short of going kinetic and forcing the PRC forces from their perches, which would potentially precipitate action across a broad front, especially in places where we are at a tactical disadvantage, the best course of action to force a disengagement would be to repeat the past Depsang strategy of occupying significant territory on the Chinese side of the LAC, and use that as leverage to force a status quo ante.
Just a thought balloon, would it be possible to capture (and hold) territory in Shaksgam valley as a counter move? That would be a big Finger 3 to both Jihadland and Hanland.
I'm not sure that's a great idea, both tactically or strategically... Access into Shaksgam from the Teram Shehr or Rimo glaciers is incredibly difficult, and any force going from there will face an enemy that is very well supplied, with road access from the POK and Xinjiang side. The alternative is to go through the Karakoram Pass and up the Yarkhand River, through territory that lies consistentlyy above 5200 m. Neither is tactically feasible, and the territory cant be held.
At a strategic level, any occupation through the Karakoram Pass opens up the entire region along DBO-Depsang to counterattack, which is most likely an opportunity the Chinese are just chomping at the bit for. Remember, our infrastructure and access to the area is still not very good, and there is only one route to DBO - the DSDBO road. The Saser La road is going to be closed for winter in a couple of months. And it brings Pakistan into the equation too, where they could claim casus belli, whereas now, there really isn't one.
Why would we then try to occupy territory that we cannot conceivably hold when it is a strategically and tactically unsound plan?
The better option would be to occupy territory in other sectors along the LAC where we are at a tactical advantage, with good all-year connectivity.