China Adds Troops To India Border, Will Defend Sovereignty At "Whatever Cost"

Tyler Durden's picture

With attention focused on geopolitical tensions involving North Korea, the world may have missed that another, potentially more troubling conflict is brewing on the border between India and China, where as we reported over the weekend, China threatened with military action after a "blatant sovereignty infringement." Since then tensions have grown, and on Monday China warned on Monday that it will step up its troop deployment in a border dispute with India, vowing to defend its sovereignty at "whatever cost".

The latest standoff started more than a month ago after Chinese troops started building a road on a remote plateau, which is disputed by China and Bhutan.  Indian troops countered by moving to the flashpoint zone to halt the work, with China accusing them of violating its territorial sovereignty and calling for their immediate withdrawal.

"The crossing of the mutually recognised national borders on the part of India... is a serious violation of China's territory and runs against the international law," Chinese defence ministry spokesman Wu Qian told a press conference quoted by AFP, adding that "the determination and the willingness and the resolve of China to defend its sovereignty is indomitable, and it will safeguard its sovereignty and security interests at whatever cost."

He also said that "border troops have taken emergency response measures in the area and will further step up deployment and trainings in response to the situation," without giving any details about the deployment.

Meanwhile, showing no signs that either nation is willing to relent, India and China both said they have foreign support for their positions on the conflict. As AFP adds, India-ally Bhutan has said construction of the road is "a direct violation" of agreements with China. Bhutan and China do not have diplomatic relations.

India, which fought a war with China in 1962 over a separate part of the disputed Himalayan border, supports Bhutan's claim, although India should "not have any illusions" that its position will prevail, Wu said.


"The history of the PLA (People's Liberation Army) over the past 90 years has proven that our resolve to safeguard (China's) sovereignty and territory... are indomitable," he said.  "It is difficult to shake the PLA, even more difficult than to shake a mountain."

India and China have vied for strategic influence in South Asia, a key component of China's "One Belt One Road" initiative, with Beijing ploughing large sums into infrastructure projects in Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. Bhutan has remained closely allied to India.

* * *

Finally, courtesy of Bloomberg here is a primer on the ongoing conflict between the world's 2 most populous nations:

China and India, two nuclear-armed powers with a combined population of 2.7 billion, have been in an “eyeball-to-eyeball” military stand-off over territory in Bhutan, a kingdom in a remote area of the Himalayas, since mid-June. The flare-up, one of the most serious since China won a border war in 1962, comes as the two rising powers jostle for regional influence. The current dispute is near a three-way junction between Bhutan, China’s Tibet and India’s Sikkim.

1. Why is the area important?

All land-based military and commercial traffic between India’s northeastern provinces and the rest of the country travels through the narrow strip of land known as the Siliguri Corridor -- also sometimes referred to as the Chicken’s neck. The Doklam Plateau -- where troops are currently facing off -- overlooks the corridor, which India defense strategists fear could be vulnerable to Chinese attack in case of a conflict.

2. How far back does this dispute go?

An 1890 convention between Britain and China is supposed to determine the location of the border near the Siliguri Corridor. However it contains a contradiction that allows each country to claim support for its position, said Taylor Fravel, who studies border disputes at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. India contends the border is at Batang La, while China argues it is at Mount Gimpochi, three miles to the south. If China is correct, it would gain access to the Doklam Plateau.

3. What’s the status of ties between the three countries?

Bhutan has had close relations with India since 1949 when it agreed to a Friendship Treaty under which India would “guide” Bhutan’s foreign policy. This was updated in 2007 to remove the guidance provision. Both agreed that neither government would allow its territory to be used for activities harmful to the national security of the other. Bhutan doesn’t have diplomatic ties with China, though the two sides routinely holds talks aimed at resolving seven disputed border areas.

4. What is behind the latest flare-up?

All three sides agree that a People’s Liberation Army road-building team entered the Doklam Plateau and started construction. India said that its troops entered Bhutan’s territory “in coordination” with Bhutanese authorities to stop the Chinese road builders. There are now about 3,000 troops on each side on the plateau, according to the Times of India. It is the first time that Indian troops have confronted China from a third country.

5. Is it all about a road?

Bhutan’s foreign ministry says the road is being constructed on territory subject to a border dispute, and that the two sides in 1988 and 1998 agreed to refrain from changing the status quo of the boundary. China contends that it is operating in its own territory and cites the 1890 convention. The removal of Indian troops from the area is a prerequisite for “meaningful dialogue” to resolve the issue, China’s foreign ministry says. India cites a 2012 agreement that indicates the boundary points are yet to be finalized and says China’s actions could have serious implications for India’s security.

6. Is this stand-off more sensitive than others?

All this is taking place during a period of tense relations between two rivals competing for influence in the broader South Asia region. Bilateral relations were frosty even before the current border dispute began because New Delhi objects to President Xi Jinping’s “Belt and Road” trade-and-infrastructure initiative. Part of it traverses the Pakistan-administered part of disputed Kashmir, which India claims as its sovereign territory. China’s Global Times, raising Kashmir, said “under India’s logic, if the Pakistani government requests, a third country’s army can enter the area disputed by India and Pakistan.”

7. Will it lead to war as we saw in 1962?

Most observers think not. Conflict wouldn’t serve either country’s interest. India, with an election in 2019, would risk losing an economically debilitating conflict with a much more powerful foe. China would risk its efforts to present itself as an international leader, filling the shoes of an isolationist U.S.

8. Without war, what other solution is possible?

With nationalists in both countries stoking tensions, neither side can afford to be seen standing down. Most analysts predict a protracted stand-off before the two countries figure out a diplomatic solution. But it won’t be easy. Neither side wants to be the first to withdraw troops.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Déjà view's picture

China as U.S. becoming persona non grata...

Creepy_Azz_Crackaah's picture

India is planning on invading China?...

Haus-Targaryen's picture

No, its a pissing contest over nothing.  Nothing will come of it. 

Looney's picture


This “territorial dispute” is as ridiculous as all territorial disputes between Mexico and Canada.  ;-)


abyssinian's picture

fighting over untapped natural resources in that area...

OverTheHedge's picture

Or pressure from US via India? India isn't necessarily a lapdog, but I'm sure can be bought for the relevant freshly minted dollars. Do we have any reports of cargo aircraft making surreptitious deliveries? Being paranoid, my uninformed opinion is to lean toward China being in the right, just because of the history of western pressure tactics. I haven't seen a map, and have no idea what the realities are here - just pontificating, because it's fun.

Yog Soggoth's picture

My guess is that you don't know much. Ever heard of Tibet? There was some border dispute there.

Jim Sampson's picture

Looks like China is trying to take all the smaller countries around it...   Now where have I heard of this before?

Creepy_Azz_Crackaah's picture

It seems like China is pushing a lot of limits with its man-made military islands, etc.

Haus-Targaryen's picture

Who gives a shit?  Let the Philippines and Japan take care of it if its such a issue.  The Japs did fine last time, don't see why we need to do it for them. 

Creepy_Azz_Crackaah's picture

I give a shit. But that doesn't mean that I think that the U.S. should be interfering with China/India disputes. We have to get our cheap chrome plated plastic stuff from somewhere. Don't want to mess that up...

Déjà view's picture

Add Vietnam...

South China Sea: Vietnam halts drilling after 'China threats'

Buck Johnson's picture

China needs land for food and excess population.  They don't dare go via Russia (already had a war with them over 50 years ago on that border).  They really don't want India (they are in just as bad a shape as china and more of a population).  I think China is going to invade Australia and take it for themselves in the near future.

Yog Soggoth's picture

India could solve some of China's population problem. They have nukes.

Pernicious Gold Phallusy's picture

They would have to deal with the mooselims in Australia.

datbedank's picture

They said the same thing about Poland's land bridge through East Prussia to the Baltic Sea back in the 1930s which is why the Germans plowed through the poles at the start of the 2nd world war. 

Don't underestimate a small piece of land's value. 

Laughing.Man's picture

Technically they already have (according to MSM) as Indian troops are in Chinese territory.  IMO, it's a nother burger.

froze25's picture

India doesn't have the ability to beat China yet, they need time to catch up. China is in decline, their one child policy is starting to catch up to them and effect their growth rate and this will hurt them soon enough. India needs to bide its time and allow their baby boom generation that is currently in their early 20's to start forming families and move up the totem poll. The next 20 years belong to India as the Growth power house of Asia.

YourAverageJoe's picture

Ive never met an ambitious Indian.

YourAverageJoe's picture

Ok, you produced an exception.

To be fair though, I never met her. Not that I wouldn't like to though....

RealAttilashrugs's picture

The Indian-Americans I have met are all here to get rich.  And they are indeed ambitious in education and business.  

RedBaron616's picture

The problem is that their economy AND government are corrupt. Everyone wants a bribe. India would be much further along if the British were still ruling it. Not advocating that, just saying that the Indians don't seem how to advance in overall terms. Way too many people are still either ignorant or literally dirt poor.   

Ofelas's picture

try silicon valley they are all that place

poland spring's picture

As a neighbor:



DaBears's picture

Bought a pair of "Made in India" Stan Smith Adidas for $30 this weekend, way better deal than the "Made in China" ones for $50. China is being screwed side ways as the monopoly of cheap crap shifts to places like india.

JamesBond's picture

China has reached a level of military power that it won't take losing face internationally ever again.



OCnStiggs's picture

Until Trump rubs a loss in their face due to inaction in NK.

These Chinese are blowhards.

JamesBond's picture

Whoa Tiger.  Two chinese may sound like twelve, but...

A Chinese fighter just shadowed a US military plane in international waters coming within meters and we did nothing.  The rules of engagement were changed under Obama.  

China will let Trump take the lead in any NK action.  Better all the NK missles head south instead of north due to an action by China.  China is ready to seize land and military assets in NK once the shooting with SK and the US begins.



Creepy_Azz_Crackaah's picture

No matter what, if NK shoots missiles north they'll be flattened by China. Then flattened again. NK won't do it.

TheObsoleteMan's picture

Bullshit. Folly comes before the fall. Their entire economy is built on exports to countries that are rapidly approaching saturation. When the wheels finally come off {and they will}, they will need that military to protect themselves from their own people.

JamesBond's picture

They operate under communism, not a free market economy. You're applying US rules of economics to a system that this doesn't pertain to...


TheObsoleteMan's picture

They are communist internally, but are quasi-capitalist externally. That is the devil's deal they made when they agreed to join the WTO. No one forced them too. Now they are no longer a closed loop system, they are inter-dependent { globalist love that word} just like the rest of us are, maybe a little more so. This is part of the framework for the global government they are creating. In the not too distant future, national leaders will be no more than state governors. The real power will reside with the illuminated few.

DaBears's picture

Apply Mercantilism dictated by a central government. China's weakness is when people stop buying their shit and NEAR ZERO demand for their Mao-nopoly money, hence extreme internal capital control. Them building hundreds of ghost cities aren't going to save them from their shit show.

DaBears's picture

That's what Saddam said right before desert storm.

boink.voink's picture

Just more scare-mongering by the mongoloids 

surf@jm's picture

China seems to have not learned a lesson from Imperial Japan........

Eventually, the rest of the world will band to stop them.......

Haus-Targaryen's picture

Would you volunteer yourself or send your kids to protect the Japs from the Chinese?  

I most certainly wouldn't go. 

I am Jobe's picture

American kids are too fat and won't stand a chance. Might want to give it  a go?  See how patriatic they are in the region. 

malcolmevans's picture

They may not be ready for Asian invasion, but they could damn sure unfriend them. 

Lost in translation's picture

That's dangerous talk. Wars have been fought over less.

JamesBond's picture

The US would have to back out of NATO to 'not' come to their aid militarily.


Haus-Targaryen's picture

I have no doubt ther .gov and MIC would love to send a few million kids overthere to die and would likely try to -- the question is would anyone show up?  

"Here, show up to this draft station to report for duty.  We invade Manchuria next year!" 

I imagine the white male populations of Argentia, Austria, Ireland, Sweden and Finland and Switzerland explode in all directions if someone tries this. 

historian40's picture

Pacific Japan is in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization?

JamesBond's picture

Never said they were. Read between the lines. If the US didn't meet treaty obligations with Japan militarily, there would be no need or stomach for NATO to continue.