The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Senior officers loyal to erstwhile President Jiang Zemin do not want India-China relations normalised.
MADHAV NALAPAT NEW DELHI | 27th Apr 2013
Jiang Zemin
enerals still loyal to former Chinese President Jiang Zemin are believed to be behind the recent 19-kilometre incursion into territory that has been in the control of India since 1947. This is a barren strip of land near the Burtse army post in Ladakh, which is south of Depsang and the Daulat Beg Oldi airstrip, which was brought back to operational readiness in 2008 and at nearly 17,000 feet is the highest military airstrip on the globe. Information reaching Delhi indicates that "a Major-General based in Chengdu Military District" is responsible for the Chinese side launching a repeat of Jawaharlal Nehru's 1960-62 "forward policy" (i.e. of small armed pickets moving into territory controlled by the other side and setting up makeshift bases there). Since early April, PLA units reporting to senior officers loyal to the Jiang Zemin Group within the Chinese Communist Party have set up three tents, in which at present three dozen soldiers are sheltering. These are being monitored by Chinese helicopters and long-range satellite surveillance system, and are designed to provoke an armed border clash for the first time since the 1986 Sumdurong Chu incursion by China, which too was masterminded by elements hostile to Deng Xiaoping's reconciliatory policy towards India.
Jiang Zemin has considerable influence within that section of the military leadership that is known to have substantial funds abroad, as evidenced by family staying or studying in (NATO-bloc) countries. Although former President Hu Jintao sought to cleanse the PLA of such corrupt elements, "the power of the Jiang group meant that he had only very limited success during the decade (2002-2012) that he was in power". Hu's successor Xi Jinping is known to be similarly opposed to the culture of greed and graft spawned under the Jiang years (1991-2001) and is also facing resistance to his clean-up efforts from those unwilling to give up their extra-legal privileges.
Both President Xi as well as Premier Li Keqiang have made a close strategic relationship with India a priority. India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was the second foreign leader (out of two) personally called by Premier Li on the first day of his assumption of office, and planning is on to make India the new Chinese PM's first international port of call in the third week of next month. Following on the success of Huawei in the telecoms market and Chinese power companies in energy plants, Chinese companies are looking to India to sell infrastructure equipment and projects. "Should tensions grow, Huawei may be once again barred from the Indian market, while Chinese companies would be barred from energy, finance and infrastructure sectors," a senior official worried at PLA activism pointed out, adding that "already China has lost more than $120 billion of (additional) Japanese investment and may lose an equal amount in the India market" should the Jiang group have its way in racheting up tensions along China's periphery. "The Jiang Group wants to sabotage Li's India visit, which is why they have got friendly elements in the PLA to launch a Chinese version of the Forward Policy just weeks before Li's scheduled arrival," claim sources tracking developments in China. They add that "the effort to insert troops into territory that has always been in Indian control follows the continued refusal by Jiang-era hardliners in Beijing to agree to a transparency-generating mechanism about its four Brahmaputra dam projects". These sources point out that "both the Pakistan as well as the US lobbies within the PLA are eager to sabotage cooperation with India", and that Xi Jinping's open call for military to military cooperation between Beijing and Delhi has been followed by efforts at a coordinated hard line towards the Taliban in Afghanistan. Such moves have alarmed the Pakistan and US lobbies within China, who are both working through their agents to sabotage the Xi Jinping reset in relations with Delhi, these sources claim.
Trackers of Chinese developments point out that "several so-called ultra-nationalist elements are in fact secretly working at the behest of countries hostile to China, and use ultra-patriotic rhetoric only as camouflage". Several blog posts by "super-patriotic elements in China use language that is racist and xenophobic, thereby presenting a negative picture of Chinese society to foreign observers". India is not the only theatre where pro-Jiang elements are using their friends in the PLA to ensure that Beijing deviates from the Peaceful Rise policy of Deng Xiaoping and Hu Jintao, these sources point out. Such military activism has led to tensions across the eastern and southern periphery of China, from Japan to the Philippines to Vietnam and now India. "Xi Jinping has the potential to be as great a harbinger of economic growth and social and international stability as Deng. However, he is being sabotaged from within by self-proclaimed ultra-nationalists with big foreign bank accounts," said a source familiar with the inner dynamics of Chinese politics. However, the majority view is that "with backing from Premier Li, very soon President Xi will rein in the hotheads," thereby allowing Delhi and Beijing to resume the path towards normalisation first mapped out by Deng Xiaoping and Rajiv Gandhi in 1988. Their expectation is that the present sabotage of a Sino-Indian reset via a new forward policy in Ladakh will subside within the first week of next month, thereby creating conditions for a successful visit by Premier Li, who is being "awaited with warmth" in Delhi by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
rsangram wrote:
The fundamental answer here is to begin the long and arduous task of rebuilding ourselves as a nation. There are no shortcuts and it is high time we begin. If we start now, our generation of course will get no rewards for it, maybe the next two generations will not either (other than the mental satisfaction that we did our best and we did good for our future generations) . Maybe, if we succeed in our endeavor and dont get devoured by others in the meantime, our third or fourth generations will start reaping the benefits. This is how nations are made, not through short term "Jugad", which has become our national motto.
Honesty and integrity are such attractive qualities, that everyone wants to be around people who possess them. Nations would like to align with an honest people. Adversaries will have respect and fear of an honest people. In fact, I take part of what I said earlier back, that it will take generations for us to realize the benefits if we start now. In one respect, if we just become a more honest nation and people, some of the benefits will be immediate and tangible. Scum such as Chinese and Islamists will immediately get a little intimidated and back off some, merely by seeing that India with all its other qualities now has hard work, honesty, integrity and sacrifice in its arsenal.
It will have to start with true Indian history and truth about India and its culture.
What message does this send to the Chinese and the world ?
And RohitVas, what you are stating is the obvious, that it is GOI and not the Indian Army which is the decision maker. So what ? Eklavya's point was that the decision makers should act. If you dont think they should act, then please state your reasons. You did list one that there is very little Army presence there and that it was the Government which signed agreements which lead to this low presence. That is A reason, but not a justification, is it ? So, did the government do a wise thing ?
Yo! hold it there Mr. Keyboard Commando!!!
Did you read my post and the drift therein? Can you tell me where have I said that GOI should not act? You're preaching to the choir here...please go back and read my post again; in fact there are couple on similar lines.
Sometime back there was a news report of IA having moved 70 Infantry Bde of 3 Div from reserve to Dhemchok Sector, thereby reducing the AOR of 114 Bde. In the light of present situation, I think an analysis of Indian Army position in the sector would be of good reference. I have made some changes based on information contained in recent article by Ajai Shukla.
Well, to fully understand the situation, we need to pick up thread from from the past. Allow me to indulge in some history.
3 Infantry Division started with 114 and 70 Infantry Bdes. 121 (I) Bde was in place by 1971 war and was placed under 3 Infantry Division.
102 Bde ( it was earlier called Sector 26) was raised in 1986 and has the AOR between Turtok in west to DBO in east. During the same period (1986), 28 Infantry Division was raised for west Ladakh (Kargil Sector). 121(I) bde was placed under it and 53 Infantry Bde of 28 Division became sector reserve for Ladakh.
However, in 1991, after the insurgency heated in Kashmir, 28 Division along with 53 Infantry Bde was inducted to south of Zoji La and today guards the important Baramula -Uri-Kanzalwam Sector. But this movement meant that Ladakh was w/o reserve of any sort.
Further, after 1993 Peace and Tranquility Agreement with China, 70 Bde was moved away from deployment on the LAC and marked as reserve for the sector. 114 Infantry Bde ended with the huge AOR from Chang-Chenmo (north of Pangong Tso) to Dhemchok with this development.
In mid 90s, even 70 Infantry Bde was moved into Valley for CI Ops leaving Ladakh w/o reserves of any sort. 70 Infantry Bde HQ was inducted back just before Kargil and had not made the complete movement when Kargil broke out.
8 Mountain Division moved to Kargil sector with 3 x Mountain Bdes - these were the 56/192/79 Mountain Bdes. After Kargil, the Division stayed put in the region.
Which brings me to the question - Did 8 Mountain Division absorb 121 (I) Infantry Bde? If this is the case, then western Ladakh has 4 x infantry bdes and this raises couple of possibilities.
The above question has now been answered by this information in article by Shukla:
In Ladakh, too, India is thickening its presence on the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the de facto border with China. The arrival of 8 Mountain Division in Kargil during the Kargil War freed a full brigade for the LAC. With militancy reducing in Kashmir, another brigade moved out to Chushul. Landing grounds were activated in Nyoma and DBO and roads started coming up to connect isolated posts.
So, the situation on the ground is as follows.
- 3 Infantry Division has 102/114/70 Infantry Bdes under it. We know 102 Infantry Bde is fully committed. The news about 70 Bde moving to Dhemchok in 2009 (along with 114 Bde at Chushul) means that 3 Division did not have reserve formation.
- In the light of Shukla's article, it is likely that 121(I) Infantry Bde has been absorbed by 8 Mountain Division. So, one Infantry Bde of the 8 Mountain Division is available under 14 Corps as reserve.
- Raising of new Infantry Bde will add another reserve bde for the sector.
- And (I) Armd Bde will add teeth to the forces on the ground.
"Please write the name of the region carefully as Tibet Autonomous Region of Peoples Republic of China, as it has wide international connotations," Mukherjee said.
"Please write the name of the region carefully as Tibet Autonomous Region of Peoples Republic of China, as it has wide international connotations," Mukherjee said.
Okay. They are still 19 KM in our territory. Siachen type piss zone won't do. Full Independence onlee.
CT Alert: could it be that chinese are in a fix now? i read somewhere that soon the 40 odd pla soldiers will run out of ration. And it is PLA that is seeking flag meeting now. Khurshid was even requested by chinese to prepone his visit, but GOI refused any high level political contact till 9th. by then the occupation of post will be unsustainable.
I'll grab that fig leaf and hope it grows into a full suit of armour i.e. turns out to be true. The earlier news that Sudorong chu is no longer with India doesnt give much confidence.
viv wrote:I'll grab that fig leaf and hope it grows into a full suit of armour i.e. turns out to be true. The earlier news that Sudorong chu is no longer with India doesnt give much confidence.
Remember the BJP MP complaining in 07 time frame that China has encroached, seems they were true.
Start with the issue of Chinese “incursions”. Much of the problem stems from the fact that the two sides have different notions of where the Line of Actual Control (LAC) lies.
The LAC is supposed to divide the areas that are under Indian and Chinese control since the end of the 1962 war. The line, however, was not mutually agreed upon by the two sides.
This is in contrast to similar lines with Pakistan in Kashmir. Both the Cease Fire Line of 1949 and the Line of Control of 1972 were drawn up by formal agreements between the two countries. There was no such agreement on the LAC both because the war ended with a unilateral ceasefire by China and because subsequent efforts by third parties to mediate ended in failure.
In the Ladakh sector, these differences in perception are compounded due to another reason. During the war of 1962, China occupied territory beyond the line that it had been claiming in previous negotiations over the boundary. The issue of where exactly Chinese forces stood after the war remains contested.
The areas where Chinese intrusions occur are claimed by both sides as lying on their side of the LAC. The Chinese are perfectly sincere when they claim that their forces are operating on their side of the LAC — just as the Indians are when they claim that the Chinese have intruded into the their side of the Line.
This simple fact seems to elude most of our commentators in the media. This is all the more surprising because this problem has been around for over fifty years now. Daulat Beg Oldi, the focal point of the current hubbub, was an area of contention even before the 1962 war. Such places are likely to remain contentious until there is a boundary agreement between India and China. Till such an agreement is reached, both countries will continue to send troops into disputed areas, if only to keep their formal territorial claims alive. An Indian army chief is on the record stating that “the Chinese have a different perception of the Line of Actual Control, as do we. When they come up to their perception, we call it incursion and likewise they do.”
Recognising this reality, the two countries have concluded agreements on maintaining peace and tranquillity along the border. The agreement concluded in 1996 admits that both sides have differing perceptions of the LAC. To deal with such incursions, these agreements allow the two sides to seek clarifications through diplomatic channels, including direct communication between their foreign offices. Besides, there are periodic “flag meetings” between military commanders to sort out local differences. These arrangements have worked well in the past. There is no reason why they shouldn’t now.
CONSPIRACY THEORIES
Equally mistaken is the notion that every move by China is part of some larger plan to box India into a corner. If our experts are to be believed, Beijing has worked out its strategy for the next thirty years while New Delhi can barely think thirty days ahead.
The idea that great powers work to some predetermined grand strategy flies in the face of all international history. It is certainly not true of China, which has more than its share of extraordinary blunders.
Think of the Great Leap Forward and the break with their most important ally, the Soviet Union. Consider the more recent example of China’s position in East Asia. Until a few years ago, the smaller East Asian countries were tireless in their praise for China’s “peaceful rise”.
But Beijing’s swagger and assertiveness over the last couple of years has not only driven these countries into the arms of the United States but also resulted in the announcement of an American “pivot” to Asia. The Middle Kingdom can also be the Muddle Kingdom. Too much long-term strategy should not be read into every Chinese move. Not least because it fuels the perception that China and India are locked in rivalry and are bound to conflict. The two countries are, of course, strategic competitors in certain domains. But in other key areas their interests do overlap.
The Chinese do not need to "invade" India any longer.The eunuchs in Delhi have already accepted Chinese suzerainity over the Indian subcontinent by the asinine reactions from our MEA,HM and PM.With such idiots,cretins and morons at the helm of our foreign and defence policies,we have already abdicated our sovereignity.Just watch and see how HH the Dalai lama and the Tibetan diaspora will be locked up during the visit of the Chinese honcho ,as he receives "tribute" from his vassal state the UPA-2,a country that was once India! If the BJP claim to be able to walk the talk,they should boycott the visit and organise demos across the nation against the Chinese.
Sri wrote:CT Alert: could it be that chinese are in a fix now? i read somewhere that soon the 40 odd pla soldiers will run out of ration. And it is PLA that is seeking flag meeting now. Khurshid was even requested by chinese to prepone his visit, but GOI refused any high level political contact till 9th. by then the occupation of post will be unsustainable.
Where did you read about Chinese running out of food, PLA seeking flag meeting, Chinese requesting preponement of Khurshid's visit etc?
Didn't know the Lok Sabha was going on.
In the house, Maulana Mulayam was shouting on top of his voice against loose handling of the Chinese incursion.
Terming China as the bigges threat he asked the Govt. to give a free hand to the Army in dealing with the Chinese strictly.
<SNIP>Daulat Beg Oldi, the focal point of the current hubbub, was an area of contention even before the 1962 war. Such places are likely to remain contentious until there is a boundary agreement between India and China. Till such an agreement is reached, both countries will continue to send troops into disputed areas, if only to keep their formal territorial claims alive. <SNIP>
During the 9162 war, PLA committed a Regiment+ against a lone Indian Army battalion (5 J&K Militia). Indian forces were spread in penny packets and without any secure line of communication or logistical supply chain. Air-Maintenance was attempted but was not very successful.
So, when the fighting broke out, IA resisted to the point it could and then withdrew. Had China wanted to occupy DBO and KK Pass and the adjoining areas, it would have done so forthwith. But it did not. All the present claims are an after thought designed put India on back-foot.
Recognising this reality, the two countries have concluded agreements on maintaining peace and tranquillity along the border. The agreement concluded in 1996 admits that both sides have differing perceptions of the LAC. To deal with such incursions, these agreements allow the two sides to seek clarifications through diplomatic channels, including direct communication between their foreign offices. Besides, there are periodic “flag meetings” between military commanders to sort out local differences. These arrangements have worked well in the past. There is no reason why they shouldn’t now.
The author makes the Chinese look as innocent babes in the wood. The fact is that Chinese have gone beyond even their levels of belligerence in the past. This is not some patrol loosing its way...This is a premeditated incursion and no amount of working mechanisms will resolve this w/o word from the top in Beijing.
This is the view of Raki Nala, looking towards the northeast from the most likely location of the Chinese camp (see http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 3#p1447653). Hope they have already blocked access to prevent resupply.
Furthermore, the saddle to the east of the camp should also be blocked, since it would be possible to come from that side on foot.
Virendra wrote:In the house, Maulana Mulayam was shouting on top of his voice against loose handling of the Chinese incursion.
Terming China as the bigges threat he asked the Govt. to give a free hand to the Army in dealing with the Chinese strictly.
He would then make a fat profit and support Congress Govt on all issues
Austin wrote:He would then make a fat profit and support Congress Govt on all issues
Pah , all these are local incursions onlee. Theek hai? Parliament should function and should discuss serious issues like malnutrition in you know where.
Chinese troops put up another tent in Ladakh:
Showing no signs of withdrawing from the Indian territory after their incursion in Ladakh two weeks ago, Chinese troops have erected an additional tent in the Daulat Beg Oldi sector raising to five the number of such structures in the area.
The Chinese troops have also deployed Molosser dogs to keep a vigil, according to latest reports today from the siteof incursion, 70 km south of Burtse in Ladakh division. Thereports said the Chinese side have increased the number of tents to five.
I thought there was only one camp so far, rediff live is reporting 5 camps now.
Chinese troops put up another tent in Ladakh:
Showing no signs of withdrawing from the Indian territory after their incursion in Ladakh two weeks ago, Chinese troops have erected an additional tent in the Daulat Beg Oldi sector raising to five the number of such structures in the area.
The Chinese troops have also deployed Molosser dogs to keep a vigil, according to latest reports today from the siteof incursion, 70 km south of Burtse in Ladakh division. Thereports said the Chinese side have increased the number of tents to five.
I thought there was only one camp so far, rediff live is reporting 5 camps now.
My colleagues discussing the same just now suggested shifting the entire Parliament to Ladakh in tents.
The bewildered Chinese won't be able to harm the political leadership. If they did, well that also would be a win win for the fed up janata
Jokes apart, they know that they can't press ahead now (in front of IA). So they're building up and trying their best to escalate things.
Come on GoI, what now ??
Atleast put 2 more tents there you sissies.
GoI : "Oh is it, I'm so sorry I didn't know. We thought we were all getting together for picnic in on man's land !!
Uh .. well thanks for informing. I'll see what I can do to withdraw."
By the way, some articles were flying around suggesting that both the governments were behaving rationally and issuing reasonable statements on the issue and bla bla.
So the fifth tent is in good spirit to the same bonhomie ?? ... whatever
The report said aggressive patrolling by Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) had managed to push back intruding Chinese troops back by at least nine km before they settled down at the present location which is nearly 18 km inside Indian territory in the DBO Sector. The sector is at an altitude of 17,000 feet.
The report said aggressive patrolling by Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) had managed to push back intruding Chinese troops back by at least nine km before they settled down at the present location which is nearly 18 km inside Indian territory in the DBO Sector. The sector is at an altitude of 17,000 feet.
That means the Chinese were 27 kms inside!
Yup, That is correct. They came in 30 kms initially and apparently have been pushed out by 12 kms. What we need to see really is what the IA is doing. Babus from PMO can do appeasement, but I am sure there are track II communication channels with the commanders on what to do with these chinese insects.
So far for the last 2 week, they have played the game like "lets wait and see how long the chinese stay put". By now they must have realized that the families of these 40 soldiers are at gun point in some camp in inner mongolia. So there are no way they are going back on their own. I expect to start seeing some aggressiveness from IA in a week.
harbans wrote:From the link:
That means the Chinese were 27 kms inside!
Yup, That is correct. They came in 30 kms initially and apparently have been pushed out by 12 kms. What we need to see really is what the IA is doing. Babus from PMO can do appeasement, but I am sure there are track II communication channels with the commanders on what to do with these chinese insects.
IMHO that story sounds inaccurate ... sounds far fetched that a Chinese patrol would be traveling fully loaded with supplies and while being pushed back suddenly decide to set up a camp. I would expect it would be a more planned operation. The location given ("70km south of Burtse") also contradicts earlier reports.
Last edited by Pranav on 29 Apr 2013 22:05, edited 1 time in total.
- Unpalatable border home truths and progress that annoy Beijing-baiters
K.P. NAYAR
(From left) Li Keqiang, Manmohan Singh and Shivshankar Menon
Washington, April 28: Resolute in a weekend decision to prioritise the totality of Sino-Indian relations instead of overreacting to shifting control of tracts of wasteland in Ladakh, the political leadership in New Delhi has taken charge of resolving the latest land dispute with Beijing.
The Prime Minister’s description of the new Chinese encampments in disputed areas of Daulat Beg Oldi as a “localised problem” was the highlight on the issue on Saturday. More significant, in fact, has been a moderated change in defence minister A.K. Antony’s position since the incursions in Burthe came to light a week ago.
Antony took a hard line on Monday when he told reporters outside Parliament that “we are taking every action to protect our interest… we will take every step to protect our interest”. His firmness was in line with the public mood when full facts about the Ladakh situation were not known.
Two days later, Antony said in Bangalore that the government would take all measures to protect the territorial integrity of the country. The implication was that India would reclaim what it considered to be its territory from Chinese occupation by whatever means necessary.
The defence minister was briefed on Thursday by Gen. Bikram Singh after the army chief visited Jammu and Kashmir and reviewed the situation first hand with Northern Army commander Lt Gen. K.T. Parnaik.
A significant mellowing was evident in Antony’s attitude the following day when he told reporters, again outside Parliament, that “negotiations and consultations are going on at various levels to find out a peaceful solution to the Chinese incursion issue”.
A day earlier, external affairs minister Salman Khurshid had urged that the developments in Ladakh “should not spill over into a larger spectrum”. Most significant of all was Khurshid’s iteration that he would go to Beijing as scheduled on May 9. He said: “We have our normal contacts. Things can be resolved long before I get to China.”
Behind such a reassuring change from Monday, when there was talk of a “1962-like situation” between New Delhi and Beijing, and Saturday, when hopes were raised of status quo ante, is the remarkable story of how a government — even one as besieged as the UPA — managed to salvage what is potentially its biggest diplomatic success this year, perhaps of its entire second five-year tenure.
When China’s new Prime Minister Li Keqiang decided that he would make New Delhi his very first destination for a foreign trip next month, Beijing was sending a clear message to New Delhi. It was not lost on South Block because according to protocol, it is now Manmohan Singh’s turn to visit China.
So India told China that Singh would visit Beijing in June and fulfil the demands of protocol. But Li’s office insisted that, no, the Prime Minister, who has now been in office for only six weeks, wanted to personally underline the importance he was giving to India.
The idea of back-to-back visits by Li and Singh to each other’s capitals, which is rare even among allies, alarmed China-baiters, of whom there is no shortage in India’s security, defence and foreign policy establishments.
Li’s remarkable decision must be seen in the context of an equally remarkable meeting between Singh and Xi Jinping, China’s new President since March 14, in Durban within days of Xi assuming office.
At that meeting, Xi talked about the border problem with India hinting at “a fair, rational solution… as soon as possible”. Chinese leaders don’t talk off the cuff. They never make statements without due deliberation. Previous Chinese presidential statements have been very different, about the border dispute being a legacy of history and of difficulties in resolving the dispute.
Xi’s optimism offered the first hint that national security adviser Shivshankar Menon’s years-long efforts on the border question with the Chinese had made progress after a long period of stalemate.
Then came the news of the new Chinese Prime Minister’s insistence that he wanted to make his first foreign trip to India even going against protocol.
Sources in New Delhi confirmed such progress although they insisted that the border problem was nowhere near any final solution. They refused to prematurely share any details. A leap in Sino-Indian relations and light at the end of the tunnel on the vexed border dispute have the potential to shape the Prime Minister’s legacy in foreign policy before the UPA heads into a general election.
Given this background, there is surmise in South Block about the reasons for China staying put in the areas of the Line of Actual Control in Ladakh instead of the decades-old practice of coming and going through the disputed territory just as India does from time to time.
One view is that the Chinese wanted to test how much the political leadership on Raisina Hill was aware of the ground situation in Ladakh and how much of these fine and elaborate details were being shared by the army’s Northern Command with South Block, which also houses Antony’s office. This assumed relevance in the context of Gen. V.K. Singh’s lone-ranger one-upmanship against the civilian leadership of the defence ministry.
Antony, it is understood, is now aware that India’s permanent encampments have gradually inched forward east and north of the Siachen glacier, that India has built three air strips on disputed territory and that it has beefed up its positions to such an extent that its forces can now monitor movements on the Karakoram highway and has a critical eye on roads that connect to Sinkiang.
No Indian will fault the army for doing this, but these are exactly activities that inflame public discourse in India whenever the Chinese are accused of doing so on their part in disputed territories.
On the Indian side, of course, no one wants to talk about these in public and the Chinese themselves euphemistically refer to them as their “concerns”.
But by encamping in Burthe, Beijing has forced a whole gamut of issues along the Line of Actual Control into the open and the political leadership will now be forced to discuss them during the back-to-back prime ministerial visits.
An equally strong surmise is that, in part, the Chinese have escalated the dispute now to influence the choice of India’s next foreign secretary. S. Jaishankar, the ambassador in Beijing, is one of the contenders to succeed Ranjan Mathai in a few months and his mettle, leanings and preferences will be tested in the current crisis.
The Chinese have done this before. When Nirupama Rao was ambassador in Beijing and was similarly in the running for the top diplomat’s job, the Chinese created a crisis by infiltrating the embassy, trapping the station chief of the Research and Analysis Wing. Several other staffers were casualties of that episode.
Rao, however, came out unscathed, proved her worth and went on to head South Block. If the political leadership had not stepped into the Ladakh dispute in full force, Jaishankar would have borne the brunt of the latest crisis and been tested before he heads out of Beijing to New Delhi or elsewhere soon.
muraliravi wrote:
Yup, That is correct. They came in 30 kms initially and apparently have been pushed out by 12 kms. What we need to see really is what the IA is doing. Babus from PMO can do appeasement, but I am sure there are track II communication channels with the commanders on what to do with these chinese insects.
So far for the last 2 week, they have played the game like "lets wait and see how long the chinese stay put". By now they must have realized that the families of these 40 soldiers are at gun point in some camp in inner mongolia. So there are no way they are going back on their own. I expect to start seeing some aggressiveness from IA in a week.
Aggressiveness in a week? MMS and Co. have already sent Kurshid to smoothen things over (more like beg them to stop). It's playing out like 26/11 aftermath.
Chinese leaders don’t talk off the cuff. They never make statements without due deliberation. Previous Chinese presidential statements have been very different, about the border dispute being a legacy of history and of difficulties in resolving the dispute.
This sounds childish to me. Does India (or any country for that matter) make statements on foreign policy without due deliberation?
Everyone understands the need for settling border disputes. And it is a known fact that India's stand vis.a.vis China was most liberal. China is known to make obscene claims and use it as a strategy to get more favorable settlement with its neighbors.
So what is KPN saying? That India must go ultra-liberal in its border settlement with China?
Nayar does not sound right at all. The Tibet-Xinjiang higway is at least a 100 km from the DBO area, and the Karakoram Highway is even further. And where are the three new airfields in the disputed area?
There is too much DDM garbage that is muddying the water.
Last edited by Pranav on 29 Apr 2013 23:02, edited 1 time in total.
Antony, it is understood, is now aware that India’s permanent encampments have gradually inched forward east and north of the Siachen glacier, that India has built three air strips on disputed territory and that it has beefed up its positions to such an extent that its forces can now monitor movements on the Karakoram highway and has a critical eye on roads that connect to Sinkiang.
How can this be a disputed territory for India. India has claim on it from historical times, culture and political history
In kargil sector pakis intruded and bombed highway on Indian side. Now there are highway near LAC on Chinese side and still Chinese are intruding. In both cases Indian side was subject to intrusion not other side. No excuses must be accepted about this.
RamaY wrote:
Everyone understands the need for settling border disputes. And it is a known fact that India's stand vis.a.vis China was most liberal. China is known to make obscene claims and use it as a strategy to get more favorable settlement with its neighbors.
Why is china using this strategy. Is it only for border or is this for larger global geo political strategy?
