LOC, LAC & IB warfare

Status
Not open for further replies.

Akshay Fenix

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
739
Likes
3,076
Country flag
He is talking about using UCAV not those useless UAV s and Quadcopters which someone can buy in amazon these days ..We need Predator s both to hit the paki post and also to take the jihadi camps ..But sadly we are getting Guardian Naval surveillance drones ...:facepalm:
If we use armed drones then they too will do the same with chini junk. Then what?
The artillery and small arms duals where the Indian Army has a dominance(800 porkis killed) will turn to drone wars where both the countries are zero. All that money and time we invested in making us self sufficient in artillery production will go to waste.

Finally who will be the victors in this drone wars, India or Pakistan? Nope. It will be US and China. Since it is these two countries that are currently producing best, and cheap drones.
 

SanjeevM

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
1,631
Likes
4,503
Country flag
Looks like our post are less mined,that the reason bat teams are easily coming to our side.
We should install robotic guns on the borders. Certain posts can have robotic guns that may be controlled remotely. One person can watch different screen and aim the remote guns on the targets. From a comfortable position, fire when a target is acquired. High hit rate, need not deploy men, less men can monitor large tracks of boarder, quick action team can be activated when some movement is noticed on any camera, lesser need of manual patrols. In future when China is working towards robotic army, If we make better use of technology, we can minimize fatality rate of armed forces.
 

AnantS

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
5,686
Likes
15,164
Country flag
Though not an essay on current event. But an article which gently asks both babus to keep off from Army affairs and Generals should learn to stand up against babus:
"the Chinese were so impressed by Sundarji that they invited him to visit China. They were curious to meet the person who had in the space of one year, shaken up both the Pakistan Army through Exercise Brasstacks and the PLA through Op Falcon, and led India into a military venture in Sri Lanka."
Operation Falcon: When Gen Sundarji Took the Chinese By Surprise
 
Last edited:

Bornubus

Chodi Bhakt & BJPig Hunter
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2015
Messages
7,494
Likes
17,198
He is talking about using UCAV not those useless UAV
So what. UCAV are as vulnerable to Air defense as UAV especially on LoC where Pakis have moderate to good air defense Including the MANPADS and ZPU Anti aircraft guns emplaced in their posts just mts away from LoC


Their LY 80, Spada, CROTALE are a threat to our frontline fighters let alone UCAV which India don't even have to begin with.
 
Last edited:

Bornubus

Chodi Bhakt & BJPig Hunter
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2015
Messages
7,494
Likes
17,198
Looks like our post are less mined,that the reason bat teams are easily coming to our side.
They don't raid our post but patrols and small dug outs situated between 2 Posts.


There are plenty of videos on YT where our LoC patrols were ambushed.
 

pankaj nema

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2009
Messages
10,158
Likes
38,007
Country flag
Their LY 80, Spada, CROTALE are a threat to our frontline fighters let alone UCAV which India don't even have to begin with.
We must be having a good idea about the location of their SAM Batteries ; because of our satellite imagery

If we really need to target these SAMs they can be taken out by IAF using stand off
PGMs / LGBs and Air to Surface Missiles

Generally SAMs are kept away from the Range of 155 Mm Artilery and MBRLs
 

sthf

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2016
Messages
2,271
Likes
5,327
Country flag
Their LY 80, Spada, CROTALE are a threat to our frontline fighters let alone UCAV which India don't even have to begin with.
Both India and Pak had entered a bilateral agreement in 1991 to have a clear airspace (10 km from IB/LOC). So India is free to deploy UCAV within its own airspace. IA uses surveillance drones in Kashmir anyway. Nothing is stopping them from using UCAV too except cost.

MALE UAVs fly above the ceiling of Paki AAA & MANPADs.

Spada is a static SAM system for defending air bases. Crotale and it's Chinese copy became outdated quite some time ago but is good enough for drones.

LY80 is a relatively modern system, but will most likely be used to provide SAM umbrella to Paki armoured divisions.
 

hit&run

United States of Hindu Empire
Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
14,104
Likes
63,371

LV fails..............................................................by why 40 minutes? During the 3rd or cryo stage I believe after a halt.
This need a separate thread. Why post here.
 

Bhoot Pishach

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Dec 14, 2016
Messages
878
Likes
4,314
Country flag
There is no other way out but fight out a war with China.

These bastards are grabbing land inch by inch. The present stand off with PLA at Doka-la at India-Bhutan-Tibbet Tri-juncture is because China has made Large Incursions in Bhutanies Territories right from Disputed Doklam Plateau in Bhutan right up to Doka-la.

They have already constructed roads in Doklam Plateau which was never opposed by Bhutan.

But now Chinese further Infiltrating South from Doklam Plateau towards South undermining the Current Boundary at Tri-junction 5km North of Doka-la.

They were consolidating in Doka-la by building Concrete Road in Bhutanies Territories which is undisputed as per Bhutanies claims, East of Doka-la. And Indian Army objected this Construction. Which is the real picture of this present Stand-off.

If this Land Grab of China is continued unabated, it will have SERIOUS SECURITY REPERCUSSIONS TO THE "CHICKEN NECK - SILIGURI CORRIDOR" WHICH WILL BE JUST 20 KM AWAY, FROM CHINESE REACH, AFTER THIS LAND GRAB OF CHINA.

Here is a Great Blog exhaustively clarifying what is going on, right now on the LAC.

http://vatsrohit.blogspot.in/2017/07/doklam-plateau-india-bhutan-and-china.html

Doklam Plateau - India, Bhutan and China Stand-Off

As I write this, India finds itself in a border stand-off with China. But unlike other times when India and China squared off due to difference in ‘perception’ of Line of Actual Control (LAC) along their vast border from eastern Ladakh to Arunachal Pradesh, the present stand-off is because of Chinese incursion in a region which is disputed territory between China and Bhutan. India has got involved because development in this area has serious security ramifications for India.
However, none of the reports barring one (Eyeball-to-eyeball in the Himalayas – Indian Express – Major Joshi-June 30, 2017) gives correct information about the geographical region where this stand-off has taken place and likely reason for this new conflict. Even the report by Manoj Joshi only gives a broad outline of the area.
The objective of this report is to understand the boundary issue, claims of either party (China and Bhutan), geography in the area and Indian sensitivities. The thrust of this write-up is to clear the ambiguity about the exact area where present stand-off is taking place. And why India is reacting much more strongly – to the extent of helping to keep PLA out of Bhutanese territory.

Story so far – Confusion!

When the news story broke, it spoke about Chinese removing IA bunkers in Tri-Junction Area after IA prevented the Chinese from undertaking road construction activity. These reports mentioned certain key areas like Tri-junction, Dhoka La and Doklam Plateau.

This caused confusion because if you look at map on the Google Earth, these areas are not contiguous. Have a look at the map below. I’ve marked position of Dhoka La, India (Sikkim)-Bhutan-China (Chumbi Valley) boundary tri-junction and Doklam Plateau (as shown on Google Earth). Doklam Plateau from Tri-junction is about 30 km as the crow flies while Dhoka La is about 5 km south of boundary tri-junction.


So, a question arises – If the Chinese were building a road in the Doklam Plateau on China-Bhutan border, how did the Indian Army stop their work? And how does the boundary tri-junction area and Dhoka La come into picture?

Bhutan-China border dispute
As per Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB), there are four areas of boundary alignment dispute between China and Bhutan. However, as per the Chinese, there are 7 such areas of boundary dispute. It is this mismatch in number and extent of disputed areas which has led to the present stand-off.
I’m not getting into the entire Bhutan-China boundary issue but will restrict myself to the current area of conflict.
As per the statement of King of Bhutan in National Assembly, there are four[1] areas under dispute:


  1. Up to 89 sq km in Doklam are under dispute (along Gamochen at the border, to the river divide at Batangla and Sinchela, and down to the Amo Chhu River)
  2. Approximately 180 sq km in Sinchulumpa and Gieu are under dispute. The border line stretches from Langmarpo Zam along the river up to Docherimchang, through the river divide to Gomla, along the river divide to Pangkala, and finally down to the Dramana River.
  3. Starting from Dramana, along the border line up to Zingula, and along the line of river divide down to Gieu Chhu River, and finally to Lungkala
  4. Starting from the middle of Pasamlum, along the border line and the river divide to Dompala and Neula, going from Neula along the border line and the river divide to Kurichhu Tshozam, along the river divide to Genla then to Mela, and go all the way to the east.

Point (1) above is centred along and east of the India-Bhutan-China boundary tri-junction area. Point (2) refers to area marked as Doklam Plateau on Google Earth and shows as disputed with broken line. As per the RGOB, there is no contiguity between areas covered under Point (1) and Point (2) while Chinese claim an intermediate area as well. This makes the Chinese claims much larger than Bhutanese interpretation and root cause of present conflict.
I’ve not been able to access any corresponding maps from the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB) which show the alignment of the above area. As Manoj Joshi writes in his Indian Express article, “However, none of these features are visible on publicly available maps and it requires an effort to locate them.” I’ve created some indicative maps after searching through multiple sources and will come to that shortly.
And while I could not find any RGOB Map showing disputed areas, I did come across a Chinese map which shows the 7 disputed areas as per them. Please see the map below:



Source: http://www.bhutannewsservice.org/bhutan-china-border-mismatch/

Areas with red and blue line indicated disputed areas as per the Chinese. Blue line indicated border alignment as per RGOB while red-line indicated the alignment of Bhutanese boundary as per the Chinese.
The disputed area in west is the center of present conflict. And as per the Chinese, there are three major boundary alignment issues within this sector. Compared to this, RGOB claims only two non-contiguous areas of dispute. As the Chinese map shows, Chinese claim is much larger than what the RGOB considers. The details of the three disputed areas in this region are as follows:

Mountain ridge from Batang La to Merukla/Merugla upto Sinchela
  1. The mountain ridge from Sinchela to River Amo; along River Amo from River Amo to its confluence with River Langmarpo;
  2. Region along the River Langmarpo from the confluence of River Lang-marpo and River Amo up to the confluence of Docherimchang; along River Rong from River Docherimchang confluence to Gomla; Gomla ridge from Gomla to Pankala, and Pankala ridge from Pankala to Dramana ridge; Dramana ridge from Dramana to River Tromo and River Zhiu confluence, River Zhiu from River Tromo- River Zhiu confluence to Lungkala;
Source: http://www.bhutannewsservice.org/bhutan-china-border-mismatch/

If you look at the RGOB and Chinese interpretation of boundary dispute, you realize that Point (1) in both the interpretation of boundary alignment is same. But in case of the Chinese, point (2) and (3) taken together, create a contiguous disputed area and vastly expand the area which they claim as part of Tibet. From Bhutanese perspective, point (3) in Chinese claim is same as per their understanding but is not contiguous to area under Point (1).
The blow-out map below shows how the Chinese claims are with respect to present alignment:



I’ve tried to create the Chinese claim line on a Google Earth map by using features I could identify. These features correspond to those mentioned in Chinese claims as mentioned earlier.



The Chinese are using their usual tactics – of claiming a ridge-line/water-shed (and corresponding mountain passes) which gives them depth and allows them to control west-east or vice versa movement. In case of Sino-Indian boundary in eastern Ladakh, Chinese claim line lie along ridge to west of Indian claim line. And controls all the important mountain passes which can facilitate east-west or vice-versa movement. In this case, the boundary envelope has been pushed east with the following objectives:

  1. Give depth to Chinese positions in the Chumbi Valley. As has been widely reported, Chumbi Valley is extremely narrow with steep mountain sides on either side. This gives very less rea estate to PLA to station troops and provisions. Further, this puts them at disadvantage vis-à-vis India position on ridges to the west along Sikkim-Tibet border.
  2. The present main access route into Chumbi Valley and Yadong is S-204. Given the depth of Chumbi Valley and its alignment, is susceptible to India interdiction. Chinese can consider developing a loop in S-204 which is further east and passes through the claimed area. This will give it relatively better protection against Indian fire assault.
  3. Most important gain is towards south part – opens up the restricted funnel of Chumbi Valley and brings it that much closer to Indian Siliguri Corridor. Indian area in Siliguri corridor comes under long range artillery fire from within Chumbi Valley

Doklam Plateau
The present stand-off is in the Doklam Plateau area, region marked in blue circle in the previous map. If we revisit the Chinese boundary alignment claim in this region, it mentions the following:

  • Mountain ridge from Batang La to Merukla/Merugla upto Sinchela
  • The mountain ridge from Sinchela to River Amo; along River Amo from River Amo to its confluence with River Langmarpo
The map below highlights these areas and alignment:



In case Chinese assertions are expected, then India-China-Bhutan boundary will be at Gymochen. And Dokal La, which is presently on border between India (Sikkim) and Bhutan, will become a pass on Sino-Indian border.
A closer look at the satellite imagery shows that a road leads up from the Chumbi Valley to Senche La, crosses over to Bhutanese side, runs parallel to the Merug La-Senche La ridge line and then crosses back into Chumbi Valley at Merug La. A part of this road/track from Senche La also comes towards Doka La. It seems that Chinese have extended tracks from the Merug La-Sinche La ridge line onto the Doklam Plateau. And over the years, have slowly creeped forward claiming and controlling larger part of the plateau.
The map below shows various roads/tracks in the region:


Present Issue

What seems to be happening is that Chinese are trying to further expand their hold on the plateau. From the available news, it seems that Chinese were trying to create concrete roads in the region. The maps already show tracks which came about as Chinese saw no objection from RGOB. And in typical Chinese fashion, they’ll now claim existence of these tracks as proof of ownership – apart from historical claims.
Any further advance in this area poses security threat to India. Working in tandem with RBA, Indian Army seems to have stopped this construction activity within Doklam Plateau. This partly explains the apoplectic response from the Chinese – Indian Army is operating on Bhutanese territory and working in tandem with RBA to prevent further Chinese construction activity. Hence, the repeated references to this area having nothing to do with Sikkim-Tibet border and tri-junction.
India simply cannot afford to have Chinese control the Doklam plateau. And has to prevent any further occupation creep beyond what has already happened. If the Chinese were to occupy the Doklam Plateau and place the boundary on ridge-line going east from Gymochen towards Amo-Chu river, they control a dominating ridge-line which overlooks Indian territory across Bhutan.
The map below gives distance from this ridge-line towards location in Sikkim (a major communication axis) and a location in West Bengal.



I will update the analysis as and when more news becomes available.
Please point out mistakes, if any, and share any relevant information which can improve the analysis.


THE SERIOUS IMPLICATIONS TO INDIA WHICH INDIAN GOVERNMENT AND INDIAN ARMY IS NOT DISCLOSING.
 

Bornubus

Chodi Bhakt & BJPig Hunter
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2015
Messages
7,494
Likes
17,198
Both India and Pak had entered a bilateral agreement in 1991 to have a clear airspace (10 km from IB/LOC).
The point was raised to use UCAV against Pak posts.
 

Bornubus

Chodi Bhakt & BJPig Hunter
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2015
Messages
7,494
Likes
17,198
We must be having a good idea about the location of their SAM Batteries ; because of our satellite imagery
We already have Bombardier Global 5000 jets inducted in ARC (aviation research center) modified for COMINT and ELINT tasks by Israeli Elta. Basically it can give order of Battle or pinpoint Pak Air defense assest, Radars etc. Though it's not clear if these assets are with ARC or NTRO

But there is a reason why we have a RAW station chief based in Srinagar for decades.
 

AmoghaVarsha

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2016
Messages
1,372
Likes
2,093
Country flag
We already have Bombardier Global 5000 jets inducted in ARC (aviation research center) modified for COMINT and ELINT tasks by Israeli Elta. Basically it can give order of Battle or pinpoint Pak Air defense assest, Radars etc. Though it's not clear if these assets are with ARC or NTRO

But there is a reason why we have a RAW station chief based in Srinagar for decades.
When did we get this?

30characters......
 

Adioz

शक्तिः दुर्दम्येच्छाशक्त्याः आगच्छति
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
1,419
Likes
2,819
There is no other way out but fight out a war with China.

These bastards are grabbing land inch by inch. The present stand off with PLA at Doka-la at India-Bhutan-Tibbet Tri-juncture is because China has made Large Incursions in Bhutanies Territories right from Disputed Doklam Plateau in Bhutan right up to Doka-la.

They have already constructed roads in Doklam Plateau which was never opposed by Bhutan.

But now Chinese further Infiltrating South from Doklam Plateau towards South undermining the Current Boundary at Tri-junction 5km North of Doka-la.

They were consolidating in Doka-la by building Concrete Road in Bhutanies Territories which is undisputed as per Bhutanies claims, East of Doka-la. And Indian Army objected this Construction. Which is the real picture of this present Stand-off.

If this Land Grab of China is continued unabated, it will have SERIOUS SECURITY REPERCUSSIONS TO THE "CHICKEN NECK - SILIGURI CORRIDOR" WHICH WILL BE JUST 20 KM AWAY, FROM CHINESE REACH, AFTER THIS LAND GRAB OF CHINA.

Here is a Great Blog exhaustively clarifying what is going on, right now on the LAC.

http://vatsrohit.blogspot.in/2017/07/doklam-plateau-india-bhutan-and-china.html

Doklam Plateau - India, Bhutan and China Stand-Off

As I write this, India finds itself in a border stand-off with China. But unlike other times when India and China squared off due to difference in ‘perception’ of Line of Actual Control (LAC) along their vast border from eastern Ladakh to Arunachal Pradesh, the present stand-off is because of Chinese incursion in a region which is disputed territory between China and Bhutan. India has got involved because development in this area has serious security ramifications for India.
However, none of the reports barring one (Eyeball-to-eyeball in the Himalayas – Indian Express – Major Joshi-June 30, 2017) gives correct information about the geographical region where this stand-off has taken place and likely reason for this new conflict. Even the report by Manoj Joshi only gives a broad outline of the area.
The objective of this report is to understand the boundary issue, claims of either party (China and Bhutan), geography in the area and Indian sensitivities. The thrust of this write-up is to clear the ambiguity about the exact area where present stand-off is taking place. And why India is reacting much more strongly – to the extent of helping to keep PLA out of Bhutanese territory.

Story so far – Confusion!

When the news story broke, it spoke about Chinese removing IA bunkers in Tri-Junction Area after IA prevented the Chinese from undertaking road construction activity. These reports mentioned certain key areas like Tri-junction, Dhoka La and Doklam Plateau.

This caused confusion because if you look at map on the Google Earth, these areas are not contiguous. Have a look at the map below. I’ve marked position of Dhoka La, India (Sikkim)-Bhutan-China (Chumbi Valley) boundary tri-junction and Doklam Plateau (as shown on Google Earth). Doklam Plateau from Tri-junction is about 30 km as the crow flies while Dhoka La is about 5 km south of boundary tri-junction.


So, a question arises – If the Chinese were building a road in the Doklam Plateau on China-Bhutan border, how did the Indian Army stop their work? And how does the boundary tri-junction area and Dhoka La come into picture?

Bhutan-China border dispute
As per Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB), there are four areas of boundary alignment dispute between China and Bhutan. However, as per the Chinese, there are 7 such areas of boundary dispute. It is this mismatch in number and extent of disputed areas which has led to the present stand-off.
I’m not getting into the entire Bhutan-China boundary issue but will restrict myself to the current area of conflict.
As per the statement of King of Bhutan in National Assembly, there are four[1] areas under dispute:


  1. Up to 89 sq km in Doklam are under dispute (along Gamochen at the border, to the river divide at Batangla and Sinchela, and down to the Amo Chhu River)
  2. Approximately 180 sq km in Sinchulumpa and Gieu are under dispute. The border line stretches from Langmarpo Zam along the river up to Docherimchang, through the river divide to Gomla, along the river divide to Pangkala, and finally down to the Dramana River.
  3. Starting from Dramana, along the border line up to Zingula, and along the line of river divide down to Gieu Chhu River, and finally to Lungkala
  4. Starting from the middle of Pasamlum, along the border line and the river divide to Dompala and Neula, going from Neula along the border line and the river divide to Kurichhu Tshozam, along the river divide to Genla then to Mela, and go all the way to the east.

Point (1) above is centred along and east of the India-Bhutan-China boundary tri-junction area. Point (2) refers to area marked as Doklam Plateau on Google Earth and shows as disputed with broken line. As per the RGOB, there is no contiguity between areas covered under Point (1) and Point (2) while Chinese claim an intermediate area as well. This makes the Chinese claims much larger than Bhutanese interpretation and root cause of present conflict.
I’ve not been able to access any corresponding maps from the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGOB) which show the alignment of the above area. As Manoj Joshi writes in his Indian Express article, “However, none of these features are visible on publicly available maps and it requires an effort to locate them.” I’ve created some indicative maps after searching through multiple sources and will come to that shortly.
And while I could not find any RGOB Map showing disputed areas, I did come across a Chinese map which shows the 7 disputed areas as per them. Please see the map below:



Source: http://www.bhutannewsservice.org/bhutan-china-border-mismatch/

Areas with red and blue line indicated disputed areas as per the Chinese. Blue line indicated border alignment as per RGOB while red-line indicated the alignment of Bhutanese boundary as per the Chinese.
The disputed area in west is the center of present conflict. And as per the Chinese, there are three major boundary alignment issues within this sector. Compared to this, RGOB claims only two non-contiguous areas of dispute. As the Chinese map shows, Chinese claim is much larger than what the RGOB considers. The details of the three disputed areas in this region are as follows:

Mountain ridge from Batang La to Merukla/Merugla upto Sinchela
  1. The mountain ridge from Sinchela to River Amo; along River Amo from River Amo to its confluence with River Langmarpo;
  2. Region along the River Langmarpo from the confluence of River Lang-marpo and River Amo up to the confluence of Docherimchang; along River Rong from River Docherimchang confluence to Gomla; Gomla ridge from Gomla to Pankala, and Pankala ridge from Pankala to Dramana ridge; Dramana ridge from Dramana to River Tromo and River Zhiu confluence, River Zhiu from River Tromo- River Zhiu confluence to Lungkala;
Source: http://www.bhutannewsservice.org/bhutan-china-border-mismatch/

If you look at the RGOB and Chinese interpretation of boundary dispute, you realize that Point (1) in both the interpretation of boundary alignment is same. But in case of the Chinese, point (2) and (3) taken together, create a contiguous disputed area and vastly expand the area which they claim as part of Tibet. From Bhutanese perspective, point (3) in Chinese claim is same as per their understanding but is not contiguous to area under Point (1).
The blow-out map below shows how the Chinese claims are with respect to present alignment:



I’ve tried to create the Chinese claim line on a Google Earth map by using features I could identify. These features correspond to those mentioned in Chinese claims as mentioned earlier.



The Chinese are using their usual tactics – of claiming a ridge-line/water-shed (and corresponding mountain passes) which gives them depth and allows them to control west-east or vice versa movement. In case of Sino-Indian boundary in eastern Ladakh, Chinese claim line lie along ridge to west of Indian claim line. And controls all the important mountain passes which can facilitate east-west or vice-versa movement. In this case, the boundary envelope has been pushed east with the following objectives:

  1. Give depth to Chinese positions in the Chumbi Valley. As has been widely reported, Chumbi Valley is extremely narrow with steep mountain sides on either side. This gives very less rea estate to PLA to station troops and provisions. Further, this puts them at disadvantage vis-à-vis India position on ridges to the west along Sikkim-Tibet border.
  2. The present main access route into Chumbi Valley and Yadong is S-204. Given the depth of Chumbi Valley and its alignment, is susceptible to India interdiction. Chinese can consider developing a loop in S-204 which is further east and passes through the claimed area. This will give it relatively better protection against Indian fire assault.
  3. Most important gain is towards south part – opens up the restricted funnel of Chumbi Valley and brings it that much closer to Indian Siliguri Corridor. Indian area in Siliguri corridor comes under long range artillery fire from within Chumbi Valley

Doklam Plateau
The present stand-off is in the Doklam Plateau area, region marked in blue circle in the previous map. If we revisit the Chinese boundary alignment claim in this region, it mentions the following:

  • Mountain ridge from Batang La to Merukla/Merugla upto Sinchela
  • The mountain ridge from Sinchela to River Amo; along River Amo from River Amo to its confluence with River Langmarpo
The map below highlights these areas and alignment:



In case Chinese assertions are expected, then India-China-Bhutan boundary will be at Gymochen. And Dokal La, which is presently on border between India (Sikkim) and Bhutan, will become a pass on Sino-Indian border.
A closer look at the satellite imagery shows that a road leads up from the Chumbi Valley to Senche La, crosses over to Bhutanese side, runs parallel to the Merug La-Senche La ridge line and then crosses back into Chumbi Valley at Merug La. A part of this road/track from Senche La also comes towards Doka La. It seems that Chinese have extended tracks from the Merug La-Sinche La ridge line onto the Doklam Plateau. And over the years, have slowly creeped forward claiming and controlling larger part of the plateau.
The map below shows various roads/tracks in the region:


Present Issue

What seems to be happening is that Chinese are trying to further expand their hold on the plateau. From the available news, it seems that Chinese were trying to create concrete roads in the region. The maps already show tracks which came about as Chinese saw no objection from RGOB. And in typical Chinese fashion, they’ll now claim existence of these tracks as proof of ownership – apart from historical claims.
Any further advance in this area poses security threat to India. Working in tandem with RBA, Indian Army seems to have stopped this construction activity within Doklam Plateau. This partly explains the apoplectic response from the Chinese – Indian Army is operating on Bhutanese territory and working in tandem with RBA to prevent further Chinese construction activity. Hence, the repeated references to this area having nothing to do with Sikkim-Tibet border and tri-junction.
India simply cannot afford to have Chinese control the Doklam plateau. And has to prevent any further occupation creep beyond what has already happened. If the Chinese were to occupy the Doklam Plateau and place the boundary on ridge-line going east from Gymochen towards Amo-Chu river, they control a dominating ridge-line which overlooks Indian territory across Bhutan.
The map below gives distance from this ridge-line towards location in Sikkim (a major communication axis) and a location in West Bengal.



I will update the analysis as and when more news becomes available.
Please point out mistakes, if any, and share any relevant information which can improve the analysis.


THE SERIOUS IMPLICATIONS TO INDIA WHICH INDIAN GOVERNMENT AND INDIAN ARMY IS NOT DISCLOSING.
What if Bhutan joins the Indian Union?
Just putting an idea out there:-

What if, hypothetically, Bhutan simply decides (through a referendum) that its better to become an Indian state and enjoy Indian protection rather than have their borders nibbled away at by the Chinese? I know they might not do so because form a security point of view, being neutral is better and joining India puts them squarely in the middle of the Indo-China conflict (and they just chose sides and lost all protection as a neutral state). Nonetheless, if for some other reason, what if they join India, maybe initially as a protectorate (like the Kingdom of Sikkim)?

For one, that would require a few new formations (perhaps an entire Corps) to be raised in the Indian Army for the defense of Bhutan. More infrastructure might be needed. But most importantly, it would throw the Chinese out of balance as their strategy of endangering the Siliguri corridor would fall flat on its face with Indian Army surrounding them from 3 sides at Yadong. The Indian Army would now be well within its rights to protect Doklam plateau.

This will turn the tables as now PLA approach to Yadong would be in peril. More importantly, the Siliguri corridor problem would be history. All in all, it would be a good deal, although China will most likely stir up a lot of trouble. We may have to escalate to a short local war in Sikkim and Bhutan, and we might loose a lot of territory if this is not done right, in a covert manner before the referendum and announcement about Bhutan joining India are made. The moment Chinese realise what we are up to, they will start forcible land grabbing and we have to be ready with a Corps to defend Bhutanese territories with a sizable presence in Bhutan (or atleast a good road network allowing for us to move a lot of troops swiftly to Doklam plateau and other disputed regions in Bhutan). Point is, the infrastructure for movement upto non-disputed areas needs to be in place and a large Indian formation assembled (on the India-Bhutan border). It should be able to move swiftly and establish a dominating presence directly in the disputed areas with a speed that the Chinese might not be able to match. Element of surprise, though difficult to achieve, is essential here to minimise casualties in the short conflict that will follow. Maybe we can place the 17 Mountain Strike Corps in this role, with ample airlift support from the Airforce. The Chinese should not be able to perceive this move (of Bhutan joining India, although they will be able to decipher that the increased Indian presence in Sikkim and the Indo-Bhutanese highways near border areas are elements of some Indian strategy, and will likely increase their presence beforehand) befire the announcement is made. By time the Chinese realise what is up, they should be staring at Indian troops on Doklam.

We will also need to elicit a favorable response from the international community. Maybe we need a more deft and devious political leadership to make this happen, by making it a long term objective and unleashing a relevant policy to make this happen, all in a covert manner. If Modi gets this in his head, and stays in power throughout next decade, this might be possible by 2030.
 
Last edited:

Suryavanshi

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
16,330
Likes
70,174
What if Bhutan joins the Indian Union?
Just putting an idea out there:-

What if, hypothetically, Bhutan simply decides (through a referendum) that its better to become an Indian state and enjoy Indian protection rather than have their borders nibbled away at by the Chinese? I know they might not do so because form a security point of view, being neutral is better and joining India puts them squarely in the middle of the Indo-China conflict (and they just chose sides and lost all protection as a neutral state). Nonetheless, if for some other reason, what if they join India, maybe initially as a protectorate (like the Kingdom of Sikkim)?

For one, that would require a few new formations (perhaps an entire Corps) to be raised in the Indian Army for the defense of Bhutan. More infrastructure might be needed. But most importantly, it would throw the Chinese out of balance as their strategy of endangering the Siliguri corridor would fall flat on its face with Indian Army surrounding them from 3 sides at Yadong. The Indian Army would now be well within its rights to protect Doklam plateau.

This will turn the tables as now PLA approach to Yadong would be in peril. More importantly, the Siliguri corridor problem would be history. All in all, it would be a good deal, although China will most likely stir up a lot of trouble. We may have to escalate to a short local war in Sikkim and Bhutan, and we might loose a lot of territory if this is not done right, in a covert manner before the referendum and announcement about Bhutan joining India are made. The moment Chinese realise what we are up to, they will start forcible land grabbing and we have to be ready with a Corps to defend Bhutanese territories with a sizable presence in Bhutan (or atleast a good road network allowing for us to move a lot of troops swiftly to Doklam plateau and other disputed regions in Bhutan). Point is, the infrastructure for movement upto non-disputed areas needs to be in place and a large Indian formation assembled (on the India-Bhutan border). It should be able to move swiftly and establish a dominating presence directly in the disputed areas with a speed that the Chinese might not be able to match. Element of surprise, though difficult to achieve, is essential here to minimise casualties in the short conflict that will follow. Maybe we can place the 17 Mountain Strike Corps in this role, with ample airlift support from the Airforce.

We will also need to elicit a favorable response from the international community. Maybe we need a more deft and devious political leadership to make this happen, by making it a long term objective and unleashing a relevant policy to make this happen, all in a covert manner. If Modi gets this in his head, and stays in power throughout next decade, this might be possible by 2030.
If a country like Bhutan Wants to Join India how can a third party intervene in the process?
 

Project Dharma

meh
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2016
Messages
4,836
Likes
10,862
Country flag
What if Bhutan joins the Indian Union?
Just putting an idea out there:-

What if, hypothetically, Bhutan simply decides (through a referendum) that its better to become an Indian state and enjoy Indian protection rather than have their borders nibbled away at by the Chinese? I know they might not do so because form a security point of view, being neutral is better and joining India puts them squarely in the middle of the Indo-China conflict (and they just chose sides and lost all protection as a neutral state). Nonetheless, if for some other reason, what if they join India, maybe initially as a protectorate (like the Kingdom of Sikkim)?

For one, that would require a few new formations (perhaps an entire Corps) to be raised in the Indian Army for the defense of Bhutan. More infrastructure might be needed. But most importantly, it would throw the Chinese out of balance as their strategy of endangering the Siliguri corridor would fall flat on its face with Indian Army surrounding them from 3 sides at Yadong. The Indian Army would now be well within its rights to protect Doklam plateau.

This will turn the tables as now PLA approach to Yadong would be in peril. More importantly, the Siliguri corridor problem would be history. All in all, it would be a good deal, although China will most likely stir up a lot of trouble. We may have to escalate to a short local war in Sikkim and Bhutan, and we might loose a lot of territory if this is not done right, in a covert manner before the referendum and announcement about Bhutan joining India are made. The moment Chinese realise what we are up to, they will start forcible land grabbing and we have to be ready with a Corps to defend Bhutanese territories with a sizable presence in Bhutan (or atleast a good road network allowing for us to move a lot of troops swiftly to Doklam plateau and other disputed regions in Bhutan). Point is, the infrastructure for movement upto non-disputed areas needs to be in place and a large Indian formation assembled (on the India-Bhutan border). It should be able to move swiftly and establish a dominating presence directly in the disputed areas with a speed that the Chinese might not be able to match. Element of surprise, though difficult to achieve, is essential here to minimise casualties in the short conflict that will follow. Maybe we can place the 17 Mountain Strike Corps in this role, with ample airlift support from the Airforce. The Chinese should not be able to perceive this move (of Bhutan joining India, although they will be able to decipher that the increased Indian presence in Sikkim and the Indo-Bhutanese highways near border areas are elements of some Indian strategy, and will likely increase their presence beforehand) befire the announcement is made. By time the Chinese realise what is up, they should be staring at Indian troops on Doklam.

We will also need to elicit a favorable response from the international community. Maybe we need a more deft and devious political leadership to make this happen, by making it a long term objective and unleashing a relevant policy to make this happen, all in a covert manner. If Modi gets this in his head, and stays in power throughout next decade, this might be possible by 2030.
Dude no, they are doing some really innovative stuff in terms of forest management, Gross National Happiness. I would hate for them to come under the fiefdom of Indian babus and politicians. :scared1:
 

Willy2

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Messages
847
Likes
1,559
What if Bhutan joins the Indian Union?
IS't better if Bhutan remain Independent under de-fecto protectorate status like now ?
1) As a UN member nation India-Bhutan can jointly put forward chinese aggression issue in international stage...
Bhutan as a small nation could easily play victim card which as a state of India he can't..it would left China in critical condition..like the current situation.if GOI push Bhutanese govt to push Chinese border violation matter in International forum many nation/media would catch it ..

2)"Giving Bhutan..an independent nations security cloud could give softpower of india which would help us to make alley with Phillipins, Combodia.Vietnam etc ..

3)They are happy without being an Indian state..and pro-indian...IG need to annex Sikkim because it's turn out to be shiftinh towards PRC...If our intelligence keep pro-indian block there we don't need to unnecessarily brand us "imperialistic"
 

armyofhind

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2014
Messages
1,535
Likes
2,921
Country flag
Can we start a war gaming thread about what a potential Indo Chinese war because of the current standoff look like? What will be the Chinese strategy, how far will they be willing to escalate, which other countries will get involved, will nukes be used etc..
Sir ji go through a book called Chimera by Vivek Ahuja.
Also Fenix by the same author.
 

Willy2

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Messages
847
Likes
1,559
Dude no, they are doing some really innovative stuff in terms of forest management, Gross National Happiness. I would hate for them to come under the fiefdom of Indian babus and politicians. :scared1:
Exactly..what a beautiful nation never in trouble...Indian are respected in that heaven where other foreigners are't allowed we easily go there and spend months...these type of respect and faith are rare in modern world..let it be like this
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top