Ladakh Flash Point

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Waqar Khan

Junior Member
Registered Member
While India is again raising the bogey of threat of China on Ladakh,current Covid crises has turned it into a failed state,some thoughts from our syndicate
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
T

twineedle

Junior Member
Registered Member
ougoah said:
This situation is now so abundantly clear even India figures are candidly exposing and talking about it, albeit infrequently.

If China wanted the 20%, they'd take it and there'd be nothing India could militarily do. It would just be diplomatically stupid and a useless move by China. It would also put into risk what it's been working for and building up while earning it nothing in return except for a bit more barren land. Don't forget that China already controlled the 80% of the historic legacy dispute and has so for 60 years.

In fact, China took it unilaterally and forced India to commit to a partial resolution because the situation became politically humiliating for Modi that he had to cooperate on Pangong disengagement (while pathetically dressing it up as Indian victory despite agreeing to China's terms) while the remaining standoff has no resolution. This standoff is detrimental to China and certainly to India. China has next to nothing to gain for flaring things up and risking the progress it has made. India risks very little and has everything to lose if it loses access to the entire 20% because that means losing their entire legacy claim which includes Aksai Chin.
Click to expand...
This is what China's initial terms were. In comparison, India's proposal was always both sides returning to original positions.(Indian troops to Dhan Singh Thapa at Finger 3, PLA at Sirjiap behind finger 8). Obviously something changed between the fifth and sixth corps commander talks.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"China had demanded that India remove its critical ‘Dhan Singh Thapa’ post on Finger 3 of the Lake to facilitate further disengagement, and so that the Chinese troops could move back towards Finger 8."

And before that, China had proposed to only pull back to finger 6
 
Last edited:
O

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
twineedle said:
This is what China's initial terms were. In comparison, India's proposal was always both sides returning to original positions.(Indian troops to Dhan Singh Thapa at Finger 3, PLA at Sirjiap behind finger 8). Obviously something changed between the fifth and sixth corps commander talks.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"China had demanded that India remove its critical ‘Dhan Singh Thapa’ post on Finger 3 of the Lake to facilitate further disengagement, and so that the Chinese troops could move back towards Finger 8."

And before that, China had proposed to only pull back to finger 6
Click to expand...

When has it ever been shown that "India's proposal was always both sides returning to original positions" with Finger 3 and Finger 8 positions? This is what PLA/China always wanted. There would be zero point to capture up to Finger 4 and sit on it for 9 months if Indian troops were always at Finger 3 like "India always wanted".

The issue that partly caused this stand off was the fact that Indian troops weren't just at Finger 3 and India's side of the land dispute. India was patrolling into it and looking like it was making a move on the 20% dispute. PLA witnessed increased Indian moves on dispute and to this day, Indian troops are still within the dispute in parts outside of Pangong lake. If India chooses to vacate, there would be very little reason for PLA to remain. In fact I'm certain that's what China wants India to do with the talks after Pangong disengagement was finalised.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top