On February 10, after the Chinese Communist Party‘s Ministry of Defense announced the withdrawal of troops from the Sino-Indian border, the outside world also confirmed the beginning of the disengagement of frontline troops from both sides. It should be good news to reduce the risk of military conflict and maintain peace. But on Feb. 19, the Chinese Communist Party media suddenly launched a massive propaganda campaign against the Sino-Indian border conflict, putting the blame for the conflict squarely on India on the one hand, and trumpeting the victory and fanning so-called patriotism on the other.
The CCP did not win at the Sino-Indian border, and actually failed both strategically and tactically. It is more likely that the CCP intended to provoke conflict and divert attention, or even the CCP top brass wanted to establish prestige and further consolidate military power through a local war on the Sino-Indian border, but ultimately failed to achieve its goal and had to claim victory to cover up the substantive defeat. Now under the deterrence of the U.S. military and its allies, the CCP dares not confront both the East and West fronts at the same Time, and is forced to retreat from the Western front in order to fully cope with the military pressure in the South China Sea, East China Sea and Taiwan Sea. Once again, the CCP has revealed its trait of being strong on the outside, but it has not given up its ambition to expand, and countries still need to take it seriously.
The CCP’s Usual Spiritual Victory
On February 19, the Chinese Communist Party media turned on all cylinders to publicize the victory on the Sino-Indian border. Xinhua first forwarded “Video of the clash in the Garavan Valley shows our officers and soldiers fighting to the death against foreign troops,” and then quoted the CPC military newspaper article “Heroes stand in Karakorum – A closer look at the heroic officers and soldiers defending the border in the new era,” and then forwarded the CPC military newspaper commentary “Singing Heroic Songs to Strengthen the Army to Win.
These three articles portrayed the Sino-Indian border conflict as a unilateral aggression by India, and the CCP army defended the border by winning with less. At the same time, Xinhua further fired up the patriotic propaganda machine with a photo report, “On that border line, they prepare, train, live and struggle in this way”. Xinhua also published an article “Remembering the true heroes of the Northeast Resistance League”, followed by a report “Breaking new ground in the political work of the military in a new era”, and finally Xi Jinping signed and issued the Regulations on International Military Cooperation.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry also joined this wave of propaganda, with spokesperson Hua Chunying making a high-profile statement at a press conference at the Foreign Ministry on Feb. 19, and Xinhua quoting the usual report “Hua Chunying says motherland and people will not forget the martyrs at the border”. The Chinese Communist Party media is familiar with this kind of propaganda, as it has been in all foreign military conflicts. Political propaganda always wins, fabricates heroes, and ends, of course, with the greatness of the Communist Party leaders.
Another article from Xinhua News Agency made a good footnote, “Xi Jinping wrote back to the 100-year-old veterans of the Shanghai New Fourth Army Historical Research Association, emphasizing more about the Party’s story of glorious traditions and good practices to guide the majority of Party members do not forget the original intention to remember the mission firm faith and courageous struggle,” continuing the CCP’s false propaganda.
Did the CCP really win?
From May 2, 2020, friction began to emerge between Chinese and Indian troops on the border, with numerous mutual confrontations, physical clashes, and unsuccessful negotiations between the two sides. on June 15, the largest clash between the two sides erupted in the Garhwan Valley, and although no guns were used, there were serious deaths and injuries, with varying figures from all sides. the final, closer figure was probably at least 20 Indian soldiers and 45 Chinese soldiers killed in action, but the Chinese Communist Party never revealed the relevant information, and only now suddenly claimed victory.
After that, the two sides significantly increased their troops, the risk of large-scale conflict increased significantly, and despite several rounds of negotiations, no consensus was reached, and there were several more clashes and even incidents of gunfire. India was apparently more aggressive in trying to cool things down, asking Russia to step in and coordinate, and Russia clearly sided with India, stepping up its arms sales to India and also delivering S-400 missiles, which had already been delayed to the Chinese Communist Party, to India. India’s Epidemic is difficult to control and has essentially no incentive to provoke conflict.
On April 8, Xi said at a meeting of the Standing Committee of the Communist Party’s Political Bureau, “In the face of the severe and complex international epidemic and world economic indicators, we must adhere to bottom-line thinking and do a good job of longer period of time to cope with changes in the external environment and prepare for the work of the mind.”
In April, the U.S. aircraft carrier Roosevelt was evacuated from Guam after contracting the epidemic, and the Chinese Communist Party suddenly sent the Liaoning aircraft carrier across the first island chain, to which the U.S. military responded with B-1B bombers. In the midst of internal and external difficulties, the top brass of the Chinese Communist Party is desperate for a distraction, and has not only been sending warplanes to harass the Taiwan Strait, but also trying to provoke disputes on the Sino-Indian border, perhaps even trying to imitate the Sino-Indian war launched by Mao in 1962 during the infighting.
But against all expectations, India is not what it used to be, and the intensity of its war preparations has increased. The Chinese army did not have the upper hand in the cold war, and probably lost several mountain posts it had occupied. If the Communist army had made gains, it would have been heavily publicized, but the current narrative is that it is merely defending its territory, apparently not advancing on the actual line of control, but perhaps being forced to retreat instead. This is presumably one reason why the CCP has been so slow to withdraw its troops. The CCP forces may be eager to recoup past losses, but the Indians are also on high alert and the CCP forces have been unable to make progress.
Not only did the CCP fail to win tactically, but it lost big strategically. The CCP’s attempts to divert attention have indeed alerted countries, particularly the U.S.-India relationship, and have spurred an accelerated military alliance among the U.S., Japan, India, and Australia, giving rise to a “mini-NATO” in the Asia-Pacific region. The CCP appears to be fighting on two fronts, but in reality, it has fallen further under siege.
The consequences of the CCP’s major strategic blunders are still festering today.
Victory Propaganda Cannot Conceal Strategic Retreat
The high-profile propaganda by the CCP media was, of course, intended to conceal the CCP’s defeat on the Sino-Indian border and, more importantly, to conceal the forced strategic retreat of the CCP’s top brass.
As soon as the new U.S. administration took over, the Chinese Communist Party made major provocative moves in the Taiwan Strait to test the waters. The U.S. military has continued the strong deterrence of the Trump era, and the intensity of military oppression in the South China Sea has continued unabated, while the East China Sea has also been put on heightened alert, making the Chinese Communist Party unable to cope. The Chinese Communist Party is no longer able to cope with the war on two fronts at the same time, so it is forced to retreat from the Western Front and focus on confronting the U.S. military.
On February 17, the U.S. military announced the entry of destroyers into the Spratly Islands, but the Chinese Communist Party has not issued any statement. On the one hand, the Chinese Communist Party saw the U.S. military intrusion, but did not dare to fire; on the other hand, it is likely that because the Spratly Islands are far away, the Chinese navy and air force are too far away to make the so-called warning and repelling gestures, so they simply pretended not to know. When the Chinese Communist Party covers up its defeat or needs, it will claim to “defend its territorial integrity” in a high profile, but when it is really defeated, it will be silent, and the so-called patriotism and unification of the motherland are all pretexts of the Chinese Communist Party.
The Chinese Communist Party, of course, continued to put on a show, escalating tensions in Taiwan again on February 18 by sending nine aircraft to harass them, including four J-16s, four J-7s, and a transport-9 communication countermeasure aircraft.
The Chinese Communist Party retreated from the western front, but at the same time increased provocations on the eastern front to show that it refused to back down from the U.S. forces. However, the CCP’s dispatch of a third-generation fighter like the J-Bomb-7 also reveals the strength gap. Whether dealing with Taiwan’s fighters or anti-aircraft missiles, the J-Bomb-7 is very weak, much less able to face U.S. forces. If the J-Bomber-7 does not have a secondary fuel tank, its operational range is only 900 km, and if it adds a secondary fuel tank, its weapons will be forced to be reduced. It cannot be ruled out that the Chinese Communist Party cannot afford the frequent attrition of fourth-generation fighters and can only send third-generation fighters to make up the numbers. Compared to U.S. warplanes, CCP warplanes have a short Life and maintenance cycle and limited numbers. In order to extend the service life of the fourth-generation warplanes, the number of pilot training hours is limited, and every sortie in the Taiwan Strait may be counted as part of the training.
According to the usual thinking of the Chinese Communist Party, even if they put soft, they still have to be tough on the surface. However, just as the G7 leaders are meeting, the U.S., Japan, India and Australia are having a quadrilateral security dialogue, and the U.S. and NATO are stepping up consultations, the seemingly tough signal from the CCP is by no means a wise move, and it is feared that it will once again trigger a new round of confrontation and deterrence by the U.S. military. The Chinese Communist Party was forced to retreat from the Western Front, so it has the strength to expand in the Eastern Front? Don’t forget, the Chinese Communist Party has planted another bomb in Burma, and it is only a matter of time before it becomes a botch.
Recent Comments