Courtiers are murmuring and the rest are shouting yet Emperor Modi refuses to see that he is without clothes. What must the rank and file of the Indian army, whose 22 comrades at arms laid down their lives trying to evict the Chinese from Ladakh, be thinking of Modi? Opposition Congress party leader Rahul Gandhi has aptly said: “Narendra Modi is actually Surrender Modi!”
Modi’s big mistakes were: challenging China with increased closeness towards the US, Bear hug of Quadrilateral alliance, adopting fanciful concepts like Indo-Pacific as an accomplished reality and issuance of a new map of Ladakh. Fatefully, he kept military focus on Pakistan. Mismatch between Indian assertiveness with little China relevant military muscle to back it led to the present fiasco.
Modi told a lie to his political colleagues during an online all parties’ conference (APC) on June 19. He chose Ostrich-like posturing to deny Chinese incursion into Indian territory. If India maintains that Line of Actual Control (LAC) is the de facto border between China and India, at least in Ladakh area, then the Chinese are deep inside Indian territory. Though from Chinese perspective they are still well inside the Chinese Claim Line (CCL). Has India abdicated its claim with regard to LAC without fighting? Apparently yes.
Indian strategist Pravin Sawhney tweeted after All Parties: “June 19 marks a landmark day in India’s military history when PLA (Peoples Liberation Army) won both battle and war without firing a shot. My congratulations to China on its well planned and executed strategy leading to its stunning and deserved victory. Long live India-China friendship. Jai Hind.” An earlier tweet by him was more revealing: “While LAC is tense after the June 15 Galwan incidence, [I] don’t agree that the situation could flare up leading to escalation. Sadly, Indian Military officers will ensure it does NOT happen since we lack war materiel (to say the least). Must learn lessons for future, which will be soon!” “I had said at beginning of Ladakh crisis that India had no military options. Because the army & military leadership knows nothing about PLA’s capabilities, its strategic thinking, concept of operations, it’s tactics, techniques and procedures. Hope sense would dawn now!”
Wake up Narendra Modi! It’s War Stupid! And yes, everyone knows you do not have the option to fight a war against China not even against Pakistan. The US leadership (bipartisan) is biting their nails for having invested so heavily on India for doing heavy lifting in their task China containment.
War against China was not an option for Nehru either in 1962. According to Shekhar Gupta “Nehru took a decision (“I have told my army to throw out the Chinese”) that might have looked brave, but was divorced from reality. History has judged him harshly. Not as a brave, tough leader who “died” fighting, as politically and physically he never recovered from that decision. He will forever be seen as a weakling who went to war against his conviction”.
In 1962, China was not a nuclear power and a classical linear battle was called war. Today, PLA can activate land, space, cyber, air, missiles, Electro Magnetic Spectrum even in a limited war. The politics and strategic, philosophical and ideological thought Modi and his ideological and political parents, RSS and BJP have constructed is founded on not being like Nehru. In 2020, Modi has many advantages. The opposition is weak, parliament is no threat and the armed forces are in an enormously better state, despite the PLA’s modernisation.
The pressure on Modi is to respond immediately, in anger and exasperation just to be seen to be doing something, as Nehru did. The dilemma is “How to show fellow Indians and the world that you [Modi] are not Nehru of 1962, without doing precisely what Nehru did under pressure in that fateful year”.
Modi, however, shares one weakness with Nehru: “A larger than life public image, and a thin skin. That is what Xi has seen as an exposed flank”. From Chumar to Doklam to Pulwama, the Chinese have noticed how vital a factor “face” is for Modi in his domestic politics. There is a compulsion to look hard, decisive, risk-taking, start something and then conclude it in a way you can claim victory. There is no easy option to achieve that against China, not even Pakistan. Remember how embarrassing Pakistan’s response to Balakot was.
China has the capability of algorithmic multi-domain and cross-domain war. Indian military leadership has not even started conceptualizing this kind of war. They are not yet able to come out of the mesmerising illusions of conceptually stale war fighting strategy Hybrid Warfare. This strategic mind-set would bring India another crushing defeat if it chooses to go to war with China, in exchange for paltry American aid and ego massaging and nothing is free as long as Trump is in the White House.
The international community is in a wait and see mood. Modi rejected President Donald Trump’s mediation offer. Then Russia came in the game and invited the two foreign ministers for a meeting, but this trilateral meeting scheduled for June 22, could not materialise. Russia is India’s time tested friend. Moscow is helping ease tensions between India & China. Long live India. However, cancellation of June the 22 talks would delay disengagement of troops on ground. PLA is in its permanent habitat in Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), hence it will not be affected. Indian Army formations inducted from outside to beef Ladakh based forces will have problems.
The Indian Army is in low morale and is in no mood to fight. It has transported Bofors Artillery with its Israeli Copper tipped shells without realising that there are no corresponding targets for it. The Indian Air Force is not fit for war, its performance in Pulwama-Balakot episode with Pakistan brought it humiliation. And the India Navy is no factor, one does not expect Indian air craft carriers and nuclear submarines to come to the combat zone.
Indian army’s professional proficiency was found lacking during the recent ambush type mission.CDS General Bipin Rawat likes to call such gimmicks ‘Surgical Strike’. A contingent of 35 men along with their Commanding officer crossed over to Chinese area during night, ostensibly to evict Chinese from some of the tactically important features. In the hand to hand fight that ensued, India expeditioners suffered heavy casualties. Alongside 22 deaths including the commanding officer, ten combatants were taken prisoner. The prisoners have since been released and the Indian media is mourning the slain combatants. Former Indian army chief and now minister General VK Singh reportedly says after Galwan fiasco, ‘PLA handed our (10) soldiers, ‘we handed over their people’. Wow. Why was this kept secret that India too caught PLA soldiers? How many – this would have boosted the morale of Indian public.
This episode of unarmed yet deadly combat has triggered an interesting debate in Indian military circles as to: Why did the contingent go “Unarmed” to Chinese side to tell them to vacate area? As per military drill personnel should have carried arms. In all probability, the political leadership had made clear to Indian Army that it did not want escalation, apparently because India is not prepared for that. According to 1993 agreement, the Indian army is not allowed to use weapons while patrolling India-China LAC. Or, Indians must have been armed but as per orders “chose to fight by hand and get killed!”
Azaan Javaid in his June 20 piece for The Print, titled:“Ladakh, scenic Himalayan desert at the centre of most fierce India-China conflict in 53 yrs”, reported that: “When the United Nations Security Council held a discussion on Kashmir on 16 August last year… Security officials began to discuss how the diplomatic tussle would translate or manifest on the ground. The speculations ended with death of 20 Indian soldiers, including a Colonel”. Now Modi is doing another funny thing, his party is holding virtual rallies to salute his slain Coward 22.
Aura of India’s big power status has evaporated into thin air. To pacify the domestic audience, a new line is being popularized by India that “Nowhere have the Chinese crossed the Chinese Claim Line (CCL). If so, then why so much of fuss?
According to Pravin Sawhney, “China’s Peoples’ Liberation Army (PLA) is a superpower vis a vis India. PLA understands future software driven warfare. Instead of trying to match US, it is leapfrogging in certain areas. India oblivious – believes 74 percent FDI [Foreign Defence Investment] in defence will get it [‘s] tech[nology] to match PLA”.. China will run away with victory even before India thinks of putting up a fight. China is a superpower. Almost as advanced as Russians and Americans in all aspects. The US knows this, and that’s why it washed its hands off the situation early on by offering to arbitrate. There may be early signs of US-Chinn decoupling, but it would be foolhardy to presume that the US armada would come to fight alongside Modi’s boys. No wonders, Indian leadership carved an exit for India, with loss of some territory of Chinese choosing.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi rejected President Donald Trump’s mediation offer for resolving ongoing China-India stand-off. After the conversation, Trump said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi is not in a good mood about the “ongoing big conflict” with China. Trump described the situation as a “now raging border dispute.” Even though Trump’s words were hyperbole, they reflected the seriousness of tensions.
India has border disputes with all of its neighbours, tension over the Citizenship Act with Bangladesh and a threat of false flag operations against Pakistan. China has settled its border disputes with all its neighbours except India; same goes for Pakistan.
Foreign Policy highlighted two clashes between Indian and Chinese soldiers, on May 5 and May 9, at separate border areas in India’s east and north. While no one was killed in those hand-to-hand combative skirmishes, more than 100 soldiers were injured. India and China have 3,500 kilometres long un-demarcated border which is generally a very difficult terrain. Now, soldiers from both sides are camped in Galwan Valley, according to Reuters. “About 80 to 100 tents have sprung up on the Chinese side and about 60 on the Indian side where soldiers are billeted.
India’s The Print reported that Chinese troops had moved as far as three kilometres into India’s side of the Galwan Valley. Quoting sources ‘in the know’, the online publication said that Beijing was also moving men into ‘finger areas’ of Pangong Lake while boosting its forces on its side of the LAC. Both sides now reportedly have thousands of troops stationed on either side of the ceasefire line.
Leading observers draw comparisons with the 2017 standoff between India and China in Doklam. One wonders if it is China’s reply to Doklam, or it has called Indo-US bluff of their keenness for containing China. Both the US and India are leading partners of a coalition of the unwilling to keep China bogged down in localised petty conflicts.
Former Indian military officials and diplomats told Reuters that New Delhi’s construction of roads and airstrips in Ladakh were the most likely reason for drawing Beijing’s ire. Narendra Modi’s government has pushed for improving connectivity and by 2022, 66 key roads along the Chinese border will have been built. One of these roads is near the Galwan valley that connects to Daulat Beg Oldi air base, which was inaugurated last October. “The road is very important because it runs parallel to the LAC and is linked at various points with the major supply bases inland,” said Shyam Saran, another former Indian foreign secretary. “It remains within our side of the LAC. It is construction along this new alignment which appears to have been challenged by the Chinese.” “Today, with our infrastructure reach slowly extending into areas along the LAC, the Chinese threat perception is raised,” said former Indian foreign secretary Nirupama Rao. Observers believe that India’s move to open road aims at monitoring Chinese movements, though New Delhi claims that the road is to facilitate pilgrims.
So, like in 2017, trigger of conflict this time also appears India’s own actions in the disputed area. Indian action is comparable to Nazi concept of ‘Lebensraum’, which comprised policies and practices of settler colonialism. India’s aggressive policy towards neighbours is putting regional peace at stake.
Reuters reported on May 27 that “India left red-faced after its troops were briefly detained by China in Ladakh”. “The situation became very volatile when a scuffle between Indian personnel and the Chinese resulted in detention of some of our [Indian] jawans but later they were released,” NDTV quoted a senior Indian bureaucrat as saying. Chinese authorities also seized their weapons. “But eventually weapons were handed back and our jawans also came back.” For India, it is a loss of face.
The issue, however, stretches far deeper and connects to Modi’s destabilising politics in the region. In a bid to bolster his strongman image before his constituents, Modi’s regime has taken a rash approach to regional politics.
India’s expansionist policies in the region are becoming a threat to its neighbours. Currently India is in a standoff with three of its neighbours Pakistan, China and Nepal. All three disputes are borne out of India’s hubris. And from within, India is facing severe vertical and horizontal polarizations on ethno-sectarian axes, with a Divider-in-Chief prime minister personally fanning the fire under RSS oversight. With Donald Trump’s abhorrence for war, India’s goose is cooked unless it takes the current Chinese invasion in lying down mode.
Oft referred to “Wuhan Spirit” by the Chinese side refers to the joint statement of Wuhan Summit of 2018. It was indeed a face saving given to India by China after the former’s Doklam embarrassment. China strongly thinks that India has violated the “Wuhan Spirit”—Cooperation— by participating in a number of US led anti-China ventures like: subscription to Indo-Pacific concept; pushing ahead quadrilateral dialogue; signing of deal with Australia to get access to each other’s military bases to pave the way for more military exchanges and exercises in the Indo-Pacific; signing of “The Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA)” with the US; in the wake of Covid-19, encouraging relocation of American and European led Multinational industrial units from China to India etc.
A report authored by a senior figure at an influential Chinese think-tank has linked the current tensions along the Line of Control (LAC) to India’s move last year to abrogate Article 370 and change the status of Jammu and Kashmir, a decision that China had voiced opposition to. The report, for the first time, described the move as a joint challenge to China and Pakistan, saying the move had “posed a challenge to the sovereignty of Pakistan and China”. The article was authored by Wang Shida, who is Deputy Director of the Institute of South Asian Studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR).
Ananth Krishnan for his piece for The Hindu (June 12), captioned: “Beijing think-tank links scrapping of Article 370 to LAC tensions”, reported: “Mr. Wang noted that the Chinese Foreign Minister had conveyed China’s strong opposition to the move to External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar during his visit to Beijing last year, following the abrogation of Article 370 and the establishment of Ladakh as a union territory. The week before the August visit, Indian Home Minister Amit Shah had spoken in Parliament about taking back Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) and Aksai Chin.
Indian External Affairs Minister Mr. Jaishankar conveyed to Beijing that the move was an entirely internal matter that did not impact India’s external boundaries or the LAC with China. China had opposed the Ladakh map for including Aksai Chin. The article said the move had “posed a challenge to the sovereignty of Pakistan and China” and “made India-Pakistan relations and China-India relations more complex.”
According to Pravin Sawheny, “On 5 Aug 2019 I said China will not accept it. China has changed facts on ground, so has Nepal. And, so, will peace loving tiny Bhutan. PLA’s Nakula intrusion has bypassed Indian defences from West & East in Sikkim leaving Bhutan to itself. Expect Bhutan to join BRI in a year.”
China and Pakistan bashing has never solved any of India’s problems, nor is it likely to mitigate India’s difficulties in future. Elections are contested in India by creating an anti-China and anti-Pakistan frenzy. Both mainstream parties suffer from this malice; it’s only a difference of shade. This has raised the Indian public’s expectation about their governments’ ability to deliver severe blows to China and or Pakistan.
The Indian media is in overdrive to further raise public expectations that Indian military could quickly drive the Chinese out of recently “occupied territories.” And Indian military does not have the wherewithal to prove equal to Indian leadership’s tall talk. The negative fallout of this strategic folly has been that India is now stuck up with two nuclear fronts’ nightmare. It is purely India’s own doing.
Senior PLA Colonel Zhu Bo, a familiar figure in the Chinese information war circuit and an honorary fellow in the PLA Academy of Military Sciences wrote an article for South China Morning Post in 2017, in the wake of Doklam crisis. According to Zhu, India would be the net loser of the crisis because “the disputed border was not on China’s strategic radar” till the Doklam standoff. The PLA had since reconsidered its assessment of the strategic importance of the Sino-Indian border.
According to Manosh Joshi, “Betting on a quick return to status quo ante would be hazardous security.” The dispute is more likely to herald a new and nervous era, “a geopolitical side-effect of the coronavirus pandemic which is racking the world”.
PLA is expected to give some face saving concessions in Pangong Tso only, having no tactical importance. India seems to have accepted Chinese viewpoint. So, LAC would become meaningless that could be changed by PLA at will. India has ceded significant strategic concessions during diplomatic level talks, to buy face saving peace for the time being.
India has learnt its latest lesson the hard way: “China is here and the US is there far away; and for the US India is just another tissue paper. Credible analysts have been consistently conveying it to the US, to not to bet on India in its anti-China drive. India is not a stallion, it is an ailing mule. India has disappointed President Donald Trump twice during his presidency, let’s hope this time it is the final one!
Above all, COVID-19 has added another dimension to the global body politic. All countries are left to fend for themselves; none has spare quality time to peep around and see what is happening, especially in distant parts of the world. Everyone is trying to avoid additional crises, what to talk of fighting someone else’s war. India has missed the buss to have a face saving exit from its Ladakh standoff with China President Trump could have done it for India. However, out of arrogance Prime Minister Narendra Modi chose to reject Trump’s mediation offer. Moreover, Trump has gotten so consumed in America’s domestic racial quagmire that now there is only one thing on his mind: 2020 elections. Even containing China is a distant second on his agenda, at least till November 8.
One may safely predict that a clash between India & China, if at all it happens, would end quickly. It could actually cut India down to size, leading to China led unipolarity, at least in South Asia. The US is not coming to Delhi’s help and both India as well as the US know this. The BRI appeal in subcontinent will strengthen now. Beijing has got the strategy right. And India’s much desired, though fanciful, role of leading South Asia stands dashed, thanks to Sur[r]ender Modi’s oversized strategic bites that India had no capacity to swallow; there is always a thin line between day dreaming and strategic though process, Modi failed to differentiate between them.
