Very craftily, you are portraying Congress' betrayal as incompetence!
Line of Actual Control (LAC) : India & Tibet Border Updates
- Thread starter Shashank
- Start date
Very craftily, you are portraying Congress' betrayal as incompetence!
Open opposition to Chinese occupation of tibet would have meant huge military expenditure that India could not afford just immediately after independence. But ditching the Dalai lama was something that any indian could not bring himself to do.
They claim Arunachal and every day we dhoti shiver. We do not officially even claim Tibet even though we have most of the key players living as refugees inside our country and still China sees us as an aggressor. We need to show intent before actually hitting them. The Chinese also don't fight directly all those anti-indian actions are mostly indirect. Stopping us from NSG stopping us from join the UNSC veto membership. Calling us out on Kashmir and many more. If we don't treat our enemies like enemies they will only exploit this weakness. We are not in a position to give the Chinese irreparable damage right now. Our economy is 20 years behind them. The most we can give them is a bloody nose like Vietnam. But let's start exploiting the weaknesses of the Chinese state till then..
Last edited:
While the sentiments of members towards history/current affairs and historical/current figures is well appreciated, this is not the thread for the same.
Cheers
Cheers
You can not. Not without serious repercussions - your treaty, national word and understandings not the least of them. In 2003 joint communique, under PM Mr Vajpayee, for the first time Tibet was officially acknowledged as a part of People's Republic of China.
India's Betrayal of Tibet - WSJ
www.wsj.com
China and India Edge a Bit Closer to a Border Accord (Published 2003)
India and China sign joint declaration in which India emphasizes that Tibet is part of China and China agrees to begin trading with India's northeastern state of Sikkim; Prime Min Atal Bihari Vajpayee says his meeting with Chinese leaders in Beijing will lead to stable, enduring and...www.nytimes.com
There is No Tibet Card for India to Play. Here's Why.
China considers Tibet a 'core' issue and any change in India's historical position would mean challenging China’s territorial integrity, to which Beijing would likely respond with violence.thewire.in
A dispassionate analysis of the fortifications will indicate it to be the work of PLA, the orientation of the defensive lines and redoubts. One can always argue, for example, that there is no oxygen on moon or conversely, there is.
IMO
Yes we can , provided we have the balls to do so
We have precidence to fall on eg the Chinese backed down from pancheel agreement with India and attacked India and the violations of border past and now is in contravention of signed agreements.
Only the weak adheres to agreements .
In realpolitiks agreements are made to be broken one day - the day you are strong enough to get away with it.
Indians are weak and hence they adhere to agreements inspite of transgressions since we lack the force and will to punish the violaters and rather hide under the hilarious notion of moral ascendency of maintaining agreements which is rather a soft cover for our impotence.
The USA Russia Europe regularly walk out of agreements , what's the big deal
Best we Indians get out of these silly notions of moral ascendancy . Its suicidal .
I seriously don't understand why we always end up defending
Trying to defend at multiple locations will end up in a situation where we will end up unable to defend none
What stops us from salami slicing our own territories under Chinese occupation and Tibet , then the onus shifts or at the least the enemy gets caught in its own trap.
I seriously don't understand Indians and their pussy nature
India is a soft power and a non aggressor and has to follow the decorum set by Bapu and Chacha which is Ahimsa, Satyagrah, and peaceful coexistence. No matter their statues are being pull down in south africa and usa.
Valid reason: India doesn't want west to get involved in this tension. Chinese and Pakistanis don't understand this that 2nd and 3rd world countries will take the opportunity.
I never quite understand this attitude of Indian babu-dom and our citizenry : west will betray us!!! west will conspire against us!!!! west will use us a pawns!!!!
Folks its not that hard to understand. Its negotiation. Plain and simple. Chinese did it in 1990 at WTO, a west dominated forum. They were not shit scared that west will dominate their markets or west will bring democracy and yadda yadda. They went with a purpose. They provided value and captured manufacturing and rest as they say is history.
Its the same. Do the damn negotiations. Do it right. Work out a deal with western blocs in our favour. They are not Gods. Whats the point of having a stupid non-alignment if you cann't play all sides well?
Look at Russia : Playing both Chinese and Indian side.
It can be done.
Not just a border conflict, there is much more to it.
NEW DELHI: As the Indian and Chinese armies begin the process of disengagement in Galwan Valley, closely monitored with huge distrust marking the process, there are many theories about why China violated agreements and basically trashed a bilateral relationship with India.
The disengagement may happen, but the problem will not go away. The Chinese will be back, because they are pushing more than a boundary claim with India. They are trying to secure a key route of communication and trade, the flagship project of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative.
As events have played out, it is increasingly clear that the Chinese actions are not a “response” to any recent moves India may have made although Beijing would like to portray it as such. China began the hostilities, starting the preparations in April. Hostilities began in May, when India started to counter-deploy rapidly in response to China’s
substantial build-up at several points on the Line of Actual Control.
China’s immediate goal is clearly to dominate the recently built 255-km Darbuk-Shyok-Daulat Beg Oldie (DBO) road that connects Leh to DBO at the base of the Karakoram Pass. The road, which had to be rebuilt after the initial alignment was found to be unsuitable, runs along the Shyok and Tangtse rivers.
More immediately, China wants to dominate the junction of the Shyok-Galwan river that would threaten Indian movement. Most recently, China complained about this new branch road at the junction with a bridge spanning the multi-channel stream. All of this is well within India’s side of the LAC, and India is well within its rights to build infrastructure here. China has a headstart over India in building border infrastructure, including using the Indian distraction during the Kargil conflict to build a road up to ‘Finger 4’ on the northern bank of Pangong Tso.
The Darbuk-Shyok-DBO road is seen as a threat to China — to the east is Aksai Chin which India claims and China holds, and north is Shaksgam Valley that was illegally ceded to China in the 1960s. By appropriating all of Galwan Valley, China seeks to threaten this road and sit atop the junction of two sub-sectors — Galwan Valley is the southern extremity of what the Indian Army calls “sub-sector north”.
China really wants to preserve the route from Xinjiang, crossing the Karakoram Pass, to the Siachen glacier and into Pakistan, ending at Gwadar in Balochistan. If this is indeed the case, it is a given that the Chinese will be back to push against India in the near future again. This is also why China has suddenly changed its tune and is now claiming the entire Galwan Valley. China controls part of the valley, while the rest of it is with India.
Military strategists say the reported Chinese buildup in Depsang is little more than a diversion, to stretch the Indian deployment thin. The prize is Galwan Valley.
The Darbuk-Shyok-DBO road threatens China’s game. India restarted the advanced landing grounds in DBO and Fukche in 2008, as well as the Nyoma airfield. This gives India greater ability to protect itself in inhospitable terrain. More importantly, from China’s point of view, it gives India connectivity to China’s restive
Xinjiang province, an actual physical link.
India will continue to be pushed by China in this sector — India begins its boundary with China at the trijunction of boundaries of India, China and Afghanistan, which India stated at the officials’ meeting on the boundary in 1960. Interestingly, at the same meeting, China remained fuzzy about where the boundary began, saying it had never been formally delimited and was only a “traditional customary boundary line”.
They actually divided the two countries at the Kongka Pass.
India should expect that China will persist in pushing westwards, exploiting every Indian weakness and gap they can find. Such face-offs will now become the norm.
NEW DELHI: As the Indian and Chinese armies begin the process of disengagement in Galwan Valley, closely monitored with huge distrust marking the process, there are many theories about why China violated agreements and basically trashed a bilateral relationship with India.
The disengagement may happen, but the problem will not go away. The Chinese will be back, because they are pushing more than a boundary claim with India. They are trying to secure a key route of communication and trade, the flagship project of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative.
As events have played out, it is increasingly clear that the Chinese actions are not a “response” to any recent moves India may have made although Beijing would like to portray it as such. China began the hostilities, starting the preparations in April. Hostilities began in May, when India started to counter-deploy rapidly in response to China’s
substantial build-up at several points on the Line of Actual Control.
China’s immediate goal is clearly to dominate the recently built 255-km Darbuk-Shyok-Daulat Beg Oldie (DBO) road that connects Leh to DBO at the base of the Karakoram Pass. The road, which had to be rebuilt after the initial alignment was found to be unsuitable, runs along the Shyok and Tangtse rivers.
More immediately, China wants to dominate the junction of the Shyok-Galwan river that would threaten Indian movement. Most recently, China complained about this new branch road at the junction with a bridge spanning the multi-channel stream. All of this is well within India’s side of the LAC, and India is well within its rights to build infrastructure here. China has a headstart over India in building border infrastructure, including using the Indian distraction during the Kargil conflict to build a road up to ‘Finger 4’ on the northern bank of Pangong Tso.
The Darbuk-Shyok-DBO road is seen as a threat to China — to the east is Aksai Chin which India claims and China holds, and north is Shaksgam Valley that was illegally ceded to China in the 1960s. By appropriating all of Galwan Valley, China seeks to threaten this road and sit atop the junction of two sub-sectors — Galwan Valley is the southern extremity of what the Indian Army calls “sub-sector north”.
China really wants to preserve the route from Xinjiang, crossing the Karakoram Pass, to the Siachen glacier and into Pakistan, ending at Gwadar in Balochistan. If this is indeed the case, it is a given that the Chinese will be back to push against India in the near future again. This is also why China has suddenly changed its tune and is now claiming the entire Galwan Valley. China controls part of the valley, while the rest of it is with India.
Military strategists say the reported Chinese buildup in Depsang is little more than a diversion, to stretch the Indian deployment thin. The prize is Galwan Valley.
The Darbuk-Shyok-DBO road threatens China’s game. India restarted the advanced landing grounds in DBO and Fukche in 2008, as well as the Nyoma airfield. This gives India greater ability to protect itself in inhospitable terrain. More importantly, from China’s point of view, it gives India connectivity to China’s restive
Xinjiang province, an actual physical link.
India will continue to be pushed by China in this sector — India begins its boundary with China at the trijunction of boundaries of India, China and Afghanistan, which India stated at the officials’ meeting on the boundary in 1960. Interestingly, at the same meeting, China remained fuzzy about where the boundary began, saying it had never been formally delimited and was only a “traditional customary boundary line”.
They actually divided the two countries at the Kongka Pass.
India should expect that China will persist in pushing westwards, exploiting every Indian weakness and gap they can find. Such face-offs will now become the norm.
And only one way to stop it
Take the war to Tibet and free it
Start the preparations now
India cannot solve this problem by remaining in a reactionary mode. They have to find a out of box plan to solve it.
Agreed, however, read the below article -
Sam Manekshaw, the general who told Indira when Indian Army wasn’t ready for a war
It is equally important to know when you are ready & when you are not - that decides the fate of the conflict.
If our armed forces have taken over and they are not starting the offensive, I believe it is because we are not ready to be the aggressors.
I also hope, we have a Sam Manekshaw like figure in the play some where.
Last edited:
IA assessment of Pangong Tso -
Army treating Pangong Tso flashpoint as 'semi-permanent faceoff'
The Indian Army is dealing with the flashpoint at Ladakh's Pangong Tso as a 'semi-permanent faceoff' that it expects to stretch out for weeks, if not months. In first details shared with India Today of how the Army leadership is viewing the brewing situation on the shores of the massive lake, top Army officers told India Today that the Indian Army had mobilised troops in the region more than adequately for any eventuality in a sector where the Chinese Army has built up more visibly, and in greater numbers, than any other.
Army chief General Manoj Mukund Naravane, who spent two days in Ladakh this week, briefed Defence Minister Rajnath Singh on the situation along the 832-kilometre frontier at eastern Ladakh with Chinese forces. While in Ladakh, he met with troops from units deployed in the Pangong area, including men involved in a violent clash with Chinese soldiers on the night of May 5, an incident seen as the starting point of the current standoff that has now run for 51 days and counting.
While the Army is very much seeing Chinese actions in Pangong sector as the most visible attempt to change the status quo in eastern Ladakh, sources say a parallel is being drawn internally with the Doklam standoff, which lasted over 70 days.
The Indian Army expects the Chinese to return but is being realistic about a substantial de-escalation happening anytime soon. India Today can, however, confirm that since the June 22 meeting between Corps Commanders at Chushul-Moldo 20 km south of the Finger 4 faceoff point, there has been a 'small but visible' reduction in the number of Chinese troops from the ridgeline positions. The Army is clear that it will not be treating such thinning out as milestones, but steps in an overarching pledge that has been made in the June 22 meeting.
Satellite imagery and analysis over the last 10 days has established not just Chinese tentage and camps, but also pillboxes -- permanent bunkers for weapons -- and defensive berms along the ridgeline of Finger 4. Army sources say they've also noticed sangars -- breast-high defensive walls -- come in various parts of the ridgeline. In this video interview, India Today spoke to the analyst who first published satellite images capturing the nature of the Chinese deployment at Pangong Tso's Finger 4.
Photo: Twitter/@Orion_Int
Imagery analysis this week has also uncovered Chinese support positions in areas behind the ridgeline, as well as on the south bank of the lake.
Army sources on the ground have also clarified in response to a perception that the Indian Army hasn't mobilised adequately in response to the Chinese at Pangong Tso, and has therefore lost territorial access in an area it earlier patrolled. The reality, sources say, is that the Army has mobilised adequately to 'meet any eventuality', including near the Finger 4 ridgeline. This is even though the area doesn't see heavy Indian Army deployments as part of the normal border management posture. The mobilisations have been tailored, Army sources said, to ensure forces can respond adequately no matter which direction China takes on the ladder of escalation.
Not only has the ITBP camp two kilometres west of the ridgeline been beefed up, but since Chinese camps began appearing in this area from May 17-18, the Indian Army has set up a new position, what it calls a 'face-off presence' just west of the ridgeline. Chinese ridgeline positions now look directly down on the Indian positions from a distance of less than half a kilometre.
A reason for concern has also been that things in Pangong Tso are already volatile. Apart from the troop brawl on May 5-6 which resulted in several injuries on both sides, soldiers brawled again on May 14 and then again on May 31. The latter was captured on a video that went viral on social media. Efforts have been on to keep the peace in whats has become a proper eyeball-to-eyeball situation.
The Army's assessment is also clear that its mirror mobilisations and deployments are currently enough to cater to any contingency, including a localised fighting skirmish, which at least two former Army chiefs -- General VP Malik and General Deepak Kapoor -- see as a possibility given China's relentless build-up until the token thinning out from June 22.
A September 2019 video that emerged on social media yesterday was confirmed to be from the shores of Pangong Tso between Finger 4-8. The video, capturing a Chinese patrol being challenged and stopped by an Indian Army party, is said to have happened just weeks after India's abrogation of Article 370 in J&K and the creation of two new union territories, including Ladakh. While patrolling collisions have been par for the course for years, the video clearly showed Chinese attempts to overwhelm, using larger troop numbers than normal, convoys of utility vehicles, and the most notable part -- patrol boats sailing in formation in an unmistakable intimidatory posture.
While India Today has reported on Chinese mobilisations in Depsang and DBO sectors, in reality, the Army is seeing developments there as separate from the current standoff confined to Pangong-Hot Springs-Galwan. The Depsang-DBO developments, Army sources say, is being seen as an extension of an ongoing years-long effort by China to mobilise in the area, one that has thus far been thwarted by preemptive mobilisations by the Indian Army. India Today has also learnt that patrol incursions continue by both sides in the area, though no China positions have emerged on the Indian side of the LAC. The area remains sensitive, with the Indian Air Force already establishing an air bridge from Leh to DBO capable of injecting large numbers of troops at short notice if necessary.
Army treating Pangong Tso flashpoint as 'semi-permanent faceoff'
The Indian Army is dealing with the flashpoint at Ladakh's Pangong Tso as a 'semi-permanent faceoff' that it expects to stretch out for weeks, if not months. In first details shared with India Today of how the Army leadership is viewing the brewing situation on the shores of the massive lake, top Army officers told India Today that the Indian Army had mobilised troops in the region more than adequately for any eventuality in a sector where the Chinese Army has built up more visibly, and in greater numbers, than any other.
Army chief General Manoj Mukund Naravane, who spent two days in Ladakh this week, briefed Defence Minister Rajnath Singh on the situation along the 832-kilometre frontier at eastern Ladakh with Chinese forces. While in Ladakh, he met with troops from units deployed in the Pangong area, including men involved in a violent clash with Chinese soldiers on the night of May 5, an incident seen as the starting point of the current standoff that has now run for 51 days and counting.
While the Army is very much seeing Chinese actions in Pangong sector as the most visible attempt to change the status quo in eastern Ladakh, sources say a parallel is being drawn internally with the Doklam standoff, which lasted over 70 days.
The Indian Army expects the Chinese to return but is being realistic about a substantial de-escalation happening anytime soon. India Today can, however, confirm that since the June 22 meeting between Corps Commanders at Chushul-Moldo 20 km south of the Finger 4 faceoff point, there has been a 'small but visible' reduction in the number of Chinese troops from the ridgeline positions. The Army is clear that it will not be treating such thinning out as milestones, but steps in an overarching pledge that has been made in the June 22 meeting.
Satellite imagery and analysis over the last 10 days has established not just Chinese tentage and camps, but also pillboxes -- permanent bunkers for weapons -- and defensive berms along the ridgeline of Finger 4. Army sources say they've also noticed sangars -- breast-high defensive walls -- come in various parts of the ridgeline. In this video interview, India Today spoke to the analyst who first published satellite images capturing the nature of the Chinese deployment at Pangong Tso's Finger 4.
Photo: Twitter/@Orion_Int
Imagery analysis this week has also uncovered Chinese support positions in areas behind the ridgeline, as well as on the south bank of the lake.
Army sources on the ground have also clarified in response to a perception that the Indian Army hasn't mobilised adequately in response to the Chinese at Pangong Tso, and has therefore lost territorial access in an area it earlier patrolled. The reality, sources say, is that the Army has mobilised adequately to 'meet any eventuality', including near the Finger 4 ridgeline. This is even though the area doesn't see heavy Indian Army deployments as part of the normal border management posture. The mobilisations have been tailored, Army sources said, to ensure forces can respond adequately no matter which direction China takes on the ladder of escalation.
Not only has the ITBP camp two kilometres west of the ridgeline been beefed up, but since Chinese camps began appearing in this area from May 17-18, the Indian Army has set up a new position, what it calls a 'face-off presence' just west of the ridgeline. Chinese ridgeline positions now look directly down on the Indian positions from a distance of less than half a kilometre.
A reason for concern has also been that things in Pangong Tso are already volatile. Apart from the troop brawl on May 5-6 which resulted in several injuries on both sides, soldiers brawled again on May 14 and then again on May 31. The latter was captured on a video that went viral on social media. Efforts have been on to keep the peace in whats has become a proper eyeball-to-eyeball situation.
The Army's assessment is also clear that its mirror mobilisations and deployments are currently enough to cater to any contingency, including a localised fighting skirmish, which at least two former Army chiefs -- General VP Malik and General Deepak Kapoor -- see as a possibility given China's relentless build-up until the token thinning out from June 22.
A September 2019 video that emerged on social media yesterday was confirmed to be from the shores of Pangong Tso between Finger 4-8. The video, capturing a Chinese patrol being challenged and stopped by an Indian Army party, is said to have happened just weeks after India's abrogation of Article 370 in J&K and the creation of two new union territories, including Ladakh. While patrolling collisions have been par for the course for years, the video clearly showed Chinese attempts to overwhelm, using larger troop numbers than normal, convoys of utility vehicles, and the most notable part -- patrol boats sailing in formation in an unmistakable intimidatory posture.
While India Today has reported on Chinese mobilisations in Depsang and DBO sectors, in reality, the Army is seeing developments there as separate from the current standoff confined to Pangong-Hot Springs-Galwan. The Depsang-DBO developments, Army sources say, is being seen as an extension of an ongoing years-long effort by China to mobilise in the area, one that has thus far been thwarted by preemptive mobilisations by the Indian Army. India Today has also learnt that patrol incursions continue by both sides in the area, though no China positions have emerged on the Indian side of the LAC. The area remains sensitive, with the Indian Air Force already establishing an air bridge from Leh to DBO capable of injecting large numbers of troops at short notice if necessary.
Last edited:
India in the 1950s did not have the resources to drive the chinese out of tibet
And why and how do u say so? Which country was devastated in WW2? Which country had a civil war for 20-25 years? Which country's leader carried out a mass murder in form of great leap forward? Which country had a well oiled WW2 experienced west trained army? Which country had western equipments ?
For the first 3 questions the answer is China and remaining questions answer is India , u decide.