Letters

Letters to the Editor — June 11, 2020

LAC stand-off

Given that the eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation between Indian Army soldiers and the People’s Liberation Army at the de facto China-Indian border has been across multiple points, and all at one go, it is good to note that efforts have been initiated to begin “partial disengagement” (Page 1, “India, China agree to ease stand-off”, June 10. Evidently, the senior military-level talks did not go in vain.

It is abundantly clear that on the pretext of differing perceptions of the undemarcated border, Beijing has been gauging India’s preparedness adopting a method of “incursions”. China’s immense infrastructure development along the LAC, deploying a large number of troops, and having a heavy build-up of tents, vehicles and fire power are actions that have all been very provocative for India, which has not been able to wholly exorcise the ghost of China’s 1962 betrayal and aggression. After all, it has to safeguard its territorial integrity by adopting reciprocal measures to counter any eventuality from its large and more powerful neighbour.

To avoid similar “episodic” skirmishes along the LAC, tactical level hotlines at contentious border meeting points have to be maintained, and, as proposed, formal meetings held at regular intervals for better interaction between the two armies.

Nalini Vijayaraghavan,

Thiruvananthapuram

There appears to be a lot more to the India-China stand-off than meets the eye. Though troops are moving towards partial disengagement in eastern Ladakh, there is no change in the situation at the focal point at Finger-4 where the impasse continues. The situation is no better at Naku La in Sikkim. Shifting troops to peacetime locations and achieving status quo ante, will be no walk in the park.

N.J. Ravi Chander,

Bengaluru

 

Rewind to the past

The “social media spat” between Congress leader Rahul Gandhi and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh after Mr. Gandhi had taken a dig at Home Minister Amit Shah for his comment that India is strong in protecting its borders brings to my mind the anecdote of the 1960s about Jawaharlal Nehru. “Panditji was speaking in Parliament about the Chinese invasion and while referring to Aksai Chin, is reported to have said: ‘Not a blade of grass grows there.’ MP Mahavir Tyagi got up from his seat and pointing to his bald head, retorted, ‘Panditji, not a blade of grass grows here too, but does that mean that my head should be chopped off?’”

A. Balagangadharan,

Pollachi, Tamil Nadu

 

Death of an elephant

It is shameful that in this age of advanced technology, “innovation” and billion-dollar budgets, wild animals straying into “human habitats” are still being repelled using barbaric and lethal methods such as “food-bombs”. This does not reflect well on a country that is renowned for worshipping animals. There is no dearth of successful non-violent deterrents such as engaging locals (apart from forest officials) as trackers, using SMS alert systems, beehive fences for elephants, using thorny bushes, kerosene-soaked ropes and rearing dogs specifically to deter other wild animals such as boars. Gandhiji had rightly remarked, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated” (OpEd page, “Addressing the elephant in the room”, June 8).

C.V. Krishna Manoj,

Hyderabad

Related Topics
Recommended for you
This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor

Printable version | Jul 11, 2020 2:44:30 PM | https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/letters/letters-to-the-editor-june-11-2020/article31798604.ece

Next Story