Line of Actual Control: India-China Territorial Imperative

Layout by: Elle Bixby

Whenever we discuss India and  China’s border dispute, there is an air of mystery and ambivalence surrounding the narrative. There is a remarkable lack of concrete statistics and official statements. Perhaps owing to the baggage of the 1962 Indo-Chinese war & humiliation on India due to its monumental defeat, or because of an inability to accurately ascertain and resolve the current conflict by government bodies.

Whatever the reason may be, the border dispute with China— especially in Aksai Chin, Ladakh— is undeniably one of the most pressing security concerns for the Indian nation state in the present scenario, as border tensions continue to snowball.

Before we begin tracing the nuances of this historical dispute, it is important to make a distinction between India’s border with Pakistan called LOC (Line of Control), and India’s border with China called LAC (Line of Actual Control). The LOC is clearly demarcated, while the LAC is not. India & China have conflicting claims over where the LAC actually lies, thereby creating an overlapping zone of conflict, called Area of Differing Perceptions over which both countries stake their claim. This area, along the Pangong Lake in Ladakh, was a small strip of land, uninhabited, and became the zone of occasional clashes between Indian & Chinese patrolling troops over the years. 

Explaining the differing perceptions (Source: News Laundry)

Pangong Lake: The Area of Differing Perceptions (Source: Google Maps)

The Aksai Chin Region (Source: Google Maps)

However, the current conflict, which reportedly began on 5th May 2020, is much larger than these occasional clashes. The locus of these clashes is the 130 kilometer long Pangong Lake running through Ladakh and Tibet, which is divided by the LAC and is a major Area of Differing Perceptions, which leads to overlapping claims. According to news reports, Chinese troops entered Indian-claimed territory along the Lake in early May 2020. However, these intrusions are believed to be more than an “occasional mistake” by experts,  as they were not isolated incidents. Similar occurrences thus took place in two other areas- the Galwan Valley and Kongka Pass Hot Springs. 

According to Indian Army Retd. Colonel Ajai Shukla, territory along the Lake that was earlier unoccupied has been annexed by China, and sizable troops are reported to be carrying weapons and building trenches. Lt. General Panag also paints a similar picture to describe recent developments. The Hot Springs breach is evaluated by experts as an attempt to divert attention from the other two zones. 

However, India’s predicament does not end here. The situation in Galwan Valley was construed as the most volatile of the lot, due to its unmatched geo-strategic significance to both nations, and can therefore prove to be the most detrimental to India’s national security concerns. What is especially important to note is the absence of any “differing perceptions” in this region as discussed above, i.e, there exists a clearly demarcated border, and yet there are reports of intrusions, which raise serious concerns for sovereignty and territoriality not just for India but even for China’s other neighbors. 

These reports were met with strong nationalist sentiments and an urgent demand for official military action by the Indian masses. However, the response by the government— hitherto seen as synonymous with nationalism and “an eye for an eye” kind of ideology with respect to Pakistan— was rather interesting and somewhat peculiar. The contradictory stances taken by ministers and officials are both fascinating and appalling. They have continually denied the occurrence of any skirmish on “disputed land”. 

Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh on one occasion accepted reports of incursions, however went on to deem it “fake news” later. Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar told a senior Chinese diplomat that the dispute was triggered after “the Chinese side sought to erect a structure in Galwan Valley on our side of the LAC”, according to a ministry statement. Prime Minister Modi, on the other hand, went on to outright deny any such developments along the border. “Nobody has intruded into our border, neither is anybody there now, nor have our posts been captured,” he said in a televised speech. A prominent newspaper “The Hindu” described the position of the government as an “awful silence” on the topic.

This was feasibly done in a bid to elude accountability, or to maintain internal peace and avoid mass panic or mobilization, or possibly to evade public embarrassment due to the lack of a comprehensive defense strategy (akin to 1962). However, in the world’s largest democracy, how democratic is it to actively deny information to the public (even if it is in their better interest to do so)? 

The next domain of skepticism arises from the question: “Why is China doing this?” There is no clear answer. The most informed guess would be that it is conceivably a diversion to pique nationalist sentiments within the nation against the backdrop of a failing economy and widespread international criticism due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Or it could perhaps be a desperate effort to exhibit its relentless dominance in a world that is becoming increasingly anti-China. 

In the months following these events, China went on to attack the eastern border it shares with India in Arunachal Pradesh as well, and the government’s response was similarly ambivalent and obscure. The matter remains relatively volatile, although in waves of urgency, despite talks between representatives from both nations. When & how this dispute would possibly end, is something neither us nor the government seems equipped to predict at the moment.