Then why wasn't China able to reach it's 1959 claim line in the western sector, the same line it has been referring to since 2020? And of course there is also South Tibet/ Arunachal, the biggest dispute
Last edited:
Ladakh Flash Point
- Thread starter Mt1701d
- Start date
- Status
Aksai Chin?
China's already taken and controlled 80% of the disputed landmass.
The rest - 20% disputed has presence of both Chinese and Indian troops within and infrastructure and camps although neither side "control" the 20%.
India has taken 0% despite promising in 2019 that it will "pay with blood to capture Aksai Chin"... so far India has been unable to even capture land west of Aksai Chin.
The report card stands with China at 80%, India at 0%, and 20% with parts to buffer and parts in standoff being negotiated.
India tried to capture the 20% in 2020 and failed. It was hoping to come out of this legacy dispute with at least control of 20% while China has the 80% and then work from there to slowly go onto their next project which is Aksai Chin. China stopped India right at the 20% stage where India has no hope and no access to Aksai Chin... of course this no access is only cemented after China manages to secure a total buffer deal which India seems to continue refusing. After all these new talks failed again and no more buffer zones have been announced.
Overall this is a stalemate position now but net result is China wins 80%, India wins 0%, rest 20% under partial buffer and partial troop presence from both sides.
Meanwhile laughably pathetic Indians want to chalk this result up as a victory for supa shitter India just because China "has not yet managed to take over all of China's claims" ... well if that's a measure then India has already lost 80% of its claims with no more access rights to some parts of the 20%.
Hmm... well you are clearly missing perspective. China has reached up to 80% (and more) of its 1959 claim line while India has reached up to >0%, <10% of India's claim lines.
I guess China smashed India silly then.
Why would you insist on counting China not reaching its claim line as Indian victory when China reached more than 80% of its claim line while India is in single digits % of its claim line.
You are bringing up Aksai Chin, which was settled in 62, but you are forgetting South Tibet, which is the biggest legacy dispute .
Arunachal/South Tibet has the opposite dynamic, where India is at or only a few km from it's claim line
China is more important things to deal with than India right now. When the time comes, the same will happen to South Tibet.
AP side is the opposite indeed but history suggests China's AP claim was done in response to India claiming AC. We've gone through this before.
AC side dispute is many times larger than AP side dispute in terms of land size but the claims made are roughly proportional. AP claim made by China was done immediately following the dispute starting in the 1950s between the two nations on AC side. Once India made a formal claim on AC, China immediately made a claim on AP. Once India withdraws its claims on AC, I bet China will withdraw claim on AP as well since it was done seemingly in response to India's claiming on AC which was administered back then, before Indian independence by Tibet aka China.
Aksai Chin (AC) is also relevant here with what you said earlier since it is the legacy dispute (at least 80% of it) and so it is the main topic. China won it. India said they were going to take it in 2019. India made moves in 2020. India failed. Now we're not even talking about 80% since India failed so hard that we're talking about the 20% next to it which India used to patrol A LOT more than China did and now India cannot patrol parts of it with the rest occupied by both sides with more "permanent" campsites rather than what was the norm in the past, only patrolling.
What's wrong india? How come you still don't control Aksai Chin?? You said you were going for it. This is what happens when as a country you have a bigger mouth than you have skills and capabilities. What a dumb as street shit leader this Amit is to say something like this and then fail so hard, not only do you not have a chance at your objective anymore, but you've been pushed a step back.
What do I mean by India pushed a step back?
India used to be able to patrol the entire 20% next to Aksai Chin (as did China have those rights) but India exercised those rights much, much more than China ever did and now that net positive to India has become a net zero.
So since buffer deals are a net win for China seeing as it patrolled much less, the troops presence is a net zero for both sides since both have deployments within the 20% in different areas that more or less mirror each other. India has FAR more troops behind the frontlines in Ladakh than China since India's major population centres and capital city is within rocket artillery range of Ladakh whereas China's is regional airliner ranged far away.
How can you say Arunachal isn't a legacy dispute when China still claims it and even renames towns within the state?
And according to Colonel Dinny, an infantry Officer who actually served at Pangong and led Indian patrols along the lake, China was patrolling far more than India due to it's geographic and infrastructurap advantage. Now it is forced to remain behind Sirjiap, meaning China was forced to take a step back. In other disputed areas, India now permanently occupies areas it only used to patrol previously
Last edited:
Because China made the claim on AP (Arunachal Pradesh) after India made a claim on AC? Therefore is seems to suggest China made the claim only to try and get India off its claim on AC.
Basically the thinking from China back then was that "okay India out of the blue is making a claim on our territory. How do we respond?" and the decision ended up being "we make sure they don't capture the land the Indians claim (done) and we make a claim on Indian land as well since we can't just let Indians make random claims without responding in kind".
Why else did AP only get claimed by China a while after India made the claim on AC? Why wouldn't it have been both at the same time? The fact is that the AP claim is associated and grew out of the AC dispute.
If India makes a claim on Tibet proper, you can bet your ass that China is going to make a claim on India proper as a response (after India claims let's say up to Hotan).
If China didn't then India can keep making random claims. The only way to prevent that from a strategic pov here in this specific case of Indo China dynamics is by making a claim as well so that India has something on the table to potentially lose as price of making random claims.
Would you make a bet where if the other person wins, they take half your stuff and if you win, you get nothing?
Do you understand the simple motivations and reason behind AP claim by China?
- Status