India-China Border conflict

AlphaLegis

AlphaLegis

New Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2022
Messages
127
Likes
584
Country flag
www.vifindia.org

Inapt β€˜Perceptions’ and Elusive β€˜Peace and Tranquillity’

www.vifindia.org www.vifindia.org

Brilliant analysis and suggestions in this piece:


The recent clash and fisticuffs of PLA troops with the India Army, at Yangtse in Kameng District on 09 December 2022 are hence not surprising. Are there any clear distinctions on the motivations of the latest incursion? Four characteristic facts are indicative of the latest PLA venture.

First, 300 PLA troops (600 as per some reports), transgressing the narrow Yangste ridge line in the month of December, in the latter half of the night, is NOT routine............The large strength of the PLA troops cannot be imagined as a β€˜patrol, it must be taken as a PLA battalion tasked to occupy the Ridge Line, thereby attempting to β€˜unilaterally alter the status quo,’ as stated by the Raksha Mantri on the floor of the Parliament.....

Second, Yangtse Ridge in proximity of Tawang has been stated by Dai Bingguo as being inalienable from China’s Tibet. The chosen area clearly speaks of PLA’s intent in encroachment, and if it had been successful, providing a fait accompli that could have led to likely escalation!

Third, apparently, the Xiaokang Village constructed in Tibet in proximity to Yangste Ridge, with 200 odd houses and all modern communication infrastructure, could well have been used to build-up. These 628 villages, largely in the Eastern sector, hence become launch-pads, and need careful monitoring all along the Front.

Four, Indian army units were well located at this super high altitude with adverse weather conditions. Units poised to react to such situations in real-time, indicated excellent preparations and training, and discharged their responsibility, honourably.............

Analytically, the Chinese goalposts and motivations are clear and steady, as if etched in stone! They clearly have designs over the populated Tawang tract in Arunachal Pradesh, and have plainly indicated their interests in Eastern Ladakh, which go beyond the Macartney-MacDonald Line to an inexplicable and rationale-less 1959 Line. Its failure to achieve the end-state in Yangtse, will be painful and rankle the PLA hierarchy, though fictional story-telling will be attempted to mislead own public.........


Three pathways are essential for consideration.

First, it is obvious then for India, that being strong nation alone will ensure secure borders and that will be the recipe for peaceful coexistence with China. National strength herein has the military prowess as an important component, with other (more) important facets of national power. This is a subject of separate consideration. However, though it is fashionable and intellectual to ponder about modern technological advancements in warfare like IW, space, cyber, AI, quantum, robotics, and disruptive technologies, intricate machines cannot scuffle or fisticuff, nor man muddy trenches in deep snow or driving rain. As was evident in Yangste (or in Galwan previously), the soldier still bears the burden of miscalculation. The bitter lesson most overlooked is: If we want to ensure territorial integrity of the land called home, we still need to be willing to put our sons and daughters in the mud, rain, heat and bitter cold, to defend it.

Second, is the issue of LAC β€˜perceptions’ as part of routine daily-use lingo. Perceptions......... have been largely stratified, causing immense layered confusion. In regular press-briefings too, the word β€˜perceptions’ finds its place thereby weakening own stance and trust on rationale of own border. What China believes in or perceives is immaterial to own firmness and convictions! Our β€˜perception’ of the border, on say where McMahon Line is, must not be negative and create imbroglio in minds about the truth. It is about our confidence in our truth that matters maximally. Truth and belief must not be the victim within India. As border resolution mechanism is not on the horizon, the word β€˜perceptions of the LAC’ must stand jettisoned from our lingo. India must believe on one LAC, from top to the soldier on the front. The CCP/ PLA’s versions (or perceptions) of the border should become irrelevant, till when (and if) formal discussions at politico-diplomatic level commence to resolve it!

Third is the omnipresent mention of β€˜restoring peace and tranquillity’ that emanates from the 1993 Agreement and finds itself part of all communiquΓ©s!....Tranquillity is supposed to be an immersive sense of peace and quiet, helping relax the body and nerves. Being at peace enables not to be swayed by events, hardships and difficulties, maintain inner poise, clear judgment and common sense in all situations. Peace eliminates negative, futile and restless thinking. Obviously, there is no peace and tranquillity existing on the borders, the units have been and will be increasingly so, on tenterhooks (implying, waiting nervously for something to happen). Constantly expecting fisticuffs and brawls in the melee, on a wafer-thin ridge line, is a chaotic situation with high uncertainty.Naturally wars are messy, end-state unpredictable and best avoidable. However, common-use drafting and usage of the phrase peace and tranquillity does injustice to the vagaries of through the year employment of the Army troops and units along the LAC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
geoBR India shifts 50,000 troops to China border Indian Army 2
LETHALFORCE India-China 2020 Border conflict Indian Army 29497
tarunraju India-China 2020 Border Dispute - Military and Strategic Discussion Indian Army 19501
tsunami India China LAC & International Border Discussions Indian Army 26757
Similar threads

Articles

Top