Why Are We Talking With China After Galwan? Brig Arun Bajpai
by Brig Arun Bajpai
Agreed that Indians are famous for their talks, they start talking even when there is no scope of talks, maybe it is part of our DNA or maybe we with our record of 1000 years of slavery we have become this way. It is now clear to all that the attack on us in Galwan Valley of Ladakh by Chinese Army was premediated, a fact confirmed by our MEA and the recent US Intel report which says the same. Chinese soldiers numbering more than 350 with iron rods and spiked bats were waiting for the small party of Indians numbering 50 to pounce on specially so because they were unarmed .It is a different issue that Indian soldiers despite their inferior numbers ponced on Chinese soldiers killing 43 of them and injuring 76 while thy lost 20 soldiers including CO Col Babu martyred. Still we are talking to Chinese why?
On 06 Jun the talk held between 14 Corps Cdr LT Gen Harjinder Singh and his counterpart in Chinese Army at Moldo, it was decided that both the Armies will fall back to their original positions as obtained in April This year. On 15 June when an Indian Army patrol was sent to PP 14 to find out whether the Chinese have vacated it, much to the surprise of this patrol it came to their knowledge that leave aside vacating they have reinforced PP 14 and have constructed a temporary post there. It now transpires that this was done on orders of Chinese overall boss and president for life Xi Xining.
This order was conveyed to Chinese troops by their General Zhao the commander of entire Western Sector of China. When this matter was reported to Col Babu CO 16 Bihar regiment by this small patrol, He himself with 50 men under his command decided to go and discuss this matter with his Chinese counter -part. This party of Indian Soldiers went unarmed because of 1996 and 2006 treaties with China made by Cong led UPA. They reached the PP14 at 1930 PM their aim being only to talk. However, the Chinese soldiers were waiting for them with their spiked bats and iron rods. Even before anything could be said they pounced on the Commanding Officer Col Babu and two JCOS accompanying him. They killed Col Babu and two JCOs accompanying him. Seeing their CO fallen the troops of 16 Bihar numbering just 50 against Chinese strength of more than 350 pounced on them. They snatched from Chinese their spiked bats and iron rods and beat them right left and Centre killing 43 of Chinese soldiers and wounding 76. Chinese soldiers ran away from PP14 but Indian troops followed them to kill. 20 of own soldiers were also martyred.
This has happened after clear understanding between the Corp Cdr of 14 Corps Lt Gen Harjinder and his Chinese counterpart that both sides will withdraw to April positions of theirs. This simply means that Chinese troops had no intention of withdrawing. They were only deceiving Indian troops to withdraw so that they can then occupy those areas. Case in point is that Chinese who have never claimed Galwan area as theirs are now after this incident, claiming whole of Galwan as theirs. So, what is the sense of talking To China and once again holding meeting at Moldo of Indian 14 Corp Commander and his Chinese counterpart as it has been held after this incident? Once again it has been said that this meeting was held in very cordial atmosphere and that once again both Armies have agreed to withdraw. It should by now be very clear to the Indian side that Chinese troops will withdraw in Eastern Ladakh from Gogra Hot Springs site and Galwan area because both armies are more or less on their own side of LAC here. Actually, Chinese never had any intention of sticking on there. This was only a feint to confuse Indian side that they are withdrawing.
Their main aim was to occupy 8 km of area between finger 4 and finger 8 where in this period of Galwan talks which happened from 05 May onwards, they have constructed bunkers, Pill boxes and other infrastructure to hold this area. This area is on North bank of the lake Pangong Tso. the spurs which originate from here and dominate the Indian made 255 km long Darbuka-Daulat Beg Oldi road they are not going to withdraw. Now here Indians have a problem as this is what Chinese wanted which they have got. Now why this area was left by Indians unguarded is something which must be investigated and heads must roll of people found responsible. So, what purpose these talks? China will not withdraw from here that is for sure. They have already lost a big face in Doklam where they withdrew because then Xi Jinping was to be declared in that year in October President for life, a chance which Xi Jinping did not want to lose. No such issue is there now.
So, what can India do now? India and Modi Government must understand that China is a bully and it is browbeating India because it thought that India is getting too close to US as also supporting the cause of investigation of China as to how COVID-19 virus came into being? President Trump is already calling this virous as Chinese Virous. India now must become aggressive. When china cares too hoots for Indian susceptibilities why should we care for them. India must move closer to US and QUAD countries with whom China has an axe to grind. India must recognise Tibet as an independent country as also Taiwan. India must move out of accepting one China policy in the case of Taiwan. Also, India must now become self- reliant coming out of dependence on China in economic field gradually. India must forge greater friendship with countries like Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, Malesia, Singapore & Taiwan. We must follow a policy of enemy of our enemy is our friend. All in all, we must consider China as our enemy number one. At the same time our governments must stop this policy of appeasing China. The end result of Modi Governments Wuhan Spirit, Malappuram spirit is there for all to see. An enemy will remain an enemy despite all appeasements.
Brig Arun Bajpai (Retd) is a distinguished Defence and Strategic Analyst. Views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of IDN. IDN does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same
No comments:
Post a Comment