Watch CTC 501 by @ShekharGupta . Brilliant. The PM will be vindicated as having been technically factual in his statement of no post or territory which belongs (not claimed by or disputed by) India. Shekhar draws on the paper by IISS.

So what has happened. It seems the Chinese have encroached into the extreme end of all no man’s land in every one of the 3 segments - Galwan, Gogra and Pangong.

Let us say for example a 500 meter stretch is the disputed land. The two borders of this stretch define the overlap area. Each party was permitted access to patrol but not occupy this with any structure or armament placement.

In all 3 segments; certainly in Pangong the Chinese have moved into the no man’s land to the extreme edge of their claim & have set up structures, tents & some deployment of armaments. They now are blocking the Indian patrol access to the extreme edge of India’s claimed boundary

In Galwan they may have also pitched 2 tents on the Indian side. This is what our Patrol has removed, leading to a fight and the fatalities & casualities.

All in all are the Chinese taking aggressive & incursive stance, even though the incursions are in the no man’s or disputed land but not clearly Indian land.

I guess the PM wants deescalation, give face to China to pull back to avoid a full fledged armed conflict. This is classical negotiation strategy before exercising the option to escalate the next notch. Sometimes leaders signal to the adversary a final opportunity to not escalate

So I suppose he has been technically factual, no land held by India has been taken by China. He has left it open without commenting on the disputed land or no man’s land. That does not amount to ceeding it. That is political rhetoric.

We should heed to the military minds. Baying for war, revenge and 10 heads for one in the end will leave both the countries economically devastated. Instead of 20 dead on our side and some 40 on the Chinese side, we might end up with 1000s dead on both side with neither winning

It will be a fair option to use coersive diplomacy but when it becomes a war, then you get what US got in Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Afganistan, Iraq and USSR in Afganistan or China in Vietnam & Cambodia. No one wins. The treat of force is more potent than use of force.

I only wish spokespersons explain this in a calm, non rhetorical and non partisan manner. They will not get the support of the opposition & citizens if they taunt each other, obfuscate the facts and believe that brinkmanship will convince.

Finally statesmen seek to resolve not rachet up conflicts with medieviel mindsets of revenge and honour killing. Certainly nations do not do it. Only mafia in the gang world do it. Even they fo it only as the last resort. Jai Hind. May we not shed more blood of the India soldier

On last point. If China does not pull back to the other side, the Indian claimed extreme boundary of the disputed land or no man’s land, it will put PM in a difficult position. Then if he does not evict the Chinese, his claim of not losing an inch of Indian land will sound hollow

It appears the Chinese have taken the strategic heights in Galwan, Gogra and Pangong. It will be a diplomatic challenge to get them to give up the heights. Much like asking India to give up Siachin or the recaptured Kargil heights. This where the PM has his challenge cut out