Ladakh Flash Point

Status
Not open for further replies.

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
Were the terms of the ceasefire released publically? It seems China did withdraw back to the original line given how unimport the region is strategically.

There's so much Indian disinformation its hard to keep track.

I do think the next time a ceasefire is agreed, there needs to be a clause where Indians publically accept responsibility for causing the incident.
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Were the terms of the ceasefire released publically? It seems China did withdraw back to the original line given how unimport the region is strategically.

There's so much Indian disinformation its hard to keep track.

I do think the next time a ceasefire is agreed, there needs to be a clause where Indians publically accept responsibility for causing the incident.

Not sure how useful that would be. Indian politicians are very good at finding workarounds. If military can’t patrol the area they can still get paramilitary (border police) or civilian explorers to do it.
 

lgnxz

Junior Member
Registered Member
However, we have another catch regarding how the situation evolved. Seems like after India abandoned its previous PP14, it considered Y junction as the new one. But it seems to have been left without a permanent post (merely a patrol point).
They really can't patrol there regularly, let alone controlling the area for a long period of time. He said it himself that China has the upper hand there because of we control the upstream and actually has stable land access that's not periodically submerged into the junction. This recent behavior is of course a new one, and I think it's just a very risky all-in attempt from them when they think China is too busy with its epidemic to create a new norm in the area. They would be stupid to try this again in the future, since they still lost the fight even after all those temporary advantages that they had.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Nice. Looks like those cameras mounted onto drones. Does it come with a laser for target designation? In case the intruders turn out to be hostile. It could guide some munitions onto them in a hurry.
The Sino-India boarder isn’t remotely as ‘hot’ as to require that level of lethal force capabilities, and China is keen to ensure it never gets remotely as ‘hot’.

Scuffles and stand-offs are already testing the limits of Chinese tolerance for Indian BS nonsense, any use of lethal force is a potential trigger for a full scale war.

Chinese philosophy is to not fight unless absolutely necessary, and to strike with maximum strength if forced to fight.

To borrow the words of Norman Schwarzkopf, China has no interest in poking India with fingers, if it is forced to strike, it will strike with a full fist.
 

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member

Sardaukar20

Captain
Registered Member
This Chinese general did brought up a few interesting points that got me thinking:

1) Huawei vs ZTE
The general mentions that both are rival Chinese companies in the telecom industry. ZTE, an SOE regarded Huawei, a private enterprise as its enemy. ZTE dominated at first, using its power and influence to deny Huawei telecom licenses to keep them down. Huawei OTOH never regarded ZTE as its enemy. It was targeting the largest western telecoms like Motorola, Ericsson, Cisco, and Nokia. The end result is Huawei had surpassed ZTE by 6 to 7 times. Now Huawei is at the forefront of telecom technology. This success is thanks to the courage of Huawei. This sounds a lot like the US vs China, and India vs China right now.

2) Indian 'arrogance'.
He said that while US wanted to form a NATO of Asia to contain China. That couldn't happen ironically because of India. India wanted to be boss, not to be some underling of the US. Henry Kissinger called that Indian arrogance. But its actually a more complex national self-esteem issue. The general mentioned about some Indians in Mumbai. When asked about how do they see China's development. They said that China's development is actually "catching up" with Mumbai. Well, I believe him. The Bhakts and Jai Hinds have confirmed this many times over.

He says that India's dream is simple: to dominate South Asia and the Indian Ocean. China should not get too concerned about it. Let them do it, its none of China's business. The one country who could be pissed off is the US. Because the US wants to dominate the Indo-Pacific. But since the US is not even close to being concerned about Indian dominance in the Indian Ocean, why should China worry? Well I don't really agree here. The US is way smarter than this. It is already manipulating India to think that its the 'boss' of the Indian Ocean, while America is just there to 'help' India. Hence, India would happily let the USN dominate the Indian Ocean to work against their common enemy, China.

He mentions that India wants to develop an ICBM. Why should it? All of China can already be reached by India's existing MRBMs. So an ICBMs could either threaten countries outside of Asia. Or it could be a waste of defense expenditure. Money that could have gone into actually funding conventional forces to confront China. This I agree, because India is happily wasting vast sums of money on vanity procurements. The $240mil/plane Rafales is the best highlight. I would enjoy having India continue this.

3) Which gets to @Bellum_Romanum's point. The West's agenda to maintain Western supremacy.
Starting from 15:00 to the end of the video, the ret.PLA General laid out the honest brutal truth of the struggle between China and the western world which is led by U.S. It may be offensive to some non-Asian, non-Chinese folks here but I firmly believe and agree with the general's opinion with his analysis and observation.
The general says that China must focus on the real enemy: USA and the West. They want to see India and China fighting and killing each other in order to preserve their own Western supremacy. China cannot fall into their trap. China needs to be more ambitious than to be settling scores with India. I find it hard to argue against this point. A major war between China and India does benefit the US, no matter how much China wins. We could say that China was wise to be patient with India. But I also think major credit should also be given to sheer Indian incompetence. That made the decision for China to forget about going to war with India.
 

twineedle

Junior Member
Registered Member
This Al Jazeera article is old, but still informative
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
"China says the whole of Galwan Valley, located at about 14,000ft (4,300m), is its territory and blames Indian troops for triggering the clashes." Yet some members here were saying that is not true
The article also shows the lac just south of the bend, like it does on google maps.

also, an old but interesting article from Vinayak Bhat, aka raj47(I'm not a huge fan of him, but many here consider him reliable). It showed the effects water levels had on Chinese build up.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
That is one reason why the areas previously mentioned are patrolling points, not areas India has occupied, because it is simply impossible to occupy them long term. Perhaps environmental factors may have been one reason for disengagement in the valley. Interestingly, Raj also shows the river bend as pp14
 

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
This Al Jazeera article is old, but still informative
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
"China says the whole of Galwan Valley, located at about 14,000ft (4,300m), is its territory and blames Indian troops for triggering the clashes." Yet some members here were saying that is not true
The article also shows the lac just south of the bend,
like it does on google maps.

also, an old but interesting article from Vinayak Bhat, aka raj47(I'm not a huge fan of him, but many here consider him reliable). It showed the effects water levels had on Chinese build up.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
That is one reason why the areas previously mentioned are patrolling points, not areas India has occupied, because it is simply impossible to occupy them long term. Perhaps environmental factors may have been one reason for disengagement in the valley. Interestingly, Raj also shows the river bend as pp14
Bold 1: True. India's interpretation of Galwan Valley extends only to the Y junction. China takes it as along the whole Gallowan River .

(China has begun pushing it. India gets the credit for rekindling the flames)

Bold 2: AL Jazeera is following Indian governments take. If Indian gov isn't contesting it then why should Google Maps or even AL Jazeera change it.

Bold 3: OH, I know.

Bold 4: Sure. No one claimed otherwise. Weather and Climate inflicts limitation to both sides.

Bold 5: Irrelevant. No one claimed otherwise. Did anyone here claim India had occupied there? No.

Bold 6: If Siachen isn't an issue (regarding climate and environment) then this area must be too. Or are you implying India is ready to throw patrol points away just because it's hard to patrol?

It's upto the government to decide the borders. Soldiers don't. They either run with the narrative or they don't. Ultimately it's a question of soldier's personal takes regarding faith to country, nation, government etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top