Ladakh Flash Point

[ougoah]

No it's not on finger 8. It is east of sirjiap, which itself is east of finger 8.

This is the approximate location of the bridge

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It is on the border between what is defined by the UN as Tibetan Autonomous Region and Aksai Chin. The dispute begins at finger 8, which is west of sirjiap

This is roughly where finger 8 is

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Ahh yes this is correct indeed. I thought Finger 8 was literally that border line where disputed ends and China proper begins.

Seems like Finger 8 is defined as the protrusion (it's an Indian patrol point after all) that is west of this border.

My mistake. I did not realise Finger 8 is actually within disputed rather than the point at which China proper begins.

 

[ougoah]

But my point is the same and stands. This bridge is basically on the border (just not on Finger 8). Well it is slightly west of the border where China proper begins, east of Finger 8 (well within disputed).

 

[twineedle]

But my point is the same and stands. This bridge is basically on the border (just not on Finger 8). Well it is slightly west of the border where China proper begins, east of Finger 8 (well within disputed).

this would be considered as part of the 80 percent settled in 2020. West of finger 8 is where the 20 percent begins

 

[ougoah]

this would be considered as part of the 80 percent settled in 2020. West of finger 8 is where the 20 percent begins

This is temporary control positions for China. Just like where India has troops presence within the 20%, I'm defining those positions as temporary since both are actively disputing this whole 20% (even buffer zones). Buffer zones just don't have presence and presence isn't allowed on them but PLA disengagement went from east of F4 point to east of F8 point. So yes there's Chinese troop presence between China proper and F8.

But this is contested! Just like Indian presence wherever is contested and when talking about where infrastructure is built, this bridge is built basically on the border of China proper albeit slightly west. I would consider the bridge to be NOT a piece of infrastructure build within the disputed since Chinese troops have presence (and allowed to) up to east of Finger F8, which would be past where this bridge is located.

Do we have a list of known infrastructure that's in the disputed? There's the road from F5 to China proper. Can you update us on the list for Indian constructions? Compiling a list would be good for reference. I'm only aware of Indians building a bridge somewhere in the northern parts like north west of Galwan valley. And possibly a helipad? The Chinese side only has the road.

 

[Abominable]

Whatever the situation is in the 20%, China should just put down border posts marking the LAC and vacate. There's no reason in having a permanent presence there, especially over colder months.

There's still a small chance for there to be a peace deal so I don't see how it benefits anyone keeping this a (potentially) active theatre.

 

[ougoah]

Whatever the situation is in the 20%, China should just put down border posts marking the LAC and vacate. There's no reason in having a permanent presence there, especially over colder months.

There's still a small chance for there to be a peace deal so I don't see how it benefits anyone keeping this a (potentially) active theatre.

Peace deal between the two nations depends on global geopolitics and how things swing.

Also what you suggested is ridiculous. It just invites the Indians into doing the exact same thing even if only within the 20%, basically they'll just put posts to the edge of the 20% and where they patrolled. It also means inviting a breakdown of buffer agreements without even an escalation or war where buffer agreement would be broken regardless.

Yes there's no point in having strong permanent presence but strong permanent presence (outside of the 20%) is done by both and reinforced somewhat. Certainly the Indians have reinforced more than China since this is FAR from China's major population areas and a few hours drive from India's major population areas. China cannot really mirror deploy here... not that this is required.

Within the 20% there is unknown presence. I don't call the presence permanent but both sides maintain presence and insist on it so it is sort of permanent in that sense until this issue is resolved or the border demarcated - issue resolved even further.

India refuses to demarcate because that means losing Aksai Chin. Would India agree to demarcate the border officially and renounce their claim on Aksai Chin if China gives them the 20% in exchange for finally resolving this 70 year old disagreement? Don't know. But we're nowhere near a solution from this pov. How regional geopolitics work out also unknown.

 

[Abominable]

Peace deal between the two nations depends on global geopolitics and how things swing.

Also what you suggested is ridiculous. It just invites the Indians into doing the exact same thing even if only within the 20%, basically they'll just put posts to the edge of the 20% and where they patrolled. It also means inviting a breakdown of buffer agreements without even an escalation or war where buffer agreement would be broken regardless.

Yes there's no point in having strong permanent presence but strong permanent presence (outside of the 20%) is done by both and reinforced somewhat. Certainly the Indians have reinforced more than China since this is FAR from China's major population areas and a few hours drive from India's major population areas. China cannot really mirror deploy here... not that this is required.

Within the 20% there is unknown presence. I don't call the presence permanent but both sides maintain presence and insist on it so it is sort of permanent in that sense until this issue is resolved or the border demarcated - issue resolved even further.

India refuses to demarcate because that means losing Aksai Chin. Would India agree to demarcate the border officially and renounce their claim on Aksai Chin if China gives them the 20% in exchange for finally resolving this 70 year old disagreement? Don't know. But we're nowhere near a solution from this pov. How regional geopolitics work out also unknown.

Why do you even need a buffer? It's a mountain range.

What's the alternative? Even if it isn't the final agreement you do need to demarcate a border temporarily. Right now the situation is so ambigous Indians can talk about that perceived LAC crap and pretend like they haven't lost any territory. That plays 100% into the hands of the Indians.

Put a line on the ground somewhere, a big statue behind it and go back home. Each time Indians cross the border on a patrol it moves forward.

 

[ougoah]

Why do you even need a buffer? It's a mountain range.

What's the alternative? Even if it isn't the final agreement you do need to demarcate a border temporarily. Right now the situation is so ambigous Indians can talk about that perceived LAC crap and pretend like they haven't lost any territory. That plays 100% into the hands of the Indians.

Put a line on the ground somewhere, a big statue behind it and go back home. Each time Indians cross the border on a patrol it moves forward.

Buffer is one step in the right direction of de-escalating potential for conflict. Nothing to do with at a mountain range or whatever. A total buffer secured out of India would equal the next best thing to demarcating along China's favour... far in its favour considering Aksai Chin is what India wants.

They can talk and believe whatever. Same goes for everyone. People could believe in the Ghost of Kiev an ancient Mig-29 shooting down entire RuAF in a city with no places to hide. Doesn't make it true right?

Well this strategy of your's is about as refined as suggesting Russia start using nukes. Please. There is a place for caveman style tactics but what you're suggesting here is pushing both India and China to war. You realise that does neither any good right? If war is inevitable because one side decides to shift the balance far too much (like what you're suggesting), then the victor wins but has to pay the price of war. Your statue and fence strategy is honestly without insulting you too much, childish and the strategy of a tactless imbecile. You can't think of any way that backfires and doesn't work in your favour? Or perhaps how it could be spun politically? Are you some Israeli warmongering troll? lol the stuff you've been posting in the Ukraine war thread previously makes me feel like you might be. If you're not, then please calm down and re-evaluate things. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[Abominable]

I was joking about the statue obviously...

Having an actual temporary border is the same as Russia using nukes? You'll have to explain the logic behind that.

The current situation is a mess and getting Indians to agree to a buffer is never going to happen. Putting a border down and withdrawing military presence is deescalating and giving the Indians a chance to let the situation go (for now). If they want to maintain a full deployment on their side all year round then thats up to them. As you pointed out it's closer to their population centres.

Nope 100% not Israeli...but the Ukraine thread did turn into a Israel-Palestine like situation in the end.

 

[twineedle]

Why do you even need a buffer? It's a mountain range.

What's the alternative? Even if it isn't the final agreement you do need to demarcate a border temporarily. Right now the situation is so ambigous Indians can talk about that perceived LAC crap and pretend like they haven't lost any territory. That plays 100% into the hands of the Indians.

Put a line on the ground somewhere, a big statue behind it and go back home. Each time Indians cross the border on a patrol it moves forward.

What is the current situation, according to you?