NEW DELHI: A group of Chinese troops pitching tents in Depsang Bulge in eastern Ladakh since April 15 has thrown the Indian government into a mass of confusion. As Chinese troops grow roots in an area 19km inside what India considers its own territory and which holds immense strategic importance for the country, crossed wires, leaks and a blame game has taken over New Delhi.

The civilian leadership, comprising both the MEA and the PMO, had initially discounted reports of the incursion. MEA spokesperson, Syed Akbaruddin, has made perhaps the only strongly-worded statement on the issue so far, when he said the Chinese should revert to "status-quo ante". From the beginning it was clear this was no ordinary incursion, or aggressive patrolling that Indians and Chinese regularly engage in these days. There was solid reasoning behind the MEA’s decision to raise the decibel level on this issue.

However, this was swiftly overtaken by other voices — foreign minister Salman Khurshid dismissed the incident, variously calling it "localized" and even described it as "acne". At the higher levels in the foreign policy establishment, the more important issue seemed to be preserving the bilateral ties with China. The dominant narrative was not that India would do everything to get the Chinese off Indian soil, but that this event would not be allowed to ruin ties with Beijing.

All voices arguing for a more robust response were successfully hushed. At every stage, it was more important that the new Chinese premier Li Keqiang’s visit, beginning May 20, be insulated from this. When the media noise became too loud, the government "inspired" certain strategic experts to write dismissive articles on the incident, saying it happens "all the time". Even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was advised to say the incident was "localized".

It was becoming clear that the incident was more serious than ever before and was a bigger geo-strategic threat to India. If Li’s visit was important to the Chinese they would not have done the incursion barely a month before the visit. The Chinese were clearly testing the Indian preparedness, and it was the most serious incident since Sumdorong Chu in Arunachal Pradesh 1987. India could not possibly let the Chinese stay.

The uniformed brass was busy making own assessments. Beyond dispatching a team of Ladakh Scouts to the area, the armed forces did not take the steps they should have to evict the Chinese. In Delhi, the game in the defence corridors became two-fold — the Army was waiting for directions from the civilian leadership to take any action. Among the civilian leadership, the assessment was the Army was totally incapable of taking on the Chinese juggernaut. Any military action on the Indian part would result in escalation and it could be another 1962 again. That froze all action, while it drove the Indian bureaucrats in Delhi and Beijing to burn the phone lines with the Chinese.

Besides, the paramilitary forces, the intelligence establishment, all started leaking to the media like crazy. Everybody had a partial story to tell, but everybody told it anyway, because that was the only way they were getting any traction. Thus the media knew the outcome — or lack thereof — of flag meetings before the government had a chance to vet it. Inevitably, the media became the villain of the piece. From the district commissioner’s office in Leh to bureaucrats and officers in New Delhi, a gag order has been issued.

First, India was caught off-guard. Second, India’s intelligence assessment of the incident and its implications has been inadequate at best. Third, while trying to play the good boys with Beijing initially by not taking any action, now New Delhi will be seen to be taking action under public pressure, not because the government has deemed the incident to have crossed a threshold.

An April 2005 Protocol on CBMs between India and China lays out in detail the steps to be taken by troops if they encounter a "face-off" situation. The protocol has been followed in large measure. But this time it wasn’t. China had violated the 2005 pact, but if one believes the highest levels of the government, this is just another incident.