Ladakh Flash Point

silentlurker said:

So at the end of the day did any real changes occur at LAC? Or is it just back to the previous status quo?

Click to expand...

Effectively the same. The line where China reached in 1062, the de facto lac shown on Google maps still stands, though claims by both sides have not changed. With the exception of gogra and hot springs, both sides are back to where they were before 2020, though in Galwan, both sides have permanent camps abut a km from the lac, which runs just south of the river bend(the historic pp14). In addition, there is a temporary no patrolling agreement along most of the conflict points.

In Gogra, both sides are deployed in forward positions very close to each other but on their respective sides of the lac. China did pull some camps about 2 km in july, which was reciprocated by India, but China still did not go back to its previoious position, forcing India to continue its mirror deployment. Hence, the Indian mod statement that Gogra and hot Springs have not been disengaged as there is still a standoff there, even though China is not violating Indian claims, despite what some claim(keep in mind it is China that has differing perceptions in that sector, not India. Adm. Davidson corroborated this, when he said China is occupying forward position,s but did not say they were in territory that falls within India's perceptions. For reference , the point Adm. Davidson was referring to is near the red circle, which represents territory China claims. As of now, Chinese positions are about 1-2 km behind that circle
So other than Gogra Hot Springs, the situation is mostly status quo before 2020, with restrictions on patrolling along certain parts of the lac on both sides as of now.

@Kakyan no point in disputing Chinese casualties right now. Whether China suffered 5 or 50 casualties doesn't matter, now that status quo ante has been restored to Galwan and other sectors. It is sad that there were casualties on both sides, lets just leave it at that.

silentlurker said:

So at the end of the day did any real changes occur at LAC? Or is it just back to the previous status quo?

Click to expand...

As of right now, the LAC or the perception of it in some places has been shifted into traditionally Indian patrol zones.



This is when regions are viewed in isolation.

All of it, however, crumbles a lot in significance when bigger regions are considered. Example Pangong Tso (North and South).

Complete Disengagement (if and when that happens) may mean a more mutually accepted demarcation of border through buffer zones.

Resumption of Patrols will give a further hint about the lay of things.

In Galwan, Indian LAC was shifted back by a km or so to the bend. While historically it lied further down from the bend. China extended roads to the region.

---

In Hot Springs and Gogra, disengagement has made both armies move back by 1km. (Note that this is Patrols. Camps lie in traditional regions of control). The Chinese posts are placed meters away from Indian patrol points.

It only means that patrol confrontation happens some way away from these posts (meaning within Indian patrol points)

The Indian government itself has admitted to some issues at Hot Springs and Gogra regions.

---

India lost access to Depsang (whole patrol points) after China moved in 2013. India hasn't been able to restart patrols. China has only strengthened permanent posts in these region but that is not a parcel of 2020 Confrontation and clash.

---

The US Admiral made a statement
"China has not withdrawn from the areas it seized during the initial conflict".

---

Situation right now -
Active meetings are held between two countries for disengagement in these regions (other than Panging Tso). Any disengagement signed till now has seen both sides give and take.

twineedle said:

@Kakyan no point in disputing Chinese casualties right now. Whether China suffered 5 or 50 casualties doesn't matter, now that status quo ante has been restored to Galwan and other sectors. It is sad that there were casualties on both sides, lets just leave it at that.

Click to expand...

LOLOL Whenever Indians lose, they be like, "That doesn't matter. The enemy might have suffered a million casualties (4 confirmed, the rest probable) and we did a little too (20 confirmed, no more). The important thing is that other parts have been muddled enough by the Indian media to be able to claim we didn't lose there. Let's just leave it at that."

manqiangrexue said:

LOLOL Whenever Indians lose, they be like, "That doesn't matter. The enemy might have suffered a million casualties (4 confirmed, the rest probable) and we did a little too (20 confirmed, no more). The important thing is that other parts have been muddled enough by the Indian media to be able to claim we didn't lose there. Let's just leave it at that."

Click to expand...

They are the masters of victory in spirit after all

There has been no substantial evidences from India regarding Chinese casualties other than "word of mouth".

China has been unerring in its claims of "Single Digit Casualties" which it maintains to this day (over an year).

India has only speculated to Chinese casualties. 35,45, 50 even 100. Spartan qualities and praises are being conferred to select Indian regiments but no media evidences which would've certainly added a feather.

---

Domestic media -

Indian news agencies previously submitted names of these "casualties" but they committed a blunder by taking the names of soldiers who died half a century ago.

China has released images of the clash. It can also be seen tending to the wounded Indian soldiers. No such media "propaganda" from India side. Surely, a 35 or 50 Chinese soldiers dead would be a great PR win for India. None so much whatsoever.

---

Foreign media -

No western media has given Chinese casualty number except for one US news and world report which cited "US intelligence". Suspicious as it wasn't picked up by any other media

But US news and world report also did some peculiar "pro-India" press during the Pakistan-India February 2019 aerial clash.

Russian TASS state news agency mentioned, that China suffered 35 casualties in a one-liner sentence without no source. But a Foreign Ministry official clarified that they were regurgitating Indian media claims.

---

Under all these realities,it is evident as to what might've happened.

This is a pretty good image of Gogra(keep in mind this is from one of the most anti Modi analysts)
This shows Chinese buildup from about 1-2 km from the lac(which represents Indian claims). That is the area Adm. Davidson was reffering to(btw "seized" and "captured have very different meanings." keep in mind the Admiral did not say those positions were in Indian claims.)

Indian mirror deployments are also about 1-km from that point, but are still within China's claimed areas. That could be one reason why China has not withdrawn to previous positions. China's refusal to withdraw to pre Mar 2020 positions is a problem for India, as articulated in the MOD statement.
Last summer, there were Indian and Chinese positions literally meters away from each other, or "eyeball to eyeball," as reported by Indian media. However, the partial disengagement in July created about 1-2 km of distance between the Indian army and PLA, and both are just behind the red circle in the image previously posted. Though that still means both sides are very close to the 1962 lac, though china is not occupying areas India claims, hence why Adm. Davidson said nothing about that.

As for Galwan, it is important to consider that China always claimed the lac lied to the west of the historical pp14 or the bend, as shown in that video analysis someone posted a while back. Though more recently, China updated its claims to include the entire valley. This annotated map using data from historical Indian documents and the US Office of the Geographer is pretty helpful. It shows China did temporarily violate the Indian claimed lac and occupy it for about a week. Duringthe disengagement deal, both sides moved back about 1.5 km from the Indian claim line (red line).


This is the same line shown on google, and appears to coincide with historic Indian government claims(though some may argue differently). It is also the line that has always been shown on Google earth, and is also used by satellite analysts and reputable Indian media.

In light of a depressed Jai Hind regurgitating his claims and speculation over and over again....




The rest of the ramblings are without substance or mere speculations.

twineedle said:

This is a pretty good image of Gogra(keep in mind this is from one of the most anti Modi analysts)
his shows Chinese buildup from about 1-2 km from the lac(which represents Indian claims). That is the area Adm. Davidson was reffering to(btw "seized" and "captured have very different meanings." keep in mind the Admiral did not say those positions were in Indian claims.)

Indian mirror deployments are also about 1-km from that point, but are still within China's claimed areas. That could be one reason why China has not withdrawn to previous positions. China's refusal to withdraw to pre Mar 2020 positions is a problem for India, as articulated in the MOD statement.
Last summer, there were Indian and Chinese positions literally meters away from each other, or "eyeball to eyeball," as reported by Indian media. However, the partial disengagement in July created about 1-2 km of distance between the Indian army and PLA, and both are just behind the red circle in the image previously posted. Though that still means both sides are very close to the 1962 lac, though china is not occupying areas India claims, hence why Adm. Davidson said nothing about that.

As for Galwan, it is important to consider that China always claimed the lac lied to the west of the historical pp14 or the bend, as shown in that video analysis someone posted a while back. Though more recently, China updated its claims to include the entire valley. This annotated map using data from historical Indian documents and the US Office of the Geographer is pretty helpful. It shows China did temporarily violate the Indian claimed lac and occupy it for about a week. Duringthe disengagement deal, both sides moved back about 1.5 km from the Indian claim line (red line).

Click to expand...

Bold 1: Good. It's within agreement to what has been posted.

Bold 2: Did he clarify ? You are speculating as to what he might ve meant.

Bold 3: No mirror deployments of 1 km. No evidences of that.

It is in contradiction of the initial disengagement that created a 2 km buffer zone between the forces.

Again, speculation from just a phrase "eyeball to eyeball".

Bold 4: What China does in its territory shouldn't be of concern to India. This is such a flawed reasoning.

Bold 5: As per retired Patrol Troop commander, the red line isn't just a claim line but the actual LAC of India throughout 70s to 90s. India had to shift the LAC by a km after the new disengagement. China extended the roads to the region. Also made a buffer zone at this new LAC (Y junction).