If soldiers were carrying arms during Monday's clashes, why did they not open fire? I answer that question which is far more complicated than just a border agreement or two between India and China. https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-if-soldiers-on-lac-were-carrying-arms-why-did-they-not-open-fire-6467324/

None of the articles pertains directly to the situation on Monday where 20 Indian soldiers were brutally assaulted to death by the Chinese. As Jaishankar explained, it was as per longstanding practice in the area flowing from these agreements that the soldiers did not open fire.

Most of the soldiers in that group which clashed with the Chinese soldiers were carrying their personal weapons, and had ammunition on person. This is as per prevalent practice, borne out by videos and pictures of certain patrols coming face-to-face in the recent past.

These videos show soldiers carrying weapons, but with the barrels pointing downwards. That is part of a local drill followed to avoid any accidental firing or misunderstanding because of the rifle barrel pointing at each other.

Even though not strictly coded in any rules, officers said these practices have evolved over a period of time and have been firmed as part of a routine on the LAC. In such an environment, every other weapon short of firing has become acceptable to use for the soldiers

As per some reports, even the Army recently ordered full body protectors and anti-riot gear for its soldiers deployed there, further lending credence to the notion that opening of fire was strict taboo on the LAC. The incident on Monday happened under these circumstances.

The Army’s rules of engagement, and a SOP exists in the MO Directorate about opening fire at the borders, allow soldiers from opening fire if lives of their uniformed brethren are threatened.

However, there is another side to the story. In the melee during the clash, where Indian and Chinese soldiers were grappling with each other in a hand-to-hand combat, it was very difficult to open fire without hitting one of your men.

Bottomline: Whatever be the reason for Indian soldiers not opening fire, their decision prevented the situation from escalating. That said, the killings have put a question mark on the terms of engagement between the armies of two nuclear-armed neighbours going forward. (n/n)