Amid political uproar in the Parliament, Union Defence Minister Rajnath Singh asserted that Indian troops have foiled the Chinese attempts to "unilaterally change the status quo" in the Yangtse region of the Tawang sector in Arunachal Pradesh. Though no casualties have been reported, soldiers on both sides have suffered minor injuries. The unprovoked transgression by the Chinese troops has come to the fore even as the border dispute arising out of the lethal Galwan incident has not subsided yet. The several rounds of talks carried out to date have remained largely inconclusive. It needs no recall that in October last year, troops from both sides were engaged in a similar conflict in the area between Bum La and Yangtse. The large number of Chinese troops and their use of sticks and stones, instead of arms, clearly indicate that the transgressions are strategically planned. The apparent intent is to exert military pressure without technically violating the agreed norms around the use of arms. China, with heavy infrastructure and large deployment of troops on their side, appears to challenge India on both fronts — the western front of Ladakh region and the eastern front of Arunachal Pradesh. As is known, China already claims almost the entire state of Arunachal Pradesh. Even though the Yangtse region was identified as a contested region way back in the early 1990s by a Joint Working Group (JWG), the assertion from the Chinese side has intensified only recently. With India and China sharing a long 3,488-km Line of Actual Control (LAC), interspersed with as many as 25 contested regions, the chances are that our assertive neighbour may open multiple fronts in the future. Apart from the western and eastern LAC, a fair bit of contested regions lie in the middle belt as well, bordering Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Furthermore, the recent Chinese aggression can also be contextualised around the 18th edition of the annual Indo-US joint military exercise — Yudh Abhyas — in Uttarakhand's Auli region. China was evidently rattled by the exercise, terming it to be an "interference" in the Indo-China relations by the United States. China also alleged that the joint military exercise was a violation of 1993 and 1996 peace agreements. India had refuted Chinese claims by clarifying that the exercise was carried out 100 km away from the LAC. Unleashing frequent territorial and military threats for every now and then strategic and geopolitical reasons doesn't augur well for the two most powerful nations of Asia. The only effective answers to such trends could be either a diplomatic dialogue or competitive build-up of infrastructure and troop deployment in contested regions. In a way, both these strategies are complementary to each other. Diplomatic dialogues between India and China have been quite slow in delivering results, and even failed in many instances. This is understandable as diplomacy is usually time-consuming. As far as build-up of troops and infrastructure is concerned, though far behind, India is fast catching China. Arunachal Pradesh, in particular, has attracted special focus of the Indian government. The government announced multiple connectivity projects in the north-eastern region. The 2000-km Arunachal Frontier Highway — running parallel to the LAC — deserves special mention, as it has evidently irked the Chinese dispensation. When it comes to deployment of troops, during the recent Yangtse transgression, Indian soldiers were outnumbered by that of China but they fought valiantly. Heavy deployment of troops and infrastructure along the border may avert the domination of one nation by the other, as also the large-scale casualties, but are not sustainable solutions. In the long run, this will only lead up to the culmination of tensions. It will certainly be counterproductive for India to persistently focus a large chunk of its resources along the border. India is already pestered by Pakistan on the western front. While strong military presence along LAC has now become an imperative for India, it cannot solely depend upon it. Diplomatic finesse is the need of the hour. Back home, opposition parties have come down harshly upon the government. Their argument is that by outrightly rejecting the presence of Chinese troops in Indian territory, the government has legitimised their transgression. Most importantly, by disengaging — and not de-escalating — after every transgression, China might be getting hold of parts of Indian territory. In the disengagement process, both sides are forced to step back while the advance might have been made by one particular side.