Ladakh Flash Point

About Depsang


“The present disengagement pact was limited to the north and south banks of Pangong Tso. Depsang is an old issue…Indian Army has not had access to large chunks of territory in Depsang for the last 10-15 years,” said a senior official.

The fact, however, remains the PLA since April-May last year has been actively blocking Indian soldiers from even going to their traditional Patrolling Points (PPs)-10, 11, 12, 12A and 13 in Depsang, a table-top plateau located at an altitude of 16,000-feet.

"PLA picks up the movement of our patrols through sensors and other means to block them from going beyond the `Bottleneck’ or `Y-junction’ area in Depsang (around 18-km inside what India perceives to be its territory),” said a source.


I don't think China will budge from Depsang. I see this as, for China,

1. Continued win (advantage) in Depsang
2. Slight loss in North Pangong Tso (had to pull back from F4 and stop patrols to F4)
3. Win in South Pangong Tso ( Indian advancements of taking two hills reversed).

Xsizor said:

About Depsang

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

“The present disengagement pact was limited to the north and south banks of Pangong Tso. Depsang is an old issue…Indian Army has not had access to large chunks of territory in Depsang for the last 10-15 years,” said a senior official.

The fact, however, remains the PLA since April-May last year has been actively blocking Indian soldiers from even going to their traditional Patrolling Points (PPs)-10, 11, 12, 12A and 13 in Depsang, a table-top plateau located at an altitude of 16,000-feet.

"PLA picks up the movement of our patrols through sensors and other means to block them from going beyond the `Bottleneck’ or `Y-junction’ area in Depsang (around 18-km inside what India perceives to be its territory),” said a source.


I don't think China will budge from Depsang. I see this as, for China,

1. Continued win (advantage) in Depsang
2. Slight loss in North Pangong Tso (had to pull back from F4 and stop patrols to F4)
3. Win in South Pangong Tso ( Indian advancements of taking two hills reversed).

Click to expand...

Some Indians are not happy that their defense minister didn't not mention Depsang, Hot Springs, and Gorka in the negotiation

jfy1155 said:

Some Indians are not happy that their defense minister didn't not mention Depsang, Hot Springs, and Gorka in the negotiation.

Click to expand...

Well, negotiations mean the parties have something to take as well as give up. The Indian news article cited above itself states that India has few things to offer to get the PLA give up what it wants.

The only option here is another border confrontation, this time in Depsang, HS, etc.
But that would mean the Pangong Tso again falling into chaos.

I can never understand China's philosophy of withdrawal from a position of strength or hiding facts to save face for your opponent. Totally nonsense.

Xsizor said:

About Depsang

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

“The present disengagement pact was limited to the north and south banks of Pangong Tso. Depsang is an old issue…Indian Army has not had access to large chunks of territory in Depsang for the last 10-15 years,” said a senior official.

The fact, however, remains the PLA since April-May last year has been actively blocking Indian soldiers from even going to their traditional Patrolling Points (PPs)-10, 11, 12, 12A and 13 in Depsang, a table-top plateau located at an altitude of 16,000-feet.

"PLA picks up the movement of our patrols through sensors and other means to block them from going beyond the `Bottleneck’ or `Y-junction’ area in Depsang (around 18-km inside what India perceives to be its territory),” said a source.


I don't think China will budge from Depsang. I see this as, for China,

1. Continued win (advantage) in Depsang
2. Slight loss in North Pangong Tso (had to pull back from F4 and stop patrols to F4)
3. Win in South Pangong Tso ( Indian advancements of taking two hills reversed).

Click to expand...

Honestly I think bilateral disengagement from Pangong lake finger points means bilateral disengagement in the northern points as well. Agreement to disengagement indicates some strategic shift. It makes little sense to disengage in one point only to hold forward positions and makes less sense for India to accept only a bilateral disengagement at one disputed section where they move back to finger 3 ie just like 2019 but without the constant mutually conducted patrols at least up to fingers 2 and 8 for PLA and IA respectively.

Unless of course it's just to pander and provide some sort of relief for Modi and Depsang hot springs disputes etc are still held by PLA. The picture is simply not clear enough from either side and perhaps is intended to be that way. On this, India will be the one to clarify (extrapolations from official sources not media) since they do have oppositions who have an interest in uncovering any ugly deals Modi gov has made.

longmarch said:

I can never understand China's philosophy of withdrawal from a position of strength or hiding facts to save face for your opponent. Totally nonsense.

Click to expand...

If you are Chinese, you'll understand. This is Chinese through and through the whole "look I am so much stronger and will still show mercy and friendship". That might come off as funny to some but this stupid desire to show magnanimity is only too Chinese. Especially towards those less capable for example or have the lesser hand. The reverse is also true wrt those above. It's a total reversal of cultural attitudes to the west where those above are "entitled" to ridiculous privileges.

India does however deserve one recognition at least and that is its restraint. China chalked up the June fights to poor command and momentary disorganisation and gave India the benefit of the doubt i.e. they assumed Babu did not radio in to say he has hundreds of men ready to demolish a small PLA site left relatively unguarded and attack orders weren't given the green light.

Yes much of that is down to Indian military leadership truly understanding even a short shooting skirmish will be foolish and most likely impossible to win if it escalates if nothing more than simply material stocks.

Bilateral disengagement at Pangong probably means bilateral disengagement elsewhere. There is something behind this since PLA absolutely could have simply refused to budge. They've been there for a year and since October after the Indian intrusions south of lake were repelled, there have been no more intrusion or violence only with what seems to be 50m between PLA and IA at contact points.

Since PLA has been there for a year and the Indians have stopped making military moves since October, why then the disengagement? The only difference and improvement to Indian military since has been the usual increase in arms and a few Rafales. China's military improvements since have been at both a greater scale in build up and more advanced acquisitions also of material India does not yet have. Coupled with a much stronger performing economy and less social instability in contrast to India's greater economic decline, huge social instabilities, and covid responses.

The disengagement was certainly not militarily motivated and probably isn't politically or economically since Modi and the vast majority of Indian being Jai Hind are still out to economically hurt China as much as they can. PLA could have settled and China re-written the border if they so wished as much as India will oppose it officially but do relatively little of effect just like Aksai Chin. China has still not recovered Arunachal Pradesh and surely both have made each other enemies by now.

I could only imagine CCP has wanted to settle this with no incursion and created finger 3 to 8 buffer zone as it expects something to happen with regards to the US. It could also be preparing military focus on Taiwan in what it considers a politically important moment in PRC ROC relations. There have never been a greater show of force towards Taiwan as its government under Tsai might be considering some unprecedented moves.

Kaeshmiri said:

More like India realized that Biden wont be coming to their rescue. Do remember that Biden and Modi spoke just few days back and Modi was probably informed that they're on their own here. He had no option but to accept whatever China demanded. Lol

Click to expand...

Modify maybe incompetent but he is no fool. He knows US can't deal with China alone or even with other 5-Eyes and need India help due to India strategic positions ( border with China and important Indian ocean to China shipping). He knows US and Allies are using India to leverage Chinese power, influences & markets.
If Modi play his card well, he can use the same leverage against US and Allies, Russia and China for maximum benefits to India. A permanent hot border with China is never an ideal situation for India but encouraged by US and Allies which is draining India economy.
So some de-escalation with China is preferable as India can not change the status quo with force alone and military helps from US and Allies are not guaranteed except with weapon sales.
India internal problems, Covid, farmer protests, economy are adding more complications. De-escalation is to be expected if Modi government has India best interest.

The problem with that is there is nothing really stopping India from violating any agreements from this disengagement if China is bogged down in a war with Taiwan and/or US on the east. India will have no reason to go nuclear and China has no first use so cannot even respond with an easy nuclear solution if a two front war ensues.

India is limited by small current stockpiles of warheads and missiles with that sort of range. Also by limited enrichment capabilities and rates. China has enrichment facilities all around the country and high yield thermonuclear capabilities with even MRBMs positioned near India that can cover most of its population dense north. So anyway two front means no nuclear on the Indian front for sure since they certainly will not consider that and fighting conventionally against the western command of PLA (less well equipped) means it'll be PLA's western command against most of the Indian military.

Chish said:

Modify maybe incompetent but he is no fool. He knows US can't deal with China alone or even with other 5-Eyes and need India help due to India strategic positions ( border with China and important Indian ocean to China shipping). He knows US and Allies are using India to leverage Chinese power, influences & markets.
If Modi play his card well, he can use the same leverage against US and Allies, Russia and China for maximum benefits to India. A permanent hot border with China is never an ideal situation for India but encouraged by US and Allies which is draining India economy.
So some de-escalation with China is preferable as India can not change the status quo with force alone and military helps from US and Allies are not guaranteed except with weapon sales.
India internal problems, Covid, farmer protests, economy are adding more complications. De-escalation is to be expected if Modi government has India best interest.

Click to expand...

It may have been the case where China had NOT actually wanted to choose this period of time in history to re-ignite this border or chose to respond this way to the moves by India since Doklam crisis. But rather it was really India that built up that momentum since budging in to the Bhutan China dialogue in 2013.

Perhaps India chose to inflame at this point in time not just with Doklam and increased salami slicing but also art. 370, road building, and threatening CPEC along with greater degree and depth of patrols to which PLA eventually was ordered to respond with activities since May 2020. I'm not blaming Indians. They legitimately see it as their land and then some and they do have better reasons in all honesty. Not from historic borders but from the simple fact that these parts are much closer and threatening to them since they are within even long range artillery fire of a lot of their dense northern urban areas. Anyway.

It would make sense if all CCP wanted from PLA's move and settlement more than half way into the disputed western section between valley and lake, was just to get absolute written agreements from Indian government that there will be at least no more IA patrols up to finger 8 and associated Indian recognised borders and no more road building/ construction nearby. If those conditions are met along with total withdrawal from IA back to behind finger 3, the PLA will move behind finger 8. This would really mean China was never ahead to begin with and India delayed agreeing to conditions even after PLA captured all that land because India was ahead to begin with and wanted to keep trying different wants to maintain their lead.

The reason for India eventually agreeing to something they never really "owned" is totally an internal matter and partly if not mostly due to internal instability and the crisis building. Along with of course PLA's pretty daring move to take more than half the dispute in one swooping response. What made the CCP pull back PLA with disengagement was India's agreement to China's initial theoretical conditions of no more activity and inflaming and the old "wait for future generations". Just another theory though.

This theory just shifts the understanding of the picture formed a little more to India's side from the very beginning. China can do nothing about India's threatening of CPEC and Kashmiri self determination it seems.