Ladakh Flash Point

[ZeEa5KPul]

What about that is wrong exactly?

Your assumptions about China's willingness to escalate, for one. Your emphasis on manpower, for another. Your argument is like me saying the PLA could have taken Taiwan 50 years ago because it could have sent some multiple of the RoC forces across the Strait in rowboats. There's a reason people mocked that idea as a "million man swim".

I also question your reading of the geography. China expelled India from all areas of its boundary claim, unfortunately at the cost of limiting its own patrolling rights. The exception (in China's favour) is Depsang, where China is forcefully preventing India from patrolling.

If both want to avoid war and India wants to use patrol and pushing tactics to salami slice, how can PLA respond?

That's what I mean about dubious assumptions. This entire analysis stands on the very questionable assumption that the PLA is going to be restricted to shoving matches and India can always send more squatters to outshove them. It's very clear to me that should India violate the agreements it signed that China would escalate to armed force, which means the 100x manpower become cluster munition targets. This throwing stones and mêlées silliness ends and things get serious. India struggles against Pakistan; it is not equipped to fight a modern war against an opponent like the PLA, simple as. As delusional as Indian leaders are, they're not delusional enough to forget that.

China would prefer not to escalate to armed force, while India cannot afford to escalate to armed force. It appears superficially that both sides don't want war, but serious analysis must go deeper than that and consider the asymmetries of costs. It must also not follow dubious assumptions down a rabbit hole.

China has escalation dominance of the situation. It has every incentive to climb a rung if India tries to press a wholly contingent artificial advantage that's entirely confined to the present rung.

China is preventing it from using this by threat of war if India goes down that path.

That's what escalation dominance means.

Even defeating India thoroughly, there is still nothing to gain for China except the 20% and maybe parts around Tawang. Which India would keep contesting.

I'm quoting this sentence from your original post because it demonstrates what I consider an insufficient understanding of deterrence and escalation. If you and I are in a fist fight, my objective is to knock you out or incapacitate you. If things escalate to a gunfight, my objective is no longer to incapacitate you or settle a dispute with you - it's to take your life.

If China and India go to war, it's no longer about Aksai Chin or Tawang. "Defeating India thoroughly" means a lot more than settling a border dispute.

 

[Overbom]

What about that is wrong exactly?

If India sends 100x more men to simply take over the 20%, PLA can only respond with actual force.

Why do you think this is a video game? Do you really think that India can suddenly send "100x" manpower against China. Have you ever been to actual tall mountains and try to walk there? India could have 1 billion people at the border and sending them in all against China, and they wouldnt even advance. Logistics and terrain is utterly incapable of supporting such "x100" manpower. Better for India to let loose poisonous snakes than anything else lol

If they want to repeat June fight scenario I reckon advantage would thoroughly be on India's side

Why do you think that the PLA is unwilling to go against India. Seems pretty clear to me that they arent afraid such a scenario, and contrary to your claim, Chinese border troops are now far far more capable of having a war with India than a year ago.

That means wasting resources.

Resources are there to be spent. If they are never used for fear of being "wasted", then they lose their purpose.

 

[Chin evan]

Having an unresolved border issue with India makes handling geopolitics much easier for China, think about it .

 

[ougoah]

Your assumptions about China's willingness to escalate, for one. Your emphasis on manpower, for another. Your argument is like me saying the PLA could have taken Taiwan 50 years ago because it could have sent some multiple of the RoC forces across the Strait in rowboats. There's a reason people mocked that idea as a "million man swim".

I also question your reading of the geography. China expelled India from all areas of its boundary claim, unfortunately at the cost of limiting its own patrolling rights. The exception (in China's favour) is Depsang, where China is forcefully preventing India from patrolling.

That's what I mean about dubious assumptions. This entire analysis stands on the very questionable assumption that the PLA is going to be restricted to shoving matches and India can always send more squatters to outshove them. It's very clear to me that should India violate the agreements it signed that China would escalate to armed force, which means the 100x manpower become cluster munition targets. This throwing stones and mêlées silliness ends and things get serious. India struggles against Pakistan; it is not equipped to fight a modern war against an opponent like the PLA, simple as. As delusional as Indian leaders are, they're not delusional enough to forget that.

China would prefer not to escalate to armed force, while India cannot afford to escalate to armed force. It appears superficially that both sides don't want war, but serious analysis must go deeper than that and consider the asymmetries of costs. It must also not follow dubious assumptions down a rabbit hole.

China has escalation dominance of the situation. It has every incentive to climb a rung if India tries to press a wholly contingent artificial advantage that's entirely confined to the present rung.

That's what escalation dominance means.

I'm quoting this sentence from your original post because it demonstrates what I consider an insufficient understanding of deterrence and escalation. If you and I are in a fist fight, my objective is to knock you out or incapacitate you. If things escalate to a gunfight, my objective is no longer to incapacitate you or settle a dispute with you - it's to take your life.

This is basically like I said. India understands there to be a margin of unpredictability, over which they will not even get close to let alone step into. My estimate is this certainly involves attempting to take control of the 20% through their advantage of manpower. They don't do it (despite having the means) because they fear this may unleash actual mechanised war.

As much as China dominates the escalation ladder, it now has fewer means of using PLA to force India to complete the buffer deal. If it had, then the 13th round of talks would have resulted in India agreeing to total buffer. They haven't yet and China will not use the PLA because it also does not want to do what you call "prefer(ring) not to escalate to armed force". This would simply be a waste of effort and resources and I doubt China would do more than take what it claims after the fact.

If China and India go to war, it's no longer about Aksai Chin or Tawang. "Defeating India thoroughly" means a lot more than settling a border dispute.

Like what though?

You're forgetting that China is NOT one of those powers even if some Chinese chauvinism will begin thinking in those directions. It ought not be either. Aksai Chin, Taiwan, Diaoyu are all actual sovereignty issues NOT examples of China going on some imperial expedition. They are a rising power trying to regain what was once theirs and in Taiwan's case, always been theirs if not for weakness and US support of ROC's illegal squatting of Taiwan island.

So no, China is not going to fight a war over this when it isn't necessary. India does not seem like it wants to make it "necessary" by invading Aksai Chin or even forcefully using human waves to control the 20%. This means there is no reason for China to go to war. Like I said, India is not giving China reason to and without any reason to, China is playing the long game wrt securing a signed total buffer. It appears this is going to be done via asymmetric means since using PLA is out of the question as that would 1. threaten the security of the two secured buffers and 2. because if India doesn't shoot, China won't and India will prefer to use manpower advantage which they clearly have. China cannot divert a quarter of a million troops to participate in stupid shoving matches with the IA. 赤脚不怕穿鞋. This is playing to India's strength and this is why I'm surprised and glad China at least secured two buffers even though I suspect India would break them without regard.

The reason they signed those two is because signing away two doesn't mean they can't access the rest until the entire 20% is a buffer. They still have access and are positioned within it. Another reason is because PLA was on those two sites. They get PLA off the sites for buffer exchange as well.

If China invaded India proper, it would need to invest trillions over many years and still fight Indian insurgents. It's stupid. Americans did a chain of those types of war because of their MIC and corrupted interests. Chinese MIC are state owned for the purpose of defence rather than for the purpose of profit. Why would China invade India anyway?? What's there to gain apart from headaches and problems.

 

[Overbom]

Why would China invade India anyway?? What's there to gain apart from headaches and problems.

How about getting India off China's back on a potential Taiwan scenario? As I am sure you know, India is a bomb waiting to explode for China wrt Taiwan. So why wait and have India become stronger when you can smash them today when they are very weak?

And please, noone is buying India's talk about wanting to have "good relations" with China. History and recent events have shown that whenever India thinks that China is weak or distracted or in a disadvantage, it will not hesitate to attack it. So China will not (and shouldnt) give India time to grow stronger and thus causing it bigger problems in the future.

Better to attack or provoke an attack now

Indian nationalists (you know, the people in power), have already targeted China as their biggest foe. Please explain why China should allow India's threats, propaganda, provocations and attacks go unanswered when it faces an enemy which will surely grow stronger in the future

 

[ougoah]

How about getting India off China's back on a potential Taiwan scenario? As I am sure you know, India is a bomb waiting to explode for China wrt Taiwan. So why wait and have India become stronger when you can smash them today when they are very weak?

And please, noone is buying India's talk about wanting to have "good relations" with China. History and recent events have shown that whenever India thinks that China is weak or distracted or in a disadvantage, it will not hesitate to attack it. So China will not (and shouldnt) give India time to grow stronger and thus causing it bigger problems in the future.

Better to attack or provoke an attack now

I've already repeated my explanations very clearly.

TLDR, China isn't interested in war with India unless India invade Aksai Chin or takes over the remaining legacy dispute 20% using manpower and presence only.

There is no gain for China in invading India. Why are you talking about good relations and India when it comes to Taiwan. India's been doing this sort of shit wrt Tibet for 70 years. China simply isn't going to invade India. That's it. There's no more to it. If India initiates a war, that's a different story. Initiating a war would involve invading Aksai Chin or taking control of the remaining dispute. At the moment, India's agreed to two buffer zones but refuses total buffer. That should explain the entire situation. China demands India leaves, India demands China allow Depsang patrol and allowing India to basically salami slice away the 20%. Both accuse the other of not giving way. Obviously.

Indian nationalists (you know, the people in power), have already targeted China as their biggest foe.

Sure agreed. And what though?

Please explain why China should allow India's threats, propaganda, provocations and attacks go unanswered when it faces an enemy which will surely grow stronger in the future

Answer in the form of dominating everything except propaganda that flows into the western world from India. That's how it is and how it will stay. Indian propaganda is going to dominate the west. China cannot hope to combat and counter those except to once in a while inject some truth into the entire field and the ones who need to know and are at the helm understand anyway. The rest is dominating every other aspect. Answer also in the forms of now removing Indian influence in Afghanistan, and improving relations with Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and even Afghanistan and Iran.

China is countering India in every aspect in every domain and it's been doing it very well. It's just not so obvious because it's not quite reported in those ways. India fuming over Afghanistan is no coincidence. These efforts are over the course of years and decades but if one observes, it's more than half done. What India has got is millions of internet trolls and BS publications spreading Indian propaganda either paid or entirely Indian owned. China don't play those stupid games. Where it matters is where CCP efforts go.

To me, this is how a cunning and well organised government counters threats and provocations. India threatens Aksai Chin, China threatens AP in return and managed to secure two buffers with total buffer being a work in progress. It's destroyed Indian influence in Afghanistan quietly and it's converting Bangladesh, and even Nepal, Sri Lanka and to some extent Bhutan closer to neutral when they were entirely India aligned and controlled in the past. Once that is done, AC is secured and I doubt China would in turn take pressure off AP even then.

Propaganda you cannot defeat India in. They have millions more dedicated propagandists working on it and a bigger budget ... go wonder why they get nothing serious and real done. Just blah blah blah and bollywood counters. Would you rather China stoop that low? China doesn't win wikipedia editing wars that take 20 mins to debunk... why? because Chinese are actually working.

India "runs" at a snails pace even when there are no serious effort or forces trying to hinder it. China sprints despite western combined total dedication to hinder it. I think the idea of India even reaching middle income trap status (which they have not) requires some serious social and political reforms in India. Right now it's about as effectively managed as a cat trying to herd a group of children. The amount of inefficiency and social hurdles required to be overcome is unseen partly because India is even more diverse and divided than China. Its diversity is also such that they are much more difficult to overcome. India would sooner have Socialist revolutions than it would resolve its feudalism. Then it has to begin to build and empower its bottom half which China started doing in the 1940s.

 

[Cyclist]

Just an opinion, don't let this China's victory over India makes Chinese become too over-nationalist. China needs peaceful neighborhood, India can keep coming and trying to provoke and I believe China can still beat them. China just need to keep grow stronger. India knew that although it could send 100x more soldiers, it will be a massacre (IMHO, China's firepower is a lot more stronger than India) and that's why India did not dare to do that. Even without firepower, this last conflict shows that China with around only 100+ soldiers already beat 600+ Indian soldiers.

India should work with China and accept the fair conditions that China already gave. China has been really benevolence all these times (just imagine, China knows all the truth and has all the evidences but China kept its head down for more than a year, just let India boast and its propaganda victory, just look at all the news and wikipedia page regarding this conflict) and trying to save India's face so many times, don't let the problems from British India keep lingering and sacrifice India's citizens (India is ranked 101 in Global Hunger Index from a list of 116 countries, I think that is really bad).

 

[Sardaukar20]

In my opinion. The MOU between China and Bhutan is a historic development. Never in Bhutan's history that I can recall that they have negotiated border agreements directly with the PRC.

For me, this is big. Because, it shows that Bhutan, India's own vassal is starting to assert its independence from India. Its reflects very badly on India's prestige in its neighbourhood.

This coming on the heels of the failed border talks between India & China, and the fresh conflict at South Tibet. I guess now China has finally learnt how to manage India.

India off course could send diplomats to Bhutan to reign them in. But very likely Bhutan will just give them lip service. Alternatively, India could engineer a coup in Bhutan or send in their military to oppress the Bhutanese govt. China might have limited ability to intervene, and the West might give tacit approval. But it'll still horrify India's neighbours enough to further isolate it. All in all, India does not have good options if it continues its belligerent foreign policy in Asia.

India fears the so-called 'Chinese influence offensive' in South Asia. But its rapidly becoming a reality mostly because of its own actions. Had it not acted so belligerently against China and its neighbours, this would not need to happen.

 

[twineedle]

Bhutan has been holding border negotiations with China for decades

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449067172504883200

 

[Overbom]

Bhutan has been holding border negotiations with China for decades

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449067172504883200

"Have been going for 37 years".

Only difference is that 37 years ago China was a nobody in the world stage while today, China is trading direct 1-to-1 blows with the current hegemon, the US.

Also, some strategic rethink might have happened internally so that China wants to settle this and will push for it while providing some protection to Bhutan against Indian interference