India- China border tensions and PLA ambitions

Following the incident, on May 10^th, on the India-China border in Sikkim at Naku La Pass, the two armies of approximately 250 troops each, had a fierce confrontation wherein several soldiers from both sides were injured due to stone pelting and fist fights which eventually culminated into violent clashes. The situation was diffused after the local commanders met over a flag meet to quell the tension. Subsequently, two days later, on May 12^th , two Chinese choppers were spotted on radar flying close to the Indian airspace in the Ladakh theatre, and in response, the Indian Air Force (IAF) dispatched its Sukhoi 30 MKI fighter jets from Leh base, to deter airspace violation and to ensure regular air patrols close to LAC. In the past, the Chinese military has deliberately violated the Indian airspace on several occasions, in sectors which they rightfully claim to be theirs. However, in contrast to its provocative nature, there have been incidents where the Chinese Air Force has inadvertently trespassed into the Indian territory due to the absence of a well demarcated line, along the LAC. Bearing in mind the recent military confrontations between the two sides in the past few weeks, it is reasonable to assert that this air movement along the LAC was not accidental but a deliberate act of provocation.

Soon after the incident on May 5^th- 6^th in Pangong Tso Sector, China tripled its number of boats in the Pangong Tso lake to man its side of the waterbody and has also increased the deployment of patrols along the border. In reciprocation, the Indian ground troops are operating as many boats as their counterpart, to ensure the safe control of the western part of the lake which belongs to India. Most of the open confrontations have occurred on the Western side, the Ladakh theatre, and that has resulted in an exponential military build up on either sides of the boundary, where the two armies have deployed additional reinforcements and have begun erecting makeshift infrastructure to keep vigil on each other round the clock in the Galwan Valley, near the lake. Besides the additional reinforcements in the area, both countries have increased the presence of troops in critical areas like Daulat Beg Oldie, Demchok and in areas adjacent to the Galwan river and the Pangong Tso lake.

If one observes closely, these disputes typically occur during the summers since the weather is conducive for both countries to undertake continuous patrols up to their respective perception of the LAC. For want of any official demarcation and consensus of the border in several forward areas, acts of belligerence are common and prevalent. To repress such flares of aggression, the 2013 Border Defence Cooperation Agreement stated that both parties “shall not follow or tail patrols of the other side in areas where there is no understanding” of the LAC. It also sent a mandate to “exercise maximum self-restraint, refrain from any provocative actions, not use of force or threaten the use of force against the other side” in times of crisis.

Despite the preventive measures in place to ensure peace and tranquillity in the borders, China resorts to aggression by constantly provoking the Indian forces, transgressing into Indian territory, interfering and preventing Indian patrolling activities and opposing the construction of infrastructure along the LAC. In reciprocation to the Chinese aggression, the Indian troops have been equally assertive and are unwilling back down, which has further escalated tensions in several sensitive areas on the LAC.

The sudden surge in hostility on the part of the Chinese is not underpinned by one rationale but is the consequence of multiple factors. One of the primary driving forces is India’s overall strategic infrastructural development programme along the India-China border across the states of Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Sikkim, and Arunachal Pradesh that enables the Indian border security forces to carry out frequent and deep surveillance, patrolling activities all along the border which was otherwise absent due to the physical limitation and inaccessibility. Since the Indian troops operate freely in remote areas, they frequently run into their adversary. This leads to a frictional entanglement between the two sides regarding the boundary perception. Besides, last month, India inaugurated a bridge that is strategically situated in Arunachal Pradesh near the Chinese border and which “enables faster movement of troops and artillery.” In coordination with the construction of 60 strategic roads alongside the India-China border scheduled for completion by 2022, India is set to tip the strategic scale in its favour by providing the required connectivity by road and air, and by commensurating the infrastructural, logistical and topographical advantages of the Chinese. With the increasing frequency and depth of Indian surveillance activities, China’s ‘incremental encroachment policy’ has been threatened, irking Chinese expansionist posture. It is likely that the hurdles erected by India have proved to be disagreeable to China and in countermeasure, the latter country has resorted to aggressive patrolling exercises. As both countries are bolstering ahead with their ‘Forward Policy’ in their own rights, it will be interesting to observe the trajectory of events as tensions are rapidly mounting daily.

In a recent geopolitical turn of events, China has been critical of New Delhi’s decision to reorganise the state of Jammu and Kashmir while granting Ladakh the status of Union Territory. Given that China claims various parts of Ladakh, this decision could adversely affect its territorial interests in the region, as New Delhi has renewed its stake in the newly formed Union Territory. Furthermore, Beijing is wary of India’s intent to claim back Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK), as the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), Government of India had issued a demarche earlier this month to Islamabad directing it to vacate the illegal occupation of POK, since it is an integral part of the newly formed Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. Earlier this year, India’s External Affairs Minister, Defence Minister and Chief of Defence Staff have all suggested “India can take back what’s rightfully its own territory, based on a 1994 Parliament resolution.” In response to that, the Indian Army Chief said his “forces were ready” in case the Parliament approves a military action. In such a situation, both Islamabad and Beijing will suffer colossal economic setbacks as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, (CPEC) passes through the POK region which oversees the energy and material transits of the Chinese through this region. China’s stakes in CPEC projects account for an estimated value of close to $63 billion. Besides, in a novel diplomatic initiative, New Delhi has began to report the weather forecasts of regions under the POK since the 8^th of May, 2020 explicitly signalling to Islamabad that POK is an integral part of  the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Post the abrogation of article 370, New Delhi had published a new map of India that restores an undivided Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. In doing so, India has not only exhibited a resolute stand vis a vis the sovereignty of its territorial constitution but has also apprised its adversaries of its indomitable strength in the face of adversity.

Besides such external issues, Beijing is grappling with its own internal dilemmas. In the recently concluded annual National People’s Congress plenary, three key issues were discussed that included epidemic control, economic growth and alleviation of poverty and the passing of the new security law for Hong Kong. The outbreak of the pandemic brought about an economic fallout in Beijing in the first quarter of 2020. For the first time in several decades there occurred drastic loss of jobs, bankruptcies in most small companies, withdrawal of foreign companies and losses of permanent income. If Xi Jinping fails to navigate the country through the economic crisis, his political power and authoritarian rule may be well undermined. To make matters worse, China is being held accountable by the global community for the widespread of the epidemic which puts into question the infectiveness of the Chinese leadership within the country.

To distract the public’s attention from the domestic economic issues pertaining to unemployment and poverty and epidemic crisis, Beijing has created a diversion by upscaling the tensions along the India-China border to harness the nationalist sentiment among its public. By raising concern for its territorial sovereignty, Beijing is deflecting the focus of its own major internal issues. This intentional digression by the Chinese, endeavours to redeem and restore Xi Jinping’s image of a powerful authoritarian ruler, who is in control of his state of affairs. 

Bearing in mind the various factors, it is not easy to single out any one particular reason that explains the sudden surge in aggression on the border, and considering the fact that Beijing has orchestrated well the timing of its hostility to strategically conceal its true intentions makes its motives all the more dubious. However, it is safe to say that this strategic orchestration is an immaculate reflection of the Chinese active defensive military doctrine which is intended to defend the CCP rule, national sovereignty and territorial integrity and to put up a “forward defence” posture that concentrates on the adversary’s weaknesses, initiated only when “time and conditions… favour the PLA forces and which does not limit to counter-offensive in terms of time space or response.”China is showing its paranoia when other country emulates Chinese strategy of building concrete structures to buttress its claim over land and reclaimed areas in the Oceans.

Pic Courtesy - Mayank Singh

(The views expressed are personal)