The adventurism of China in Ladakh and a few other places along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and the&nbsp;standoff between Chinese and Indian Forces have&nbsp;once again highlighted the complexity of the border issue between the two countries.

The fact that 22 rounds of special representative-level talks have taken place between India and China in the last 30 years,&nbsp;and the resolution of the border issue is nowhere in sight, speaks of the magnanimity of the problem. LAC, irrespective of differing perceptions, continues to be a compromise formula,&nbsp;which has its own pitfalls in bringing peace and tranquillity, because perceptions can be repeatedly stretched beyond limits&nbsp;if the intentions change, as has been the case with Chinese so many times. The idea of managing peace and tranquillity through agreements and&nbsp;Confidence-building measures (CBMs) has not been found effective enough.

Defining the Complexity of China-India Border Issue &nbsp;&nbsp;

People's Republic of China refused to ratify the Simla Agreement of 1914, signed between British India and Tibet. The Indian stance generally follows Johnson Line (1865) in Ladakh and McMahon Line in East. When Maharaja Hari Singh signed Instrument of Accession, Aksai Chin was part of it; hence, it rightfully belonged to India. India should have compelled China to accept the Shimla Agreement before recognising Tibet as part of Beijing. There is, therefore, no mutually agreed border treaty between Independent India and PRC. China can never be trusted, and hence, India can also have a relook at old treaties/recognitions with China. &nbsp;

It is often mentioned that China has resolved its border dispute with several other countries, however, Chinese argue that it was done on give and take principle. India and China interpret history as it suits them, which is unlikely to change easily. Expecting India to give Tawang or China to give back Akshai Chin is unlikely to be accepted by domestic constituencies on both sides. It is for this reason that every time when the talks start on border resolution, it invariably ends with additional measures for the management of undefined, LAC. &nbsp;

Why is Graceful Disengagement along the LAC Difficult?&nbsp;

LAC, by definition, indicates loosely demarcated areas under the actual control of Chinese and Indian Forces. The term was used by Zhou Enlai in his note to Indian PM Jawaharlal Nehru in 1959, followed by respective positions in 1960 and post 1962 conflict, with some unheld areas in between, and later used for negotiations since 1993, with a provision that it does not impact respective positions adopted by both countries on unresolved Border Issue. Both countries have their own perception of LAC and in certain areas these perception overlap. As LAC is not demarcated, Chinese, with scant regards to international agreements and obligations, use non-demarcation as an opportunity to pursue their ‘Strategy of Incremental Encroachment’ by laying fresh claims (Galwan Valley) and following it up with troops buildup/infrastructure development till resisted and stop just short of conflict. An opposing build-up by Indian Forces leads to ‘Standoff' each time.&nbsp;

The problem in the resolution of standoff is that a graceful retreat becomes extremely difficult due to rising sentiments/ nationalism in respective countries and media glare, thus increasing the political cost of any compromise by either side. Galwan/Pangong Tso is neither the first nor the last standoff between the two countries as&nbsp;the demarcation of LAC is doable, provided both sides “Agree to Agree”. Chinese, however, continue to drag their feet in doing so, as they fear that it will become de facto border, forcing them to forego their claims made in 1959, including Tawang and take away an opportunity to needle India, whenever it has any major divergence in strategic interests. Having developed their infrastructure up to LAC earlier than India, China does not want to let go of this comparative strategic advantage by denying similar infrastructure development by India. &nbsp;

In my opinion, the delimitation and demarcation of LAC will happen only, when the political/strategic cost of not doing so will increase for China. It could happen when China faces insurmountable military pressure on South-Eastern seaboard from a group of countries, in response to Chinese adventurism in Indo-Pacific. China, having recovered early from COVID-19, has unfairly used it as an opportunity to make quick gains in claimed areas amidst pandemic and unfair profiteering from ‘Health Silk Road’ igniting global anger. Chinese aggressiveness in South and East China Sea, blocking of global sea-lane of communication and freedom of flights, coupled with a declaration of independence by Taiwan can create such conditions, along with economic decoupling, resulting in internal dissent in the mainland, Hong Kong, and heightened rivalry with the US with accidental triggers. &nbsp;

China, on its part, will try to stop its adventurism just short of war, in consonance with Sun Tzu’s principle of ‘winning without fighting’. India will have to walk an extra mile in Indo-Pacific engagements like QUAD, and target all vulnerabilities of China, in coordination with&nbsp;like-minded countries. Till then China and India will continue with a tug of war along the&nbsp;LAC.&nbsp;

&nbsp;(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) &nbsp;

The adventurism of China in Ladakh and a few other places along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and the standoff between Chinese and Indian Forces have once again highlighted the complexity of the border issue between the two countries.

The adventurism of China in Ladakh and a few other places along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and the standoff between Chinese and Indian Forces have once again highlighted the complexity of the border issue between the two countries. The fact that 22 rounds of special representative-level talks have taken place between India and China in the last 30 years, and the resolution of the border issue is nowhere in sight, speaks of the magnanimity of the problem. LAC, irrespective of differing perceptions, continues to be a compromise formula, which has its own pitfalls in bringing peace and tranquillity, because perceptions can be repeatedly stretched beyond limits if the intentions change, as has been the case with Chinese so many times. The idea of managing peace and tranquillity through agreements and Confidence-building measures (CBMs) has not been found effective enough. Defining the Complexity of China-India Border Issue People's Republic of China refused to ratify the Simla Agreement of 1914, signed between British India and Tibet. The Indian stance generally follows Johnson Line (1865) in Ladakh and McMahon Line in East. When Maharaja Hari Singh signed Instrument of Accession, Aksai Chin was part of it; hence, it rightfully belonged to India. India should have compelled China to accept the Shimla Agreement before recognising Tibet as part of Beijing. There is, therefore, no mutually agreed border treaty between Independent India and PRC. China can never be trusted, and hence, India can also have a relook at old treaties/recognitions with China. It is often mentioned that China has resolved its border dispute with several other countries, however, Chinese argue that it was done on give and take principle. India and China interpret history as it suits them, which is unlikely to change easily. Expecting India to give Tawang or China to give back Akshai Chin is unlikely to be accepted by domestic constituencies on both sides. It is for this reason that every time when the talks start on border resolution, it invariably ends with additional measures for the management of undefined, LAC. Why is Graceful Disengagement along the LAC Difficult? LAC, by definition, indicates loosely demarcated areas under the actual control of Chinese and Indian Forces. The term was used by Zhou Enlai in his note to Indian PM Jawaharlal Nehru in 1959, followed by respective positions in 1960 and post 1962 conflict, with some unheld areas in between, and later used for negotiations since 1993, with a provision that it does not impact respective positions adopted by both countries on unresolved Border Issue. Both countries have their own perception of LAC and in certain areas these perception overlap. As LAC is not demarcated, Chinese, with scant regards to international agreements and obligations, use non-demarcation as an opportunity to pursue their ‘Strategy of Incremental Encroachment’ by laying fresh claims (Galwan Valley) and following it up with troops buildup/infrastructure development till resisted and stop just short of conflict. An opposing build-up by Indian Forces leads to ‘Standoff' each time. The problem in the resolution of standoff is that a graceful retreat becomes extremely difficult due to rising sentiments/ nationalism in respective countries and media glare, thus increasing the political cost of any compromise by either side. Galwan/Pangong Tso is neither the first nor the last standoff between the two countries as the demarcation of LAC is doable, provided both sides “Agree to Agree”. Chinese, however, continue to drag their feet in doing so, as they fear that it will become de facto border, forcing them to forego their claims made in 1959, including Tawang and take away an opportunity to needle India, whenever it has any major divergence in strategic interests. Having developed their infrastructure up to LAC earlier than India, China does not want to let go of this comparative strategic advantage by denying similar infrastructure development by India. In my opinion, the delimitation and demarcation of LAC will happen only, when the political/strategic cost of not doing so will increase for China. It could happen when China faces insurmountable military pressure on South-Eastern seaboard from a group of countries, in response to Chinese adventurism in Indo-Pacific. China, having recovered early from COVID-19, has unfairly used it as an opportunity to make quick gains in claimed areas amidst pandemic and unfair profiteering from ‘Health Silk Road’ igniting global anger. Chinese aggressiveness in South and East China Sea, blocking of global sea-lane of communication and freedom of flights, coupled with a declaration of independence by Taiwan can create such conditions, along with economic decoupling, resulting in internal dissent in the mainland, Hong Kong, and heightened rivalry with the US with accidental triggers. China, on its part, will try to stop its adventurism just short of war, in consonance with Sun Tzu’s principle of ‘winning without fighting’. India will have to walk an extra mile in Indo-Pacific engagements like QUAD, and target all vulnerabilities of China, in coordination with like-minded countries. Till then China and India will continue with a tug of war along the LAC. (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article)

Why the resolution of border dispute between China and India is complicated?

US-based space technology company Maxa Technologies has published satellite images that show road construction and Chinese Military resources at the disputed border area between India and China. Watch report.

India-China standoff: US space firm releases photographs of LAC and patrol point 14

India and China on Wednesday agreed to ensure expeditious implementation of the understanding on disengagement of troops from eastern Ladakh as decided in a meeting of senior military commanders on June 6.

The two sides held diplomatic talks through video conference. The talks were held between Joint Secretary (East Asia) in the Ministry of External Affairs Naveen Srivastava and Director General in the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs Wu Jianghao.

However, China has significantly ramped up its military presence in several other key sectors along the Line of Actual Control in Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Uttarakhand.

On Sunday, the Indian government gave the armed forces "full freedom" to give a "befitting" response to any Chinese misadventure along the LAC.

The Army has already sent thousands of additional troops to forward locations along the border in the last one week.&nbsp;The IAF has also moved a sizeable number of its frontline Sukhoi 30 MKI, Jaguar, Mirage 2000 aircraft and Apache attack helicopters to several key air bases including Leh and Srinagar following the clashes.

Meanwhile, the Chinese regime is still blaming India for escalating tensions and it has once again claimed sovereignty over the Galwan valley.

Amid China's rhetoric and lies also came a confession. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian accepted that construction of roads and bridges on the Indian side of the border was the reason behind China's aggression.

These contrasting statements only discredit everything that China has been saying. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/maintaining-peace-and-tranquility-along-sino-india-border-in-common-interests-of-both-parties-china-308242">Also Read: Maintaining peace and tranquility along Sino-India border in common interests of both parties: China</a>

China has been in occupation of Tibet since 1951 and the Tibetan government is in exile in India. Now with China's unprecedented aggression towards India, there's a growing sentiment among Indian citizens to call the border by its rightful name - the Indo-Tibet border.

From anti-China sentiments to anti-China decisions, reports have emerged that custom officials in Chennai have held Chinese shipments for extra checks. However, there is no official order from the government yet. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/how-india-is-slowly-but-surely-boycotting-china-308083">Also Read: How India is slowly, but surely, boycotting China</a>

The Galwan clash has indeed been a turning point in India-China relations. If the anti-China sentiments in India are anything to go by, it may very well be a breaking point. 
 
(With inputs from PTI) 
&nbsp;

India and China on Wednesday agreed to ensure expeditious implementation of the understanding on disengagement of troops from eastern Ladakh as decided in a meeting of senior military commanders on June 6.

India and China on Wednesday agreed to ensure expeditious implementation of the understanding on disengagement of troops from eastern Ladakh as decided in a meeting of senior military commanders on June 6. The two sides held diplomatic talks through video conference. The talks were held between Joint Secretary (East Asia) in the Ministry of External Affairs Naveen Srivastava and Director General in the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs Wu Jianghao. However, China has significantly ramped up its military presence in several other key sectors along the Line of Actual Control in Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Uttarakhand. On Sunday, the Indian government gave the armed forces "full freedom" to give a "befitting" response to any Chinese misadventure along the LAC. The Army has already sent thousands of additional troops to forward locations along the border in the last one week. The IAF has also moved a sizeable number of its frontline Sukhoi 30 MKI, Jaguar, Mirage 2000 aircraft and Apache attack helicopters to several key air bases including Leh and Srinagar following the clashes. Meanwhile, the Chinese regime is still blaming India for escalating tensions and it has once again claimed sovereignty over the Galwan valley. Amid China's rhetoric and lies also came a confession. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian accepted that construction of roads and bridges on the Indian side of the border was the reason behind China's aggression. These contrasting statements only discredit everything that China has been saying. Also Read: Maintaining peace and tranquility along Sino-India border in common interests of both parties: China China has been in occupation of Tibet since 1951 and the Tibetan government is in exile in India. Now with China's unprecedented aggression towards India, there's a growing sentiment among Indian citizens to call the border by its rightful name - the Indo-Tibet border. From anti-China sentiments to anti-China decisions, reports have emerged that custom officials in Chennai have held Chinese shipments for extra checks. However, there is no official order from the government yet. Also Read: How India is slowly, but surely, boycotting China The Galwan clash has indeed been a turning point in India-China relations. If the anti-China sentiments in India are anything to go by, it may very well be a breaking point. (With inputs from PTI)

India-China standoff: Situation along the LAC continues to remain grim

The disengagement agreed upon between India and China on how to resolve the stand-off at three&nbsp;points in East Ladakh has begun on Wednesday by the withdrawal of Chinese troops from Indian territory.

The&nbsp;flashpoints to be discussed include Galwan valley's Patrol point 14, 15 and 17A, Hot springs and Pangong Tso, Finger 4. &nbsp;Sources told that Chinese troops have gone back 500 metres in all the 3 flashpoint areas.&nbsp;

Patrol Point 14 in Galwan which saw the India China clashes on June 15, the Chinese troops have been seen moving back to their rear position up to 20 km on the Chinese side of LAC.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/new-satellite-images-show-chinese-military-build-up-and-activity-along-galwan-valley-308225" hreflang="en">New satellite images show Chinese military build-up and activity along Galwan valley</a>

Sources told WION, the Indian side is cautiously observing&nbsp;Chinese moves and the situation will be verified on the ground over a period of time.&nbsp;

Following the marathon 11 hours talks between Indian and Chinese forces on Monday, both have arrived at a "mutual consensus" on disengagement. Corps Commander level talks on Monday at Moldo was to chalk out the differences on the ground in the aftermath of 15 June face-off, that saw casualties on both sides.&nbsp;

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/amid-talks-with-india-china-once-again-claims-sovereignty-over-galwan-valley-308192" hreflang="en">Amid talks with India, China again claims 'sovereignty over Galwan Valley'</a>

During the meeting, modalities for disengagement from all friction areas in Eastern Ladakh were discussed and it will be taken forward by both the sides.

On&nbsp;June 1 also both forces of both countries meeting and arriving at disengagement consensus. While some disengagement did happen, the 15th June violent faceoff in galwan happened after the Chinese side "sought to erect structures just across the LAC" and "unilaterally attempted to change the status quo there", India had said. The face-off saw casualties on both sides. &nbsp;Since June 1, both sides have had around 8 rounds of military talks to defuse the situation.&nbsp;

Since early May 2020, the Chinese side has been hindering India's normal patrolling pattern the LAC area in Ladakh. In Mid-May, the Chinese side attempted to transgress the LAC in other areas of the Western Sector of the India-China border areas and this was met with an appropriate response by Indian forces.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The disengagement agreed upon between India and China on how to resolve the stand-off at three points in East Ladakh has begun on Wednesday by the withdrawal of Chinese troops from Indian territory.

The disengagement agreed upon between India and China on how to resolve the stand-off at three points in East Ladakh has begun on Wednesday by the withdrawal of Chinese troops from Indian territory. The flashpoints to be discussed include Galwan valley's Patrol point 14, 15 and 17A, Hot springs and Pangong Tso, Finger 4. Sources told that Chinese troops have gone back 500 metres in all the 3 flashpoint areas. Patrol Point 14 in Galwan which saw the India China clashes on June 15, the Chinese troops have been seen moving back to their rear position up to 20 km on the Chinese side of LAC. Also read: New satellite images show Chinese military build-up and activity along Galwan valley Sources told WION, the Indian side is cautiously observing Chinese moves and the situation will be verified on the ground over a period of time. Following the marathon 11 hours talks between Indian and Chinese forces on Monday, both have arrived at a "mutual consensus" on disengagement. Corps Commander level talks on Monday at Moldo was to chalk out the differences on the ground in the aftermath of 15 June face-off, that saw casualties on both sides. Also read: Amid talks with India, China again claims 'sovereignty over Galwan Valley' During the meeting, modalities for disengagement from all friction areas in Eastern Ladakh were discussed and it will be taken forward by both the sides. On June 1 also both forces of both countries meeting and arriving at disengagement consensus. While some disengagement did happen, the 15th June violent faceoff in galwan happened after the Chinese side "sought to erect structures just across the LAC" and "unilaterally attempted to change the status quo there", India had said. The face-off saw casualties on both sides. Since June 1, both sides have had around 8 rounds of military talks to defuse the situation. Since early May 2020, the Chinese side has been hindering India's normal patrolling pattern the LAC area in Ladakh. In Mid-May, the Chinese side attempted to transgress the LAC in other areas of the Western Sector of the India-China border areas and this was met with an appropriate response by Indian forces.

India-China standoff: Disengagement begins at LAC's three flash points

The Indian Army said on Tuesday that Commander-level talks between India and China were held in a "cordial, positive &amp; constructive atmosphere" as both sides decided to "disengage with the mutual consensus". 
 
On Monday, Lt Gen Harinder Singh, the commander of the 14 Corps, held a nearly 11-hour meeting with Commander of the Tibet Military District Maj Gen Liu Lin in an attempt to lower the temperature between the two sides.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-ladakh-dispute-india-china-agree-to-disengage-308097/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

China has agreed to de-escalate at the border and it expressed willingness to chalk out differences with India. A step-by-step withdrawal is being planned and the disengagement will happen not only in Galwan, but in all friction areas of eastern Ladakh.

The first round of the Lt General-level talks was held on June 6 as both sides agreed to disengage gradually, however, Indian and Chinese troops clashed at the Galwan Valley on June 15-16. And hence, blindly believing that Beijing would live up to its promise this time will be a mistake. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/need-to-respect-ethos-of-international-law-says-jaishankar-in-a-meet-with-china-russia-307955">Also Read: Need to respect ethos of international law, says Jaishankar in a meet with China, Russia</a>

A US intelligence report has emerged which contradicts everything that China has been saying about the Galwan skirmish. It indicates that this faceoff was an attempt by China to teach India a lesson. 
 
Furthermore, Moody's Investors Service has projected the Indian economy to shrink by 3.1 per cent this year. It said that clashes on the Ladakh border suggest that geopolitical risks are rising in the entire region. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/after-commander-level-talks-china-says-decided-to-take-steps-to-cool-down-things-at-the-border-307891">Also Read:&nbsp;China says 'decided to take steps to cool down things at the border'</a>

The foreign ministers of Russia, India and China held a virtual meeting on Tuesday. In a veiled attack at China against the backdrop of a tense border stand-off, External Affairs Minister S.&nbsp;Jaishankar said that "Respecting international law, recognizing the legitimate interests of partners, supporting multilateralism and promoting common good is the only way of building a durable world order.

India will need to make necessary adjustments in its foreign and defence policy and devise a strategy to thwart Beijing's larger hegemonic objectives.

The Indian Army said on Tuesday that Commander-level talks between India and China were held in a "cordial, positive & constructive atmosphere" as both sides decided to "disengage with the mutual consensus".

The Indian Army said on Tuesday that Commander-level talks between India and China were held in a "cordial, positive & constructive atmosphere" as both sides decided to "disengage with the mutual consensus". On Monday, Lt Gen Harinder Singh, the commander of the 14 Corps, held a nearly 11-hour meeting with Commander of the Tibet Military District Maj Gen Liu Lin in an attempt to lower the temperature between the two sides. × China has agreed to de-escalate at the border and it expressed willingness to chalk out differences with India. A step-by-step withdrawal is being planned and the disengagement will happen not only in Galwan, but in all friction areas of eastern Ladakh. The first round of the Lt General-level talks was held on June 6 as both sides agreed to disengage gradually, however, Indian and Chinese troops clashed at the Galwan Valley on June 15-16. And hence, blindly believing that Beijing would live up to its promise this time will be a mistake. Also Read: Need to respect ethos of international law, says Jaishankar in a meet with China, Russia A US intelligence report has emerged which contradicts everything that China has been saying about the Galwan skirmish. It indicates that this faceoff was an attempt by China to teach India a lesson. Furthermore, Moody's Investors Service has projected the Indian economy to shrink by 3.1 per cent this year. It said that clashes on the Ladakh border suggest that geopolitical risks are rising in the entire region. Also Read: China says 'decided to take steps to cool down things at the border' The foreign ministers of Russia, India and China held a virtual meeting on Tuesday. In a veiled attack at China against the backdrop of a tense border stand-off, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar said that "Respecting international law, recognizing the legitimate interests of partners, supporting multilateralism and promoting common good is the only way of building a durable world order. India will need to make necessary adjustments in its foreign and defence policy and devise a strategy to thwart Beijing's larger hegemonic objectives.

Ladakh dispute: Consensus reached between India and China on disengagement

Indian and Chinese militaries are holding a second round of senior military-level talks on Monday in an attempt to lower the temperature following the violent clashes in Galwan Valley last week in which 20 Army personnel were killed in action.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-ladakh-dispute-india-gives-free-hand-to-forces-307820/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The Indian delegation at the talks is being led by 14 Corps Commander Lt Gen Harinder Singh while the Chinese side was to be headed by&nbsp;Major General Lin Liu, the commander of the South Xinjiang Military District,&nbsp;

Meanwhile, the Indian Army Chief, General MM Naravane, is expected to visit Ladakh soon to review the security arrangements.

Amidst the continuing standoff between the Indian Army and China''s PLA, the Centre on Monday reviewed ongoing road projects along the Sino-Indian border, and decided to expedite work on 32 of them. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/tibetan-govt-in-exile-warns-of-chinese-expansionist-policy-in-the-region-says-beijing-buying-elites-in-nepal-307694">Also Read: Tibetan govt in exile warns of Chinese expansionist policy in the region</a>

The decision was taken at a high-level meeting convened by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), and attended by the Central Public Works Department (CPWD), Border Roads Organisation (BRO) and the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) among others.

Furthermore, the Central government has granted more financial power to Defence&nbsp;Forces under which they can buy any ammunition or weapon of up to Rs 500 crore without seeking clearances.

The government has also given the Armed Forces "full freedom" to give a "befitting" response to any Chinese misadventure along the 3,500-km de-facto border.

As India makes these moves, China is watching closely and speaking through its state media. "If Indian soldiers use firearms against Chinese soldiers in the future, there will be a different picture in the border areas," quoted&nbsp;the Global Times. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/not-bats-but-batman-indian-army-takes-dig-at-china-in-post-saluting-martyrs-307615">Also Read: 'Not bats, but batman': Indian Army takes dig at China in post saluting martyrs</a>

In the past, India never took pre-emptive measures and only offered localised resistance, but New Delhi is changing the game to give its Armed Forces an edge, and this has baffled Beijing.

Experts suggest that India must bolster its border areas in Ladakh, putting together necessary infrastructure the Army would need for any future confrontation with China.

(With inputs from PTI)

Indian and Chinese militaries are holding a second round of senior military-level talks on Monday in an attempt to lower the temperature following the violent clashes in Galwan Valley last week in which 20 Army personnel were killed in action.

Indian and Chinese militaries are holding a second round of senior military-level talks on Monday in an attempt to lower the temperature following the violent clashes in Galwan Valley last week in which 20 Army personnel were killed in action. × The Indian delegation at the talks is being led by 14 Corps Commander Lt Gen Harinder Singh while the Chinese side was to be headed by Major General Lin Liu, the commander of the South Xinjiang Military District, Meanwhile, the Indian Army Chief, General MM Naravane, is expected to visit Ladakh soon to review the security arrangements. Amidst the continuing standoff between the Indian Army and China''s PLA, the Centre on Monday reviewed ongoing road projects along the Sino-Indian border, and decided to expedite work on 32 of them. Also Read: Tibetan govt in exile warns of Chinese expansionist policy in the region The decision was taken at a high-level meeting convened by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), and attended by the Central Public Works Department (CPWD), Border Roads Organisation (BRO) and the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) among others. Furthermore, the Central government has granted more financial power to Defence Forces under which they can buy any ammunition or weapon of up to Rs 500 crore without seeking clearances. The government has also given the Armed Forces "full freedom" to give a "befitting" response to any Chinese misadventure along the 3,500-km de-facto border. As India makes these moves, China is watching closely and speaking through its state media. "If Indian soldiers use firearms against Chinese soldiers in the future, there will be a different picture in the border areas," quoted the Global Times. Also Read: 'Not bats, but batman': Indian Army takes dig at China in post saluting martyrs In the past, India never took pre-emptive measures and only offered localised resistance, but New Delhi is changing the game to give its Armed Forces an edge, and this has baffled Beijing. Experts suggest that India must bolster its border areas in Ladakh, putting together necessary infrastructure the Army would need for any future confrontation with China. (With inputs from PTI)

Here's how India is responding to China's provocations

In a bid too woo Bangladesh, China has provided a huge trade boost to the country by announcing tariff exemption for 97 per cent of Bangladeshi products effective from July 1.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-bangladesh-next-in-chinas-trap-307824/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The decision has come one month after Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and Chinese President Xi Jinping held a discussion to upgrade their bilateral relations during the Covid-19 pandemic

This move reduces Bangladesh's dependence on India. Bangladesh shares the highest trade deficit with India at over $7 billion dollars. But things may change now because China has lured Dhaka with tariff exemptions in a bid to become its top export destination.

Beijing has said that&nbsp;Bangladesh will get priority if it develops the vaccine. So far, Bangladesh has reported over 115,000 cases that place it among the top-20 worst affected countries in the world. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/heres-how-india-is-responding-to-chinas-provocations-307772">Also Read:&nbsp;Here's how India is responding to China's provocations</a>

Beijing is also helping Bangladesh with its relief work to contain coronavirus spread. 
 
China has also proposed sister-city alliances with six Bangladeshi cities which Beijing wants to use to foster cultural and commercial ties with Bangladesh.

China's geopolitical gameplan for South Asia is in motion - rake up the border conflict during the pandemic to keep India busy and befriend the neighbours.

In a bid too woo Bangladesh, China has provided a huge trade boost to the country by announcing tariff exemption for 97 per cent of Bangladeshi products effective from July 1.

In a bid too woo Bangladesh, China has provided a huge trade boost to the country by announcing tariff exemption for 97 per cent of Bangladeshi products effective from July 1. × The decision has come one month after Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and Chinese President Xi Jinping held a discussion to upgrade their bilateral relations during the Covid-19 pandemic This move reduces Bangladesh's dependence on India. Bangladesh shares the highest trade deficit with India at over $7 billion dollars. But things may change now because China has lured Dhaka with tariff exemptions in a bid to become its top export destination. Beijing has said that Bangladesh will get priority if it develops the vaccine. So far, Bangladesh has reported over 115,000 cases that place it among the top-20 worst affected countries in the world. Also Read: Here's how India is responding to China's provocations Beijing is also helping Bangladesh with its relief work to contain coronavirus spread. China has also proposed sister-city alliances with six Bangladeshi cities which Beijing wants to use to foster cultural and commercial ties with Bangladesh. China's geopolitical gameplan for South Asia is in motion - rake up the border conflict during the pandemic to keep India busy and befriend the neighbours.

Amid standoff with India, China tries to woo Bangladesh

The Line of Actual Control (LAC) is a 3,500 km long loose demarcation line that separates Indian-controlled territory from Chinese-controlled territory in the India-China border area.

It subsequently referred to the line formed after the 1962 Sino-Indian War and is part of the Sino-Indian border dispute.

Over the years, there have been tensions at several points along this line of actual control. The June 15 skirmish was in Ladakh's Galwan valley.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-why-india-china-must-define-the-border-307826/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Experts say -- it was the lack of a clear demarcation that allowed the Chinese to change its status quo. The Pangong Tso provides a classic example of this loophole.

Pangong Lake is located 13,900 feet above sea level. The line of actual control does not run through the land in this region.

It runs through the Pangong Lake and lake is 134 kilometers long. 
2/3d of it is controlled by China. The mountains jut into the lake at eight different points.

These points are known as fingers, India claims that its territory goes up to finger 8. This is what India views as the line of actual control, Indian troops have been patrolling till this area — that is till finger 8 — for years now.

India has a post between finger 3 and finger 4.It is manned by the Indo Tibetan border police.

The Chinese follow a different lac, their line of actual control crosses the finger 2 and finger 3 points.

The PLA has posts and bases at finger 8. This was the status quo. China has unilaterally changed it.

In the last two months, China has occupied the land between finger 4 and finger 8.

It is an 8-km-long stretch, the PLA has set up bunkers, they have also built trenches, and boatsheds.

If satellite images are to be believed-- then China has built 500 structures in an area that does not belong to them and more structures are under construction.

The PLA has also blocked all Indian patrols beyond finger 4.The Chinese have changed the status quo.

And changed it unilaterally, and that is the crux of the problem. China does not want to clearly define the LAC and china has prevented all efforts to do so.

There have been multiple rounds of talks but Beijing doesn't want to define the border and keep grabbing land on the sly.

The Line of Actual Control (LAC) is a 3,500 km long loose demarcation line that separates Indian-controlled territory from Chinese-controlled territory in the India-China border area.

The Line of Actual Control (LAC) is a 3,500 km long loose demarcation line that separates Indian-controlled territory from Chinese-controlled territory in the India-China border area. It subsequently referred to the line formed after the 1962 Sino-Indian War and is part of the Sino-Indian border dispute. Over the years, there have been tensions at several points along this line of actual control. The June 15 skirmish was in Ladakh's Galwan valley. × Experts say -- it was the lack of a clear demarcation that allowed the Chinese to change its status quo. The Pangong Tso provides a classic example of this loophole. Pangong Lake is located 13,900 feet above sea level. The line of actual control does not run through the land in this region. It runs through the Pangong Lake and lake is 134 kilometers long. 2/3d of it is controlled by China. The mountains jut into the lake at eight different points. These points are known as fingers, India claims that its territory goes up to finger 8. This is what India views as the line of actual control, Indian troops have been patrolling till this area — that is till finger 8 — for years now. India has a post between finger 3 and finger 4.It is manned by the Indo Tibetan border police. The Chinese follow a different lac, their line of actual control crosses the finger 2 and finger 3 points. The PLA has posts and bases at finger 8. This was the status quo. China has unilaterally changed it. In the last two months, China has occupied the land between finger 4 and finger 8. It is an 8-km-long stretch, the PLA has set up bunkers, they have also built trenches, and boatsheds. If satellite images are to be believed-- then China has built 500 structures in an area that does not belong to them and more structures are under construction. The PLA has also blocked all Indian patrols beyond finger 4.The Chinese have changed the status quo. And changed it unilaterally, and that is the crux of the problem. China does not want to clearly define the LAC and china has prevented all efforts to do so. There have been multiple rounds of talks but Beijing doesn't want to define the border and keep grabbing land on the sly.

India-China standoff: Land grab is a classic Beijing transgression and biggest test for New Delhi

China’s recent intrusions in Galwan Valley and Pangong Tso, once again prove that after years of bending over backwards to accommodate or somewhat appease China, India has not yet learned any meaningful lessons about the Chinese strategic mindset. After annexing Tibet, Mao said, Tibet is the palm, and now they must get the five fingers- Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, and Arunachal Pradesh. However, India's early leadership was perceptive enough to visualize this and act accordingly by warming up to the five fingers and in Sikkim’s case by integrating it with India in 1975. &nbsp;

Looking Back&nbsp;

In 1954, India and China signed the Panchsheel agreement. With it, also began, India’s implied support to the doctrine of the “One-China” policy. However, CCP’s expansionist designs continued to simmer and manifested in Chinese inroads in Tibet and later in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh. The betrayal and debacle of 1962 shattered Nehru, ultimately leading to his demise and sending India into a phase of what this author would prefer to call “strategic depression.” India became inward-looking, insanely skeptical of foreign powers, and obsessed with putting its own house in order. After 1962, China and India went through a long phase of uneasy silence, apart from the clashes of 1967 when the Indian army routed the Chinese in Nathula, killing hundreds of PLA soldiers and the Chinese attack on the Assam Rifles patrol party in 1975 at Tulung La in Arunachal. &nbsp;

The Long era of Appeasement&nbsp;

In 1988, Rajiv Gandhi’s China visit after the Sumdorongchu standoff (1986) ‘broke the ice’ and resumed bilateral ties after three decades. In 1993, PM Narsimha Rao visited China and signed the Border Peace and Tranquility Agreement. &nbsp;

In 1996, China agreed upon a range of CBMs with India in the military field along LAC. Following it was the border trade agreement of 2003 to promote border trade through Nathu La and develop friendly ties. In 2005, India-China signed the Agreement on the Political Parameters and Guiding Principles for the Settlement of the Boundary Question, in 2012, the agreement on border tri-junction (India, China, and Bhutan), and in 2013, the agreement on border defence and cooperation. &nbsp;

India continued with its policy of engaging China and accommodating Chinese concerns in the naïve hope of resolving border disputes, weakening China’s ties with Pakistan, and harness the strengths of civilizational-cultural ties. In 2015, India extended the privilege of electronic visas to Chinese citizens on arriving in India and removed China from the list of the “countries of concern” to attract more Chinese investment. It resulted in massive dumping by Chinese firms doubling the trade surplus to $60 billion per year. In 2018, Delhi refused an official contact with Dalai Lama and Tibet’s India-based government-in-exile. However, Chinese intrusions continued. In 2013, the Chinese made incursions in Depsang valley, indulging in provocative military action. In 2014, during Xi Jinping India-visit, PLA made incursions in Ladakh’s Chumar area and in 2017, in Doklam plateau, resulting in a 73-day long stand-off between the two armies. &nbsp;

Lessons from the Past&nbsp;

After 22 rounds of special-representative level meetings to settle the boundary dispute, the CCP shows no intent to resolve the border dispute. The flare-ups in Doklam, Depsang, Chumar, Ladakh, and intensifying pressure on Nepal and Arunachal Pradesh clearly suggest that CCP is still chasing Mao’s dream of occupying the five fingers. &nbsp;

On the Indian side, it appears that there is a deep-rooted policy ambiguity about China. Whether China is an adversary or a friend continues to remain an unanswered question at the policy level? India’s powerful foreign ministry mandarins have advocated the policy of positive engagement with China, over the last 30 years. India’s dominant left-wing academic and journalistic community, many of whom are now baying for Chinese blood, have consistently held that India and China have an economic interdependence, and India cannot economically grow without China. &nbsp;

The recent skirmishes have once again proved that both groups are living in a fool’s paradise. After decades of written agreements and CBMs, China still encroaches into Indian territory, making a complete mockery of goodwill and appeasement shown by India. In the economic realm also, Delhi’s foreign policy mandarins preferred engaging China either through BRICS or by joining the AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank). However, it hardly brought any favorable change in China’s strategic behaviour. &nbsp;The trade, investment, and economic relationship have mostly hovered around India importing cheap consumer goods from China. China has not transferred any technology to India. It has had a detrimental effect on the local innovation and entrepreneurship and increased India’s dependence manifold. Even though India has a trade deficit of $60 billion, it has failed to leverage it on the strategic front.&nbsp;

Over the Chinese side, the strategic thought has been consistent, i.e., to keep the borders vague and make continuous inroads laying sovereign claims to more and more territory. Chinese have deliberately continued with the policy of keeping LAC vague and widening the military and economic gap with India so that it can negotiate on its terms in the future. &nbsp;

It is not hard to discern the pattern of “two-steps forward and one-step backward” in Chinese policy. Moreover, China agreed to a range of things in the bilateral agreements with India; however, they continued to misinterpret them and change the goalposts when it suits them. As recently as 2018, China agreed to Delhi’s offer of an annual informal bilateral summit. However, such goodwill gestures had no impact on China’s intrusions. After the Doklam standoff, China built permanent structures and enhanced its deployments gaining control of most of the barren plateau claimed by India’s ally, Bhutan. Interestingly, China agrees to the bilateral summits and diplomatic engagements because it aligns well with its “engagement with containment” strategy with India. &nbsp;

India has to learn from Tibet’s and its own experience that deception, surprise, and concealment is a fundamental aspect of CCP’s strategic thought, diplomacy, and military policy. The reason lies in the devious expansionist intent, the essence of the CCP’s strategic thought process. It originates from the genesis of CCP, its inherent ideological totalitarianism, deterministic approach, and the revanchist attitude, rooted in historical grudges and frustrations. Also, China’s expansionist intent is not merely India-specific and confined to the political domain. China’s bullying and arm-twisting in the South China Sea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Eastern Turkestan also emanates from the same imperial DNA of CCP.&nbsp;

In the economic sphere, China’s torturous loans sending nations into debt-trap, demographic engineering in Gilgit-Baltistan to secure CPEC, violation of environmental norms in African countries, and supporting dictators, oppressors, and human rights violators in Central Asia strengthens its expansionist credentials. On the home front, extreme levels of information control, suppression of religious and cultural minorities, in particular, the treatment meted out to Uighurs in the reeducation camps of Xinjiang and the lunatic mission to homogenize China with Han Chinese population remind one of the fascist regimes of Hitler and Mussolini and the horrors of the holocaust. Perhaps a little digression, but the author believes that if the world powers do not unite against the racist and fascist regime of CCP led by Xi, humanity may witness another holocaust. &nbsp;

Reportedly, the recent Ladakh incursions were planned months ago after India abrogated article 370. Also, it is pertinent to mention that there is a strong likelihood of China-Pakistan working in tandem preceding the recent incursions. During his field visit to Kashmir for a research project on terror financing, the author’s interlocutors informed that PLA cadres and officers were moving with Pakistan’s patrol parties near the LoC. They were assisting the Pak army in installing advanced air defence systems and missiles near the LoC. Also, departing from the past, the PLA officers were meeting the militant commanders of Lashkar and Jaish in the training camps in PoK. China and Pakistan’s intelligence and security establishment has evolved into an intricate and robust network cooperating and collaborating at multiple levels and on multiple fronts. Further, India’s appeasement and meek response to its intrusions ended up whetting China’s voracious appetite for grabbing more territory, instead of placating it. Also, since it feels secure that India is unlikely to retaliate strongly, frequent incursions in India help in whipping up the nationalist sentiment on the home front where CCP faces increasing unpopularity and resentment.&nbsp;

The Road Ahead

As long as CCP continues to exist, China will be India’s adversary, and it would be irrational for India to trust China in the future. Under the Mao’s reincarnate Xi Jinping, CCP has long-term imperial ambitions of world domination, and hence China’s errant behaviour is likely to abate in the future unless India abandons Dalai Lama, accepts a completely subordinate status and act accordingly, willingly surrenders Arunachal and whatever new claims of sovereignty that will float from Beijing, as per their strategic interests. &nbsp;The policy of engagement or a long era of appeasement since 1988, in Brahma Chellaney’s words, has proved to be a Himalayan blunder and a monumental disaster. &nbsp;Now the question arises- what should be India’s future course of action? Certainly, no engagement &nbsp;!! Beyond that, Delhi needs a multi-pronged and a long-term strategy to contain China.&nbsp;

&nbsp;(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

China’s recent intrusions in Galwan Valley and Pangong Tso, once again prove that after years of bending over backwards to accommodate or somewhat appease China, India has not yet learned any meaningful lessons about the Chinese strategic mindset.

China’s recent intrusions in Galwan Valley and Pangong Tso, once again prove that after years of bending over backwards to accommodate or somewhat appease China, India has not yet learned any meaningful lessons about the Chinese strategic mindset. After annexing Tibet, Mao said, Tibet is the palm, and now they must get the five fingers- Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, and Arunachal Pradesh. However, India's early leadership was perceptive enough to visualize this and act accordingly by warming up to the five fingers and in Sikkim’s case by integrating it with India in 1975. Looking Back In 1954, India and China signed the Panchsheel agreement. With it, also began, India’s implied support to the doctrine of the “One-China” policy. However, CCP’s expansionist designs continued to simmer and manifested in Chinese inroads in Tibet and later in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh. The betrayal and debacle of 1962 shattered Nehru, ultimately leading to his demise and sending India into a phase of what this author would prefer to call “strategic depression.” India became inward-looking, insanely skeptical of foreign powers, and obsessed with putting its own house in order. After 1962, China and India went through a long phase of uneasy silence, apart from the clashes of 1967 when the Indian army routed the Chinese in Nathula, killing hundreds of PLA soldiers and the Chinese attack on the Assam Rifles patrol party in 1975 at Tulung La in Arunachal. The Long era of Appeasement In 1988, Rajiv Gandhi’s China visit after the Sumdorongchu standoff (1986) ‘broke the ice’ and resumed bilateral ties after three decades. In 1993, PM Narsimha Rao visited China and signed the Border Peace and Tranquility Agreement. In 1996, China agreed upon a range of CBMs with India in the military field along LAC. Following it was the border trade agreement of 2003 to promote border trade through Nathu La and develop friendly ties. In 2005, India-China signed the Agreement on the Political Parameters and Guiding Principles for the Settlement of the Boundary Question, in 2012, the agreement on border tri-junction (India, China, and Bhutan), and in 2013, the agreement on border defence and cooperation. India continued with its policy of engaging China and accommodating Chinese concerns in the naïve hope of resolving border disputes, weakening China’s ties with Pakistan, and harness the strengths of civilizational-cultural ties. In 2015, India extended the privilege of electronic visas to Chinese citizens on arriving in India and removed China from the list of the “countries of concern” to attract more Chinese investment. It resulted in massive dumping by Chinese firms doubling the trade surplus to $60 billion per year. In 2018, Delhi refused an official contact with Dalai Lama and Tibet’s India-based government-in-exile. However, Chinese intrusions continued. In 2013, the Chinese made incursions in Depsang valley, indulging in provocative military action. In 2014, during Xi Jinping India-visit, PLA made incursions in Ladakh’s Chumar area and in 2017, in Doklam plateau, resulting in a 73-day long stand-off between the two armies. Lessons from the Past After 22 rounds of special-representative level meetings to settle the boundary dispute, the CCP shows no intent to resolve the border dispute. The flare-ups in Doklam, Depsang, Chumar, Ladakh, and intensifying pressure on Nepal and Arunachal Pradesh clearly suggest that CCP is still chasing Mao’s dream of occupying the five fingers. On the Indian side, it appears that there is a deep-rooted policy ambiguity about China. Whether China is an adversary or a friend continues to remain an unanswered question at the policy level? India’s powerful foreign ministry mandarins have advocated the policy of positive engagement with China, over the last 30 years. India’s dominant left-wing academic and journalistic community, many of whom are now baying for Chinese blood, have consistently held that India and China have an economic interdependence, and India cannot economically grow without China. The recent skirmishes have once again proved that both groups are living in a fool’s paradise. After decades of written agreements and CBMs, China still encroaches into Indian territory, making a complete mockery of goodwill and appeasement shown by India. In the economic realm also, Delhi’s foreign policy mandarins preferred engaging China either through BRICS or by joining the AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank). However, it hardly brought any favorable change in China’s strategic behaviour. The trade, investment, and economic relationship have mostly hovered around India importing cheap consumer goods from China. China has not transferred any technology to India. It has had a detrimental effect on the local innovation and entrepreneurship and increased India’s dependence manifold. Even though India has a trade deficit of $60 billion, it has failed to leverage it on the strategic front. Over the Chinese side, the strategic thought has been consistent, i.e., to keep the borders vague and make continuous inroads laying sovereign claims to more and more territory. Chinese have deliberately continued with the policy of keeping LAC vague and widening the military and economic gap with India so that it can negotiate on its terms in the future. It is not hard to discern the pattern of “two-steps forward and one-step backward” in Chinese policy. Moreover, China agreed to a range of things in the bilateral agreements with India; however, they continued to misinterpret them and change the goalposts when it suits them. As recently as 2018, China agreed to Delhi’s offer of an annual informal bilateral summit. However, such goodwill gestures had no impact on China’s intrusions. After the Doklam standoff, China built permanent structures and enhanced its deployments gaining control of most of the barren plateau claimed by India’s ally, Bhutan. Interestingly, China agrees to the bilateral summits and diplomatic engagements because it aligns well with its “engagement with containment” strategy with India. India has to learn from Tibet’s and its own experience that deception, surprise, and concealment is a fundamental aspect of CCP’s strategic thought, diplomacy, and military policy. The reason lies in the devious expansionist intent, the essence of the CCP’s strategic thought process. It originates from the genesis of CCP, its inherent ideological totalitarianism, deterministic approach, and the revanchist attitude, rooted in historical grudges and frustrations. Also, China’s expansionist intent is not merely India-specific and confined to the political domain. China’s bullying and arm-twisting in the South China Sea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Eastern Turkestan also emanates from the same imperial DNA of CCP. In the economic sphere, China’s torturous loans sending nations into debt-trap, demographic engineering in Gilgit-Baltistan to secure CPEC, violation of environmental norms in African countries, and supporting dictators, oppressors, and human rights violators in Central Asia strengthens its expansionist credentials. On the home front, extreme levels of information control, suppression of religious and cultural minorities, in particular, the treatment meted out to Uighurs in the reeducation camps of Xinjiang and the lunatic mission to homogenize China with Han Chinese population remind one of the fascist regimes of Hitler and Mussolini and the horrors of the holocaust. Perhaps a little digression, but the author believes that if the world powers do not unite against the racist and fascist regime of CCP led by Xi, humanity may witness another holocaust. Reportedly, the recent Ladakh incursions were planned months ago after India abrogated article 370. Also, it is pertinent to mention that there is a strong likelihood of China-Pakistan working in tandem preceding the recent incursions. During his field visit to Kashmir for a research project on terror financing, the author’s interlocutors informed that PLA cadres and officers were moving with Pakistan’s patrol parties near the LoC. They were assisting the Pak army in installing advanced air defence systems and missiles near the LoC. Also, departing from the past, the PLA officers were meeting the militant commanders of Lashkar and Jaish in the training camps in PoK. China and Pakistan’s intelligence and security establishment has evolved into an intricate and robust network cooperating and collaborating at multiple levels and on multiple fronts. Further, India’s appeasement and meek response to its intrusions ended up whetting China’s voracious appetite for grabbing more territory, instead of placating it. Also, since it feels secure that India is unlikely to retaliate strongly, frequent incursions in India help in whipping up the nationalist sentiment on the home front where CCP faces increasing unpopularity and resentment. The Road Ahead As long as CCP continues to exist, China will be India’s adversary, and it would be irrational for India to trust China in the future. Under the Mao’s reincarnate Xi Jinping, CCP has long-term imperial ambitions of world domination, and hence China’s errant behaviour is likely to abate in the future unless India abandons Dalai Lama, accepts a completely subordinate status and act accordingly, willingly surrenders Arunachal and whatever new claims of sovereignty that will float from Beijing, as per their strategic interests. The policy of engagement or a long era of appeasement since 1988, in Brahma Chellaney’s words, has proved to be a Himalayan blunder and a monumental disaster. Now the question arises- what should be India’s future course of action? Certainly, no engagement !! Beyond that, Delhi needs a multi-pronged and a long-term strategy to contain China. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Time for an assertive force posture against China

China foreign ministry in a press conference said it was in communication with India but refrained from giving the number of casulties the PLA had suffered during the border clash with Indian troops last week.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-china-military-commanders-to-hold-talks-along-lac-after-galwan-valley-clash-307585">Also Read:&nbsp;India, China military commanders to hold talks along LAC after Galwan Valley clash</a>

"Don't have any information to add on the number of casualties faced in Galwan faceoff," the Chinese foreign ministry said.

India and China were involved in clash at Galwan Valley in Ladakh on June 15-16 which led to the death of 20 Indian soldiers, the Indian government had said. China has refused to divulge the number of soldiers killed during the clash even though China's state-run Global Times had said that there were casualties on its side as well.

Meanwhile, reports said that corps commander-level meeting will be held at Moldo on the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control(LAC) opposite Chushul to discuss the ongoing dispute in Ladakh amid tensions at the border.

Indian Air Force chief Rakesh Badhuria had earlier said that the IAF has "full analysis" of China's strength at the border while asserting that its forces are ready to "handle any contingency that may come up".

"China deploys a fair number of aircraft in this area for their own training it happens every summer but this year the number of deployments have increased, beyond May it increased further," the IAF chief said.

Last week India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that "Nobody has intruded into our borders, nor have any of our posts been taken over by China."

"Our brave soldiers were martyred in Ladakh but they went after teaching a lesson to those who challenged our mother India," PM Modi said.

"India has never accepted any kind of external pressure. Whatever is necessary for national security, construction of infrastructure will be expedited like this in the future also," PM Modi said, adding,"I want to assure you that our Army is not leaving any stone unturned for the security of our nation."

China foreign ministry in a press conference said it was in communication with India but refrained from giving the number of casulties the PLA had suffered during the border clash with Indian troops last week.

China foreign ministry in a press conference said it was in communication with India but refrained from giving the number of casulties the PLA had suffered during the border clash with Indian troops last week. Also Read: India, China military commanders to hold talks along LAC after Galwan Valley clash "Don't have any information to add on the number of casualties faced in Galwan faceoff," the Chinese foreign ministry said. India and China were involved in clash at Galwan Valley in Ladakh on June 15-16 which led to the death of 20 Indian soldiers, the Indian government had said. China has refused to divulge the number of soldiers killed during the clash even though China's state-run Global Times had said that there were casualties on its side as well. Meanwhile, reports said that corps commander-level meeting will be held at Moldo on the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control(LAC) opposite Chushul to discuss the ongoing dispute in Ladakh amid tensions at the border. Indian Air Force chief Rakesh Badhuria had earlier said that the IAF has "full analysis" of China's strength at the border while asserting that its forces are ready to "handle any contingency that may come up". "China deploys a fair number of aircraft in this area for their own training it happens every summer but this year the number of deployments have increased, beyond May it increased further," the IAF chief said. Last week India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that "Nobody has intruded into our borders, nor have any of our posts been taken over by China." "Our brave soldiers were martyred in Ladakh but they went after teaching a lesson to those who challenged our mother India," PM Modi said. "India has never accepted any kind of external pressure. Whatever is necessary for national security, construction of infrastructure will be expedited like this in the future also," PM Modi said, adding,"I want to assure you that our Army is not leaving any stone unturned for the security of our nation."

In communication with India, says China but refrains from revealing causalities in border clash

Nepal's Upper House on Thursday&nbsp;passed a controversial bill that claims Indian territories of Lipulekh, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura as its own.

The Constitution Amendment Bill will now go to the President, Bidhya Devi Bhandari, for her signature and then the new map will become part of the national emblem of Nepal. 
&nbsp; 
While India is facing China in Ladakh, a much smaller neighbour and a supposedly old friend, has claimed 335 kilometers&nbsp;of Indian territory. 
 
Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/after-india-nepal-risks-severing-ties-with-us-for-china-305468">After India, Nepal risks severing ties with US for China</a>

India considers Lipulekh, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura as part of Uttarakhand's Pithoragarh district and now, Nepal has officially laid claim to these territories.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-hou-yanqi-the-architect-of-india-nepal-map-dispute-306944/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

It all began with Nepal objecting to a road built by India in this region. This was a new link road to Kailash Mansarovar that goes through the Lipulekh pass in Uttarakhand. The link road was inaugurated by defence minister Rajnath Singh last month, and just like China, Nepal grew suspicious about India's intentions.

India has managed and developed these areas for decades and never used them for military activities or to provoke Nepal, but despite this Kathmandu claims that India violated its territorial sovereignty. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/nepals-upper-house-passes-bill-to-update-map-that-includes-indian-territories-306754">Also Read: Nepal's Upper House passes bill to update map that includes Indian territories</a>

The government of Nepal is highly unstable due to constant infighting and there's a risk that the Nepal Communist Party may split. Factions within the party want the prime minister KP Sharma Oli to take a tough stand against India. To add to that, the prime minister is under fire for not doing enough to contain the Wuhan virus.

The Communist Party of China knows the pressure comrade Oli faces, so it has decided to micro-manage Nepal's affairs. Last month, the Chinese ambassador met several political stakeholders to settle the internal dispute and at the same time, the Chinese embassy fueled anti-India rhetoric.

This map move&nbsp;is only a preview of what's to come. A new report claims that foreign news channels may lose transmission rights in Nepal if they don't beam ad-free content. In other words, foreign TV channels will have to air content without any commercials.

Thousands of Nepalese viewers prefer Indian channels for entertainment, and now they may not receive permission to air permanently if Nepal goes ahead with this plan. By all means, no network will agree to such a policy because it is not economically viable.

&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

Nepal's Upper House on Thursday passed a controversial bill that claims Indian territories of Lipulekh, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura as its own. The Constitution Amendment Bill will now go to the President, Bidhya Devi Bhandari, for her signature and then the new map will become part of the national emblem of Nepal.

Nepal's Upper House on Thursday passed a controversial bill that claims Indian territories of Lipulekh, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura as its own. The Constitution Amendment Bill will now go to the President, Bidhya Devi Bhandari, for her signature and then the new map will become part of the national emblem of Nepal. While India is facing China in Ladakh, a much smaller neighbour and a supposedly old friend, has claimed 335 kilometers of Indian territory. Also read: After India, Nepal risks severing ties with US for China India considers Lipulekh, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura as part of Uttarakhand's Pithoragarh district and now, Nepal has officially laid claim to these territories. It all began with Nepal objecting to a road built by India in this region. This was a new link road to Kailash Mansarovar that goes through the Lipulekh pass in Uttarakhand. The link road was inaugurated by defence minister Rajnath Singh last month, and just like China, Nepal grew suspicious about India's intentions. India has managed and developed these areas for decades and never used them for military activities or to provoke Nepal, but despite this Kathmandu claims that India violated its territorial sovereignty. Also Read: Nepal's Upper House passes bill to update map that includes Indian territories The government of Nepal is highly unstable due to constant infighting and there's a risk that the Nepal Communist Party may split. Factions within the party want the prime minister KP Sharma Oli to take a tough stand against India. To add to that, the prime minister is under fire for not doing enough to contain the Wuhan virus. The Communist Party of China knows the pressure comrade Oli faces, so it has decided to micro-manage Nepal's affairs. Last month, the Chinese ambassador met several political stakeholders to settle the internal dispute and at the same time, the Chinese embassy fueled anti-India rhetoric. This map move is only a preview of what's to come. A new report claims that foreign news channels may lose transmission rights in Nepal if they don't beam ad-free content. In other words, foreign TV channels will have to air content without any commercials. Thousands of Nepalese viewers prefer Indian channels for entertainment, and now they may not receive permission to air permanently if Nepal goes ahead with this plan. By all means, no network will agree to such a policy because it is not economically viable.

Map move: Why is Nepal provoking India?

Since late May, China has positioned nearly 5,000 troops and occupied at least three areas along its disputed border with India, known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC). In some instances, armed forces on both sides have punched, kicked, and thrown stones. 20 Indian and reportedly 35 Chinese soldiers have been killed, many others have been injured, and both sides have prepared heavy weapons in the event of further escalation. Even if the tensions ease, they will not vanish completely, and important questions remain. Why is China provoking India? What should India (and others in the Indo-Pacific region) do? With regard to China’s motivation, the clash along the India-China border has three important similarities with the situations in the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Examining these similarities helps to contextualize China’s actions along the LAC and indicates how India, as well as neighbours like Vietnam and Japan, should respond to China’s provocations. &nbsp;&nbsp;

The first similarity of note is China’s repeated disregard for international law when laying claim to new territory. In the South China Sea, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague rejected China’s claim to sovereignty over much of the South China Sea in 2016. Despite this, China continues to claim and occupy the area. In the East China Sea, China did not claim the Senkaku Islands before the 1970s. China’s attitude has since changed due to the potential existence of oil reserves in the East China Sea. Now, Chinese Coast Guard ships enter Japan’s territorial waters surrounding the Senkaku Islands and pursue Japanese fishing boats to claim sovereignty over this sea. The nonobservance of this international border further demonstrates China’s attitude of territorial entitlement and disrespect for international law. And China is expressing the same attitude at the India-China border. In this case, Dr Lobsang Sangay, the President of the Tibetan exile administration, expressed that the Dalai Lama considers the disputed territories of both Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh (along the LAC) to be a part of India. Thus, there is a high possibility that China’s claim to areas along the India-China border is legally baseless.&nbsp;

A second recurring facet of China’s behaviour is its exploitation of military power vacuums. For example, China occupied half of the Paracel Islands just after France withdrew from Indochina in the 1950s. In 1974, China expanded its presence to all of the Paracel Islands after the US withdrew from South Vietnam. Additionally, China occupied six features of the Spratly Islands after the Soviet Union decreased its military presence in Vietnam in 1988. Again in 1995, China laid claim to Mischief Reef after US troops withdrew from the Philippines.&nbsp;

In the India-China border area, the military balance has changed recently, causing China to mistakenly infer that there is a power vacuum. According to the SIPRI Military Expenditure Database published in April 2020, from 2010–2019, China increased its military expenditures 85 per cent. In comparison, India increased its expenditures by 37 per cent. Though India’s military defences along the Indo-China border are not weak, the gap between the two countries’ defence budgets has widened in the last decade. And along with the greater relative increase in military spending, China’s military activities have also increased. In 2011, China has made about 213 incursions into the LAC. But since 2011, the number of incursions have increased greatly: 426 (2012), 411 (2013), 460 (2014) , 428 (2015), 296 (2016), 473 (2017), 404 (2018). And last year, the number reached 663 incursions. This year, when India and the world are focusing on the COVID-19 crisis, China is trying to exploit the situation even more aggressively.&nbsp;

Finally, China’s arguably lawless expansionism is usually paired with an effort to exclude countries that are outside the region. In the South China Sea, China blames its assertive behaviour on the intervention of outsiders. Similarly, in the case of the India-China border, China is trying to halt Indian cooperation with the US, Japan, and Australia, which India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi has stepped up of late. This month, India just concluded a Logistical Support Agreement with Australia. If India and Japan conclude a similar pact, all four countries will have agreed to Logistical Support Agreements (Japan calls this agreement Acquisition and Cross Servicing Agreement, instead of LSA). China believes the agreements among these four countries are an effort at containment and therefore wants to stop them. To do so, which country would China choose to pressure? The most likely answer is India because China and India share a nearly 4,000 km land border (unlike the US, Japan, and Australia), allowing China to leverage its army. Moreover, China perceives that it can more easily persuade India to leave the US-led security framework because India and the US are not formal allies. Much like its behaviour in the South China Sea, China is using its military to pressure India to drop foreign partnerships that might inhibit China. &nbsp;

China’s lack of respect for international law, expansion of territorial claims where there are power vacuums, and efforts to exclude outside actors from the regional intervention are all common themes of China’s exploits in the South China Sea, East China Sea, and now the India-China border. Thus, the question remains—how do countries affected by China’s ambitions, like India, Vietnam, and Japan, respond? Knowing the pattern of China’s behaviour points toward the answer: they should do the opposite of what China wants. First, countries around China must continue to respect the rules-based order grounded in current international law. Second, China’s neighbours need to fill military power vacuums by increasing their defence budgets. And third, countries around China need to continue to enhance security cooperation with the US, Australia, and other like-minded countries. When India, Vietnam, Japan, etc., cooperate with the US, Australia, or other like-minded countries, the partnerships should promote not only regional security (helping to fill those power vacuums), but also economic cooperation. The strength of China’s army depends on an ample military budget. Thus, China’s neighbours should avoid supporting China’s economy (and hence funding its military) by strengthening relations with the US, Australia, and other like-minded countries. If those in the Indo-Pacific region care to limit China’s territorial encroachments, they must directly counter China’s behaviours and intentions. &nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Since late May, China has positioned nearly 5,000 troops and occupied at least three areas along its disputed border with India, known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

Since late May, China has positioned nearly 5,000 troops and occupied at least three areas along its disputed border with India, known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC). In some instances, armed forces on both sides have punched, kicked, and thrown stones. 20 Indian and reportedly 35 Chinese soldiers have been killed, many others have been injured, and both sides have prepared heavy weapons in the event of further escalation. Even if the tensions ease, they will not vanish completely, and important questions remain. Why is China provoking India? What should India (and others in the Indo-Pacific region) do? With regard to China’s motivation, the clash along the India-China border has three important similarities with the situations in the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Examining these similarities helps to contextualize China’s actions along the LAC and indicates how India, as well as neighbours like Vietnam and Japan, should respond to China’s provocations. The first similarity of note is China’s repeated disregard for international law when laying claim to new territory. In the South China Sea, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague rejected China’s claim to sovereignty over much of the South China Sea in 2016. Despite this, China continues to claim and occupy the area. In the East China Sea, China did not claim the Senkaku Islands before the 1970s. China’s attitude has since changed due to the potential existence of oil reserves in the East China Sea. Now, Chinese Coast Guard ships enter Japan’s territorial waters surrounding the Senkaku Islands and pursue Japanese fishing boats to claim sovereignty over this sea. The nonobservance of this international border further demonstrates China’s attitude of territorial entitlement and disrespect for international law. And China is expressing the same attitude at the India-China border. In this case, Dr Lobsang Sangay, the President of the Tibetan exile administration, expressed that the Dalai Lama considers the disputed territories of both Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh (along the LAC) to be a part of India. Thus, there is a high possibility that China’s claim to areas along the India-China border is legally baseless. A second recurring facet of China’s behaviour is its exploitation of military power vacuums. For example, China occupied half of the Paracel Islands just after France withdrew from Indochina in the 1950s. In 1974, China expanded its presence to all of the Paracel Islands after the US withdrew from South Vietnam. Additionally, China occupied six features of the Spratly Islands after the Soviet Union decreased its military presence in Vietnam in 1988. Again in 1995, China laid claim to Mischief Reef after US troops withdrew from the Philippines. In the India-China border area, the military balance has changed recently, causing China to mistakenly infer that there is a power vacuum. According to the SIPRI Military Expenditure Database published in April 2020, from 2010–2019, China increased its military expenditures 85 per cent. In comparison, India increased its expenditures by 37 per cent. Though India’s military defences along the Indo-China border are not weak, the gap between the two countries’ defence budgets has widened in the last decade. And along with the greater relative increase in military spending, China’s military activities have also increased. In 2011, China has made about 213 incursions into the LAC. But since 2011, the number of incursions have increased greatly: 426 (2012), 411 (2013), 460 (2014) , 428 (2015), 296 (2016), 473 (2017), 404 (2018). And last year, the number reached 663 incursions. This year, when India and the world are focusing on the COVID-19 crisis, China is trying to exploit the situation even more aggressively. Finally, China’s arguably lawless expansionism is usually paired with an effort to exclude countries that are outside the region. In the South China Sea, China blames its assertive behaviour on the intervention of outsiders. Similarly, in the case of the India-China border, China is trying to halt Indian cooperation with the US, Japan, and Australia, which India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi has stepped up of late. This month, India just concluded a Logistical Support Agreement with Australia. If India and Japan conclude a similar pact, all four countries will have agreed to Logistical Support Agreements (Japan calls this agreement Acquisition and Cross Servicing Agreement, instead of LSA). China believes the agreements among these four countries are an effort at containment and therefore wants to stop them. To do so, which country would China choose to pressure? The most likely answer is India because China and India share a nearly 4,000 km land border (unlike the US, Japan, and Australia), allowing China to leverage its army. Moreover, China perceives that it can more easily persuade India to leave the US-led security framework because India and the US are not formal allies. Much like its behaviour in the South China Sea, China is using its military to pressure India to drop foreign partnerships that might inhibit China. China’s lack of respect for international law, expansion of territorial claims where there are power vacuums, and efforts to exclude outside actors from the regional intervention are all common themes of China’s exploits in the South China Sea, East China Sea, and now the India-China border. Thus, the question remains—how do countries affected by China’s ambitions, like India, Vietnam, and Japan, respond? Knowing the pattern of China’s behaviour points toward the answer: they should do the opposite of what China wants. First, countries around China must continue to respect the rules-based order grounded in current international law. Second, China’s neighbours need to fill military power vacuums by increasing their defence budgets. And third, countries around China need to continue to enhance security cooperation with the US, Australia, and other like-minded countries. When India, Vietnam, Japan, etc., cooperate with the US, Australia, or other like-minded countries, the partnerships should promote not only regional security (helping to fill those power vacuums), but also economic cooperation. The strength of China’s army depends on an ample military budget. Thus, China’s neighbours should avoid supporting China’s economy (and hence funding its military) by strengthening relations with the US, Australia, and other like-minded countries. If those in the Indo-Pacific region care to limit China’s territorial encroachments, they must directly counter China’s behaviours and intentions. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

What should India do now to fight China's provocations?

India and China had a 'violent face-off' in which 20 Indian Army personnel died in action and 35 Chinese soldiers were killed. Soon calls for boycotting Chinese products grew louder.

Prasar Bharati, India’s public broadcasting agency, posted on Twitter about All India Radio’s Tibetan world service on June 17, 2020. It also mentioned short wave frequency of 9450 kHz, AIR application, and YouTube services for it. “Listen to All India Radio’s Tibetan World Service for authentic news and programs for and from Tibet,” reads the Tweet. &nbsp;

On the following day, Prasar Bharati tweeted the YouTube link of 10-part series on the "story of River Indus from Tibet to Sea flowing through Ladakh as chronicled in ancient Indian texts.” YouTube channel linked was the official channel of Prasar Bharati Archives.&nbsp;

This was, perhaps, the nudge from New Delhi to Beijing that it can vociferously raise the issue of Tibet from now onwards. &nbsp;

BJP MPs, Meenakshi Lekhi and Rahul Kaswan, virtually attended the swearing-in ceremony of Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen on May 20. &nbsp;They were among the 92 dignitaries from 41 countries. Taiwan, Tibet, Macau, and Hong Kong are the weak-points for China.

Along with increasing proximity with Taiwan and Tibet, India gave a strong message to Chinese companies too. In a couple of days, India reportedly cancelled a series of contracts signed with Chinese companies.&nbsp;

There were reports that the government has given the contract of building a 5.6 kilometres long tunnel on the Delhi-Meerut RRTS project to China. But on June 18, authorities have clarified that it was “under process” and “yet to be finalised”. On the same day, Indian Railway terminated contract worth Rs 471 crore by citing “poor performance”.&nbsp;

Indian intelligence agencies have also reportedly asked the government to red-flag the use of 52 mobile applications including TikTok, UC browser, Zoom, SHAREit, and clean master. The Indian government, according to reports, has also prohibited the use of gears manufactured by Chinese companies in BSNL and MTNL.&nbsp;

It is uncertain what will happen to Indo-China relations after this point. PM Narendra Modi is going to address the nation in the upcoming days. There are speculations that India may increase the excise duties on the Chinese imports or&nbsp;it may cancel existing contracts. India may also give further relief to manufacturing companies to shift their operations from China to India. &nbsp;

But the intentions of these messages are clear: One, India may raise the issue of Tibet and Taiwan. Two, Chinese companies will lose the market in India. &nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

India and China had a 'violent face-off' in which 20 Indian Army personnel died in action and 35 Chinese soldiers were killed. Soon calls for boycotting Chinese products grew louder.

India and China had a 'violent face-off' in which 20 Indian Army personnel died in action and 35 Chinese soldiers were killed. Soon calls for boycotting Chinese products grew louder. Prasar Bharati, India’s public broadcasting agency, posted on Twitter about All India Radio’s Tibetan world service on June 17, 2020. It also mentioned short wave frequency of 9450 kHz, AIR application, and YouTube services for it. “Listen to All India Radio’s Tibetan World Service for authentic news and programs for and from Tibet,” reads the Tweet. On the following day, Prasar Bharati tweeted the YouTube link of 10-part series on the "story of River Indus from Tibet to Sea flowing through Ladakh as chronicled in ancient Indian texts.” YouTube channel linked was the official channel of Prasar Bharati Archives. This was, perhaps, the nudge from New Delhi to Beijing that it can vociferously raise the issue of Tibet from now onwards. BJP MPs, Meenakshi Lekhi and Rahul Kaswan, virtually attended the swearing-in ceremony of Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen on May 20. They were among the 92 dignitaries from 41 countries. Taiwan, Tibet, Macau, and Hong Kong are the weak-points for China. Along with increasing proximity with Taiwan and Tibet, India gave a strong message to Chinese companies too. In a couple of days, India reportedly cancelled a series of contracts signed with Chinese companies. There were reports that the government has given the contract of building a 5.6 kilometres long tunnel on the Delhi-Meerut RRTS project to China. But on June 18, authorities have clarified that it was “under process” and “yet to be finalised”. On the same day, Indian Railway terminated contract worth Rs 471 crore by citing “poor performance”. Indian intelligence agencies have also reportedly asked the government to red-flag the use of 52 mobile applications including TikTok, UC browser, Zoom, SHAREit, and clean master. The Indian government, according to reports, has also prohibited the use of gears manufactured by Chinese companies in BSNL and MTNL. It is uncertain what will happen to Indo-China relations after this point. PM Narendra Modi is going to address the nation in the upcoming days. There are speculations that India may increase the excise duties on the Chinese imports or it may cancel existing contracts. India may also give further relief to manufacturing companies to shift their operations from China to India. But the intentions of these messages are clear: One, India may raise the issue of Tibet and Taiwan. Two, Chinese companies will lose the market in India. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

New Delhi's message to China indicates a change in the strategy

After widespread speculation that several Indian soldiers are in Chinese custody. The Indian Army has set the record straight confirming that all soldiers involved in the Galwan valley skirmish are accounted for.

India-China standoff | No Indian soldiers missing: All injured personnel stable

PM Modi warned in a strong message to China after the Galwan valley fight on June 15 that marked the giant escalation after weeks of tension. PM said that he wanted to assure the nation that the sacrifice of Indian soldiers killed in a clash with Chinese troops at Galwan Valley in Ladakh would not go in vain and India.

India-China stand-off: PM Modi speaks after Ladakh clash, India wants peace

In the biggest military confrontation between India and China in over five decades, at least 20 Indian Army soldiers were killed in a violent clash with Chinese troops in Ladakh's Galwan Valley on Monday night

'Troops on border duty always carry arms' says EAM S Jaishankar

The US is "closely monitoring" the situation following a fierce clash between Indian and Chinese forces in eastern Ladakh, and hopes that the differences will be resolved peacefully.

WION Dispatch: 'No formal plans to mediate between India and China', says US

Galwan Valley is located at an altitude of almost 17,000 feet with extreme weather conditions and sub-zero temperatures. A valley that gets its name from the Galwan river - this 1960 claim line is the de facto of Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the valley.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-why-the-galwan-valley-has-become-a-flashpoint-306642/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The Galwan Valley falls under sub-sector north (SSN) and is one of the points that has direct access to Aksai Chin from India.

Galwan Valley has become a flashpoint in India-China conflict again because of India's construction in the area.

India is building a network of feeder roads which lead to the 224-km Shyok-Daulat Beg Oldi road which is at least 10 kilometers inside the (Line of Actual Control) LAC. Daulat Beg Oldi is the northern-most corner of the Indian territory of Ladakh. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-china-border-dispute-what-happened-in-nathu-la-in-1967-306590">Also Read:&nbsp;India-China border dispute: What happened in Nathu La in 1967</a>

It also houses the world's highest landing strip - the Daulat Beg Oldi landing strip. The Indian Air Force has successfully landed the C17 Globemaster aircraft here.

In case of a war or conflict, India can now ferry thousands of troops to the region within hours. China's fears intensified when India built a bridge, the Colonel Chewang Rinchen Setu, across the Shyok river. The idea was to facilitate Indian troop movement in the region.

Even before China could digest this, India began constructing another bridge across the Galwan Nullah. This concrete bridge is a part of the feeder road project and it replaces an existing wooden structure, to allow heavy military movement.

It was this bridge that triggered the latest standoff. A nervous China deployed its troops along the LAC to put pressure on India to stop road construction. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/35-chinese-soldiers-dead-in-galwan-valley-clash-us-intelligence-sources-306447">Also Read: 35 Chinese soldiers dead in Galwan Valley clash</a>

The Shyok-Daulat Beg Oldi road, the feeder roads and the landing strip have all cemented India's dominance in the region.

Now, China's biggest fear is India's recovery of Aksai Chin which was captured by China in 1962. The Galwan area was among the biggest flashpoints during the 1962 war too and it has become a flashpoint again.

India has a strategic advantage in the region and its borders are secured. India is stepping up infrastructure, on its own side of the border, and on its own land. The idea is to help Indian forces reach remote locations quickly and that is why China is protesting because its border transgressions are being challenged.

 
&nbsp;

Galwan Valley is located at an altitude of almost 17,000 feet with extreme weather conditions and sub-zero temperatures. A valley that gets its name from the Galwan river - this 1960 claim line is the de facto of Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the valley.

Galwan Valley is located at an altitude of almost 17,000 feet with extreme weather conditions and sub-zero temperatures. A valley that gets its name from the Galwan river - this 1960 claim line is the de facto of Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the valley. The Galwan Valley falls under sub-sector north (SSN) and is one of the points that has direct access to Aksai Chin from India. Galwan Valley has become a flashpoint in India-China conflict again because of India's construction in the area. India is building a network of feeder roads which lead to the 224-km Shyok-Daulat Beg Oldi road which is at least 10 kilometers inside the (Line of Actual Control) LAC. Daulat Beg Oldi is the northern-most corner of the Indian territory of Ladakh. Also Read: India-China border dispute: What happened in Nathu La in 1967 It also houses the world's highest landing strip - the Daulat Beg Oldi landing strip. The Indian Air Force has successfully landed the C17 Globemaster aircraft here. In case of a war or conflict, India can now ferry thousands of troops to the region within hours. China's fears intensified when India built a bridge, the Colonel Chewang Rinchen Setu, across the Shyok river. The idea was to facilitate Indian troop movement in the region. Even before China could digest this, India began constructing another bridge across the Galwan Nullah. This concrete bridge is a part of the feeder road project and it replaces an existing wooden structure, to allow heavy military movement. It was this bridge that triggered the latest standoff. A nervous China deployed its troops along the LAC to put pressure on India to stop road construction. Also Read: 35 Chinese soldiers dead in Galwan Valley clash The Shyok-Daulat Beg Oldi road, the feeder roads and the landing strip have all cemented India's dominance in the region. Now, China's biggest fear is India's recovery of Aksai Chin which was captured by China in 1962. The Galwan area was among the biggest flashpoints during the 1962 war too and it has become a flashpoint again. India has a strategic advantage in the region and its borders are secured. India is stepping up infrastructure, on its own side of the border, and on its own land. The idea is to help Indian forces reach remote locations quickly and that is why China is protesting because its border transgressions are being challenged.

Why Galwan Valley has become the flashpoint in India-China conflict once again?

Monday's scuffle, the biggest confrontation between India and China since the 1967 clashes in Nathu La, has significantly escalated the already-volatile border standoff in the Ladakh region.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-the-inside-story-of-1967-nathu-la-conflict-306639/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The last military conflict between India and China took place at Nathu La in the Indian state of Sikkim in September 1967 when&nbsp;88 Indian soldiers died in action while Beijing lost over 300 men.

In 1967, India decided to fence its border with China and the plan was to put three&nbsp;layers of barbed wire, the work for which began on August 20, 1967.

Three days later, about 75 Chinese troops marched towards Nathu La in battle uniform and stopped at the border, shouting slogans for about an hour. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/china-took-pre-meditated-action-in-galwan-valley-that-led-to-violence-indian-foreign-minister-tells-beijing-306542">Also Read: China took pre-meditated action in Galwan valley that led to violence</a>

There was an uneasy calm over the next week and a half.

On September 5, China objected to concertina coils on the Indian fence. A supervising officer of the PLA picked up an argument with an Indian commanding officer and the work on the fence stopped for two days.

On September 7, 100 Chinese troops rushed to the border and engaged the Indian soldiers in a scuffle. They resorted to stone-pelting.

When the protesting Chinese army came back to the border on September 11, Lt. Colonel Rai Singh, the commanding officer of the local infantry battalion, went to talk to the Chinese troops.

Chinese soldiers opened fire, injuring Lt Colonel Rai Singh. Indian soldiers retaliated by attacking the Chinese post, but they suffered a heavy casualty.

Soon, Indian artillery fire turned the tide and over 300 PLA soldiers were killed. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-china-border-dispute-20-indian-soldiers-martyred-in-a-violent-face-off-with-chinese-troops-306357">Also Read: 20 Indian soldiers martyred in a violent face-off with Chinese troops</a>

On September 12, New Delhi extended a note of unconditional ceasefire across the Sikkim-Tibet border which was rejected by China.

However, China had learnt a lesson in exchange of heavy casualty. &nbsp;On September 15, it handed over bodies of Indian soldiers, along with their arms and ammunition.

The bloodshed at Nathu La too was a result of Chinese insecurity. 53 years later, one question remains unanswered - why does construction on Indian land infuriate china?&nbsp;

China must accept that India has the sovereign right to protect its territory 
&nbsp;

Monday's scuffle, the biggest confrontation between India and China since the 1967 clashes in Nathu La, has significantly escalated the already-volatile border standoff in the Ladakh region.

Monday's scuffle, the biggest confrontation between India and China since the 1967 clashes in Nathu La, has significantly escalated the already-volatile border standoff in the Ladakh region. The last military conflict between India and China took place at Nathu La in the Indian state of Sikkim in September 1967 when 88 Indian soldiers died in action while Beijing lost over 300 men. In 1967, India decided to fence its border with China and the plan was to put three layers of barbed wire, the work for which began on August 20, 1967. Three days later, about 75 Chinese troops marched towards Nathu La in battle uniform and stopped at the border, shouting slogans for about an hour. Also Read: China took pre-meditated action in Galwan valley that led to violence There was an uneasy calm over the next week and a half. On September 5, China objected to concertina coils on the Indian fence. A supervising officer of the PLA picked up an argument with an Indian commanding officer and the work on the fence stopped for two days. On September 7, 100 Chinese troops rushed to the border and engaged the Indian soldiers in a scuffle. They resorted to stone-pelting. When the protesting Chinese army came back to the border on September 11, Lt. Colonel Rai Singh, the commanding officer of the local infantry battalion, went to talk to the Chinese troops. Chinese soldiers opened fire, injuring Lt Colonel Rai Singh. Indian soldiers retaliated by attacking the Chinese post, but they suffered a heavy casualty. Soon, Indian artillery fire turned the tide and over 300 PLA soldiers were killed. Also Read: 20 Indian soldiers martyred in a violent face-off with Chinese troops On September 12, New Delhi extended a note of unconditional ceasefire across the Sikkim-Tibet border which was rejected by China. However, China had learnt a lesson in exchange of heavy casualty. On September 15, it handed over bodies of Indian soldiers, along with their arms and ammunition. The bloodshed at Nathu La too was a result of Chinese insecurity. 53 years later, one question remains unanswered - why does construction on Indian land infuriate china? China must accept that India has the sovereign right to protect its territory

India-China border dispute: What happened in Nathu La in 1967

India on June 18 rejected the claims made by the Chinese, that sovereignty over the Galwan Valley area in Ladakh "always belonged to it", calling it 'untenable'.

India responds to claim over Galwan valley: China making 'inevitable' claims

The Indian Army on June 16 has confirmed that the number of Indian soldiers martyred in the “violent face-off” with Chinese troops in the Galwan Valley on June 15 night is now 20. Many Indian soldiers are said to be in the custody of China. Watch report.

Face-off at India-China border: 20 Indian soldiers martyred, Some in China's custody

At a time when Indo-China tensions are escalating at the eastern front, experts believe that sales of Chinese goods in India can be impacted in the short term and the consumer-oriented sectors like smartphones and automobiles could be at the receiving end of this crisis.

Tensions to hit Chinese firms: China's stec bagged Rs.1,000 cr contract

India China face-off | 20 Indian soldiers killed in action | Galwan valley

External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi spoke on phone on Wednesday and discussed the prevailing situation in Eastern Ladakh.

WION Dispatch: 'Current conflict will have serious impacts on bilateral relationship'

EAM Jaishankar discusses border conflict with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi

In the biggest military confrontation between India and China in over five decades, at least 20 Indian Army soldiers were killed in a violent clash with Chinese troops in Ladakh's Galwan Valley

'Sacrifices of soldiers will not go in vain', says PM Modi on LAC violent clash | India-China

'India wants peace but capable of giving fitting reply', PM Modi on India-China conflict

China's Foreign Ministry on Wednesday briefs over violent border standoff that claims lives of soldiers on both the side. Ministry's spokesperson says that 'Indian troops crossed the LAC and entered in our territorial region that further leads to faceoff between both the armies', he also added that 'Military and diplomatic talks are underway to diffuse the tensions'.

'In a very close diplomatic communication with India', China's briefing on India faceoff

As many as 35 Chinese troops died, including one senior officer, in a fierce clash with the Indian Army in the Galwan Valley in eastern Ladakh on June 15, hints US Intelligence.

35 Chinese troops dead in clash with Indian Army, says US Intelligence

Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian in a press release said that India and China at this point in time are in close communication with each other in a bid to try and diffuse the tensions at the border.

Chinese spokesperson Zhao Lijian: Indian troops violated protocols, attacked Chinese troops

india-china

India China, News on India China, stories on India China, articles on India China, India China stories at Wion, India China news, India China latest news

india china

Why the resolution of border dispute between China and India is complicated?

India-China standoff: US space firm releases photographs of LAC and patrol point 14

India-China standoff: Situation along the LAC continues to remain grim

India-China standoff: Disengagement begins at LAC's three flash points

Ladakh dispute: Consensus reached between India and China on disengagement

Here's how India is responding to China's provocations

Amid standoff with India, China tries to woo Bangladesh

India-China standoff: Land grab is a classic Beijing transgression and biggest test for New Delhi

Time for an assertive force posture against China

In communication with India, says China but refrains from revealing causalities in border clash

Map move: Why is Nepal provoking India?

What should India do now to fight China's provocations?

New Delhi's message to China indicates a change in the strategy

India-China standoff | No Indian soldiers missing: All injured personnel stable

India-China stand-off: PM Modi speaks after Ladakh clash, India wants peace

'Troops on border duty always carry arms' says EAM S Jaishankar

WION Dispatch: 'No formal plans to mediate between India and China', says US

Why Galwan Valley has become the flashpoint in India-China conflict once again?

India-China border dispute: What happened in Nathu La in 1967

India-China stand-off: PM Modi speaks after Ladakh clash, India wants peace

India responds to claim over Galwan valley: China making 'inevitable' claims

Face-off at India-China border: 20 Indian soldiers martyred, Some in China's custody

Tensions to hit Chinese firms: China's stec bagged Rs.1,000 cr contract

India China face-off | 20 Indian soldiers killed in action | Galwan valley

WION Dispatch: 'Current conflict will have serious impacts on bilateral relationship'

EAM Jaishankar discusses border conflict with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi