Brought to you by an American "conservative think tank" ... lol. Great minds working towards an equitable, fair, honest, decent world... through deceit, manipulation, and cheap words like "India will not be cowed or coerced"... meaningless phrases if one truly think about them. The pros and experts of meaningless phrases full of loaded questions and assumptions and saying nothing while saying a lot.
The Indian bhakts and ultra nationalists cannot accept that China took over the stretch and controlled it and only disengaged after talks where India walked back on their encroachment. That India is the one who instigated this. It is unacceptable to think that India could possibly be the aggressor on this front back 2019 to 2020 and China responded. If China's aim was to capture the stretch, why would it capture it and then disengage with no real military engagement happening at all. After all, China took it over and held it for 9 months. If they intended to do as the bhakts say, why would they disengage? The bhakts would say it's because China is oh so afraid of supa India but they forget China captured dozens upon dozens of Indians.
The Indians also didn't start shooting. If India is so strong why didn't India start fighting the war since China took up to finger 4? The bhakts' story adds positive integers into a negative sum. The reality is China wants total stability here on these borders. India's reneging of Article 370 promised some instability in the backdrop of Doklam drama. Modi was militarising Hindutva and that is clear as day now while it was building to this clarity for the last half decade. China wanted an assured buffer that disintegrated with increased Indian patrolling (as admitted to by VK Singh) to 2020. India understandably wants to work towards de facto control of that stretch of land with similar salami slicing tactics China employed between 1962 and 2000s.
So where is the resistance part. The words from the "conservative think tank" from USA is so out of place and has no relevance. How can india be resisting against a bilateral dispute that's existed for 70 odd years and a situation it has built up alone or at the very least contributed to flaring up.
Should we remind Mr. Smith that China is offering total buffer deal along this stretch and it is India that is refusing to convert total buffer. It is therefore India that has a desire to eventually control the remaining stretch as it claims 100x more land beyond this tiny stretch - Aksai Chin.
As is usual, the western power is devilishly manipulative and while India is not necessarily a pawn in this game, it is a willing partner of the method as it stands to gain from riding that path and partnering up for now. However these little nothings have close to zero real consequence as long as the real decision makers are aware of all the truths and complexities to the micro problem and the macro problem. I'm speaking of course about Chinese leadership being aware of what the US is about and why it says what it says when it does. India is understandably frustrated at all the drama as it is unwilling to admit and realise that it never controlled Aksai Chin in its pre-British history which btw was not even of a nation. This stretch is Tibetan and as such, it is Chinese land.
Last edited:
