Chinese have already won, the war is over.The Chinese won’t change. Just like the leopard, the Chinese don’t change their spots. This became evident once again during the week, when Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson, Wang Wenbin said, “For the Chinese side, we have been honouring the agreements signed between China and India. We are committed to peace and stability in the border area. Meanwhile, we are committed to our sovereignty and territorial integrity.” In other words, in Chinese view, to repeat a cliché, “might is right”. So China will continue to shift the LAC to its advantage and if India stands up to it, China will push India towards war, or try to tie it down along the LAC, thus wearing it out and draining its resources. And all the while playing the victim.
It’s all about teaching India a lesson for trying to be a global power, about scaring away potential investors, as well as about sending a message not only to the rest of the world and the minnows who stand up to it, but also a challenge to the United States by treating India as its proxy. But then that is how the Chinese are—always have been. The problem is that it is Indians who still believe that the Chinese can be made to mend their way, see reason, as External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar hoped ahead of the Moscow meeting with his counterpart Wang Yi.
The outcome of that meeting was a five-point agreement, which incorporated the oft-repeated clichés that have become a part of any India-China dialogue—“differences should not become disputes”; “abide by all the existing agreements and protocol on China-India boundary affairs”; “border troops…should continue their dialogue, quickly disengage, maintain proper distance and ease tensions”. Meaningless words, considering China is consistently guilty of violating each and every of the five points. Worse, the agreement lays a minefield for India for it talks about disengaging and retreating from current positions, which means India vacating all the heights it presently occupies on the bank of Pangong Tso, overlooking PLA’s Moldo garrison—which is now a sitting duck—and thus losing the tactical advantage it has. And the 14-15 June clash at Galwan is proof of what disengagement means to the Chinese.
This is not the time for hoping that China will see reason. This is not the time to give China a “face-saving exit as India cannot take them on”, as is being whispered in certain quarters. In this context, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh’s words in Parliament were, for a change, candid: “China says one thing and does the opposite.” His statement that India wanted peace but was ready for war is welcome. It is not every day that such strong statements come from India’s power corridor, which has had decades of practice in staying silent on China’s aggression for fear of angering Beijing, thus exposing itself to be weak and vulnerable. It’s hoped that the Defence Minister’s words will not be mere words and India will not capitulate tamely in its attempt to make peace. China is a bully, which needs to be taught a lesson. The bully needs to realise that it has underestimated India; that it will have to pay a price for its aggression, in both economic and military terms. That it cannot be business as usual when soldiers of the two countries are engaged in an eyeball to eyeball standoff, with the prospect of a military conflict—possibly even an actual war—hovering on the horizon.
Make no mistake, China under Xi Jinping is desperate for a victory. And in their eyes, India is the lowest hanging fruit for this. It is not a question of if, but when China will strike! The only thing that will deter China from its misadventure is India striking suitable alliances—including working towards a Nato-like construct for the Quad and Quad-Plus countries, where every signing member is treaty-bound to come to each other’s assistance when attacked by China. The need of the day is an Indo-Pacific charter, with the firm objective of containing China. If the Chinese Communist Party is afraid of anything it is afraid of a united world standing up to it. But in pursuing such a policy India cannot be seen to be a reluctant ally, which is still waffling around, unable to choose a side, in the name of a long dead non alignment, while hanging onto the coattails of countries that are supping with China.
China has won, they have given the Indians a huge scare by killing Indian troops without even firing a shot, the rest is going to be a walkover.Nope until AP retaken, we won nothing. Lol
The comparison is not quite accurate. In an all out war re-enforcements and reserves are all taken into consideration by the war gamers. Casualties are cynically counted as a % loss to the attackers. The Germans were fullyHe know ladakh quite well. He is ex military. I believe him. I also believe that it's not easy to break indian defensive layers. It's hard. Yes indians will face massive firepower but remember, India also has bigger army so fatalities for them doesn't matter until China pushes them deep. China can push them but it will be absolute bloodbath. It's not easy. When an army decides to defend an area, it's quite difficult to break through. I remember Pak army didn't even have reinforcement when India wanted to invade in 2001 but reinforcement arrived later. Obviously it was indian mistake not to attack pakistan. after complete reinforcement, attacking any army is difficult.
You looks familiar with history and militarily operations. Lets us believe that china captured 30 Indian soldiers and returned after 10 days. What is your take, Why did china returned? India had some leverage or made some concession?Figaro,
For WC Abhinandan's return there was a media event with people waving flags and painting their cheeks with saffron, white and green stripes; as there should have been to welcome any hero home. How come there were no flag wavers and people clapping to receive the 30 captured soldiers ( which included at least two officers and other ranks ) when the PLA handed them over 10 days after capturing them at Galwan. WC Abhinandan was returned in 60 hours. There was no media frenzy to free these brave men, and there were no demonstrations in front of the Chinese embassy. Many of those captured had fought valiantly ( like WC Abhinandan) and had been severely injured.
Why this difference?
Those who resisted capture at Galwan and were injured are heroes too.
Why does it take a long drawn calculations for China to take the territories it claims? Is it so tough for superpower Chinese to deal with Indians?I don't think China is "desperate" for any "victory". It's very calm and calculating and can play the attrition game. Indians like to think China is desperate or backed into the corner. This idea helps Indians sleep better.
You tell me sir.You looks familiar with history and militarily operations. Lets us believe that china captured 30 Indian soldiers and returned after 10 days. What is your take, Why did china returned? India had some leverage or made some concession?
A reminder:You looks familiar with history and militarily operations. Lets us believe that china captured 30 Indian soldiers and returned after 10 days. What is your take, Why did china returned? India had some leverage or made some concession?
Lets talk about Galwan clashYou tell me sir.
It is not "let us believe ". This was widely reported in the international and Indian media both.
Here are the possibilities.Please choose :
1. China was trembling in its shoes fearing an Indian Brahmastra attack so it let the prisoners go. This would be just as it let 4000 prisoners go home after holding them for 7 months. They feared the Brahmastra in 1962 as well, which is why they let every prisoner ( including generals ) return.
2. The prisoners were eating too much or needed constant medical attention, neither of which the Chinese were in a position to afford. The Chinese also ran out of tea.
3. The prisoners were crying all night in pain keeping them awake.
4. A goodwill propaganda gesture so that the prisoners go back saying "The Chinese are not so bad after all"
Take your pick, Which do you think is more likely?
Not really.Why does it take a long drawn calculations for China to take the territories it claims? Is it so tough for superpower Chinese to deal with Indians?
- PRTP GWD
Wish this statement was made by the current army chief or MOD ( just as the MOD announced shooting down a Pakistani F-16 after WC Abhinandan was captured). However the general retired in 2012 and is currently the State Transport Minister. Don't know if a single statement to one newspaper counts.Lets talk about Galwan clash
VK Singh told
What it wants now, what it wants in future. Long term goals. Short term goals. 55 years wait for Ladakh clashes. Why doesn't China simply finish it quickly and be done with it? China is a hyperpower, isn't it? So why so much planning and delays? @PAKISTANFOREVER @Mangus Ortus Novem @saiyan0321 @Sal12 @CriticalThought @ARMalik @Indus PakistanNot really.
China got what it wanted for now.
It has largely diminished the threat to the CPEC corridor by posturing all along the DBOD road. What is the long term goal is not known at this time.,