Ladakh Flash Point

Here's an interesting take:

Border conflict with China/Pakistan provides an unification force within India. It's this "guys we have to stop fighting amongst ourselves, we are surrounded by enemies" thing. This rally around the flag effect is in effect regardless of weather India win or lose. Indian elites care little for the lives of their low cast foot soldiers and in any event their media can paint a loss into a win. What matters most is there is some sort of 1984-isk conflict at the border when internal unity is threatened.

By de-escalating, China takes this tool away from India, and at a precise moment when India could really use some unifying force.

discspinner said:

The official Chinese wording of 'disengagement' is identical to that at Doklam. Rest assured, China did not cede anything to India, and if it did, there was something gotten in return (Depsang). Pangong lake is much more sensitive and in the media limelight. You have to throw a bone to keep the dog happy.

Click to expand...

That remains to be seen but China does not want to invade India. There is nothing to gain from making war here except to play into American interests. But China did pull its side in the escalation at Ladakh. So ask why China responded to what it interpreted as strong Indian provocations building up to 2019 and then the confrontations in May 2020 and following.

If China has no desire to get drawn into a fruitless war with no pay-off even if it ends in short and relatively bloodless victory, then why proceed to unilaterally make moves up to finger 4 and occupy it only to just go back to 2019 positions?

Considering the above, there are really only two main theoretical reasons ASSUMING any of the disengagement to finger 8 is even true.

1. China expects some military confrontation with Taiwan/US in response to their political or military action. Or China intends to make moves on Taiwan and wants to keep the western front down. Negotiations for disengagement could have involved India making promises not to inflame western front during any action in the Pacific. If India piles on, then China may have to either fight a difficult two front war which it doesn't want, or have to escalate very far and use nukes on India if it isn't able to contain Indian invasion while it is engaged against the US.

2. The negotiations have certain appealing concessions India is willing to give China. I don't see what it can offer except agreement to stop roadbuilding in all disputed border regions and both sides to stop trespassing beyond mutually agreeable points, leaving the dispute to be kicked further down the road.

This one is interesting depending what version of the story one wishes to believe. For example for those who believe India has been very offensively building up and performing increasingly deep incursions with only China responding, then this point is a net gain for China as it would have concluded with at least the Indians ceasing what China wishes for them to have ceased in the past - gradual ingress far into what China claims. If one wishes to believe it is China ingressing and India responding to a belligerent gradual Chinese build up into what Indian claims as India, then this result would be a defeat of Chinese operations to settle the dispute in its favour. Overall this is back to same old for both sides with any effort wasted and no real political development except increased tension.

Honestly since the Chinese side officially confirmed disengagement, this is trustworthy news. The Chinese side have not misled once throughout this issue. However the details are extremely light on disengagement positions.

Side theories that don't really stand up to much scrutiny feature a Jai Hind favourite fairytale.

India beat China and defeated it in a silent war despite India making mountains of noise over capturing lone PLA soldiers "lost" or scouting and making week long fusses over the smallest trivial things like IA managing to sneak into China proper and holding a dance festival. I doubt such bloody fighting could have escaped attention from either side.

There is also the claim that PLA lost 45 soldiers during the June clash where India lost at least 20. This doesn't hold water because China captured dozens upon dozens as admitted by both sides. Yet when India captures 1 PLA there is news about it for a week and then some. It's strange to imagine how the Russian TASS could have known about 45 PLA losses while neither India nor China officially make such a claim. China claims they lost 1 communication officer and two soldiers from injury iirc. While this isn't impossible at all, how India managed to count while they were scattered, captured, and dead is a mystery. Not to mention the two senior IA men who led the June clash were killed by PLA rather than succumbing to injuries like the remaining IA. At least this is China's story and they probably wouldn't want to say they actually killed the rest in cold blood but holding prisoners seem to indicate they actually aren't lying here otherwise why not kill them all in cold blood since they allegedly killed 45 PLA??

If my men were ambushed with 45 killed due to enemy action and I hold such an upper hand that I ended up with over 40 opposition forces captured and who were responsible for killing 45 of mine, I wouldn't be so merciful on them and certainly wouldn't return them intact like the PLA did. Since we know the latter is true for certain as India admits to this, it really casts a shadow of doubt to the former claim. Anyway.

There's also the theory the 9 negotiations eventually led to India relinquishing after the first few talks and after their attempt at trading land with a failed capture of Reqin Chinese territory. Since they obviously failed to hold Chinese land for bargaining, they haven't had another attempt at anything since. Why?

Perhaps the rest of the negotiations after that October 2020 failed strategy shift, the talks were all about how to help Modi save face. Both sides need to agree on a narrative. While China obviously held the upper hand (India unable to take back PLA captured disputed zones for over a year despite several attempts to), China goes into the talks with an advantage (unless India had new cards to play which it really doesn't**) and so came out with certain benefits but both sides need to make Modi save face in the current turmoil India is in.

China agreed to playing a certain narrative of neutral disengagement that makes it look reasonable to the hippies and pro-China left, it still gets to maybe keep a sliver of disputed land as settled or perhaps some other benefit. How could China go in to these talks with such advantage but leave neutrally? CCP ain't that friendly.

The CCP understands India is not going to be friendly to China anytime soon and its foreign policy is staunchly working against China. Therefore there is no real cause for goodwill here from China.

I feel there is something misleading that both sides are putting up a facade for some more hidden strategic purposes or for the simple matter of helping Modi find a PR way out.

** India is currently in quite a state with 250 million people protesting and this isn't even counting the student protests that went on for a year between 2018 and 2019. Then there's covid ravaging India and despite AZ vaccine being made there in number, there is still a while to go before innoculation programs can be completed and this is assuming the AZ vaccine is useful which has just recently become a topic as at least one country has now declared it problematic.

It's also been in an economic slump for over two years and had to deal with a recent drought as expected winds carried rain into the southern hemisphere. Glaciers wreaking havoc on dams (blamed on China as usual) and the general worsening of social standards as the underlying issues push reality further into attention.

Even without considering the military aspects, India is going into talks with weaker positions as its political leaders require both a good distraction and a "win". It is up to India's own self auditing to reveal any truths behind these theories but India silences its press that doesn't toe the line as Modi has been urgently censoring unfriendly Indian media and performing internet blackouts on the biggest scale suppression of "free speech" they like to harp on so much about. The likes of which would have made 1960s Chinese Communists blush.

Considering these relative positions (with China recovering and having won the trade war in the economic front but with casualties on Huawei), it is insane to think that India would have picked up some trump card (lol) to the talks like a direct US threat that stems out of Indian request or the Ladakh issue. It's as unlikely as CCP just being so good natured as to forgive and move on with the hopes of forging a better future India China relation. That would be epically foolish even if magnanimous and well calculated because that's not how most Indians work and certianly not how India's overall social and political structure is going to work.

Temstar said:

Here's an interesting take:

Border conflict with China/Pakistan provides an unification force within India. It's this "guys we have to stop fighting amongst ourselves, we are surrounded by enemies" thing. This rally around the flag effect is in effect regardless of weather India win or lose. Indian elites care little for the lives of their low cast foot soldiers and in any event their media can paint a loss into a win. What matters most is there is some sort of 1984-isk conflict at the border when internal unity is threatened.

By de-escalating, China takes this tool away from India, and at a precise moment when India could really use some unifying force.

Click to expand...

I contemplate this and then remind myself how futile such a thing would be. Since their media is so effective and instilling a China hate in its people, there is no purpose to such a move because you'd only lose what you had to offer/ price to pay while missing the intended agenda of removing that unifying force. The Hindu nationalist/ Jai Hind/ bhakt is already firmly united with a concrete opinion/feeling toward the complex topics. So this may be but really ... nah.

Modi's support from that crowd is U.N.W.A.V.E.R.I.N.G.

The problems causing these protests and further disintegration of society in India is not China's fault even in any small indirect part and it isn't going to go away with unity against China which is already common even within non-bhakt crowds and the protest movements and supporters. If anything Modi and his media claiming a "win" out of the situation despite it ending in India not even allowed to patrol up to points they held camps in back in 2019, is only going to help him find greater popularity and further his narrative. Therefore it is unlikely this is China's plan if there even is one, and assuming any of the disengagement to finger 2 and finger 8 is actually true and not a tall tale agreed on by both sides for concessions to the one that help negotiation position.

IMHO the best explanation is that China all along has wanted to have good relations with India, even full well knowing that India's socio-political environmental would prohibit that in the near and mid term. Look, India is a civilization comprising 1/6 of humanity. It will not go away. In fact, it will look pretty much the same in 500 years, which cannot be said of say, the US.

China does not want to make an eternal enemy of India, even though it knows India secretly covets Tibet for itself. The gap between India and China is huge, widening every year, and India has not shown any indication of reversing that trend any time soon. The best long term development course for India at the moment is a Brazil, South Africa, or Mexico.

China was forced to make a statement last summer because the Indian army tried to take advantage of the COVID-19 outbreak to make aggressive patrols in Galwan beyond where it had previously gone. Territorial sovereignty is a core principle that the CCP upholds as a mark of legitimacy to the Chinese people. The CCP instructed the PLA to defend China's borders, and that was precisely what happened. The Indian leadership (perhaps not the media and other parties within the establishment), most importantly Modi himself, got the message.

Also notice the largest chorus of the media saying this was a mistake by China that pushed India into the fold of the Quad are the Quad members themselves. Folks, the Quad is losing. Europe ex Britain is turning towards China now. The rest of the world was already well on their way.

Time is on China's side. The Biden administration will compete with China but ultimately cannot reverse the tide. This border issue with India is just a side show.

discspinner said:

IMHO the best explanation is that China all along has wanted to have good relations with India, even full well knowing that India's socio-political environmental would prohibit that in the near and mid term. Look, India is a civilization comprising 1/6 of humanity. It will not go away. In fact, it will look pretty much the same in 500 years, which cannot be said of say, the US.

China does not want to make an eternal enemy of India, even though it knows India secretly covets Tibet for itself. The gap between India and China is huge, widening every year, and India has not shown any indication of reversing that trend any time soon. The best long term development course for India at the moment is a Brazil, South Africa, or Mexico.

China was forced to make a statement last summer because the Indian army tried to take advantage of the COVID-19 outbreak to make aggressive patrols in Galwan beyond where it had previously gone. Territorial sovereignty is a core principle that the CCP upholds as a mark of legitimacy to the Chinese people. The CCP instructed the PLA to defend China's borders, and that was precisely what happened. The Indian leadership (perhaps not the media and other parties within the establishment), most importantly Modi himself, got the message.

Also notice the largest chorus of the media saying this was a mistake by China that pushed India into the fold of the Quad are the Quad members themselves. Folks, the Quad is losing. Europe ex Britain is turning towards China now. The rest of the world was already well on their way.

Time is on China's side. The Biden administration will compete with China but ultimately cannot reverse the tide. This border issue with India is just a side show.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. But also consider that for Chinese leaders who intend to "deal" with India, it would mean nuclear exchange or total devotion to building friendship. That ship seems to have sailed off pretty far for now. There is no way China can effectively fight India because even if winning conventionally, what are they going to do with over 1 billion starving people? If they aren't looked after and provided for there are going to be huge refugee waves and if you let them have self determination therefore sovereignty, that basically means another India. The nuclear option is unthinkable unless in response to Indian nuclear strikes on China. Even surviving fallout and exchange would have untold political consequences.

But since they don't want to make an eternal or long term enemy out of India, why then even pursue that policy which resulted in PLA holding onto Indian claimed lands for over a year?! That's a blunder! If the intention was always to make good eventually, some price is to be paid and it could either have been conceding all disputes to India after very effective political greasing and forging enough goodwill out of the gesture to completely turn not only India China issues around and resolved but also regional ones like Kashmir and the tensions between Pakistan and India where China will still be preserving friendly relations with Pakistan while neutral to friendly ones with India. This doesn't add up.

Chinese leaders know all too well to "deal" with India i.e. remove it as any future threat or live well with it, it would mean either a total war where if China lost, it would be over but if China won it would also be over or at least completely futile as described above. Therefore since 1.3 billion people will only eventually go a similar but unique path to industrialisation and wealth, development etc, then why not pursue on extreme position of being very supportive and pro India? It hasn't since the border war and China has viewed India as unreliable and potentially influenced easily by the west given the cultural and historic ties. Those westernised Indian elites who are basically an extension of western policies and thinking trump those who hold grudges against imperialism.

This either means the CCP are full of amazingly stupid morons with no ability to form coherent strategies or this isn't the path China's really pursuing. The thinking could be that India is eventually going to "grow up" from these chaotic ages and get its act together but China just needs to provide enough leeway so that it doesn't become an absolute eternal enemy when India is on the path. Time changes anything but at the moment, it was more appropriate to both show assertiveness so that at the very least no more border tensions and incursions from either side or showing force and testing Indian resolve with a very restrained confrontation from both sides. In a wider and more inclusive context, the way China and India clash have actually been relatively "sensible" and constrained. Neither really allowed the situation to escalate and here if these disengagement is true, China is also willing to go back. Jai Hinds will take it as weakness etc etc but then those guys will always take the most retarded perspective that contradict most of the facts. It's just the time and society India currently has and the CCP will have to live with that or engage and waste a fair bit of effort and material, to the glee of Anglo American elites.

ougoah said:

Absolutely. But also consider that for Chinese leaders who intend to "deal" with India, it would mean nuclear exchange or total devotion to building friendship. That ship seems to have sailed off pretty far for now. There is no way China can effectively fight India because even if winning conventionally, what are they going to do with over 1 billion starving people? If they aren't looked after and provided for there are going to be huge refugee waves and if you let them have self determination therefore sovereignty, that basically means another India. The nuclear option is unthinkable unless in response to Indian nuclear strikes on China. Even surviving fallout and exchange would have untold political consequences.

But since they don't want to make an eternal or long term enemy out of India, why then even pursue that policy which resulted in PLA holding onto Indian claimed lands for over a year?! That's a blunder! If the intention was always to make good eventually, some price is to be paid and it could either have been conceding all disputes to India after very effective political greasing and forging enough goodwill out of the gesture to completely turn not only India China issues around and resolved but also regional ones like Kashmir and the tensions between Pakistan and India where China will still be preserving friendly relations with Pakistan while neutral to friendly ones with India. This doesn't add up.

Chinese leaders know all too well to "deal" with India i.e. remove it as any future threat or live well with it, it would mean either a total war where if China lost, it would be over but if China won it would also be over or at least completely futile as described above. Therefore since 1.3 billion people will only eventually go a similar but unique path to industrialisation and wealth, development etc, then why not pursue on extreme position of being very supportive and pro India? It hasn't since the border war and China has viewed India as unreliable and potentially influenced easily by the west given the cultural and historic ties. Those westernised Indian elites who are basically an extension of western policies and thinking trump those who hold grudges against imperialism.

This either means the CCP are full of amazingly stupid morons with no ability to form coherent strategies or this isn't the path China's really pursuing. The thinking could be that India is eventually going to "grow up" from these chaotic ages and get its act together but China just needs to provide enough leeway so that it doesn't become an absolute eternal enemy when India is on the path. Time changes anything but at the moment, it was more appropriate to both show assertiveness so that at the very least no more border tensions and incursions from either side or showing force and testing Indian resolve with a very restrained confrontation from both sides. In a wider and more inclusive context, the way China and India clash have actually been relatively "sensible" and constrained. Neither really allowed the situation to escalate and here if these disengagement is true, China is also willing to go back. Jai Hinds will take it as weakness etc etc but then those guys will always take the most retarded perspective that contradict most of the facts. It's just the time and society India currently has and the CCP will have to live with that or engage and waste a fair bit of effort and material, to the glee of Anglo American elites.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Letting them off the hook will basically validate the Forward Strategy, and they’ll be back in force for certain right as the weather is about to thaw. This is a baffling decision.

Hypothetical!

China's play could have been a bluff all along to see if India will simply concede the loss of a large portion of disputed territory in Ladakh to China or if it would call the bluff. The Chinese side may have been trying to get India to concede with enough show of force while allowing Indian military leaders to wake up politicians on how ridiculous it would be to actually engage a war. This in the hopes that those political leaders would then simply concede. Maybe CCP underestimated Indian resolve here and while they never relented, CCP understood from the beginning that initiating the war was not the intention but responding violently but retrained is an option if attacked. This would only work in its favour as Indian leaders take a very limited loss and be encouraged even more to concede.

India didn't really bite the bait and fire the first shot but neither did they relent and give up during talks (hypothetical!). Perhaps Indians knew that war is out of the question for China but it's also not an option India can take or should be taking to tackle China here. They would have known that the position is untenable long term and the PLA really stayed over the winter and an entire year before revealing it has no intention to go further or fire on India and get drawn into a war.

That is an interesting gambit that could have paid off. It risks a short restricted war maybe one which China was willing to risk and more than confident it would win as it could call the shots. If such a thing really somehow got out of hand, as long as China didn't fire the first shot, they could at least fall back on the defending myself excuse as it unleashed on India. Indian military leaders know all too well such a thing is untenable with stocks for about a week of fighting before utter depletion. Real escalation would be in China's favour since it has much more high yield nuclear weapons and actually has had BMD systems for a long while. BMD enough to secure against India. The real unknown here is what the US would do as these things unfold.

discspinner said:

The official Chinese wording of 'disengagement' is identical to that at Doklam. Rest assured, China did not cede anything to India, and if it did, there was something gotten in return (Depsang). Pangong lake is much more sensitive and in the media limelight. You have to throw a bone to keep the dog happy.

Click to expand...

All that infrastructure from Fingers 4 to 8 though. It would be a shame if they demolish them.