INDIA’S PANGONG PICKLE: NEW DELHI’S OPTIONS AFTER ITS CLASH WITH CHINA

[ENRL]

China needs a real physical victory. India needs face saving mental victory. I believe GOI will accept the new status quo and declare 43 Chinese dead and redefine the LAC.

Maybe you should tell Global Times to remove the reference where it states 70 causalities.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1192345.shtml

In general, what's funny is how much the Pakistani members jump for joy, given they are the ones who lost East Pakistan, not to mention 3 wars and a limited conflict in 1999, after claiming it was Mujaheddin at first. :0
The reality is that its not India that's loosing territory, its Pakistan. Pakistan will economically mortgage itself with Chinese infrastructure projects and surrender control to China after being unable to pay. This is how modern colonization takes place, economically.

If members want to refer to 1962, why don't they also refer to 1967? Perhaps that does not support their preconception. 1962 was a Chinese victory and 1967 was an Indian victory. China or India, just like any other country can win if many things line up - training, tactics, coordination, logistics, intelligence, technological edge and preparation. China got schooled by Vietnam and so did the US. They both underestimated the groundwork before undertaking a war.

Modern war is not like a bar fight, where if someone punches you, you punch right back. Neither country can sustain a full blown war and they are aware of it. Not even the United States, let alone a country which is developing fast, but still 2-3 decades behind the US(China).

Countries pick the time, place and strategy of their choosing. China made its pick, after months of immediate preparation, and years of overall preparation in the general area. Now we will have to wait and see where, what and how India picks its battle.

I've been reading this forum for over 15 yrs. Over the last year or two, the forum has become a joke. This is no longer a forum where there is intelligent discussion on strategic topics. It turned to a collection of troll posts and adolescent jokers typing faster than they can think.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Maybe you should tell Global Times to remove the reference where it states 70 causalities.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1192345.shtml

In general, what's funny is how much the Pakistani members jump for joy, given they are the ones who lost East Pakistan, not to mention 3 wars and a limited conflict in 1999, after claiming it was Mujaheddin at first. :0
The reality is that its not India that's loosing territory, its Pakistan. Pakistan will economically mortgage itself with Chinese infrastructure projects and surrender control to China after being unable to pay. This is how modern colonization takes place, economically.

If members want to refer to 1962, why don't they also refer to 1967? Perhaps that does not support their preconception. 1962 was a Chinese victory and 1967 was an Indian victory. China or India, just like any other country can win if many things line up - training, tactics, coordination, logistics, intelligence, technological edge and preparation. China got schooled by Vietnam and so did the US. They both underestimated the groundwork before undertaking a war.

Modern war is not like a bar fight, where if someone punches you, you punch right back. Neither country can sustain a full blown war and they are aware of it. Not even the United States, let alone a country which is developing fast, but still 2-3 decades behind the US(China).

Countries pick the time, place and strategy of their choosing. China made its pick, after months of immediate preparation, and years of overall preparation in the general area. Now we will have to wait and see where, what and how India picks its battle.

I've been reading this forum for over 15 yrs. Over the last year or two, the forum has become a joke. This is no longer a forum where there is intelligent discussion on strategic topics. It turned to a collection of troll posts and adolescent jokers typing faster than they can think.

Funny isn't it, how the timing of this forum becoming perceived as a "joke" by so many Indian members coincides with India's military defeats at the hands of the PAF and the PLA?

Perhaps your wrath should be directed at your own armed forces for their incompetence.

By the way, let's be clear. Pakistan occupies half of Kashmir according to your own government and every map I've ever read. Please come and "liberate" it before declaring eternal victory.

 

[ENRL]

Lol! Here we go. They are not my armed forces, buddy. If I praised anyone, it was Vietnam.

If the Indian military was humiliated, why are there 70 causalities on the Chinese side? Did they punch themselves in the dark?

I wouldn't say 1/2, 1/3 seems a good estimate for Kashmir. Why don't they liberate it? The cons must outweigh the pros. Let's not forget history, Pakistan lost territory and resulted in the creation of a new nation, that is doing better than Pakistan

 

[jaybird]

Maybe you should tell Global Times to remove the reference where it states 70 causalities.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1192345.shtml

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said Friday that his government has given the armed forces full freedom to take any necessary action, and he also appeared to downplay the clash that killed 20 Indian soldiers and injured more than 70 on the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control in the Galwan Valley on Monday.

This sentence from the global times article meant 20 killed and 70 injured Indian soldiers happened on the Chinese side of Line of Actual Control in Galwan Valley. It's not about Chinese numbers at all.

 

[ENRL]

Fair, the way it is worded could mean that too. Do you really think that China will ever acknowledge their losses? Nope! I remember reading a post from Hu Xijin's Twitter account where he did acknowledge causalities but did not provide the number. I don't think China ever will, not for the next 20 years atleast.

US sources citing 35 dead on the Chinese side. https://www.usnews.com/news/world-r...ina-face-off-in-first-deadly-clash-in-decades
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-with-india-global-times-editor-idUSKBN23N1BE

I take it you are a smart chap. Let's be real, in a brawl like that, in the dark, on a ridge, with hundreds going at it, do you think soldiers from only one side will die?

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said Friday that his government has given the armed forces full freedom to take any necessary action, and he also appeared to downplay the clash that killed 20 Indian soldiers and injured more than 70 on the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control in the Galwan Valley on Monday.

This sentence from the global times article meant 20 killed and 70 injured Indian soldiers happened on the Chinese side of Line of Actual Control in Galwan Valley. It's not about Chinese numbers at all.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Lol! Here we go. They are not my armed forces, buddy. If I praised anyone, it was Vietnam.

If the Indian military was humiliated, why are there 70 causalities on the Chinese side? Did they punch themselves in the dark?

I wouldn't say 1/2, 1/3 seems a good estimate for Kashmir. Why don't they liberate it? The cons must outweigh the pros. Let's not forget history, Pakistan lost territory and resulted in the creation of a new nation, that is doing better than Pakistan

We're happy we lost Bangladesh. All power to them and their floodplain. It was strategically untenable and if we still had Bangladesh, it would be an economic/logistics nightmare.

However, not a day goes by when some member of India's cabinet doesn't bang on about liberating Indian territory in Pakistani-administered Kashmir.

They will be bitter for decades to come from all the salami slicing they've been experiencing.

If you honestly think the cons outweigh the pros of taking the whole Kashmir region, then obviously you've never heard of CPEC.

 

[ENRL]

Is the loss of life, potentially in the 1000s worth taking back a stretch of land? I don't think so. India doesn't even efficiently use the land it has ! The effort is better spent in furthering their economy and military. Pakistan, at one point, probably did better than India, on a fair number of indicators. Can't say that is true today. China is where it is because it did not wage war but kept developing its economy.

A 'peaceless' Kashmir is useless to India, Pakistan or China. All three will be better off not having it.

We're happy we lost Bangladesh. All power to them and their floodplain. It was strategically untenable and if we still had Bangladesh, it would be an economic/logistics nightmare.

However, not a day goes by when some member of India's cabinet doesn't bang on about liberating Indian territory in Pakistani-administered Kashmir.

They will be bitter for decades to come from all the salami slicing they've been experiencing.

If you honestly think the cons outweigh the pros of taking the whole Kashmir region, then obviously you've never heard of CPEC.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Is the loss of life, potentially in the 1000s worth taking back a stretch of land? I don't think so. India doesn't even efficiently use the land it has ! The effort is better spent in furthering their economy and military. Pakistan, at one point, probably did better than India, on a fair number of indicators. Can't say that is true today. China is where it is because it did not wage war but kept developing its economy.

A 'peaceless' Kashmir is useless to India, Pakistan or China. All three will be better off not having it.

Agree with some of what you say, but the investment in Kashmir isn't purely economic, hence we will diverge in our final assessments.

 

[ENRL]

Agree with some of what you say, but the investment in Kashmir isn't purely economic, hence we will diverge in our final assessments.

Sure, what is the objective of CPEC? What is your view?

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Sure, what is the objective of CPEC? What is your view?

Too broad a question to summarise in a forum post, but essentially CPEC is a neo-silk route. Chinese access to the Persian gulf via Pakistan, while Pakistan gains infrastructure and economic development, not to mention military and political cooperation with our oldest ally in the region. That's just an overview.

 

[ENRL]

Here is the issue with that. Pakistan doesn't gain. China gains while Pakistan 'appears' to gain. Is the CPEC development costs free for Pakistan? Or is it a loan? Essentially China plays for itself. China gets an alternate trade path while Pakistan pays for it - both in cash and by providing jobs and consumption of Chinese raw materials/services.

If Pakistan was paying for infrastructure development, any other developed country can do the same, be it Germany, Japan or the US. China is not the world's sole infrastructure developer.

The India-China tension can be beneficial for Pakistan under a few conditions.
1. Pakistan doesn't instigate or support any terrorism against India
2. Pakistan opens up the economy and start posing itself like a place worth investing in
3. Cut out the nuclear rethoric/war messages. Focus on economic prosperity and reform to the world

India has no interest in fighting Pakistan. India's attention is towards China. If Pakistan keeps the above conditions, it frees itself of the need to keep spending money on the military. This is a problem for China as it no longer gets to pit Pakistan against India and so must also focus on India, not just the South China sea.

Result Pakistan wins against both India and China, opportunity-wise. Pakistan can focus on development without being shacked/indebted to China.

Too broad a question to summarise in a forum post, but essentially CPEC is a neo-silk route. Chinese access to the Persian gulf via Pakistan, while Pakistan gains infrastructure and economic development, not to mention military and political cooperation with our oldest ally in the region. That's just an overview.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Here is the issue with that. Pakistan doesn't gain. China gains while Pakistan 'appears' to gain. Is the CPEC development costs free for Pakistan? Or is it a loan? Essentially China plays for itself. China gets an alternate trade path while Pakistan pays for it - both in cash and by providing jobs and consumption of Chinese raw materials/services.

If Pakistan was paying for infrastructure development, any other developed country can do the same, be it Germany, Japan or the US. China is not the world's sole infrastructure developer.

The India-China tension can be beneficial for Pakistan under a few conditions.
1. Pakistan doesn't instigate or support any terrorism against India
2. Pakistan opens up the economy and start posing itself like a place worth investing in
3. Cut out the nuclear rethoric/war messages. Focus on economic prosperity and reform to the world

India has no interest in fighting Pakistan. India's attention is towards China. If Pakistan keeps the above conditions, it frees itself of the need to keep spending money on the military. This is a problem for China as it no longer gets to pit Pakistan against India and so must also focus on India, not just the South China sea.

Result Pakistan wins against both India and China, opportunity-wise. Pakistan can focus on development without being shacked/indebted to China.

Firstly, Pakistan would rather partner with China than any other infrastructure developer because China has a vested interest (CPEC) and won't back out. We've seen China stand firm despite several terrorist attacks by BLA and other Indian proxies on Chinese interests. It is actually in Pakistan's interests that China - of all possible countries - is our partner for this project because of the above.

As for your numbered list, I'm not sure what planet you're living on. When India apologises for and/or desists from: supporting terror against Pakistan historically, using terror to instigate the very loss of territory you referenced earlier, and continuing to support terror networks in Pakistan today, then we shall be lectured by India and its global Bollywood fanbase on such matters. Pakistan will certainly develop into an attractive prospect for investment as soon as we rid Pakistan of India's proxies of choice operating in the west of our country. It is no coincidence that the attacks are concentrated on the CPEC region. Go figure.

I think you need to review the rhetoric emanating from south Asia in recent years. At every possible juncture, PM Khan has offered talks, has offered a peaceful solution, has offered a hand of cooperation, has offered deescalation of tension to Modi. Khan has only ever wanted to find a peaceful solution to Pakistani conflicts with India in line with UN resolutions and international best interests. It is India who has attacked Pakistan, India who has refused talks, India who has banned our sportsmen and artists from engaging with Indian counterparts, India who has cancelled transport routes to link civilians of the two countries together, India who has closed borders, trampled on previous agreements and ignored treaties, India who has lined its politicians up to stir hatred with vitriolic speeches against Pakistan and against Pakistani interests. Sir - if you are getting news that suggests to you that Hindustan is some innocent Bollywood heroine, then you simply need to read some additional sources.

 

[ENRL]

I can assure you Bollywood does not have as big a fan base as you might suggest. Pakistan has an international credibility issue.
1. Kargil - Initial reports were that the fighters were Mujaheddin, later we find that they are Pakistan Army soldiers, who illegally crossed the LoC. That is not passable as "proxies" when trained soldiers are involved.
Seeing the UK flag you have, from the Independent. You may call the paper a Bollywood fan, that's ok.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ficer-sandy-berger-bruce-riedel-a6758501.html

2. Osama - For years, the US has been supporting Pakistan and paying it to find Osama. Where was he? A few hundred meters away from a Pak Military Base. Who found him? The US did it themselves. Pakistan claims ignorance of the person who lives in a high, walled compound a near a military base.

Of course, China has a vested interest. China looks after itself, Pakistan just happens to be an instrument for this.

Now, about India. They have a joker for a PM and a fool for a Minister of Home Affairs. The Modi government is a disgrace. The biggest letdown, since Nehru. India is suffering under Modi. They have lost their values under this government.

Firstly, Pakistan would rather partner with China than any other infrastructure developer because China has a vested interest (CPEC) and won't back out. We've seen China stand firm despite several terrorist attacks by BLA and other Indian proxies on Chinese interests. It is actually in Pakistan's interests that China - of all possible countries - is our partner for this project because of the above.

As for your numbered list, I'm not sure what planet you're living on. When India apologises for and/or desists from: supporting terror against Pakistan historically, using terror to instigate the very loss of territory you referenced earlier, and continuing to support terror networks in Pakistan today, then we shall be lectured by India and its global Bollywood fanbase on such matters. Pakistan will certainly develop into an attractive prospect for investment as soon as we rid Pakistan of India's proxies of choice operating in the west of our country. It is no coincidence that the attacks are concentrated on the CPEC region. Go figure.

I think you need to review the rhetoric emanating from south Asia in recent years. At every possible juncture, PM Khan has offered talks, has offered a peaceful solution, has offered a hand of cooperation, has offered deescalation of tension to Modi. Khan has only ever wanted to find a peaceful solution to Pakistani conflicts with India in line with UN resolutions and international best interests. It is India who has attacked Pakistan, India who has refused talks, India who has banned our sportsmen and artists from engaging with Indian counterparts, India who has cancelled transport routes to link civilians of the two countries together, India who has closed borders, trampled on previous agreements and ignored treaties, India who has lined its politicians up to stir hatred with vitriolic speeches against Pakistan and against Pakistani interests. Sir - if you are getting news that suggests to you that Hindustan is some innocent Bollywood heroine, then you simply need to read some additional sources.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

I can assure you Bollywood does not have as big a fan base as you might suggest. Pakistan has an international credibility issue.
1. Kargil - Initial reports were that the fighters were Mujaheddin, later we find that they are Pakistan Army soldiers, who illegally crossed the LoC. That is not passable as "proxies" when trained soldiers are involved.
Seeing the UK flag you have, from the Independent. You may call the paper a Bollywood fan, that's ok.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ficer-sandy-berger-bruce-riedel-a6758501.html

2. Osama - For years, the US has been supporting Pakistan and paying it to find Osama. Where was he? A few hundred meters away from a Pak Military Base. Who found him? The US did it themselves. Pakistan claims ignorance of the person who lives in a high, walled compound a near a military base.

Of course, China has a vested interest. China looks after itself, Pakistan just happens to be an instrument for this.

Now, about India. They have a joker for a PM and a fool for a Minister of Home Affairs. The Modi government is a disgrace. The biggest letdown, since Nehru. India is suffering under Modi. They have lost their values under this government.

My dear fellow. Regarding Kargil, are you under some mistaken impression that Pakistan's attempt to take Kargil was an act of "terrorism" by any definition? Pakistan will challenge India's military in regions it regards as occupied by all means necessary. Targeting Indian military for the purposes of liberating occupied territory from them is not terrorism under any definition. You - as a Vietnamese - should understand this.

Now, notwithstanding the above technicality on definitions, there is more to be said here regarding your understanding of matters.

Pakistan will ALWAYS have a "credibility issue" with the anglo-american nexus that dominates the narrative discourse in the world you and I both live in. I can give them Osama, I can withhold Osama. I can send regulars to liberate Kashmir, I can send irregulars to liberate Kashmir. I can do or not do whatever London and Washington ask of me.

It makes no difference.

What matters is whether I do something that helps make Pakistan strong or not. The moment I try to make Pakistan truly independent and strong, I will be shot down as a terrorist or a fundamentalist or an India-basher or a communist-sympathiser or any other descriptor of the week that renders me an enemy of the western nation-building process.

If I do something genuinely good and empowering for Pakistan, I will be declared "an enemy of Pakistan" by our supposed guardians in the western capitals. If I do something good for Pakistan, I will ironically condemn Pakistan to blacklisting and socioeconomic blackmail by way of the dollar-addiction system, to the point that I will be declared an enemy of all people everywhere.

See the nature of the scoundrels that London and Washington would engage with and insert into positions of power - those who would loot my country and yours for personal wealth and security at the expense of national advancement.

See the fluctuating designation of "terrorist" relative to whether said terrorist serves the interests of those who control the discourse or not.

If Osama had suddenly switched sides and fought for American interests, do you think Pakistan would be condemned for holding him?

If Pakistan reverted to being governed by American stooges and drained of its potential in geopolitical terms, do you think America would continuously try to suppress Pakistan via various mechanisms, or do you think we would magically disappear from FATF grey lists overnight?

Do you not realise there are countless examples of nations and leaders who cannot reasonably or objectively be described as "terrorists" or "harmful to their own people" and yet, incurred the wrath of the anglo-American nexus to the point that they became pariahs necessitating destruction by "noble" Western powers?

The descendants of Ho Chi Minh ought to know better.

 

[rott]

It's just common sense, if it's 40 dead, you think we would release 60 captured? The delusion and living in denial syndrome is very strong in the Indians.

Let them think 40 dead at least they won't start lynching and killing the Chinese in India.

20 soldier died to protect India, they got the honor. You don't even know names of the PLA died.

You can get their names from the 1955 Korean war.