Tag: india china pangong tso

‘PM’s Silence Is Deafening’: Rahul Gandhi on Reports of Chinese Advances into India

“PM’s silence is deafening. Our land, our people, our borders deserve better,” the Congress leader said on Twitter.

New Delhi: Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Tuesday questioned the silence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi over reports of China constructing a bridge on the Pangong Tso Lake in Ladakh near the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

“PM’s silence is deafening. Our land, our people, our borders deserve better,” Gandhi said on Twitter.

He cited a news report claiming that the Chinese have been constructing a bridge on Pangong Tso Lake for over two months which is extremely close to the LAC.

“The bridge will connect the north and south bank of the lake,” the report claimed.

The Congress party and Gandhi have been critical of the government’s handling of the border situation with China in eastern Ladakh, which has also seen bloody clashes between the Indian and PLA troops last year.

How India Played into China’s Hands on the Border Dispute

India has only to blame itself for its increasingly limited options.

The Narendra Modi government seems to be its own worst enemy. It has willy-nilly allowed the border dispute with China to become a matter of ‘Chinese sovereignty’. Consequently, India now appears to be the aggressor. Worse, it has handed over the Ladakh narrative on a platter to China.

Tragically, this has happened at a time when the Indian Army leadership – the lead service in any confrontation with the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) – has failed to understand how to fight the war China is preparing for. Hence, the government needs to be asked why and how such a blunder has been made, especially at a time when India is militarily unprepared. Clearly, those who have advised the government on this matter have no idea about both China and future warfare.

The unravelling of India’s tough-guy posture started with a shocking admission by the minister of state for road transport and highways and former army chief General V.K. Singh, to whom was assigned the ignominious task of writing on the wall.

Speaking to the media in Madurai on February 7, he said: “…none of you come to know how many times we have transgressed as per our perception. We don’t announce it. Chinese media does not cover it… Let me assure you, if China has transgressed 10 times, we must have done it at least 50 times, as per our perception.”

This was in contradiction to the Indian position that it never transgresses. It reinforced the Chinese claim that the actual Line of Actual Control (LAC) was its unilateral 1959 one. Hence, by adhering to the 1993 LAC, the Indian Army was guilty of transgressing Chinese sovereignty.

Also read: Harsh Winter Conditions Contributed to India-China Pullback from Pangong Tso

Losing little time, China, while putting the blame for Ladakh on India, said it would defend its sovereignty at all costs. To recall, China’s President Xi Jinping, since assuming power in November 2012, has repeatedly said that not an inch of its territory would be given up. To take the Chinese argument further, nothing stops China from voicing the idea of reunification of the state of Arunachal Pradesh, which it calls South Tibet, with the mainland.

Indian Army

An Indian Army convoy moves along a highway leading to Ladakh, at Gagangeer in Kashmir’s Ganderbal district June 18, 2020. Photo: Reuters/Danish Ismail

Perhaps, one shouldn’t be too harsh on V.K. Singh for apportioning the blame of the Ladakh crisis on the army he once commanded. Through January 2021, numerous media reports had unnerved the Modi government. Showing commercial satellite imagery, these reports spoke of massive PLA war preparedness in Tibet opposite Arunachal Pradesh.

With the possibility of a two-front war staring it in the face, the Modi government clearly panicked. The military thinking, conveyed to the government, was that while the army (military) could fight a two-front war (fighting the primary front while holding the second one), China should not be the primary front because then Pakistan would be certain to open the second front. In Indian thinking, the opposite wouldn’t happen.

Consequently, such was the haste to deescalate, that the Modi government also gave up the only tactical bargaining chip it had in Ladakh – the Kailash range in south Pangong which overlooks PLA’s Moldo garrison and was captured by the Indian Army in a daring night operation. The September 10 Moscow agreement between foreign minister S. Jaishankar and Chinese state councillor Wang Yi had been held up for five months because of this niggling point. The PLA was insistent that the Indian Army vacate the heights on the Kailash range. With the Pangong disengagement underway, defence minister Rajnath Singh told Parliament on February 10 that other friction areas like Hot Springs, Gogra, Demchok, and especially Depsang would be taken up within 48 hours.

Even as the Indian government was walking on eggshells, Wang Yi decided to put out in the public domain the Chinese perspective on the Ladakh face-off, as well as the future of the bilateral relationship. The Chinese readout of the telephonic conversation between Jaishankar and Wang Yi (at Jaishankar’s initiative) claimed that India was responsible for aggression in Ladakh and that it had strayed from the path of friendly ties and needed to come back on track. This was an unambiguous reference to the Wuhan understanding reached between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Xi at the first informal summit in 2018 where both sides had committed to cooperate and not be rivals.

Also read: Jaishankar, Wang Yi Review ‘Status of Disengagement’ in Phone Call

Of course, no reference was made to the PLA’s massive build-up and the threat to Arunachal Pradesh dangling over India. In order to ensure that the Modi government did not wander off the path again, it was decided to have a hotline between the two foreign ministers. Interestingly, India, for a decade, had been unsuccessfully asking China to have a hotline between the two armies for quick resolution of border face-offs.

Under the Wuhan understanding there is plenty that China needs India to deliver: Normalise bilateral trade to pre-Ladakh levels; not be a party to the militarisation of Quadrilateral Dialogue mechanism (between US, Japan, Australia and India) and the US-led Indo Pacific strategy to contain China; not use its soft power (comprising continuity and traditional ties) to influence (against China) smaller nations in South Asia which have already signed-up for the Belt and Road Initiative; and to work with China under the agreed China-India-Plus one (smaller nation) model for regional prosperity.

Pakistan angle

If this was not enough, China also played a crucial, behind the scene role, in the February 25 announcement of a sudden ceasefire on the Line of Control by the director generals of military operations of India and Pakistan. During the second informal summit between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese supremo Xi Jinping in October 2019 in Chennai, Xi had spoken at length on the need for trilateral ties between India, Pakistan, and China for peace, trade and connectivity in the region. It was reported in The Hindu of October 17, 2019 by its Beijing reporter, attributing this disclosure to Wang Yi. Since it was in the immediate aftermath of August 5, 2019, Modi ignored it.

To remove doubts on the ceasefire announcement by military officers of the two sides, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan tweeted the following day that it was now for India to create an enabling environment for further progress for normalisation of relations. Pakistan had downgraded diplomatic ties with India following the reading down of Article 370 and the scrapping of 35A from Jammu and Kashmir. It now wants India to reverse that: Restore Articles 370 and 35A and revert to the pre-August 5, 2019 constitutional status of Jammu and Kashmir. Basically, convert the union territories of J&K and Ladakh back into the state of J&K.

While Pakistan has the full support of China for its demands made on India, it would be unwise to underwrite Pakistan’s self-confidence which has come from its risen geopolitical status. Pakistan, under its first hybrid government of Imran Khan and army chief, General Qamar Bajwa has successfully transformed itself into a self-assured nation eager to see beyond India – its perceived existential threat. Being the flagship of China’s 2013 BRI through the China Pakistan Economic Corridor, and the pivot of the 2015 Digital Silk Road (to leapfrog into the fourth industrial revolution of artificial intelligence), Pakistan’s narrative today is about trade, connectivity, and peace. How convincing this peace narrative is can be assessed by Pakistan’s recent multi-nation naval exercise, Aman-21, where the navies of all three geostrategic players (the US, Russia and China) participated.

File photo of Indian soldiers on the Line of Control. Photo: PTI

Moreover, post-August 5, 2019, events in J&K have got Pakistan and China, already in a strategic partnership, into a tighter embrace. Pakistan consults China on policy matters, and the two have developed the kind of interoperability (i.e. the ability to fight together against a common enemy) which would dwarf that between North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies.

While China and Pakistan have little intention of going to war with India now, should war happen in the future, the PLA and Pakistan military would be in it together with defined missions. The reality is that the Indian military’s two-front war threat has been replaced by a one-front reinforced war threat. The PLA, in a double tasking role, would fight in the eastern and central sectors (Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh), and support the Pakistan military with its awesome non-kinetic and kinetic capabilities in the western sector of Ladakh.

For the present, China has more than achieved its objectives in Ladakh. Not only does it now occupy territory upto its 1959 claim line without fighting but it also got the Indian government to admit that India had repeatedly violated Chinese sovereignty, by clinging to the 1993 line, which did not exist in the Chinese narrative.

China knows that the Modi government has sought temporary reprieve and has no intentions of desired cooperation with China, especially when post Ladakh, it is unable to arrive at a geopolitical equilibrium with it. Modi would likely stray away from the Wuhan understanding soon in the hope that the Indian military would get a breather for war preparedness which has already begun. There are reports of army formations being permanently moved from the Pakistan front to the Chinese front, and the army is gearing up for round the year taskings on the LAC and the air force is strengthening its capabilities against the PLA Air Force (PLAAF). The paramilitary forces, as the first line of defence, are also being reinforced and rationalised.

The problem, however, is that the army and the air force are bracing themselves for the wrong war against the PLA. This is apparent from the remarks made by the army chief, General M.M. Naravane on February 24 at the webinar organised by the Delhi-based Vivekanand International Foundation. The PLA has at least eight ‘systems destruction’ and algorithm war-fighting strengths, two of which are its capability to fight exceptionally in the virtual domains of war, and its flexible and intelligent software systems connectivity.

The PLA considers cyberspace and electromagnetic space as one continuum and understands that without supremacy, if not dominance, in these virtual spaces, a conventional war would be decisively lost before it is joined. Cyber, electronic, and space war domains reside in this virtual space with the capability to blind, disable, disorient, and destroy communications at all levels of war.

Also read: India and China Are on the Verge of Lasting Peace, if Modi Wants It

To put it bluntly, in the 1962 war, Indian soldiers fought valiantly, but were let down by their command which took to heel. In war with the PLA, bereft of communications, interaction between command and rank and file would get snapped, leading to uncertainty and chaos. The Indian military, focused on physical war domains, has failed to understand the operational importance of virtual war fighting.

According to General Naravane, Multi Domain Operations are the future of war for which the army is preparing. Globally, however, this decade-old warfighting strategy has been replaced by Joint Multi Domain Operations. There is a huge difference between the two.

The US military worries that the PLA’s strength in software systems would allow it quicker information flow between the six war domains (space, cyber, electronic, land, air, and sea) in Joint Multi Domain Operations, allowing it to close the kill chain (data-decision making-action loop) faster than it could do. Given this, the US military, while fighting the PLA, could lose the war of cognition (military decision making), leading to defeat.

An analogy would help understand the importance of software systems where the Indian Army (military) has paid scant attention. For example, the value of a smartphone is not its hardware but the software system which supports applications. This is why notifications are regularly given to users to update software operating systems in their smartphones. Today, with 4G networks, smartphones provide cloud facilities. With 5G wireless telecommunications, smartphones would transform into a virtual internet in-hand. All this is true in algorithm war where the PLA is a global leader.

In General Naravane’s view, tanks, ships, and aircraft which were the fighting icons of the 20th century would be rendered less significant in war. This is not correct. They would remain significant as unmanned and intelligent (autonomous) weapon platforms. Inspired by the swarm drone warfare seen in the Armenia-Azerbaijan war, the army chief said these would be the game-changers in future war. According to him, by demonstrating a swarm of 75 drones on Army Day on January 15, a powerful message was sent to India’s adversaries (China and Pakistan). The reality is that in a war with the PLA, swarm drones, if used at all, would be a side show.

There is a reason why I have quoted extensively from General Naravane’s talk. By exposing the Indian Army’s lack of understanding of new war with disruptive technologies, the army chief has unwittingly harmed the Indian military posture. The PLA would now be even more aggressive and experimental with its unmanned systems in a possible future war with India. The lessons learnt against India with first mover advantage would help the PLA in better preparing against its main adversary, the US military.

Even though no catch-up is possible with China, India, by understanding future war correctly, can at least it can start preparing for the right war. The current military reforms enunciated by chief of defence staff General Bipin Rawat are only harming the military more. They must be stopped forthwith.

Having got its way in Ladakh by forcing India to accept the 1959 LAC – something that China had not managed to do in 60 years – Beijing will not ease its pressure on India. Past-masters of conflict and cooperation, China will continue with its military coercion all along what is now a reinforced one-front from west to east, even as it pressures India to normalise ties. India has only itself to blame for its increasingly limited options.

Pravin Sawhney is editor of Force news magazine.

In Jaishankar-Wang Yi Phone Call, Promise of Ministerial Hotline, Further Easing of Situation

While Jaishankar had announced the phone conversation with a tweet on Thursday night, the two foreign offices issued detailed readouts only on Friday. 

New Delhi: With foreign ministers of both countries expressing satisfaction with the progress made in disengagement at the border, India and China on Thursday, February 25, agreed to set up a hotline number. 

The two ministers spoke to each other for the first time after respective military forces completed disengagement at the southern and northern banks of Pangong Tso at the LAC last week. India has called for broader “de-escalation” of troops at the Line of Actual Control, while China has stressed on the need to improve border mechanisms.

Since early May, the two sides have been locked in a military stand-off at multiple points, including at Pangong Tso in eastern Ladakh. In June last year, 20 Indian soldiers and four members of the Chinese army were killed in a violent face-off at Galwan valley.

While Jaishankar had announced the conversation with a tweet on Thursday night, the two foreign offices issued detailed readouts on Friday. 


The common takeaway from both the press releases was that the two Asian neighbours had agreed to set up a hotline between the foreign ministers to “remain in touch” and “timely communication and exchange of views”.

Also read: Jaishankar, Wang Yi Review ‘Status of Disengagement’ in Phone Call

India and China had been talking about a hotline between the militaries as per the 2013 border agreement. But the project has been delayed for years. 

They also referred to their last face-to-face meeting in Moscow in September 2020, when both sides agreed to five guiding principles for future direction to relations.

Jaishankar indicated, as per the Ministry of External Affairs’ communique, that two sides had “maintained communication since then through both the diplomatic and military channels”. This continuous engagement has led to the recent breakthrough, he asserted. “This had led to progress as both sides had successfully disengaged in the Pangong Tso Lake area earlier this month,” noted the MEA.

The external affairs minister said that with the Pangong Tso lake area disengagement now over, it was the turn for quick resolution of the “remaining issues along the LAC in Eastern Ladakh”. “EAM said that once disengagement is completed at all friction points, then the two sides could also look at broader de-escalation of troops in the area and work towards restoration of peace and tranquility”.

The Chinese readout said that “the situation on the ground has been noticeably eased” after the resolution at the lake on the LAC. Asserting that the two sides should cherish the “hard-won relaxation” to consolidate the progress, Wang also told his Indian counterpart they should “keep up the consultation momentum, further ease the situation, and improve the border management and control mechanisms”. 

Indian and Chinese troops and tanks disengage from the banks of Pangong lake area in Eastern Ladakh where they had been deployed opposite each other for almost ten months now. Photo: PTI/Indian Army handout

“The two sides also need to advance the boundary talks to build up mutual trust and realize peace and tranquility in the border areas,” said the press release issued by Beijing.

The two ministers’ assessment of the lessons learned and the cause of the drift, not surprisingly, differed. Jaishankar reiterated that China had indulged in “provocative behaviour and unilateral attempts of the Chinese side to alter status quo”.

The Chinese state councillor and foreign minister Wang Yi stated that there had been “some wavering and back-pedalling in India’s China policy, and practical cooperation between the two countries has been affected” in the past year. He was likely referring to India’s steps to ban Chinese mobile apps, stop participation of Chinese firms in strategic projects, and 5G trials.

However, as recent Indian government data shows, China had toppled the US to regain the position of India’s top trade partner in 2020. This was mainly due to India’s reliance on imported heavy machinery, telecom equipment and home appliances from China.

Also watch | China Not Keen on Further Disengagement, Withdrawal at Depsang Looks Unlikely: Ajai Shukla

Wang asserted that “decades of experience” has shown that “heightening differences does not help solve problems” and only “erodes the basis of mutual trust”. “A negative trajectory of bilateral relations will incur unnecessary costs and losses on both”.

As per the Chinese foreign ministry, he also repeated China’s position that the disputed boundary should not impact the rest of the relationship. They should handle the boundary question properly to prevent the bilateral relationship from sinking into a negative cycle. While that the two countries have boundary disputes is an objective fact, which should be taken seriously, it is not the whole of China-India relations, and it should be put at a proper place in the overall bilateral relations”.

Jaishankar also reiterated India’s stance on the same issue on the opposite end of China. “EAM said that Boundary Question may take time to resolve but disturbance of peace and tranquility including by violence, will inevitably have a damaging impact on the relationship”.

According to the Chinese readout, Jaishankar also noted that “having in mind the long-term development and larger picture of bilateral relations, [India] is ready to act on the important understandings between the leaders of both countries for the bilateral relationship to get back on track at an early date”.

Jaishankar, Wang Yi Review ‘Status of Disengagement’ in Phone Call

The conversation between the two foreign ministers took place against the backdrop of the disengagement between the two militaries along the LAC.

New Delhi: After the completion of disengagement at Pangong Tso, Indian and Chinese foreign ministers spoke on Thursday afternoon to review the process and implement the “five guiding principles” reached at their meeting in Moscow last year.

The conversation between the two foreign ministers took place against the backdrop of the disengagement between the two militaries at southern and northern banks of Pangong Tso at the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

India and China have been involved in a military stand-off since early May at multiple points in eastern Ladakh. In June last year, 20 Indian soldiers and four Chinese troops were killed in a violent face-off at Galwan valley.

 

In a tweet, Indian external affairs minister S. Jaishankar said that the two ministers “discussed the implementation of our Moscow agreement and reviewed the status of disengagement”.

Also read: India Set to Clear Some New Investment Proposals From China in Coming Weeks: Report

Earlier in the day, Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Anurag Srivastava said that both sides considered the “smooth and successful completion of disengagement in the North and South Bank as a significant first step as this forms a basis for resolution of remaining issues so as to achieve the eventual goal of complete disengagement in all friction areas”.

He added that India and China “have agreed to work towards a mutually acceptable resolution of the remaining issues”.

The Moscow agreement that Jaishankar referred to were the five “guiding principles” that the two ministers agreed at their meeting in Moscow on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation on September 10.

These included understanding that the border troops of both sides should continue their dialogue and abide by all the border agreements and protocol.

Watch | ‘By Standing Up to China’s Bullying, India’s Image Has Risen Several Notches’

Gautam Bambawale, former Ambassador to China and former High Commissioner to Pakistan, said China’s strategic aim is to show the world it’s the hegemon of Asia and that India is much weaker.

Expressing a view that will surprise many people, one of India’s highly regarded former ambassadors to China, who has also served as High Commissioner to Pakistan and Ambassador to Bhutan, has said “India’s standing in the neighbourhood and world has gone up several notches because India has shown it is willing to stand up to China’s bullying.”

Asked if he was saying that India is more highly regarded than previously, Gautam Bambawale emphatically replied “absolutely”. However, Bambawale accepted this is an answer many will find surprising or, even, paradoxical.

In a 35-minute interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire, Bambawale said it is “significant” that restoring status quo ante to what it was in April “finds no mention in the Joint Statement”.

He added this clearly means “the two sides are far apart on this issue”. However, he said the fact that the Joint Statement talks about border areas and not the Line of Actual Control – although all the boundary-related accords and protocols refer to LAC – “is not something I find special or alarming”.

Bambawale said there are clearly two implications behind China’s behaviour in Ladakh: tactically, the aim is to move the ground position of the LAC. In other words, China is moving its control of land right up to where China thinks the LAC lies. Strategically, he said, China’s aim is to show India and the world that there is a huge asymmetry between China and India. As he put it, China wants to show “it’s the hegemon and India is much weaker”.

Bambawale told The Wire that what’s happening in Ladakh is very different to what happened at Depsang in 2013 and Chumar in 2014. The number of troops involved this time is much larger. He added that to move such a large number of troops can only be done with planning and premeditation. His point was obvious. This is not something China has done overnight. It has been carefully planned.

The PLA has denied the Indian Army’s patrols access to five patrol points – PP 10, 11, 11a, 12 and 13 – by blocking them at Bottleneck/Y junction around 18 km inside the LAC. Map: The Wire.

He added that India needs to respond with leverage in both the military and policy areas. He said the policy area can be further sub-divided into two – the economic sphere and the political sphere. The sizeable military build-up by the Indian army, in response to China’s behaviour, is a clear sign that India has responded adequately in military terms and the Chinese know this. In political terms India needs to build-up its relationship with Australia, Japan, the United States i.e. the Quad countries.

When questioned on whether India has economic leverage to cause China sufficient pain to make it change its behaviour, Bambawale emphatically argued that it did. He did not accept that China would already have factored in any disruption in trade, which is anyway only 2% of China’s trade, or the debarment of Huawei from India’s 5G development plans. As he put it, “India has a huge telecom market. 900 million. If Chinese companies like Huawei cannot participate it’s going to be quite painful.”

Citing Sumdorong Chu in 1986 which took seven years to resolve, Bambawale said, “Time is on India’s side”. He said “a combination of leverage will work in the long run”. He cited how India’s banning of TikTok had led to several countries like the United States, Australia and, even, Japan, rethinking or reconsidering their relationship with TikTok.

However, Bambawale was critical of the government’s failure or reluctance to share more information about what’s happening in Ladakh with the Indian people. As he put it: “The government should share more information with all of us about what’s happening on the border in Ladakh rather than allow leaks to define the narrative”.

Bambawale told The Wire that he did not find it reassuring that point 5 of the Joint Statement issued by the Indian and Chinese Foreign Ministers committed both countries to a new confidence building mechanism. He said “a whole series of confidence building measures already exist. An entire architecture which has been implemented over 30 years. But it has been junked by China since May. China has violated every principle that existed”. He said the earlier confidence building measures have now been thrown “into the dustbin of history”.

However, Bambawale added that “it’s a good thing the Foreign Ministers met in Moscow. It shows a channel of communication is open.”

Finally, when asked whether he fears that if it comes to war Pakistan might open a second front, Bambawale, who has also served as High Commissioner to Pakistan, said: “I don’t fear it. I know they will.”

India Tells China it Wants Complete Disengagement at All Friction Points

China however has reiterated that the ‘pressing need’ is for New Delhi to ‘correct its mistake’.

New Delhi: India on Thursday stated that there should be “complete disengagement” at all friction points, with special emphasis on Pangong Tso Lake, even as China reiterated that the “pressing need” was for New Delhi to “correct its mistake” and disengage its troops.

The differing emphasis between the two sides is especially stark after the foreign ministers met at Moscow on September 10 and agreed on five principles that are supposed to guide their approach to the ongoing stand-off in eastern Ladakh.

At the weekly briefing on Thursday, MEA spokesperson Anurag Srivastava said that  following the Moscow consensus, both countries should “focus on easing tensions in the friction areas by refraining from any actions that may lead to an escalation in the situation”.

Also read: What Rajnath Left Out: PLA Blocks Access to 900 Sq Km of Indian Territory in Depsang

“The Chinese side should sincerely work with the Indian side for complete disengagement at the earliest from all friction areas including Pangong Lake as well as de-escalation in border areas in accordance with the bilateral agreements and protocols on maintenance of peace and tranquility in border areas,” he said.

Indian and Chinese troops have clashed on the north and south banks of the lake, which straddles the LAC. Shots had also been fired on multiple occasions this month, according to several reports.

He added that China should “strictly respect and observe the Line of Actual Control and not make further attempts to unilaterally change status quo”.

Earlier in the day, defence minister Rajnath Singh had issued a statement that India-China skirmishes had been over patrolling disputes and that New Delhi wants restoration of the traditional patrolling pattern of its military in that area.

The Chinese side, meanwhile, asserted for the second consecutive day that India will have to take the first step.

“Like I said in my reply to Indian correspondents yesterday, the Chinese border troops have always strictly observed the relevant agreements between the two countries and are committed to safeguarding China’s territorial sovereignty and maintaining peace and stability in the border areas. What is pressing now is that the Indian side should immediately correct its mistake, disengage on the ground as soon as possible and take concrete actions to ease the tension and lower the temperature along the border,” said Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin on Thursday in Beijing.

At the meeting in Moscow, the two ministers had decided that ground commanders would hold further round of talks, but no dates have been confirmed so far.

India-China Skirmishes Have Primarily Been Over Patrolling, Rajnath Singh Tells Rajya Sabha

The defence minister said “no force in the world can stop Indian soldiers from patrolling”.

New Delhi: Defence minister Rajnath Singh on Thursday spoke on the military standoff with China along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and said that no force in the world can stop Indian troops from patrolling the country’s border in the Ladakh region.

Singh’s statement comes two days after his address to the Lok Sabha on the border standoff along the LAC, where he said that China had mobilised large number of troops, weapons and ammunition on the LAC in Eastern Ladakh, violating all bilateral agreements in the process.

“Chinese actions reflect a disregard of our various bilateral agreements. The amassing of the troops by China goes against the 1993 & 1996 Agreements,” Singh asserted, adding that China continues to illegally occupy approximately 38,000 sq. kms in the Union territory of Ladakh.

Also read: What Rajnath Left Out: PLA Blocks Access to 900 Sq Km of Indian Territory in Depsang

After the defence minister’s statement, the opposition slammed the government for not being allowed to speak by Lok Sabha speaker, Om Birla.

Replying to the clarifications sought by members of parliament on the border standoff, Singh said in Rajya Sabha that skirmishes and face-off with China in the last few months have been primarily over the issue of patrolling the Ladakh border. “I want to make it clear, skirmishes and face-off are because of this (issue of patrolling),” he said, adding that the patrolling pattern is traditional and well-defined.

“No force in the world can stop Indian soldiers from patrolling. Our soldiers have sacrificed their lives only for this,” the minister said.

In his statement, Singh said China attempted to change the status quo along the LAC with its provocative military manoeuvres late last month and that there is a mismatch between what Beijing says and does.

Also read: As Beijing Engages Delhi in Discursive Talks, Maintaining Troops at LAC Becomes a Costly Affair

The minister said India wants a peaceful solution to the boundary issue, but will not shy away from any action required to defend the sovereignty of the country.

While the two sides were engaged in diplomatic and military dialogues, Singh said, “The Chinese side again engaged in provocative military manoeuvres on the night of 29th and 30th August in an attempt to change the status quo in the South Bank area of Pangong Lake”.

“But yet again, timely and firm actions by our armed forces along the LAC prevented such attempts from succeeding,” he said, adding that, “Unki kahani aur karni alag hai (their actions are at variance with their words”.

(With inputs from PTI)

We Need to Look at What Was Missing in the India-China Joint Statement

Restoration of status quo ante has to be squeezed into the agenda of negotiations. Until this is achieved, bilateral relations will remain skewed.

Nothing is deemed to be done till words have translated into deeds. This is the vertebrae of the cold war principle of trust, but verify.

The outcome of the low-expectation dialogue of foreign ministers of India and China, S. Jaishankar and Wang Yi, from the five-point agreement in Moscow on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), is neither breakdown nor breakthrough. Simply put, it is old wine in new bottle.

Still, for the first time, neither country has blamed the other for the tensions on the border which had become standard practice. It is also the first time there was a joint statement instead of customary separate ones, but each side issued a supplementary note.

What was conspicuously missing from the joint statement was RSQA – restoration of status quo ante. Think of it. RSQA has never appeared in any of the Chinese statements in the past. The Chinese have repeatedly mentioned ‘restoration of peace and tranquility in border area’. The word LAC is also not used.

Also read: Chinese Company ‘Monitors’ Top Indian Politicians, Bureaucrats and Defence Officials: Report

The Indian statements have also not used RSQA probably due to deference to Chinese sensitivities. But RSQA has figured frequently outside the formal Indian statements.

Similarly, Depsang where the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has made the deepest incursion and is the most strategic ingress is not covered by the DDP – disengagement and de-escalation process – which has revived in military lexicon, the terms buffer zones and friction points.

‘Provocative action’

Pre-empting the PLA’s attempts at what it has done on the north bank of Pangong Lake on the south bank, Indian elite troops from Special Frontier Force consisting of exiled Tibetans occupied the commanding heights on the ridgeline of Kailash Range overlooking Chinese Moldo garrison, including tactical heights point 5167, Bump, Magar Hill, Gurung Hill, Mukhpari, Rezang La and Rechin La stretching almost 30 kilometre.

Rattled by this bold pre-emptive forward deployment similar to their own multiple intrusions in April-May, the PLA has deftly created a friction point by occupying a plateau opposite Mukhpari about 500 metres (m) away and 100 m lower than that. It is here that 40 to 50 PLA soldiers, armed with rods, spears and firearms, fired shots, sparring Indian soldiers into a Galwan-like clash.

After the PLA fired in the air, Indians reciprocated and did not allow the PLA to close in.

A friction point was manufactured a few days prior to the Moscow talks by the PLA so that the tactically significant Mukhpari and other heights could be included in the DDP when Corps Commanders resume their sixth round of talks later this week. The last round was held on August 2.

Incidentally it is now being reported by government sources that between 29 and 31 August, Helmet and Black Top – both on or close to Kailash ridge and on Chinese side of LAC – which were reported to having been occupied by Indian troops are in fact not in their possession, and are probably occupied by the PLA which gives them a foothold on these commanding heights.

Also read: The Key Issue Dividing India and China Today Is Not the Border

In brief, the five-point joint agreement calls for quick disengagement to ease tension, avoiding escalatory action, abiding by existing border protocols and continuing dialogue at all levels including special representatives and instituting new confidence building measures (CBMs).

Engaging through diplomatic channels

Some escalation has already taken place: the Galwan clash which resulted in casualties and the prophylactic firing by both sides near Kailash ridge, both events occurring for the first time in 45 years.

Each side made separate comments and statements after the agreement accompanied by vicious reports by China’s Global Times, reflecting deep differences and, especially, the demolition of trust.

A file photo of S. Jaishankar and Wang Yi. Photo: PTI

At a press conference along with Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, Wang said: “As for relations between China-India, the whole world follows the development…most important is to avoid new violations of the obligations of the border”.

More importantly, he added: “We are ready to take conciliatory steps. Troops and equipment should be withdrawn from the Line of Actual Control.” He also noted that strategic guidance from Indian and Chinese leaders suggested that India and China were not competitive rivals or threat to each other.

Overall, he struck a friendly note, quite the opposite of the belligerent comments made by PLA western theatre command.

But a document released by the Chinese foreign ministry claimed that the “Indian side does not consider the relations to be dependent on the settlement of the boundary question”. This is 360 degrees to what Jaishankar has publicly asserted: bilateral ties cannot be separate from the situation on LAC.

Jaishankar told Wang that India will not de-escalate until there is complete and verifiable disengagement at all points on the LAC, as overall relations will suffer if there is no peace since the root cause of tension is Chinese breaking existing agreements in April-May. The Global Times wrote: ‘If India wants peace, China and India should uphold LAC of 7 November 1959. But if India wants war, China will oblige’.

India is reasonably satisfied with the agreement though there is no reference to RSQA or a timeline.

India has no coercive deterrent or leverage to force a border settlement due to a simple capacity deficit. Otherwise it would have acted more resolutely as it did during the Sumdorong Chu standoff in 1986, or in 1996 when the terms of CBMs and the LAC were institutionalised between two nearly equal powers.

With the economy bottoming and COVID-19 pandemic skyrocketing, India is in no position to exercise the military option that Chief of Defence Staff General Bipin Rawat has put out on the table at this late stage. The government can keep its domestic constituency happy with such rhetoric but is dangerous in case the balloon goes up.

Also read: ‘Afghan Soil Shouldn’t Be Used for Anti-India Activities’: Jaishankar at Intra-Afghan Talks Opening

China’s land grab policy

China certainly does not want war or even a limited conflict. It has demonstrated its policy of land grab by stealth – without firing a shot – through multiple intrusions presenting a fait accompli.

It knows India will not initiate hostilities and will only act in self-defence.

Some Generals from my tribe have been wagging their index finger on TV and print media to teach China a lesson (wish that were feasible), by recalling Indian soldiers’ combat superiority to PLA in mountains.

Realism has eluded them or josh and hosh must go together.

The PLA has cleverly drawn out Indian forces from their prepared conventional high-altitude defences to the plateau areas of Ladakh (except Kailash ridge) to fight combined arms combat not mountain warfare.

Jaishankar understands the perils of war better than some unthinking Generals. China’s recent massive build up following the debacle in south Pangong and battle drills in Tibet coupled with war cries from Global Times are components of psy-war matching India’s unprecedented deployment.

While the chances of an accidental trigger to a Galwan-like clash exists, military conflict is unlikely despite China delaying the DDP.

Whether the Wang-Jaishankar agreement will provide fresh impetus for disengagement is not clear yet. The imponderable is PLA’s willingness to give up its hard-earned gains on the LAC.

The war-baiting Global Times’ statements are in consonance with PLA thinking. It will also test Wang’s clout as a political councilor. The Chinese game since April-May has been to push LAC west toward its 1959 claim line which they call Green Line.

Also read: How China Turned the Tables on India and Converted 1993 Agreement Into a Land Grab

Clearly, the Chinese have abandoned the concept of LAC and are instead playing for the 1959 claim line. Further, they have changed the meaning of LAC to Line That You Can Control.

The first hitch in the DDP will be China’s insistence on Indian forces withdrawing from the new friction point at Mukhpari on Kailash ridge which is on the Indian side of LAC. This will require astute negotiating skills which the Indian military team has not displayed so far.

The immediate task will be to get PLA to disengage properly from Hot Springs and Fingers area where the pullback from Finger 4 was cosmetic and jostling for heights there has not stopped.

Equally, the deep freeze of Depsang blockade has to be thawed.

While RSQA is still a bridge too far, it has to be squeezed into the agenda of negotiations. This will not be easy. But until it is achieved, bilateral relations – the Chinese will have to be told – will remain skewed.

To take consolation from the US not being able to restore the status quo ante in South China Sea is to rub the ignominy of the fait accompli.

India must remind China how President Hu Jintao had prescribed the virtues of the India-China border peace and tranquility model to Pakistan. In his era India and China signed a strategic partnership agreement…yes!

There is a good chance that Prime Minister Narendra Modi could meet President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Riyadh in November. The two leaders will need to renew strategic guidance for the establishment of new framework to ensure stable and peaceful borders once RSQA is reaffirmed and implemented.

In which case, maybe only token garrisons from both sides will have to contend with harsh winter in east Ladakh. This could of course, be wishful thinking.

General Ashok K. Mehta was part of the monitoring team of Defence Planning Staff in MoD of the year long PLA intrusion at Sumdorong chu in 1987/88.

News Channels Claim Old Images of Chinese Army Cemetery Are Graves of Galwan Dead

TV anchors of two media groups said the photos were exclusive and proved that near 40 PLA soldiers had died in the hands of the Indian Army at Galwan.

The deadly face-off between Indian and Chinese soldiers in Galwan valley on June 15 led to the deaths of 20 Indian army men. The casualties suffered on the Chinese side, on the other hand, has been left to much speculation by the Chinese government thus giving rise to misinformation. While rumours have killed anything between five to 100 People’s Liberation Army (PLA) soldiers, the official death toll remains a mystery.

On August 31, however, Aaj Tak claimed to have obtained ‘exclusive’ images that prove “40 PLA soldiers” were killed in the cross-border skirmish. Anchor Rohit Sardana claimed in a passionate narration, “We are showing you pictures of the graves of Chinese soldiers. Several people in the country wanted proof of the Chinese soldiers who were killed in Galwan clashes. The proof is on your television screens…more than 40 Chinese soldiers died in clashes with India and you can watch how Chinese soldiers paid respect to their tombs.”

[Translated from: “आज तक एक्सक्लूसिव तस्वीरें. ये आपको दिखा रहा है चीनी सैनिकों की कब्र की तस्वीरें हैं. गलवान में जो झड़प हुई थी उसमें जो चीनी सैनिक मारे गए थे, जिसके लिए देश में भी बहुत सारे लोग खड़े हो गए थे कि सबूत कहां है उसका? उसका सबूत ये सामने टेलीविज़न स्क्रीन पर है…भारत से झड़प में चीन के 40 से ज़्यादा जवान मारे गए थे और उनकी कब्रों पर आप देख सकते है उनको श्रद्धांजली दी जा रही है”]

Aaj Tak’s English counterpart, India Today, also broadcast similar visuals. The channel showed satellite imagery of the same set of graves with two red arrows pointing at specific area claimed to be “new graves”. Anchor Nabila Jamal claimed, “China soldiers who died in Galwan clash buried at Kangxiwa war memorial. Pictures of that show graves being visited by PLA soldiers…proof of China’s massive Galwan casualties.”

Chinese soldiers, who died in #GalwanValley clash, buried at Kangxiwa war memorial. #IndiaChinaClash #galwanvalleyclash

Chinese soldiers, who died in #GalwanValley clash, buried at Kangxiwa war memorial. #IndiaChinaClash #galwanvalleyclash

Posted by India Today on Sunday, 30 August 2020

Times Now, on the other hand, claimed, “Photos of 106 PLA tombstones reveal [the] extent of Chinese casualties in June 15 Galwan clash.” The channel further wrote in a tweet, “PM Modi was right about Galwan grit, pro-China lobby ‘doubted’ India.”

Swarajya penned an article based on Times Now’s reportage.

NewsX and ABP News also broadcast shows where they claimed over 30 graves of Chinese soldiers who died in Galwan clashes were discovered.

Fact-check

These photographs are of the Chinese military cemetery in Kangxiwa town that contains graves of PLA soldiers martyred in the 1962 Indian-Sino war.

While Aaj Tak claimed that 40 PLA soldiers died in the Galwan clashes, India Today did not make a verbal claim on the death toll yet ran images of the cemetery as “proof of massive casualty”. An infographic aired during the show suggested that the cemetery has 105 graves. A defence expert invited on the show, however, said these graves have been present at least since December 2019 and some new graves have recently cropped up.

Alt News found that the Google Earth photo aired by India Today dates back to 2011. As per our calculation as well, there are 105 graves (43 on the left and 62 on the right) in this imagery.

Quite ironically, India Today had used the same map in a report published on August 29 which mentioned that it is from 2011.

We will break down the rest of the fact-check into two sections that separately count the number of graves on the left and right sides of the cemetery.

Number of graves on the left

A photograph of the cemetery which is viral on social media was found using Chinese search engine Baidu. It dates back to 2011 and clearly shows 43 graves on the left side. The last row (marked in red) contains only one grave.

 

On August 24, the Chinese military had shared a video of their visit to the war memorial on the micro-blogging website Weibo. The same video can also be watched on Chinese video-sharing platform Bilibili. Here, the last row on the left has two graves (marked in red). It’s unclear when the new grave was built, however, it was certainly dug up after 2011. Thus bringing up the total number of graves to 44.

Number of graves on the right

Another image of the cemetery circulating on social media gives a clear view of 63 graves on the right. This image is also fairly recent as the last row on the left has two graves (marked in red circle).

If you notice the above image carefully, the last row on the right contains five graves (marked in red line). However, in the latest visuals uploaded by the Chinese military, there is a new grave in this row (marked in green below) bringing up the total number of graves in the last row to six and the total number of graves on the right side of the cemetery to 64.

This means the cemetery has 108 graves. The video uploaded by the Chinese military on August 24 also says that there are 108 graves in the war memorial.

[Tip: Upload images on Google docs or Google translate (phone) to extract texts.]

A document uploaded on the website of the Chinese Defence Ministry in April 2020 had put the total number of martyrs buried in Kangxiwa war memorial at 108. The military face-off between Indian and Chinese troops in Galwan reportedly took place in May-June. Thus the imagery aired by Aaj Tak and India Today cannot represent graves of Chinese soldiers martyred in these clashes.

In fact, we found another picture aired by India Today which dates back to at least December 2019. This picture was uploaded on Chinese question and answer website zhihu.com akin to quora.com. The date can be seen at the bottom of the article.

It is noteworthy that one of the widely circulating photographs may be recent but we were unable to confirm the antecedents of this grave.

To sum up the fact-check, India Today used a satellite image from 2011 to report on Chinese casualties in the Galwan clashes. The pictures aired by India Today, Aaj Tak and Times Now show the memorial in Kangxiwa that contains graves of Chinese soldiers who died in the 1962 war with India. Alt News found that at least three new graves were built on the site post-2011. Another picture of a grave that appears to have been recently built is floating online. However, we were unable to confirm the details of this grave.

Misinformation viral on social media

Journalist Sushant B Sinha tweeted pictures of the Kangxiwa war memorial as graves of Chinese martyrs in the Galwan clashes. “Do not except the ‘give us proof’ brigade to feel any shame,” he wrote.

Newly-founded website Kreately published a report claiming more than 100 Chinese soldiers were killed in the clashes. This was shared by BJP leader Kapil Mishra and party supporter Sanjay Dixit. Kreately had earlier promoted the false claim that Chinese dissident Yang Jianli had said that 100 Chinese soldiers died in Galwan skirmish.

Rishi Bagree tweeted “big blow to China and Congress” while claiming “35-106” Chinese soldiers fell in the Galwan clashes based on the same set of images.

Other Twitter users that drew hundreds of retweets were @IndoPac_Info and @BefittingFacts.

This article first appeared on Alt News. Read the original here.

Since the Clash in Galwan Valley, Ladakhis Feel Insecure, Fearful and Betrayed

Watching the PLA inch onto Indian territory, people who live on the frontlines are pained by the Union government’s inaction in the face of the Chinese ‘land grab’.

New Delhi: Over the past few weeks, the country has been assured and reassured periodically by the Ministry of External Affairs that there is no longer anything to worry about in Ladakh’s Galwan Valley, the place on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) between India and China where, on June 15, 20 Indian soldiers including their commanding officer, were killed in a face-off with China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

But the people of Ladakh, who are right on the frontlines, continue to worry.

Dubious of heightened Chinese activity in the Demchok area, Urgain Chodon, chairperson of the Nyoma Block Development Council, said on Facebook, “Whatever has happened in Galwan is not new, it has been happening since many years. People are in a state of panic, people are not afraid of coronavirus anymore, they’re afraid of the Chinese intrusion and the war-like situation here. Everyone here is frightened since the border inhabitants have to face the consequences first.”

Since the Chinese intrusion, Chodon added, the people of Galwan Valley have lost land where their cattle could graze, which means their livelihoods are threatened. Border patrolling, however, she said, appears to be limited.

Pangong Tso Lake on the India-China border region in Ladakh. Photo: Koshy Koshy/Flickr (CC BY 2.0)

‘We can see them usurp our land’

“Intrusion is not new to Ladakhis, the only concern is that the Chinese have not withdrawn completely,” said Rigzin Spalbar, former chairman and chief executive councillor of the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council. “But this time, the Chinese have occupied a very vulnerable and crucial point and the pronouncement by the Central government that there is no cause to worry makes us worry even more, because we can see the Chinese usurping our lands.”

By denying the presence of the Chinese on Indian territory, Spalbar said, India gives the impression that it is scared.

Ladakhis are certainly scared, says Drass-based Ghulam Rasool Nagvi, the chief spokesperson for the National Conference (Ladakh). He told The Wire, “People are fearful; people are in pain because of the inaction of the Central government on this land grabbing by China.” Over the years, China has “inched further” into Ladakh, he said and that Ladakhis have been losing “hard earned” land to them. “We don’t even have the space to protest because we know how this government functions. Today I protest and tomorrow I will be jailed,” Nagvi said.

Also Read: How Rajnath Singh Spilled the Beans on the PLA in Ladakh After Sustained Misinformation

The Galwan crisis has cracked open a set of developmental insecurities that need to be tackled as soon as poosible, observed retired Colonel Sonam Wangchuk, who received the Maha Vir Chakra for his service in Kargil.

“Perpetual land slicing, herders losing their grazing lands and concentrated commercialisation in and around Leh is posing obstacles for nomads and remote village folk,” Wangchuk told The Wire. “This crisis shows the lack of good infrastructure at the borders. If the army must be mobilised in any eventuality, it is going to be very difficult.”

Having served at Pangong Tso himself, Wangchuk spoke with good authority on the neglect faced by those who live on the borders. “If the Chinese apply the stick and carrot approach and try to appease the border folk, reshaping their minds to facilitate further encroachment upon Indian territory, it could pose major problems,” he said. “Any sort of laxity from our side in patrolling can aid the PLA and it is important to relay information to prevent such incidents in future.”

An Indian Army convoy moves along a highway leading to Ladakh, at Gagangeer in Kashmir’s Ganderbal district June 18, 2020. Photo: Reuters/Danish Ismail/Files

The irony of appropriation

For many Ladakhis, India’s low-key response to the Chinese aggression speaks not only of fear but also of the failure of policy. “During the Kargil War, India gave a bold, befitting response to the aggressors,” pointed out Sajjad Kargili, a social activist from Kargil. “But in this episode of military intrusion in Galwan, 21 years after Kargil, we see a clear failure of India’s foreign policy as well as domestic policy.”

Kargili pointed out the irony of the Central government’s sense of triumph over the reading down of Article 370 on August 5, 2019, and its plans to regain Aksai Chin, when in actuality, it is China that is getting closer to Ladakh with every move. “Regional insecurity had increased since August 5 last year, but now the people feel a deeper insecurity because of the clash at the international border as well,” he said.

Also Read: Intelligence Failure on PLA Intrusions in Ladakh Brings Back Memories of Kargil

“Apprehension has become part of our life as Ladakhis,” said Deldan Namgyala, former MLA from the Nubra valley. “While many government officials and media channels have said that the situation is de-escalating, I can tell you that there is still a PLA presence in the Finger Four area near Pangong Tso, though it has decreased somewhat. The people of Chushul village still haven’t been allowed to return and even the BSNL network has been snapped,” he told The Wire.

The behaviour of the media has not helped calm Ladakhis at all, Namgyal added. “Reporters from channels like India Today and Zee News have been pointing to other peaks and calling them Galwan Valley, claiming that the PLA has moved out. But Galwan has a river which swells at this time of the year. Armies often move away for this reason,” he explained. “Claims that the PLA structures have been removed cannot also be completely believed because satellite imaging is not 100% accurate in mountainous valleys.”

Satellite image of Ladakh, with the Chinese claim line marked in yellow and the Chinese road from Yecheng in Xinjiang to Tibet in red passing through Aksai Chin in eastern Ladakh. Image: The Wire/Google Earth

Both the Indian Army and the PLA patrol the area to the point of Finger Eight (a western post near the LAC). But the PLA got to Finger 4 and then retreated back to 5, which puts Fingers 5-8 in their control, said Namgyal. “The increased movement of helicopters and fighter jets in this region has heightened anxieties among the locals. Many are already losing their livelihoods because of the capture of their grazing lands by the PLA,” he said.

The locals are uncertain, anxious and confused about what will happen to their homes. “The government has forgotten Ladakh after carving it into a Union Territory,” said Rigzin Dorjey, a student activist from Sakti village. “Ladakhis are able to sleep soundly only because of the Indian Army, but the Central government is apathetic to the Army as well. This silence and inaction on the part of the government insult the Army too,” added Dorjey.