The Evening Wrap: No fatalities on Indian side in Yangtse faceoff, says Rajnath

Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops tried to transgress the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Yangtse area of Tawang sector of Arunachal Pradesh and “unilaterally” change the status quo, which was contested by Indian troops in a “firm and resolute” manner and compelled them to return, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh has informed the Parliament while stating that there were “no fatalities or serious casualties” on the Indian side. Making a statement on the incident of December 9, Singh said, “The ensuing face off led to a physical scuffle in which the Indian Army bravely prevented the PLA from transgressing into our territory and compelled them to return to their posts. The scuffle led to injuries to few personnel on both sides.” He added: “I wish to share with the House that there are no fatalities or serious casualties on our side.” The Defence Minister further said that due to timely intervention of Indian military commanders, “PLA soldiers went back to their positions”. As a follow-up to the incident, the local commander in the area held a flag meeting with his counterpart on December 11 to discuss the issues in accordance with established mechanisms, he said in the statement first made in the Lok Sabha and then in the Rajya Sabha. “The Chinese side was asked to refrain from such actions and maintain peace and tranquillity along the border. The issue was also taken up with the Chinese side through diplomatic channels,” Singh added. Earlier in the day, Singh chaired a high-level meeting, during which he was briefed by the Services on the incident as well as the overall situation along the LAC, according to defence sources. In a short statement on the faceoff on Monday evening, the Army while noting that there are areas of differing perception in the area said that both sides immediately disengaged from the area after the scuffle. Yangtse has been an area of friction and seen faceoffs in the past including a major one around this time last year. As reported by The Hindu, the clash occurred as a very large PLA patrol of around 600 soldiers tried to transgress the LAC in the area and some injured soldiers are currently being treated at a hospital in Guwahati. While the number of injured on the Chinese side wasn’t available, several defence sources said they were higher than that on the Indian side. The Indian Air Force is closely monitoring the situation along the LAC in Arunachal Pradesh, people familiar with the development said according to PTI. As India pushes China back on LAC, PLA’s growing transgressions risk ‘strategic miscalculation’ The December 9 clash along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Arunachal Pradesh following an attempted transgression by more than 600 People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops that was pushed back by the Indian Army, has underlined the growing risks of “strategic miscalculation” along the border, a former senior Indian official has said, with China’s increasingly aggressive posture wrongly discounting India’s willingness to respond. The PLA on Tuesday defended its actions in the Yangtse area of Tawang sector in Arunachal Pradesh, with Senior Colonel Long Shaohua, spokesperson for the Western Theater Command, in a statement saying “a regular patrol in the Dongzhang area” on “the Chinese side of the LAC” was “blocked by the Indian Army illegally crossing” the line. We ask the Indian side to strictly control and restrain front-line forces and work with the Chinese side to maintain peace and tranquility on the border,” he said. In a separate comment, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin at a daily briefing said the “current border situation between China and India is generally stable” and “both sides have maintained unimpeded communication on border-related issues through diplomatic and military channels”. The PLA’s recent LAC transgressions – including at multiple areas starting in April 2020 in the Western Sector in Ladakh – reflected an aggressive posture, seen since 2013, as well as raised the question “whether there is a potential for strategic miscalculation by China after the military standoff in Ladakh”, former Foreign Secretary and Ambassador to China Vijay Gokhale wrote in a new paper published on Tuesday by Carnegie India on China’s India policy. The PLA attempted to unilaterally change the status quo in the Western Sector, and the latest move has suggested a similar attempt in the East. “Two Chinese assumptions —that India will not intentionally escalate militarily in response to low-level coercion and that India will not form alliances against the coercer — should be weighed against the changes in Indian strategic thinking since 2020,” he said. “First, the ambiguity that prevailed in India’s decision-making and strategic circles as to whether China is a partner or a rival has been replaced by strategic clarity. China’s behaviour is now perceived as adversarial and few are willing to give it the benefit of the doubt….Second, the idea of strategic restraint has been redefined. This has involved a change in risk-taking appetite among the political class, as a result of which the Snow Leopard counter-operation at Rezang La/Rechin La was carried out in August 2022,” he said, referring to India’s countermoves in the south of Pangong Lake which pushed China to subsequently disengage on the north bank. “This was an intentional escalation by India that was not anticipated by China,” he noted. “Thus the Chinese assumption that there will be no immediate backlash to low-level coercion on the LAC because India is risk-averse may no longer be valid.” Bilkis Bano plea | Supreme Court judge Justice Bela M Trivedi recuses from hearing against early release of convicts Supreme Court judge, Justice Bela M. Trivedi, has recused herself from hearing a writ petition filed by Bilkis Bano against a Gujarat government decision to prematurely release 11 men sentenced to life imprisonment for gang-raping her during the 2002 riots. Justice Ajay Rastogi, who led the Bench, said the writ petition would be returned to the Chief Justice of India to be listed before another Bench of the apex court. Justice Trivedi hails from Gujarat. She started her judicial career in the district judiciary in 1995. Justice Trivedi had worked in different posts like Registrar-Vigilance in the High Court, Law Secretary in the Gujarat government, CBI court judge, Special Judge, etc. She was elevated as a Gujarat High Court judge in February 2011. A review petition of Bano was also listed on Tuesday for a decision via circulation by a Bench led by Justice Ajay Rastogi. Bano has sought a review of a Supreme Court judgment of May 2022. The judgment had paved the way for the Gujarat government to consider and release 11 convicts serving life sentence in her case under the State’s Premature Release Policy of 1992. In her writ petition, Bano, through advocate Shobha Gupta, has argued that the early release of the convicts amounted to a violation of her fundamental right to life. She has said the remission policy of the State of Maharashtra, where the trial happened, and not Gujarat would have governed the case. Others like CPI (M) leader Subhashini Ali and others like TMC leader Mahia Moitra have also challenged the early release of the convicts. Their petitions were last heard by Justice Rastogi’s Bench on October 18. The court had then given petitioners time to respond to a Gujarat government affidavit which showed that the Special Judge and the CBI in Mumbai had opposed the premature release of the 11 convicts. The affidavit by the State of Gujarat had revealed that while the Superintendent of Police, CBI, Special Crime Branch, Mumbai and the Special Judge (CBI) of Greater Bombay opposed the premature release, all the authorities in Gujarat and the Home Ministry recommended their release. Union Home Ministry evades direct reply on Ladakh’s inclusion under Sixth Schedule of Constitution Evading a direct reply on the possible inclusion of Ladakh under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution, the Union Home Ministry has informed a Parliamentary panel that the main objective of the inclusion of tribal populations under the said schedule is to ensure their overall socio-economic development, which the Union Territory’s administration “has already been taking care of since its creation”. On August 5, 2019, the former State of Jammu & Kashmir was bifurcated into two Union Territories — Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh, the latter without a Legislative Assembly. After its special status was removed, several political groups in Ladakh have been demanding that land, employment, and the cultural identity of Ladakh should be protected under the Sixth Schedule. The Schedule protects tribal populations, providing autonomy to communities through the creation of Autonomous Development Councils, which can frame laws on land, public health and agriculture. As of now, ten autonomous councils exist in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. In 2021, Ladakh’s only member in the Lok Sabha, the BJP’s Jamyang Tsering Namgyal, demanded constitutional safeguards by amending the Ladakh Autonomous Hill District Council (LAHDC) Act for the protection of land, employment, and the cultural identity of Ladakh under the Sixth Schedule. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs tabled a report in the Rajya Sabha which said that, according to the 2011 Census, the tribal population in the Union Territory of Ladakh is 2,18,355, that is 79.61% of the total population of 2,74,289. The committee recommended that special status may be granted to the Union Territory of Ladakh considering the developmental requirements of the tribal population. The report said: “The Committee further recommends that the possibility of including Ladakh in fifth or sixth Schedule may be examined.” Responding to this, the Ministry stated that “the main objective for inclusion of tribal population under fifth/sixth schedule is to ensure their overall socio-economic development, which, the UT Administration has already been taking care of since its creation. Sufficient funds are being provided to Ladakh to meet its overall developmental requirements”. It added that the Ladakh administration had recently increased the reservation for Scheduled Tribes in direct recruitment from 10% to 45%, which would help the tribal population significantly in its development. The apex body for Leh, a group comprising all political parties in Ladakh, the influential Buddhist association, and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA), have been demanding Statehood for Ladakh and protection under the Sixth Schedule. Sajjad Kargili of the KDA said they would intensify their protest in the coming days to demand the special status. Kerala Assembly passes bills to remove Governor as Chancellor of universities The Kerala Assembly passed two University Law (Amendment) Bills to replace the Governor as the Chancellor of universities in the State on December 13, 2022. The United Democratic Front (UDF) staged a walkout in protest against the refusal to accept all of its proposed amendments to the Bill and the alleged efforts being made to turn universities into Marxist centres. The legislation will enable the government to appoint academicians or “persons of eminence” in various fields of knowledge including agriculture and veterinary science, technology, medicine, social science, humanities, literature, art, culture, law or public administration. The Opposition sprung a surprise during the discussion as it moved a motion to appoint one Chancellor for 14 universities instead of separate Chancellors for each. They also proposed appointing a retired Supreme Court judge or a retired Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court to the post and creating a selection committee comprising the Chief Minister, Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court and the Leader of Opposition for the purpose. Law Minister P. Rajeeve, who had piloted the bills on behalf of the Chief Minister, highlighted potential legal hurdles in including the Chief Justice in the panel. He, instead, proposed the inclusion of the Speaker in the panel that would be chaired by the Chief Minister and also have the Leader of the Opposition as a member. The amendment too was passed by the Assembly. Rajeeve, however, refused to entertain the other proposals that were made by the Opposition. This prompted the Leader of Opposition V.D. Satheesan to accuse the State government of paving the ground to bring people they favoured to the helm of the universities and erode their autonomy. In Brief: A Constitution Bench on Tuesday listed for January 10, 2023 a series of long-pending petitions challenging Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 which allows citizenship to illegal immigrants, mostly from neighbouring Bangladesh, who entered Assam before March 1971. These petitions had been lying dormant while the court had gone ahead and monitored the publication of the final Assam NRC list in August 2019 and the government had enacted the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. Section 6A was a special provision inserted into the 1955 Act in furtherance of a Memorandum of Settlement called the ‘Assam Accord’ signed on August 15, 1985 by the then Rajiv Gandhi government with the leaders of the Assam Movement. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. [logo] The Evening Wrap 13 DECEMBER 2022 [The Hindu logo] Welcome to the Evening Wrap newsletter, your guide to the day’s biggest stories with concise analysis from The Hindu. [[Arrow]Open in browser]( [[Mail icon]More newsletters]( Dear reader, We have now made it easier for you to manage your The Hindu newsletter subscriptions in one place! 1. Visit [The Hindu newsletters page]( 2. Click MANAGE tab and then click LOGIN / SIGN UP 3. If you don’t have an account with The Hindu, please click SIGN UP OR If you already have an account with The Hindu with this email ID, please login using the email ID Yangtse faceoff | No fatalities or serious casualties on Indian side, Rajnath tells Parliament Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops tried to transgress the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Yangtse area of Tawang sector of Arunachal Pradesh and “unilaterally” change the status quo, which was contested by Indian troops in a “firm and resolute” manner and compelled them to return, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh has informed the Parliament while stating that [there were “no fatalities or serious casualties” on the Indian side](. Making a statement on the incident of December 9, Singh said, “The ensuing face off led to a physical scuffle in which the Indian Army bravely prevented the PLA from transgressing into our territory and compelled them to return to their posts. The scuffle led to injuries to few personnel on both sides.” He added: “I wish to share with the House that there are no fatalities or serious casualties on our side.” The Defence Minister further said that due to timely intervention of Indian military commanders, “PLA soldiers went back to their positions”. As a follow-up to the incident, the local commander in the area held a flag meeting with his counterpart on December 11 to discuss the issues in accordance with established mechanisms, he said in the statement first made in the Lok Sabha and then in the Rajya Sabha. “The Chinese side was asked to refrain from such actions and maintain peace and tranquillity along the border. The issue was also taken up with the Chinese side through diplomatic channels,” Singh added. Earlier in the day, Singh chaired a high-level meeting, during which he was briefed by the Services on the incident as well as the overall situation along the LAC, according to defence sources. In a short statement on the faceoff on Monday evening, the Army while noting that there are areas of differing perception in the area said that both sides immediately disengaged from the area after the scuffle. Yangtse has been an area of friction and seen faceoffs in the past including a major one around this time last year. As reported by The Hindu, the clash occurred as a very large PLA patrol of around 600 soldiers tried to transgress the LAC in the area and some injured soldiers are currently being treated at a hospital in Guwahati. While the number of injured on the Chinese side wasn’t available, several defence sources said they were higher than that on the Indian side. The Indian Air Force is closely monitoring the situation along the LAC in Arunachal Pradesh, people familiar with the development said according to PTI. As India pushes China back on LAC, PLA’s growing transgressions risk ‘strategic miscalculation’ The December 9 clash along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Arunachal Pradesh following an attempted transgression by more than 600 People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops that was pushed back by the Indian Army, has underlined the growing risks of “strategic miscalculation” along the border, a former senior Indian official has said, with China’s increasingly aggressive posture wrongly discounting India’s willingness to respond. The[PLA on Tuesday defended its actions in the Yangtse area of Tawang sector]( in Arunachal Pradesh, with Senior Colonel Long Shaohua, spokesperson for the Western Theater Command, in a statement saying “a regular patrol in the Dongzhang area” on “the Chinese side of the LAC” was “blocked by the Indian Army illegally crossing” the line. We ask the Indian side to strictly control and restrain front-line forces and work with the Chinese side to maintain peace and tranquility on the border,” he said. In a separate comment, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin at a daily briefing said the “current border situation between China and India is generally stable” and “both sides have maintained unimpeded communication on border-related issues through diplomatic and military channels”. The PLA’s recent LAC transgressions – including at multiple areas starting in April 2020 in the Western Sector in Ladakh – reflected an aggressive posture, seen since 2013, as well as raised the question “whether there is a potential for strategic miscalculation by China after the military standoff in Ladakh”, former Foreign Secretary and Ambassador to China Vijay Gokhale wrote in a new paper published on Tuesday by Carnegie India on China’s India policy. The PLA attempted to unilaterally change the status quo in the Western Sector, and the latest move has suggested a similar attempt in the East. “Two Chinese assumptions —that India will not intentionally escalate militarily in response to low-level coercion and that India will not form alliances against the coercer — should be weighed against the changes in Indian strategic thinking since 2020,” he said. “First, the ambiguity that prevailed in India’s decision-making and strategic circles as to whether China is a partner or a rival has been replaced by strategic clarity. China’s behaviour is now perceived as adversarial and few are willing to give it the benefit of the doubt….Second, the idea of strategic restraint has been redefined. This has involved a change in risk-taking appetite among the political class, as a result of which the Snow Leopard counter-operation at Rezang La/Rechin La was carried out in August 2022,” he said, referring to India’s countermoves in the south of Pangong Lake which pushed China to subsequently disengage on the north bank. “This was an intentional escalation by India that was not anticipated by China,” he noted. “Thus the Chinese assumption that there will be no immediate backlash to low-level coercion on the LAC because India is risk-averse may no longer be valid.” Bilkis Bano plea | Supreme Court judge Justice Bela M Trivedi recuses from hearing against early release of convicts Supreme Court judge, Justice Bela M. Trivedi, has [recused herself from hearing a writ petition filed by Bilkis Bano]( against a Gujarat government decision to prematurely release 11 men sentenced to life imprisonment for gang-raping her during the 2002 riots. Justice Ajay Rastogi, who led the Bench, said the writ petition would be returned to the Chief Justice of India to be listed before another Bench of the apex court. Justice Trivedi hails from Gujarat. She started her judicial career in the district judiciary in 1995. Justice Trivedi had worked in different posts like Registrar-Vigilance in the High Court, Law Secretary in the Gujarat government, CBI court judge, Special Judge, etc. She was elevated as a Gujarat High Court judge in February 2011. A review petition of Bano was also listed on Tuesday for a decision via circulation by a Bench led by Justice Ajay Rastogi. Bano has sought a review of a Supreme Court judgment of May 2022. The judgment had paved the way for the Gujarat government to consider and release 11 convicts serving life sentence in her case under the State’s Premature Release Policy of 1992. In her writ petition, Bano, through advocate Shobha Gupta, has argued that the early release of the convicts amounted to a violation of her fundamental right to life. She has said the remission policy of the State of Maharashtra, where the trial happened, and not Gujarat would have governed the case. Others like CPI (M) leader Subhashini Ali and others like TMC leader Mahia Moitra have also challenged the early release of the convicts. Their petitions were last heard by Justice Rastogi’s Bench on October 18. The court had then given petitioners time to respond to a Gujarat government affidavit which showed that the Special Judge and the CBI in Mumbai had opposed the premature release of the 11 convicts. The affidavit by the State of Gujarat had revealed that while the Superintendent of Police, CBI, Special Crime Branch, Mumbai and the Special Judge (CBI) of Greater Bombay opposed the premature release, all the authorities in Gujarat and the Home Ministry recommended their release. Union Home Ministry evades direct reply on Ladakh’s inclusion under Sixth Schedule of Constitution  [Evading a direct reply on the possible inclusion of Ladakh under the Sixth Schedule]( of the Constitution, the Union Home Ministry has informed a Parliamentary panel that the main objective of the inclusion of tribal populations under the said schedule is to ensure their overall socio-economic development, which the Union Territory’s administration “has already been taking care of since its creation”. On August 5, 2019, the former State of Jammu & Kashmir was bifurcated into two Union Territories — Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh, the latter without a Legislative Assembly. After its special status was removed, several political groups in Ladakh have been demanding that land, employment, and the cultural identity of Ladakh should be protected under the Sixth Schedule. The Schedule protects tribal populations, providing autonomy to communities through the creation of Autonomous Development Councils, which can frame laws on land, public health and agriculture. As of now, ten autonomous councils exist in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. In 2021, Ladakh’s only member in the Lok Sabha, the BJP’s Jamyang Tsering Namgyal, demanded constitutional safeguards by amending the Ladakh Autonomous Hill District Council (LAHDC) Act for the protection of land, employment, and the cultural identity of Ladakh under the Sixth Schedule. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs tabled a report in the Rajya Sabha which said that, according to the 2011 Census, the tribal population in the Union Territory of Ladakh is 2,18,355, that is 79.61% of the total population of 2,74,289. The committee recommended that special status may be granted to the Union Territory of Ladakh considering the developmental requirements of the tribal population. The report said: “The Committee further recommends that the possibility of including Ladakh in fifth or sixth Schedule may be examined.” Responding to this, the Ministry stated that “the main objective for inclusion of tribal population under fifth/sixth schedule is to ensure their overall socio-economic development, which, the UT Administration has already been taking care of since its creation. Sufficient funds are being provided to Ladakh to meet its overall developmental requirements”. It added that the Ladakh administration had recently increased the reservation for Scheduled Tribes in direct recruitment from 10% to 45%, which would help the tribal population significantly in its development. The apex body for Leh, a group comprising all political parties in Ladakh, the influential Buddhist association, and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA), have been demanding Statehood for Ladakh and protection under the Sixth Schedule. Sajjad Kargili of the KDA said they would intensify their protest in the coming days to demand the special status. Kerala Assembly passes bills to remove Governor as Chancellor of universities The [Kerala Assembly passed two University Law (Amendment) Bills]( to replace the Governor as the Chancellor of universities in the State on December 13, 2022. The United Democratic Front (UDF) staged a walkout in protest against the refusal to accept all of its proposed amendments to the Bill and the alleged efforts being made to turn universities into Marxist centres. The legislation will enable the government to appoint academicians or “persons of eminence” in various fields of knowledge including agriculture and veterinary science, technology, medicine, social science, humanities, literature, art, culture, law or public administration. The Opposition sprung a surprise during the discussion as it moved a motion to appoint one Chancellor for 14 universities instead of separate Chancellors for each. They also proposed appointing a retired Supreme Court judge or a retired Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court to the post and creating a selection committee comprising the Chief Minister, Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court and the Leader of Opposition for the purpose. Law Minister P. Rajeeve, who had piloted the bills on behalf of the Chief Minister, highlighted potential legal hurdles in including the Chief Justice in the panel. He, instead, proposed the inclusion of the Speaker in the panel that would be chaired by the Chief Minister and also have the Leader of the Opposition as a member. The amendment too was passed by the Assembly. Rajeeve, however, refused to entertain the other proposals that were made by the Opposition. This prompted the Leader of Opposition V.D. Satheesan to accuse the State government of paving the ground to bring people they favoured to the helm of the universities and erode their autonomy. In Brief: A [Constitution Bench on Tuesday listed for January 10, 2023]( a series of long-pending petitions challenging Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 which allows citizenship to illegal immigrants, mostly from neighbouring Bangladesh, who entered Assam before March 1971. These petitions had been lying dormant while the court had gone ahead and monitored the publication of the final Assam NRC list in August 2019 and the government had enacted the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. Section 6A was a special provision inserted into the 1955 Act in furtherance of a Memorandum of Settlement called the ‘Assam Accord’ signed on August 15, 1985 by the then Rajiv Gandhi government with the leaders of the Assam Movement. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow. Interested in daily updates from Tamil Nadu? Subscribe to the brand new "Tamil Nadu Today" daily newsletter to know the latest and most important news from TN [Subscribe Now!]( Today’s Top Picks [[U.S. scientists announce breakthrough in fusion energy that powers the sun and stars] U.S. scientists announce breakthrough in fusion energy that powers the sun and stars]( [[All about ‘Avatar: The Way of Water’: James Cameron and his cast on returning to Pandora] All about ‘Avatar: The Way of Water’: James Cameron and his cast on returning to Pandora]( [[FIFA World Cup | Messi 'fool' taunt spawns mugs, T-shirts in Argentina] FIFA World Cup | Messi 'fool' taunt spawns mugs, T-shirts in Argentina]( [[Watch | How I hit seven sixes in a single over: Ruturaj Gaikwad on his recent world record, MS Dhoni and CSK] Watch | How I hit seven sixes in a single over: Ruturaj Gaikwad on his recent world record, MS Dhoni and CSK]( Copyright @ 2022, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](