• Ram Lalla Virajman
  • Voice of India
  • Free Books
  • Operation Sindoor

    Pakistan pleads for Trump's help.
  • Hindu Nationalism

    It (is) not easy … to draw a line between Hindu nationalism and true nationalism. The two overlap as India is the only home of Hindus and they form a majority there. — J. Nehru 

  • Lord Buddha was every inch a Hindu

    Sakyamuni Buddha
  • Animal Slaughter

    Those who permit slaying of animals; those who bring animals for slaughter; those who slaughter; those who sell meat; those who purchase meat; those who prepare dishes out of meat; those who serve that meat and those who eat it are all murderers. — Manusmriti

  • Jesus in India?

    Jesus
  • Tainted Teresa

    Mother Teresa
  • Word of God?

    When I think of all the harm the Bible has done, I despair of ever writing anything to equal it.” — Oscar Wilde

    Christianity is the most ridiculous, the most absurd and bloody religion that has ever infected the world. — Voltaire

    Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned, [molested]: yet we have not advanced one inch towards humanity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half of the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support error and roguery all over the earth. — Thomas Jefferson

  • Homos & Hinduism

    Beware of alien Christian morals – Swami Aksharananda
  • National Shame!

    Mukherjee & Santa
  • Mohd Posters Iran

    Posters of Mohd exist in Iran & Egypt
  • Islamic terrorism

    How to wipe out Islamic terror
  • Tolerance Paradox

    Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. […] We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. — Karl Popper

  • India Crossed Out!

    India Crossed-Out!
  • Ambedkar Says …

    The methods adopted by the invaders have left behind them their aftermath. One aftermath is the bitterness between the Hindus and the Muslims which they have caused. This bitterness, between the two, is so deep-seated that a century of political life has neither succeeded in assuaging it; nor in making people forget it. As the invasions were accompanied with destruction of temples and forced conversions, with spoliation of property, with slaughter, enslavement and abasement of men, women and children, what wonder if the memory of these invasions has ever remained green, as a source of pride to the Muslims and as a source of shame to the Hindus?  — B. R. Ambedkar

  • Jesus: An Artifice for Aggression

    Jesus Christ Cover

Beating the Chinese fait accompli trap – Ameya Pratap Singh

Chinese village in AP (Nov. 2020)

Ameya Pratap SinghChina is said to have illegally occupied at least 38,000 sq. km. of Indian land over the years. — Ameya Pratap Singh

One of the more perplexing but under-discussed aspects of the on-going Sino-Indian border stand-off relates to the gains of territorial expansion: Why has China used fait accompli strategies on the Sino-Indian border? Recently, there have been reports of Chinese construction of three villages in Arunachal Pradesh 5 kilometres from the Bum La Pass. In total, China is said to have illegally occupied at least 38,000 sq. km. of Indian land over the years. To some observers the question posed here may seem odd as increases in territorial holdings have been part of the raison d’etre of the modern nation-state for centuries, and motives often range from intangible gains such as reputation for resolve, domestic legitimacy, or status to more tangible one’s such as control over natural resources.

But, since World War II, the territorial integrity norm and self-determination have caused territorial conquest to decline sharply. If local populations cannot be convinced of the legitimacy of foreign rule, then their occupation becomes expensive and a risky as well as morally dubious enterprise. Moreover, “size of territory” has declined in importance as a vital indicator of state power, being replaced with nuclear weapons, military modernisation, technology, industrial production etc. In fact—as India knows all too well—the inability to defend vast territories can restrict a state’s rise. Especially in Ladakh, large parts are still largely inhospitable mountainous terrain with scarce human population or vegetation and lack any key natural resources. The territorial sovereignty of each state is often held to be a sacred and inviolable feature, but this still does not explain the rationale behind China’s choice of fait accompli strategies for territorial conquest across the Sino-Indian border.

Well, China does so because faits accompli is the preferred mode of modern territorial conquest. American political scientist Dan Altman has argued that while territorial wars and invading armies indeed became exceedingly rare after 1945, modern conquest has evolved to encourage a different type of territorial conquest. Expansionist states now purposefully target the seizure of smaller pieces of unpopulated and ungarrisoned territories that keep the risk of conflict within manageable proportions. Instead of “brute force” they use “fait accompli”. The goal is to gamble on the military occupation of a small piece of territory that is unlikely to provoke large-scale war. In this case for example, China presents India with a difficult choice—if India chooses to evict PLA forces and escalate, it could risk war. But it would be unlikely to risk such a war over 1000 sq km of territory. Altman argues that this logic also under-girded Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and China’s seizure of the Paracel Islands in 1974.

This means the credibility of India’s red line against China’s use of force across the LAC is in peril. What can India do? Can it ensure China does not profit from its aggression meant to induce fait accompli? India certainly needs to improve its deterrence by denial posture and expedite its road infrastructure plans, modernise its military, and make appropriate changes to bring operational efficiency to the Army’s northern command for rapid mobilisation (C4I2 capability). India will also need to improve its radar surveillance systems, long range fire power, air power and missile capability in border areas along with electronic warfare and cyber capabilities. Loopholes exposed by the Chinese ingress in Ladakh in the analytic framework for intelligence processing need addressing too. In essence, India should be able to better pre-empt and quickly respond to Chinese fait accompli strategies to prevent them in the future. While financial and administrative limitations have prevented fuller realisation, this has arguably been the intended strategy of the Indian government so far.

However, this may not be enough. India also needs deterrence by punishment options. New Delhi needs to invest in its 17 Mountain Strike Corps (MSC), which is intended to act as a counter-offensive force against China along the LAC. There have already been reports that the Indian Army has mobilised two strike corps for the mountains facing China. But their use should not be limited to counter-offence in response to Chinese fait accompli strategies (especially when delayed), since this makes for a predictable script. Instead, the MSC should also focus on the possibility of India offering faits accomplis of its own across the LAC during situations of low-threat expectation and exposed vulnerabilities on the Chinese side. If faits accomplis are attractive to Beijing because they are perceived to be low-risk, their use can only be discouraged by awakening the Chinese to the grave escalatory risks and debilitating costs of a constant threat of a limited but difficult to reverse territorial ingress along a 2100-mile long border from the Indian side. In world politics, norms restraining competition often emerge from the fear of inadvertence and escalation rather than the goodwill of rivals.

Such force projection may not be possible in the short term—considering India was unable to raise a second division of the MSC in Pathankot in 2017-18 due to paucity of funds—but is nonetheless necessary in the long run to raise costs for Chinese “salami slicing”. One must also remember that such a strategy went horribly wrong for Jawaharlal Nehru before the 1962 War and therefore adequate funding and capacity-building are essential before this option can be fully explored and deployed successfully. But if this strategy is indeed implemented dexterously—although it will play out over a longer timeline—India’s crisis bargaining position and demand for the restoration of the status quo as of April 2020 may finally have some teeth to it.

An equally pertinent policy solution for the Chinese challenge on the border is the economic development of India’s border populations and regions. Beyond building roads to gain access to vital strategic points, allowing border areas to flourish as population centres has been part of the Indian government’s agenda at least since the Himmatsinghji Committee Report of 1951. While there is a strong case to be made for such measures from the perspective of public welfare, there is also a defence imperative, both for internal (against insurgencies and armed separatist factions) as well as external security. First, as border regions become denser population wise, the potential for cross-border encroachment diminishes. This approach may have limits in certain inhospitable parts, but to prevent Chinese settlements in lower-lying areas local populations may be nearly as important for border security as the Indian Army. Second, not only will this improve India’s own administrative control and acceptance in these border regions, it will also offer Tibetans on the other side a glimpse into what state-led economic development can look like in a democratic society.

According to Altman, faits accomplis are part of an “advancing without attacking” strategy and notoriously difficult to deter and draw red lines against. Considering this, India’s security interests simply cannot afford an ill-managed economy, bureaucratic inefficiency, and delays in plans for military modernisation. To finance this increased defence burden, India’s economic growth and need for domestic stability will assume salience like never before. Due to the successful staging of its “peaceful rise” policy, China under Deng Xiaoping could bide its time and rise without the overhang of geopolitical competition. But India under Modi faces Xi’s revanchist China on the border along with an increasingly hostile regional security environment. There is no margin for error. – The Indian Express, 22 January 2021

› Ameya Pratap Singh is reading for a DPhil in Area Studies (South Asia) at the University of Oxford.

China-India-Bumla-AP-Border Map