CHINA: Border Conflict with India Likely to End After Pact Agreement
Summary: After weeks of talks between Beijing and New Delhi, they have come to an agreement and formed a pact over the much disputed “Line of Actual Control (LAC).” Beijing and New Delhi will likely stop conflict over the border and strengthen their relationship.
Development: On 21 October, Beijing and India reached an agreement over their four-year border skirmish. Beijing and New Dehli formed a border agreement pact after many weeks of discussion between military negotiators. In June 2020, Chinese and Indian soldiers began clashing along the Sino-Indian Border or LAC, the border created after the Sino-Indian conflict in 1962. Both countries claim its borders go beyond the LAC. Clashes eventually escalated to deaths of Indian and Chinese soldiers, followed by both sides deploying more soldiers, tanks, and artillery. In September 2020, the conflict reached its peak with small-arms fire exchanged from both sides. This conflict lasted four years with both sides refusing to withdraw and continued military patrols and stationing of troops and vehicles. Both countries placed boycotts on each other’s imports. The pact opened communications between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi before the three-day BRICS summit. Neither side stated the specifics of the pact, but both sides agreed to patrol the LAC without engagement.
Analysis: The Beijing and India pact likely has ended the four-year conflict over the LAC. The end of this conflict will almost certainly deescalate tensions and improve relations between Beijing and India. Beijing will likely move thousands of troops and hundreds of vehicles and artillery out of the border area and focus their resources onto other areas and zones of interest. Chairman Xi and Prime Minister Modi will likely return from BRICS with new agreements and a stronger relationship between their countries for a future of trade between Beijing and India.
[Brooks Yarlott]
TURKEY: Terrorist Attack May Lead to Escalation of Military Operations
Summary: A deadly attack on the headquarters of Turkish Aerospace Industries (TUSAS) linked to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) may exacerbate conflict with the group, despite talks of Ankara releasing its long-term leader.
Development: On 23 October, insurgents with rifles and explosives attacked the headquarters of Ankara’s state-run aerospace company near facilities near Ankara. TUSAS, a key player in Ankara’s defense industry, produces military aircraft used in counterterrorism operations. Turkish authorities blamed the PKK, a Kurdish nationalist terrorist organization, for the assault, although no group claimed responsibility. The PKK’s primarily aims to establish an independent Kurdish state within Turkey and neighboring states. Despite a two-year ceasefire from 2013 to 2015 and another short-lived ceasefire in 2023, the PKK reignited the armed struggle, stating that its actions have become “inevitable.” This attack comes after a Turkish nationalist leader suggested the potential release of PKK founder Abdullah Ocalan if he renounces violence and disbands his organization. In retaliation for the PKK’s recent attack, Turkish forces launched airstrikes on Kurdish militant targets in Iraq and Syria. Turkish Defense Minister Yasar Guler acknowledged Ankara’s response, saying, “We inflict the necessary punishment on those ignoble [PKK] members, but they never wise up,” according to the New York Times.
Analysis: The PKK likely targeted TUSAS because of its strategic importance to Ankara’s defense and counterterrorism efforts, likely intensifying Ankara’s military operations against Kurdish militants, both domestically and across its borders. Airstrikes and cross-border raids into Iraq and Syria may increase in an effort to dismantle their operations. Additionally, Turkey may impose stricter security measures on defense facilities and high-risk targets to prevent further attacks. The timing of the attack, shortly after the proposition of Ocalan’s release, suggests that the PKK may oppose the idea of negotiated peace.
[Gracie Bryner]
ISRAEL: Strikes on Iran Likely Aimed to Degrade Missile Production
Summary: Tel Aviv struck roughly 20 military targets in Iran using various munitions and striking missile and drone production facilities. This is the first time Tel Aviv publicly struck targets in Iran, likely to degrade Tehran’s missile production capabilities.
Development: On 26 October, at around 0100 local time, Tel Aviv launched an attack on Tehran’s military infrastructure and air defense capabilities. Tel Aviv launched this attack mainly using air-launched ballistic missiles from the border of Iraq and Iran. Tel Aviv launched munitions using various aircraft including F-15Is, F-16C, and F-35s, using F-15As and F-16Cs for air superiority. Some reports allege that Israeli F-35I Adir fighters penetrated Tehran’s airspace. The Israel Defense Force (IDF) struck specific locations including the Shahrud missile production facility, Sanayee Khani missile production facility, Parchin military base, Khojir military base, Bardisan Camp near Qom, and a factory in Shamsabad Industrial City, Iran. These facilities all produce components of offensive capabilities, such as drone or missile parts, for the Tehran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and allies like Russia. Tel Aviv also destroyed all of Tehran’s remaining S-300 air defense systems, but it remains unclear if they were referring to the launchers, or other parts of the S-300 system, according to The Warzone.
Analysis: Tel Aviv’s strikes on military targets, while not targeting nuclear or energy facilities, likely aimed to threaten Tehran with its capabilities, such as damaging Tehran’s missile production. If reports of F-35I Adirs penetrating Iranian airspace are true, it threatens the Iranian regime that Tel Aviv can operate nearly uncontested in Tehran’s airspace. It would also provide Tel Aviv with additional intelligence gathering capabilities from the F-35’s automated logistics information system. The attacks on production facilities will likely also result in less munitions provided to Moscow. Tehran will likely have to respond to these strikes more strategically due to the damage to their missile production facilities. The destruction of Tehran’s remaining S-300 air defense systems almost certainly make Tehran more vulnerable to future strikes. The destruction of Tehran’s air defense systems also most likely increases the success of future IDF air strikes, requiring less munitions to suppress Tehran’s air defenses. [Julian Spagnolo-Crowne]
