Tensions between India and China are heating up again. China accuses India of sending troops across the border near Pangong Tso Lake. The lake is split between the Chinese territory of Tibet and Ladakh, which is part of the Kashmir dispute. In a statement, Beijing said Indian troops engaged in "open provocation and caused the border situation to become tense" by "seriously violating China's territorial sovereignty." The statement followed an Indian claim that Chinese troops had "carried out provocative military movements to change the status quo" in Ladakh a few days back. Beijing had responded to this claim by saying its troops have "always strictly respected" the Line of Actual Control.
We are inclined to believe the Chinese position, given that India is still in denial over what happened the last time the two countries had a 'light' bust-up. The deadly fistfights at the LAC near Ladakh culminated with China retaining control of some of the land both countries claim and beginning construction of facilities. To this day, India claims it lost no ground in the disputed region, despite satellite imagery from independent sources showing this is not true. It is also interesting that despite always talking a big game with Pakistan, India rushed to the negotiating table for talks with China. Perhaps this is India's way of admitting that it is actually a cowardly bully, willing to pick on smaller neighbours, but shaking in its pants at the prospect of being smoked by the dragon to the north. Even now, there are holes in the Indian claims being reported. The Indians claim they "pushed back" the Chinese, but "without any violence”.
We fail to understand how “pushing back”, an inherently violent gesture, can take place without violence. A more thorough reading of the Indian claims would imply that the Chinese troops accidentally stepped across the undefined border and Indian troops shakily asked them to step back across. But while China's statements reflect that the recent incidents were exaggerated, we must credit India for winning one war — the war on intelligence. How else could an entire country accept that banning TikTok was a suitable response to loss of territory?
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ