A new Chinese heliport being constructed 20 kilometres east of the Line of Actual Control near the sensitive ‘Fishtails’ region of Arunachal Pradesh, may give Chinese armed forces the ability to speedily move in military resources into an under-developed, remote area along the Indo-Chinese frontier.

The heliport, images of which appear in this report, lies along the banks of the Gongrigabu Qu river in the Nyingchi Prefecture of the Tibet Autonomous Region. This is within Chinese territory that India does not dispute.

Open-source satellite imagery available on EOS Data Analytics shows that till December 1, 2023, there was no construction at the site where the heliport is being constructed. A subsequent satellite image dated December 31, shows land being cleared for construction. The latest Maxar-sourced high-resolution images, shot on September 16, indicate that the facility is in an advanced state of construction.

Geospatial intelligence experts such as Damien Symon who first highlighted the existence of the heliport point out that “this new heliport will allow the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to intensify intelligence-gathering, surveillance, and reconnaissance activities.” This closes logistical challenges in the densely forested region which features rugged mountains that make military movement cumbersome. The construction of the heliport “enables rapid troop deployment to distant areas, strengthening patrol efficiency and augmenting China’s overall military footprint in these strategically important, remote locations.”

Military sources who are monitoring the construction of the heliport add that while “this is definitely military infrastructure being constructed,” the new facility may also have a dual-use function to enable the movement of civilians into the remote area. The heliport, they add, enhances Chinese “defensive and offensive operations [and] their reaction capabilities increase.” This enables a speedy build-up of troops during a contingency.

The Fishtails area of Arunachal Pradesh, named after the distinctive shape of the boundary-line in this area, is comprised of Fishtail 1 and Fishtail 2. While Fishtail 1 lies in the Dibang Valley, Fishtail 2 is partly in the Anjaw district of the state. Both areas are considered ‘sensitive’, in other words, zones where China and India have differing perceptions of the Line of Actual Control.

“This heliport will be a threat to key areas which are considered ‘sensitive’ here,” says Lt General Pravin Bakshi (retired), who headed the Eastern Command of the Indian Army. “I would take serious note and look to orchestrate a suitable response, if ever required, in concern with the Indian Air Force so as to prevent any ‘grey-zone’ warfare being efficiently prosecuted by the Chinese here.” Grey-Zone warfare refers to a form of conflict which falls below the threshold of conventional war while still threatening boundary lines through coercive means that threaten stability.

The heliport under construction features a 600-metre runway which can be used for rolling take-offs of helicopters, a technique used in high-altitude areas where there is less power available for helicopters to use. Despite this runway, the new heliport is situated in an area where the altitude is substantially lower than large tracts of the Tibetan plateau. This benefits helicopter operations. “While the rest of the plateau has a disadvantage because of altitude, the general altitude in this area is in the 1500 metre (approximately 5000 feet) range which allows greater payload to be carried by choppers and aircraft.”

The heliport also features at least three hangars, a sizeable apron area for helicopters to be positioned, an air traffic control facility and associated buildings and structures.

China’s construction of the new heliport comes at a time when Beijing is in the process of constructing hundreds of ‘Xiaokang’ or dual-use villages along the frontier with India. These villages are a tool for China to assert its claims in disputed areas along the Line of Actual Control. By constructing these villages and changing facts of the ground, China has been involved in what India’s late Chief of Defence Staff General Bipin Rawat referred to as “salami slicing” of territory. This has been particularly evident in the Kingdom of Bhutan, where undefended parts of its border regions, including ancestral lands of its royal family, have been physically taken over by the Chinese, who have built townships connected by an extensive road-network.

“This illustrates how China is quietly creating new facts on the ground,” says Brahma Chellaney, a leading strategic affairs expert who focusses closely on China. “The current efforts to defuse the military standoff raise the question as to what a possible deal can accomplish, given the new military realities China has created along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) since 2020.”

India, which has engaged China in protracted talks after the violent skirmishes of 2020 in Ladakh, has begun countering China’s border strategy by launching the ‘Vibrant Villages’ development project that covers 3,000 villages in four Northeastern border states, including Arunachal Pradesh. Rs 4,800 crore has been allotted for the first phase of the project. Separately, a 2,400-kilometre trans-Arunachal highway is being completed that drastically reduces travel time, particularly in Eastern Arunachal Pradesh. The highway, along with separate road projects in the state, enable connectivity to frontline Army posts as well.

Shifting pressure to the east of Arunachal Pradesh through the construction of the new heliport, however, “opens up a new vista,” says Lt General Bakshi. Despite the rapid build-up of infrastructure along the frontier, “This area remains the least developed in our area of responsibility.”

With inputs from Divyam Sharma

Lebanon’s political system is deeply entrenched in sectarian divisions. The country is a confessional democracy, meaning that key political and military positions are reserved for representatives of specific religious sects.

The President must always be a Maronite Catholic, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim, and the Speaker of the Parliament a Shia Muslim. While the Deputy Speaker of Parliament and the Deputy Prime Minister are always Greek Orthodox Christians, the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces is always a Druze. This delicate balancing act extends to the composition of the Lebanese Parliament, which maintains a ratio of 6:5 in favour of Christians to Muslims (including Druze).

The current political system was largely imposed by France in 1920 when it was the colonial power in the Levant region. Ironically, France, one of the most secular nations in Europe, created a state system in Lebanon that is wholly dependent on religious identities, said  

The roots of this system lie in a proposal from the Maronite Church, as Muslims, particularly the Sunnis, initially refused to accept the creation of a separate Lebanese entity and preferred instead to merge with Syria. Thus, the state that emerged lacked solid foundations, setting the stage for its current troubles.

Today, Hezbollah, a militant group backed by Iran, has emerged as the de facto ruler of Lebanon, operating with more power and influence than the official government and threatening all-out war with Israel.

On Tuesday, a series of explosions from pagers used by Hezbollah members in Lebanon resulted in at least nine deaths and approximately 2,800 injuries. The Iran-backed group attributed the blasts to Israel. While Israel has not commented, the operation’s sophistication has led many to suspect the involvement of its intelligence agency, Mossad.

Inside Lebanese Politics

“Lebanon is an illiberal democracy. That is, the Lebanese do go to the polls fairly regularly, but they are expected to choose from a set of pre-determined ideas that do not interfere with the existing structure as was designed by the oligarchs, and now taken over by Hezbollah,” said Hussain Abdul-Hussain, veteran journalist, Middle East expert and research fellow at the Foundation For Defense of Democracy in Washington DC, told NDTV.

The power-sharing arrangement that forms the bedrock of Lebanon’s government is not just an outdated relic; it is a carefully maintained system designed to preserve the status quo. The shadow state within the official state has now become the norm, with the real power held not by elected officials but by Hezbollah and its allies. The militia group, which pledges allegiance to Iran’s Supreme Leader, operates outside of the traditional state structures but holds ultimate authority.

“Suppose you want to run on a platform that demands unconditional and immediate peace with Israel, you will either be disqualified or suffer violence by non-state actors (Hezbollah). Even though the country has a hybrid presidential/parliamentary system, its rulers have been pretty much the same people over the past 40 or more years,” Mr Abdul-Hussain added.

The political elites who drafted Lebanon’s constitution in 1926, mainly Christian business leaders, ensured that state powers were decentralised, effectively granting various religious sects immunity from state prosecution and accountability.

This arrangement created a system where the political and business elite thrived while national identity and state institutions remained weak. The sectarian affiliation has, for decades, overridden national identity, resulting in a fractured society and a government that struggles to maintain order.

Hezbollah: From Militia To De Facto Ruler

Hezbollah’s journey from a militia group to Lebanon’s most powerful political and military entity started in 1982 following Israel’s invasion of the country. Initially perceived as a resistance movement against Israeli occupation, Hezbollah has since transformed into a big game player in Lebanese politics. Today, it is not just a political party but a state within a state – a powerful armed militia that supersedes the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) in strength and authority.

“Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah does not hold any public office, but he is the de facto ruler of Lebanon. He rules by televised speech. The rest of the state (even when there was a president and prime minister), learn the fate of their country and tailor their policies in accordance with what they hear Nasrallah saying,” Mr Abdul-Hussain told NDTV.

Hezbollah’s Role In Lebanese Government

The group has successfully infiltrated various branches of the Lebanese government and security apparatus, ensuring its interests are safeguarded.

“Hezbollah started in 1982 during Israel’s occupation of Beirut, splitting from the original Shia militia, Amal, which was more secular. Amal and Hezbollah fought for turf but ultimately came to a living arrangement since both of them were pro-Syria,” said Nizar Farsakh, lecturer at the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University in Washington DC, told NDTV.

“While both were active in the resistance, having been part of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) militias before getting formed, Hezbollah took on most of the resistance, effectively monopolising it by the end of the 1990s,” he added.

Hezbollah gained widespread recognition in the 2000s when Israel unilaterally withdrew from Lebanon after years of resistance. This victory was historic, marking the first time an Arab military force successfully forced Israel out of occupied territory, unlike Egypt’s success, which came through diplomacy rather than combat. The triumph elevated Hezbollah’s status not only in Lebanon but across the Arab and Muslim worlds, where it became a symbol of resistance against Israeli aggression.

“Coupled with very strong relations with Iran and Syria, it got flooded with weapons and got extensive training in addition to creating a very well-oiled political movement that was theocratically totalitarian,” Mr Farsakh explained.

The 2006 Lebanon War further solidified Hezbollah’s role as a key player in the region. Although Israel inflicted severe damage on Lebanon’s infrastructure, Hezbollah’s ability to hold off the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) for over a month was seen as a success by many in the Arab world.

Hezbollah’s power was again demonstrated in 2008 when the anti-Syrian camp in Lebanon attempted to dismantle its separate telecommunications network, sparking a brief conflict. Hezbollah quickly asserted its dominance, establishing itself as the de facto military power in Lebanon. This marked a turning point, showing that no force in Lebanon could challenge Hezbollah’s authority.

“Some Hezbollah members are MPs and some are cabinet ministers.  And while Lebanon has a mostly non-sectarian professional army, it does not challenge Syria nor Hezbollah, and the two coordinate to ensure they co-exist without clashes. Some Lebanese feel that even the army is controlled by Hezbollah. Therefore, nothing happens in Lebanon that Hezbollah is not on board with,” Mr Farsakh told NDTV.

Hezbollah vs Lebanese Armed Forces

The last Lebanese security official who dared to defy Hezbollah, Brigadier General Wissam al-Hassan, was assassinated after exposing the armed group’s role in the 2005 assassination of Prime Minister Rafic Hariri. al-Hassan was the chief of Lebanon’s intelligence agency and a leading Sunni figure in the country. In 2012, al-Hassan was killed along with seven others in a massive car bombing that also injured 80 others.

The Lebanese security agencies, riddled with Hezbollah loyalists, are often seen as mere extensions of Hezbollah’s influence rather than independent state bodies.

“Hezbollah is multifold and more powerful than the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF). Hezbollah also infiltrates the LAF and other security agencies by planting its loyalists at high levels. These security agencies do Hezbollah’s bidding, and never go against it,” said Mr Abdul-Hussain.

Since the 1989 Taif Agreement, which ended the Lebanese civil war, the LAF’s role has increasingly been to counter Hezbollah’s narrative that it alone can defend Lebanon against external threats. This is particularly evident in the context of US military aid to the LAF, which has totalled over $2.29 billion since 2005.

Political Stalemate: A Vacant Presidency

Currently, Lebanon’s presidential post is vacant, which is emblematic of the country’s political paralysis. The two main contenders for the presidency – Gebran Bassil and Suleiman Frangieh – are both allied with Hezbollah, but the group has refrained from endorsing either candidate to avoid alienating one faction of its support base.

“The anti-Hezbollah parliamentary opposition has its own candidates, but even if it manages to get the majority of the vote, Hezbollah breaks the session midway. The speaker of the Lebanese assembly, Nabih Berri, is Shia like Hezbollah and heads the Amal movement, a Hezbollah ally,” said Mr Abdul-Hussain.

Lebanon’s government is thus paralysed, unable to elect a president or move forward on critical national issues. This paralysis is compounded by an economic crisis that has seen the country’s currency collapse and basic services like electricity and water cut off for weeks at a time. Yet Hezbollah, impervious to the country’s plight, continues to prepare for potential conflicts, such as a war with Israel, as seen in its support for Hamas during recent regional tensions.

“Iran has replicated its model in Lebanon in which two states are expected to coexist: A weak official state, usually elected, and a strong shadow state, unelected but holding the reigns of power through non-state militias that report to a cleric Supreme Leader. In Iran, the shadow state dictates routine elections. In Lebanon, Hezbollah always balances out the degree of dictation and the will of its oligarch allies. Since Hezbollah is allied with many oligarchs, and since many of them have competing interests, whenever there is a deadlock, the Iran-backed militia refrains from intervening,” Mr Abdul-Hussain explained.

Main Drivers Of Conflict

Hezbollah’s position as the dominant force in Lebanese politics shows no signs of weakening, despite economic pressures and dwindling financial resources due to cuts in Iranian funds and US sanctions. The U.S. considers Hezbollah not only a regional threat but a global one, labelling it a transnational criminal organization due to its extensive network of sleeper cells across continents.

However, the idea that Lebanon could see a significant shift away from Hezbollah’s control seems unlikely. Mr Abdul-Hussain argues that the chances of a full-blown conflict between the LAF and Hezbollah are slim, as the army command has already ruled out initiating such a conflict due to the heavy human and political toll it would take. Instead, the focus remains on containing Hezbollah’s influence within Lebanon through economic and political pressure.

“Two trends have been competing in Lebanon since its independence in 1948. The Christian-led bloc demands Lebanese regional neutrality and openness to the West. The Muslim-led bloc insists that Lebanon should be involved in regional conflicts, such as fighting for the liberation of Palestine. This fault line caused a civil war in 1975, which only ended when Muslims committed that Lebanon would become neutral. Hezbollah never agreed to this arrangement and as it took over the country in 2008, has proven it,” Mr Abdul-Hussain said.

Potential Full-Blown War With Israel

Ever since Hezbollah, and Iran, entered Israel’s ongoing conflict with Hamas in Gaza, frequent skirmishes along the Israel-Lebanon border have resulted in multiple deaths on both sides.

On August 25, Hezbollah and Israel both announced large-scale military operations against each other today. According to a statement from Hezbollah, “more than 320” Katyusha rockets were launched, targeting key Israeli military sites.

In response to the threat, the Israeli military initiated pre-emptive strikes on targets in Lebanon. The IDF announced these strikes early Sunday, stating that they had detected preparations by Hezbollah for “large-scale” attacks on Israeli territory. Israeli Air Force fighter jets were deployed to neutralise these threats, focusing on Hezbollah positions that posed an immediate danger to Israeli civilians.

But is Hezbollah, backed by Iran, ready for a full-scale battle with Israel, backed by the US?

“Lebanon will be destroyed and Iran will not enter the war. Iran will only fight if Israel goes after the Iranian nuclear facilities,” Mr Abdul-Hussain claimed.

Mr Farsakh believes that the general Israeli population fears any escalation with Hezbollah given how the Israeli military is fighting Hamas, considering it is a group that is ten times smaller than Hezbollah in both personnel and equipment.

“Literally no one but Benjamin Netanyahu and his coalition want a regional war. Iran, Hezbollah, and the US are all doing their best to avert any escalation,” he claimed. “But Netanyahu has been provoking both by killing very senior military and political figures in Iran and Lebanon. Particularly, military commanders with battle experience fighting in Syria. By eliminating enough of them, Israel would weaken Hezbollah’s command and control structure as well as strategic capacity. Making a land invasion a bit less difficult for Israel. Netanyahu is trying to soften them up as much as possible before the inevitable ground war.”