IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/asseca/v12y2025i3p315-339.html

From Denial to Punishment: Strategic Shift in India’s Deterrence Strategy Towards China Post-Galwan

Author

Listed:
  • Soumyodeep Deb

Abstract

The dynamics of the India–China relationship have undergone a significant transformation in recent years, with mistrust and suspicion clouding the bilateral ties. This article argues that India’s strategic deterrence posture towards China has shifted from denial to punishment following the 2020 Galwan crisis, which resulted in casualties on both sides. The study aims to examine the measures taken by India post-2020 that demonstrate this shift in strategy and the implications for the overall India–China relations. This article contends that India has applied punitive measures in the military, economic and diplomatic domains to deter China’s actions along the border, with the goal of raising the overall cost for China. The theoretical framework of deterrence is employed to analyse the shift from denial to punishment, highlighting the importance of military capability, credibility and communication in enhancing a state’s deterrence posture. This article also discusses the evolution of deterrence theory in the post-Cold War era, with the emergence of technologically advanced conventional weapons altering the nature of modern conflict. The study concludes that the shift towards deterrence by punishment is likely to intensify competition between India and China, making it the new norm in their bilateral relations. The findings contribute to the understanding of India’s evolving conventional deterrence posture towards China and its multidomain approach to deterrence.

Suggested Citation

  • Soumyodeep Deb, 2025. "From Denial to Punishment: Strategic Shift in India’s Deterrence Strategy Towards China Post-Galwan," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 12(3), pages 315-339, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:12:y:2025:i:3:p:315-339
    DOI: 10.1177/23477970251351402
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/23477970251351402
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/23477970251351402?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sumit Ganguly & Michal Smetana & Sannia Abdullah & Ales Karmazin, 2019. "India, Pakistan, and the Kashmir dispute: unpacking the dynamics of a South Asian frozen conflict," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 129-143, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abdul Razaque Larik & Syed Gulzar Ali Shah Bukhari & Mubasharah, 2024. "The ‘India Factor’ and the Future Security Landscape in South Asia: Conflict, Competition, or Cooperation?," International Journal of Politics & Social Sciences Review (IJPSSR), International Journal of Politics & Social Sciences Review (IJPSSR), vol. 3(III), pages 223-230.
    2. Yelena Biberman & Christopher B Mann, 2025. "The effects of state presence on the mental mapping of security: Evidence from an experiment in Kashmir," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(2), pages 390-401, March.
    3. Dar, Aehsan Ahmad & Deb, Sibnath, 2020. "Psychological distress among young adults exposed to armed conflict in Kashmir," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    4. Kamil Christoph Klosek & Vojtěch Bahenský & Michal Smetana & Jan Ludvík, 2021. "Frozen conflicts in world politics: A new dataset," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(4), pages 849-858, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:12:y:2025:i:3:p:315-339. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.