https://stratnewsglobal.com/india/china-realised-were-not-budging-had-to-relent-northern-army-commander-lt-gen-yk-joshi/ the spin is that it is status quo ante now. but mind you it is not so in that we have given up crossing over to our claimed LAC, even if chi has also given given up crossing over to his. this is the good part, in that no transgresssions and stand offs. 1

2 so status quo ante that is taken as the aim achieved, is not good enough. a crisis of this consequence requires a better dividend. so this ruling out by the army commander that the disengagement is not intended to help address the LAC issue is a dereliction at the higher level

3 not recognising the 1959 claim line is rhetoric, but we defacto end up doing so by agreeing to not step across it. so the army commander is right that the LAC needs defining, but then why say this crisis outcome is not intended to help with that. what a waste of a good crisis

4 the transgression policy of 2x or 5x crossings over the chi 1959 claim line than they do our LAC version requires accountability. was put in to assert our LAC claims and walk over the chi claims. now abandoned. who thought it up and was unmindful of consequence in such a crisis

5 a dormant sector now has sucked in willy nilly over a division, with the interviewer mentioning a division of armour. dividend? clarifying LAC is a good idea, but doing so requires recognition of the chi 1959 claim line the general disparages multiple times. a contradiction

6 the good general takes care to mention NSA. good for the general. not so for govt accountability. why was indian deterrence so degraded that the chi walked in in face of a transgression policy gone wrong? who relied on the modi spell over xi as the way to handle the neighbour?

7 by agreeing not to patrol forward we are defacto recognising the chi 1959 claim line. in the same breath denouncing gives @MEAIndia @DrSJaishankar a loop hole not to step up and engage with a long term solution. clarifying the LAC means tackling the 1959 issue. lets do so

8 and lets not leave it at LAC clarification. go for an IB. sitting on a militarised undefined line is irresponsible for two nuclear powers. the crisis outcome should be used to good effect in a longer term settlement of the border, that inevitably will have trade offs. so lets