dissent and social unrest. In April 2018, the Chinese government inaugurated the first-ever Ministry of Veteran Affairs tasked with establishing a centralized system and policies on veteran affairs, including helping former military personnel find jobs.

However, there is still no clarity on who will pay them their benefits, and reemployment woes have only increased given PRC President Xi Jinping’s 2015 decision to majorly downsize and reorganize the army by cutting 300,000 posts.

In face of the potential of organized veteran protests to mobilize the current service men and women, in April of 2017, China’s Ministry of Defense, among its larger efforts of “military reform” orchestrated by Xi Jinping, terminated the old system of China’s army unit numbers and patches and adopted a new one. This change has made it more difficult for the protesting veterans to identify their affinities in the military forces and make appeals to them.

Separately, fearful of organized mass protests, the Chinese authorities have subjected those veterans found participating in protests to suppression, surveillance, detentions and even beatings. There have been several instances of mysterious deaths of veterans who have been actively petitioning the government for their dues. Media mentions of veteran issues are also strictly censored in the country.

All this is a far cry from the reverence these PLA veterans once elicited from the CCP, leading them to now even voice regret for having served the army. If such negative sentiments of the veterans is coupled with the rhetoric that the CCP leadership of today does not even acknowledge the lives laid by its soldiers at its borders, referring to the Galwan Valley causalities, the rank-and-file support for CCP leader President Xi Jinping, who is also chairman of the Central Military Commission, would be at grave threat.

It could also adversely impact Mr. Xi’s ambitious goal of modernizing the PLA by 2035 and to become a top-tier military by 2050, by failing to attract better qualified and highly motivated soldiers.

The PLA has long been a key pillar of the CCP’s power. If the sentiments of the serving PLA cadres are hurt and they get together with the millions of disgruntled veterans (which may be facilitated by those within the PLA who are already unhappy with Mr. Xi — and there are thousands of them, such as those who were hurt by Mr. Xi’s move to separate PLA from commercial activities), they could form a formidable force capable of challenging Mr. Xi’s leadership.

Significantly, the CCP leadership cannot afford to undermine the veterans’ potential to launch a collective and “armed” anti-regime action. Hence, the continuing incidence of veterans’ protests, despite significant coercive pressure and bureaucratic measures, is a source of intense anxiety for Xi Jinping and the CCP leadership.

• Jianli Yang is founder and president of Citizen Power Initiatives for China.

credit https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... e-a-force/

[nam]

Did China miscalculate the rise of India?

No. The Chinese have calculated very well. It is we who are delusional.

Both Pak & China are ideological entities. Countries have boundaries. Ideologies don't.

Pak would want us to make a Islamic country. Chinis would want us to make their vassal in their form, a commie state. Both are focused on their task, otherwise you wouldn't see two diametrically opposite ideologies have joined hands over one specific task: Us.

We are expecting them to behave like countries. As i said, we are delusional, which is why the first response we give when our enemies make their move: "they stabbed on our back".

[Deans]

paytm which has a fairly large cheeni shareholding is hoping to break into the Indian insurance space.

This should be stopped and paytm asked to divest the enemy shareholdings ASAP

PayTm is losing huge amounts of money. As long as its Chinese money its fine by me. Their competition is the UPI (BHIM) app of banks which is free.

[williams]

Slightly OT and longish post (Part III) Alert ON.

My concluding part. My objective is not to increase fatalism or dhoti-sibbering. But I want to see realism. I hope to see joint planning by politicians and military. I want us as a nation to be realistic and more people to realize what we need to do. Till we don't measure we can never control.

Mukesh Ji very good writeup on the logistics required to take over GB. The key take away from your post is that it is impossible for the Pakis to do the reverse. So then the question comes how a two-front war will succeed if the objective is to take over Ladakh or J&K for that matter. It seems more like one front war with troops tied up to defend the other front.

[Deans]

Now, that we are over that, let’s figure out how this can be worked out:
First, let’s quantify. Where exact quantification is not possible, let’s make approximations, and debate them rationally. Don’t tell me that terrorist victim’s lives don’t have a value. It can be approximated as a value of the person’s life and the impact on our society’s well being. Obviously, there will be things that cannot be quantified, but at least debate it out. Put a framework for logic. Benefits can be an estimate of a peace dividend which opens up economy to faster growth. Even a 1% up tick on the economy for a USD 3 trillion base can change the numbers substantially.
Second, set this task to the military planners. Now that we have a CDS, put the different services to plan jointly. Select leaders and give them Staff roles. Let them go back and convince their services. In future, only people who have had successful staff roles in joint commands/ planning exercises should be considered for senior level roles.
Third, use these staff planning exercises and integrate MoD, DRDO, HAL, etc into this. Find ways how costs of key weapon systems can be cut down through local development. Fine you want 250 C17’s, localize and cut down costs by 20%. Same thing for towed artillery, MANPADS, IFV's.

I am sorry; this has dragged on for very long. But wanted to get this off my chest. And sorry for making hypothesizes that sound like armchair general, but our strategic community seriously needs to look at this.

Slightly OT and longish post (Part III) Alert OFF.

Appreciate questions for further analysis and debate[/i]

Mukesh ji, I'm glad you posted this. I would personally have liked to reply to all the posts of liberating GB / POK or Tibet as `neither possible nor desirable', for pretty much the same reasons you elaborated on.
There is a great deal we can do to harm Pak and China, even with all the deficiencies we have, but this is not one of them.

[Philip]

Let me tell you about China's deception againsi India. Mao's fords after annexing Tibet.Apart from his saying that " Tibet is the palm.After seizing the palm we must get the 5 fingers too." Meaning Aksai Chin,Nepal,Sikkim,Bhutan and NEFA now Ar.Pr.
Conversations between the Chinese and Pakis.
Mao told us ( India) that as we had no major problems between us he would tell his army not to shoot at us. The Chin army told us so. We happily brlieved it and thinned our forces.Mao said he immediately sent in
three and-a-half divisions,invaded ,taught us a lesson and went back. Deception,deception,deception,the middle name of China.

So gents,so much for these grand newsbytes about China withdrawing which our telly channels and their hyperventilating anchors will crow as a great victory! Just wait for the next Chin surprise and it won't be the kind of party you imagine. The fireworks won't be for sheer entertainment either.

The action being taken to stock up for the winter with food supplies several times over than actual reqs. for the troops is a sound idea,as XI simply cannot be trusted. We must maintain the pressure on China on all fronts ,especially the economic,with each day bringing another act barring Chin cos.,goods,etc. from entering India. Ban by ban,,we must de-addict ourselves from the
Chin eco. opiate and in thd process strengthen our own self-reliance. Militarily right now only continuing to beef up forces and paras ,at least matching them man for man at the hotspots, presenting no easy spot on the LAC where they could ingress by surprise as they did at Galwan.

PS: I am watching the IT channel right now. Some facts.In '62 they withdrew from Galwan and 90+ days later the war of '62 was started by them. So will we yet again lower our guard? We should instead beef up our forces even more! It reminds me of how Stalin treated the Germans who complained to him about anti- German activities that Sov.intel where behind.Stalin pretended he knew nothing about it and would order his side to stop any such activities if at all it was the Soviets who were responsible.After the ambassador left he supposedly called Felix Dzerzhinsky,the legendary head of the Cheka,the Sov. secret service ,and told him to double the trouble for the Germans! I say bugger the Chins again and againanx again. China is our mortalcenemy who can never be trusted and only a massive Indian military posture puttint IT on the defensive that will brinv it to heel. That too for us to never lower our guard and dlways keep our powder dry.

[Rs_singh]

Let me tell you about China's deception againsi India. Apart from his saying that " Tibet is the palm.After seizing the palm we must get the 5 fingers too." Meaning Aksai Chin,Nepal,Sikkim,Bhutan and NEFA now Ar.Pr.
Militarily right now only continuing to beef up forces and paras ,at least matching them man for man at the hotspots, presenting no easy spot on the LAC where they could ingress by surprise as they did at Galwan.

An old NCO used to say, show me 5 ways you will advance and the enemy will show you a 6th. PLA thrives on deception and surprise. They have the initiative and have us reacting to them for the last two weeks.

I also agree with you that this talk of withdrawal is nonsense. I’m waiting for them to open a new front so to speak, somewhere in the East, this time.

[Rs_singh]

Did China miscalculate the rise of India?

As i said, we are delusional, which is why the first response we give when our enemies make their move: "they stabbed on our back".

I said exactly the same thing in my very first posts on this forum. Couldn’t agree more.

[Rs_singh]

I dont thinks its tanks, its mostly Tube or Rocket Artillery or Ammo stores.

Neither, nor are they tank pens. They are clustered HAS typical soviet style. Check out any VVS frontline airfield. Some of our own older AFS also have the same structures with a feeder road.

[madhu]

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
China has caused great damage to the United States and the rest of the World!
5:58 PM · Jul 6, 2020·

No idea what he mean by this. But it is good for india especially during border standoff.

[Cyrano]

Chinese FM Wang Yi is holding talks with NSA Ajit Doval, bypassing EAM S Jaishankar who would be his normal counterpart.

A cheap tactic to create division within our establishment, but what he may not have realised is that the Indian side works as a team, and Doval is a way more harder nut to crack in a such negotiation than Jaishankar who is by no means a pushover.

[Y I Patel]

However, you haven't addressed my concern about the existing Chinese ability to concentrate forces, even armor along the Indus River valley. To prevent them from over-runing Demchok, we have no option but to fight them with armor there. As far as getting the armor there, I notice some roads and interesting installations from the Ulming La meeting the Demchok-Fukche road north west of Demchok. These are shielded from Chinese observation as far as I can tell.

As an aside, when I look at the "last-mile" infrastructure that the Chinese have built up (and the photos I see are only as recent as 2010) compared to ours, I am saddened that we didn't use the "peaceful" border management protocol to do some aggressive build up of our own. It really is a shame and criminal negligence on our part, leaving our forces to deal with such a logistical asymmetry.

@Anoop

Preventing Demchok from getting overrun - we still have it not for lack of Chinese attempts to wrest it, but because we never ceded the heights behind it, right And now you are beginning to appreciate our buildup due to infra development in and close to Umling La...

I have to say that a close study of the geography has given me new found admiration for the sheer tenacity that India has demonstrated in just hanging on to its claims post 1962

[schinnas]

Chinese FM Wang Yi is holding talks with NSA Ajit Doval, bypassing EAM S Jaishankar who would be his normal counterpart.

A cheap tactic to create division within our establishment, but what he may not have realised is that the Indian side works as a team, and Doval is a way more harder nut to crack in a such negotiation than Jaishankar who is by no means a pushover.

A simple Google search would have helped you. This is not a ministerial meeting. Even before Jaishankar became EAM, Doval has been acting as Special Representative for border talks with China and that arrangement has continued. Nothing new here.

It is better for India for the talks to be done by a security conscious person than a diplomat.

[SSridhar]

Chinese FM Wang Yi is holding talks with NSA Ajit Doval, bypassing EAM S Jaishankar who would be his normal counterpart.

A cheap tactic to create division within our establishment, but what he may not have realised is that the Indian side works as a team, and Doval is a way more harder nut to crack in a such negotiation than Jaishankar who is by no means a pushover.

No, not correct. The talks are at Special Representatives (SRs) level. Wang Yi happens to be both FM & SR for China.

[Cyrano]

I think you are right SSridhar. My bad.

[vijayk]

Brahma Chellaney @Chellaney
Jul 6
This is the third round of "disengagement." The first round ended with bloody clashes, with India crying deceit. The second round only yielded two new PLA encroachments. Now, in the third round, note key differences in the Chinese and Indian statements, including China's charges.

Brahma Chellaney @Chellaney Jul 6
Missing from China's statement is India's assertion that both sides agreed to "strictly respect and observe the line of actual control" and "not take any unilateral action to alter the status quo." China also doesn't use India's terms "de-escalation," "earliest," "expeditiously."

Brahma Chellaney @Chellaney Jul 6
China, underpinning its freshly minted claim to Galwan Valley after encroaching there, has alluded to India as the aggressor and asserted that it will "continue firmly safeguarding our territorial sovereignty." Simply put, China is saying it will defend its new territorial gains.

Brahma Chellaney @Chellaney

The earlier disengagement process became a ruse for PLA to encroach on two new Indian areas: Depsang Y-Junction; and Galwan's PP-14. Armed with greater leverage, PLA is now said to have pulled back from PP-14—but after making the Indian side move back from known Indian territory.

[chetak]

Chinese FM Wang Yi is holding talks with NSA Ajit Doval, bypassing EAM S Jaishankar who would be his normal counterpart.

A cheap tactic to create division within our establishment, but what he may not have realised is that the Indian side works as a team, and Doval is a way more harder nut to crack in a such negotiation than Jaishankar who is by no means a pushover.

just as we cannot choose who will talk to whom on the chinese side, they also cannot do so.

Doval has been given this task specifically.

this is a procedural issue that has been decided after a lot of discussions.

[pankajs]

IIRC, Special rep. on Boundary from the Indian side is NSA Ajit Doval and FM Wang Yi from the Chinese side.

Makes sense from them to discuss boundary related issues.

[Rs_singh]

IIRC, Special rep. on Boundary from the Indian side is NSA Ajit Doval and FM Wang Yi from the Chinese side.

Makes sense from them to discuss boundary related issues.

Yes, this is the same mindset that was raking up their maj gen talking to own lt gen. Making a controversy out of a non issue.

[chetak]

why did India not do this

Ken Juster@USAmbIndia·11h

On behalf of the U.S. Government & the American people, we congratulate His Holiness @DalaiLama on his 85th Birthday.

It is our privilege to work with His Holiness to advance the values that Americans & Tibetans share. Stay tuned for my remarks as Chief Guest.

[vijayk]

So according to CHellany ...

Chinese CORONA PIN G is staying put in Depsang Y-Junction; He is going back in Galwan's PP-14

But he is forcing us to move back in our own territory ...

[Rs_singh]

So according to CHellany ...

Chinese CORONA PIN G is staying put in Depsang Y-Junction; He is going back in Galwan's PP-14

But he is forcing us to move back in our own territory ...

Well according to what they agreed and images in “osint” both sides are moving back 2km from clash points, specifically in the Galwan valley. This implies we are moving back in own territory and they are moving back in claimed territory. This is clear from the words used in either official statements as well. Ours is reconciliatory and their’s is accusatory. Take what you will, this is far from over.

[chetak]

this is the point that all of us must internalize

Dr David Frawley@davidfrawleyved·13h

China’s technological and economic efforts to dominate India, combined with attempts to subvert academia and media, and support for Naxalites and Maoists, must be exposed and countered on all levels. It is not just a border clash that is going on.

[Prem Kumar]

^ Agreed with Rs_singh. As long as they have not moved back to their April positions, its premature to declare this as any sort of victory. And even if they do, there is no telling that they won't do a 1962 redux.

Not sure what we gain by continuously signaling that "we want peace, de-escalation & reconciliation at the soonest", especially when the enemy is sitting on your neck and isn't keen on any of these

[Cyrano]

If there is so much difference between Indian & Chinese statements, then how much the future Chinese actions will correspond to the Indian side's understanding and expectations is anybody's guess.

More rough waters ahead.

[chetak]

for people questioning the Modi xi meetings, the Indian establishment wasn't just naively 'talking peace' with xi jinping at wuhan, mamallapuram and ahmedabad.

India has quietly tripled its spending on roads and infrastructure along the china border in the past four years, constructing at a pace
faster than ever done before.

[nishant.gupta]

Sir, check around 800 meters NE for 4 more.



All have come post 2012 before 2019. Before that, it was just barren land.

Rough calculation puts them at around 15 meters wide each. Assuming the shed next to it is around 3-3.5 meters then the depth also seems to be greater than 5 meters based on shadows falling. Theoretically good enough to fit tanks also!

How many tanks can you fit in there and what is the strength of a Chinese tank battalion?

Sir no intention of commenting on number of tanks. I did say "theoretically" only based on size of opening and wiki uncle's inputs on size of various chunk tanks. More knowledgeable people can make more educated assessments.