Col @sdinny14 who has actually commanded the area spanning #PangongTso to #GalwanValley, has given a lucid and Crystal clear explanation of the terrain and the situation in the area of so-called "conflict" and single-handedly demolished the whole narrative of "India under massive
Incursion" or "India under attack" from China. Thank you @sdinny14 for clearing the air on the matter.
Kudos to @nitingokhale for bringing out this interview. You hv once again proved that you remain the most reliable and accurate Journalist on India's Def and Strategic matters.
Kudos to @nitingokhale for bringing out this interview. You hv once again proved that you remain the most reliable and accurate Journalist on India's Def and Strategic matters.
Let me just quickly summarize the key points by @sdinny14 -
- Col Dinny has cleared the air on the nomenclature used for the "fingures" in the area.
- The tactical position in the area on the LAC is quite clear now. F4 has a cliff which restricts any vehicular movement. It has
- Col Dinny has cleared the air on the nomenclature used for the "fingures" in the area.
- The tactical position in the area on the LAC is quite clear now. F4 has a cliff which restricts any vehicular movement. It has
Only a small path where Infantrymen can walk only in a single file to cross the F4. Which makes is quite clear why the Chinese claim LAC till F4. It has a natural protection for them.
- India controls the territory till the West of F4. We have permenent presence right till F4.
- India controls the territory till the West of F4. We have permenent presence right till F4.
-China has permenent presence near Sirijap on the East of F8. This wjere they stopped in '62. But they claim their territory till F4, as it gives tactical protection.
- while India claims the LAC passes at F8. The area between F4-F8 has always been patrolled by both sides.
- while India claims the LAC passes at F8. The area between F4-F8 has always been patrolled by both sides.
Indian Soldiers go till F8 and Chinese come till F4. The Chinese build a road till F4 during Kargill War when India was busy elsewhere. But that has not changed the status quo. The territory between F4-F8 remains disputed due to differing claims on LAC positions (Let me make one
Thing clear though, India claims LAC passes at F8, but doesn't mean we have accepted its undisputed Chinese territory East of F8. The Int'l border claimed by India is further East of Sirijap, ahead of Khursak Fort, LAC is a temporary arrangement officially speaking).
- This also means that any Chinese vehicle could not have crossed F4. That video making rounds on the SM, even *if* it is indeed from current faceoff, it has to have happened East of F4, that is in the gray zone of F4-F8. As stated earlier, this area is already been patrolled by
Both sides since '62 and patrol parties coming in contact with each other in this area is quite usual. Majority of times the troops back off peacefully, only rarely the situation escalates to a fist-fight.
- So there is neither any incursion on Indian controlled area, nor there
- So there is neither any incursion on Indian controlled area, nor there
is any unusual situation as far as the stand-off is concerned.
- Col Dinny has also said that there cannot be a large scale deployment in this area. Any Chinese action has an equal and opposite Indian reaction anyhow.
- Ditto for Galwan Valley, where the terrain simply doesn't
- Col Dinny has also said that there cannot be a large scale deployment in this area. Any Chinese action has an equal and opposite Indian reaction anyhow.
- Ditto for Galwan Valley, where the terrain simply doesn't
support any large scale deployment. In fact is far more difficult for the Chinese to forward-deploy in Galwan Valley given the narrow valleys and sharp ridges, than doing so at Pangong Tso or Hot springs area.
- Col Dinny also points out why would China oppose DSDBO road only nw
- Col Dinny also points out why would China oppose DSDBO road only nw
when we have been building for a few yrs now. IMO the current Chinese reaction may have been to the feeder road from DSDBO in Galwan Valley reaching right upto the LAC, which would allow the Indian troops to quickly reach the LAC but for the Chinese its an arduous journey of tens
of km on foot to reach the LAC. But even then they cannot afford to forward-deploy a large force in Galwan Valley near LAC, or maintain permenent positions unless they are willing to take the herculean logistical efforts to maintain logistical routes thru valleys which do not
allow vehicular movement.
- Perhaps the most imp point that Col Dinny raised is given Indian tactical command spans the area between Pangong Tso and Galwan Valley, its quite likely that similar structure exists on the Chinese side and its quite possible that the current standoff
- Perhaps the most imp point that Col Dinny raised is given Indian tactical command spans the area between Pangong Tso and Galwan Valley, its quite likely that similar structure exists on the Chinese side and its quite possible that the current standoff
happening in 3 places are not actually co-ordinated spread out event but it could simply be result of a single overzealous PLA officer commanding that particular area of LAC. I mean, if we consider Naku La incidence to be an unrelated co-incidence, then what we are seeing can
very well be a local tactical level action by local commander of PLA and not some grand strategy being co-ordinated from Beijing.
Only time will bring out the right answers on this perhaps. But its quite clear there is no incursion, let alone a large scale from the Chinese.
Only time will bring out the right answers on this perhaps. But its quite clear there is no incursion, let alone a large scale from the Chinese.
