De-escalation in Ladakh

Why in news?

The process of de-escalation has been underway on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Ladakh.

What is de-escalation?

The reasons for the Sino-Indian conflict are the unsettled border issue, divergent geopolitical interests and ideological dimensions.

What is the genesis of the boundary dispute?

In Ladakh, India considered the border to be along the Johnson Line of 1865, which included Aksai Chin.
The Chinese initially agreed to the Macartney-MacDonald (M-M) line of 1899, which was west of the Johnson Line.

In 1960, the Chinese came out with a map laying claim to almost the whole of Aksai Chin.
The main reason why China went for war in 1962 was to capture the claimed territories in eastern Ladakh, as also to teach India a lesson.
By the time the Chinese declared a unilateral ceasefire, the PLA had almost secured the areas up to the 1960 claim line.
At the end of the war, the two sides withdrew 20 km from the positions last held by the opposing forces.

Subsequently, the LAC came to denote the line up to which the troops on the two sides actually exercised control.
However, the LAC was neither delineated on the map nor demarcated on the ground.
Hence, both India and China have different perceptions on the alignment of LAC.

How do both the sides assert claims?

Over a period of time, Patrolling Points (PPs) were identified on the ground, setting the limits up to which the two sides could patrol.
These PPs became reference points, although these are not bang on the LAC but at some distance on the home side.
Hence, it is through patrolling boundaries that the Indian and Chinese troops assert their territorial claims.
There were 23 areas which were contested by both sides.

What are the agreements signed?

Given the potential for clashes, five major agreements were signed between India and China to ensure peace on the border. They are,

‘Maintenance of Peace and Tranquillity along the LAC’ was signed in 1993, which formed the basis for the subsequent agreements.
Agreement on ‘Confidence Building Measures’ was signed in 1996 along the LAC, denouncing use of force or engaging in hostile activities.
In the 2005 Agreement, ‘standard operating procedures’ were laid down to obviate patrol clashes.
The Agreement of 2012 set out a process for consultation and cooperation.
The ‘Border Defence Cooperation Agreement’ was signed in 2013.
Its emphasis was on enhancing border cooperation and exercising maximum restraint in case of ‘face-to-face’ situations.

What is China’s aim?

In the Chinese strategic culture, the use of force is considered perfectly legitimate.
Given the scope and scale, the PLA aggression was well planned.
In the process, the Chinese violated all of the above agreements, and once again betrayed India’s trust.
Beijing’s strategic aim was to convey a strong message to New Delhi to submit to its interests.
It also aimed to send a message to desist India from building border infrastructure.
The PLA’s objectives in Ladakh would have been to pose a threat to Siachen and ensure the security of the Western Highway.
Given India’s strong resolve both at the political and military levels alongside favourable world opinion, the Chinese decided to de-escalate.
But it has achieved their initial aim and to obviate further upsurge.

What is the general process of de-escalation?

Every conflict has a cycle – it begins with escalation.
It is followed by contact, stalemate, de-escalation, resolution, peace-building and reconciliation.
The de-escalation process entails talks at multiple levels, and ground action in various stages.

On the ground, the first step in the de-escalation process is of disengagement.
This means breaking the ‘eyeball-to-eyeball’ contact between the opposing troops on the forward line by pulling back to create a buffer zone.
The next step is the pulling back of the troops in the immediate depth, followed by reserve formations in the rear

What is the de-escalation process in this case?

In this case, there have been three rounds of talks.
They happened at the Corps Commander level, simultaneous talks between Joint Secretaries, and at the level of Special Representatives.

Disengagement - This is currently in progress.
The forward troops on both sides are reported to have pulled back by about 1.5 km in most areas.
Pulling back - The PLA created many intermediate positions, besides staging forward 4 Motorised and 6 Mechanized Divisions.
Even fighter aircraft have been positioned at the forward air bases.
India too, has undertaken the requisite build-up.
Withdrawal of all these elements will require many more rounds of talks at various levels.
Each move of the opposite party will need to be confirmed and verified on the ground, and complemented by other surveillance means.
The PLA is in a better position to build up, given the terrain advantage and better infrastructure.
So, the distance of pulling back cannot be sacrosanct.

What is the conclusion?

India’s bottom line at the negotiation table is to restore the April 20 status quo ante.
Maj Gen Liu, who represents the PLA in the Corps Commander-level talks, can be expected to indulge in hard bargaining.
Therefore, the de-escalation process is set to be in for a long haul, marked by the ‘going back and forth’ phenomenon.

Source: The Indian Express