Indian Air Force Remains Deployed at Disputed Border Despite Planned Disengagement With China

NEW DELHI—The Indian Air Force (IAF) has decided to maintain its deployment on the disputed border with China, despite the much-talked-about military disengagement between the two countries at certain friction points in Ladakh.
Experts say this indicates that disengagement between the two countries is challenging.
According to multiple Indian media reports, the IAF’s deployment will remain as such, underscoring India’s commitment to safeguarding its borders and ensuring operational readiness in the region.
Pathikrit Payne, a senior research fellow at the New Delhi-based Syama Prasad Mookerjee Research Foundation, told The Epoch Times that disengagement doesn’t mean the return to tranquility on the India–China border.
“Disengagement doesn’t mean de-escalation or demobilization,” Payne said, adding that the deployment of troops and build-up of military infrastructure will remain unchanged.
The disengagement agreement, announced on Oct. 21, came ahead of the extremely harsh winter season in the high-altitude border region.
Two days after the disengagement was announced, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese regime leader Xi Jinping met formally for the first time since the deadly 2020 Galwan conflict—in which at least 20 Indian soldiers and four Chinese soldiers were killed—during the 16th annual BRICS summit in Kazan on Oct. 23.
During their meeting, Modi and Xi announced that their special representatives would meet to find solutions and “explore a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable solution to the boundary question,” according to a statement by the Indian external affairs ministry.
Namrata Hasija, a research fellow at the New Delhi-based Center for China Analysis and Strategy, said that disengagement between the two countries isn’t easy despite all the hype.
“There’s zero trust between India and China; [the] hype around disengagement is just Chinese optics. They want our market,” Hasija said while emphasizing that the Chinese narrative behind disengagement aims to maintain Beijing’s interest in India’s lucrative market.
According to Payne, disengagement has allowed soldiers from both sides to temporarily step back from confrontational positions while remaining ready for battle if needed.
“Soldiers are not returning to barracks. Both sides continue to sharpen their knives,” he said, adding that disengagement is a diplomatic victory from India’s perspective.
The 2020 bloody Galwan conflict happened because Chinese soldiers had entered Indian territory, where they were confronted by Indian forces, leading to an escalation. Since then, China’s People’s Liberation Army troops have remained in their new positions, which India asserts is part of its territory.
The Indo–Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), a border force under India’s Ministry of Home Affairs, has deployed four new battalions while also establishing more than two dozen outposts along the Arunachal Pradesh border, according to Indian daily newspaper Hindustan Times. They will be joined by three additional battalions—two currently in training and one being recruited.
Hasija said the additional troop deployment in Arunachal Pradesh proves beyond a doubt that disengagement between India and China is difficult.
“The Indian Army chief, [Gen. Upendra Dwivedi], also said it’ll take a long time to rebuild the trust,” she said.
A day after the disengagement agreement, Dwivedi pointed out trust issues with the Chinese regime, stating that both New Delhi and Beijing would need to reassure and convince each other for the subsequent phases of disengagement.
The expansion of Indian troops in the eastern sector is the largest in 11 years. “Seven new battalions,” Payne said, noting that a significant modernization initiative is supporting the additional personnel.
However, the increase in troop numbers does not necessarily indicate rising tensions along the India–China border, according to Payne. Instead, he said, it shows that India is determined to be fully prepared for any situation.
“We are at a state of no war, no peace,” he said.