China’s relentless pursuit of territorial expansion through “salami slicing” represents one of the most insidious threats to stability in Asia today. This method of gradual encroachment—taking small slices of territory that individually seem trivial but collectively amount to sweeping gains—has become a defining feature of Beijing’s strategy against its neighbours.
The term was first used by Hungarian communist leader Mátyás Rákosi to describe dismantling opposition “slice by slice.” Today, it perfectly captures China’s patient but persistent push to alter borders without triggering full-scale conflict. By keeping each action just below the threshold of outright war, Beijing has perfected a form of expansionism that exploits a blind spot in international law: the inability to respond to cumulative aggression unfolding over decades.
The Doklam Precedent
The 2017 Doklam standoff remains the clearest demonstration of China’s salami-slicing method. When PLA engineers began building a road at the India–China–Bhutan tri-junction, the move appeared minor. But strategically, it would have handed China a vantage point over the Siliguri Corridor—India’s “chicken’s neck” lifeline to the northeast.
India’s swift deployment of 270 troops to halt the construction was a decisive counter. For 73 tense days, Indian and Chinese soldiers stood face-to-face until Beijing agreed to disengage. The message was unambiguous: incremental aggression could be resisted when met with resolve. Yet, Beijing’s subsequent manoeuvres across the LAC—and its continued militarisation of dual-use infrastructure—show that Doklam was not an aberration but part of a broader playbook.
A Pattern Across Regions
Salami-slicing is not confined to the Himalayas. In the South China Sea, Beijing has dredged coral reefs into fortified islands, each step framed as defensive, yet collectively turning international waters into Chinese-controlled territory. The strategy is deceptively simple: build slowly, consolidate quietly, and present the world with new “realities” that are difficult to reverse.
Its insidiousness lies in exploiting democratic restraint. A few tents pitched across the LAC, or a modest new outpost in disputed waters, may not justify military retaliation. But when repeated across years, these actions produce permanent changes that diplomacy alone struggles to undo.
Strategic and Legal Implications
Salami slicing reveals Beijing’s shrewd understanding of modern conflict. In an era of nuclear deterrence and economic interdependence, outright invasions carry prohibitive costs. Instead, China advances by stealth: each move avoids provoking unified global action, yet collectively it reshapes the regional balance of power.
International law, designed to punish overt aggression, has no effective mechanisms for cumulative encroachment. This gap allows China to chip away at sovereignty while avoiding the penalties that accompany invasion. Unless addressed, this undermines not only Asian security but the very principles on which the post-war international order rests.
India’s Response and Global Resonance
India’s approach has hardened since Doklam. As former Army Chief General M.M. Naravane observed, China’s incremental advances have delivered it tangible gains over decades, forcing New Delhi to adapt with more assertive responses. The Galwan Valley clash of 2020 marked a turning point, with India demonstrating both the capability and the will to impose costs.
Crucially, India’s resistance has resonated beyond its borders. From the Philippines standing up in the South China Sea to European states like Lithuania confronting Chinese coercion, the lesson is spreading: appeasement of incremental aggression only emboldens further encroachment. Countering salami slicing requires timely pushback, not belated recognition.
Slice by Slice, Stability at Risk
China’s salami-slicing strategy is not just a border management issue; it is a fundamental challenge to international security. By normalising gradual territorial gains, Beijing threatens to unravel the very norms that preserve peace. Its cumulative approach may appear less dramatic than invasion, but it is no less destabilising—and arguably more dangerous because it avoids galvanising collective resistance.
The international community must treat incremental aggression with the same seriousness as conventional war. Coordinated responses, legal innovations, and political will are needed to prevent Beijing’s tactics from succeeding “slice by slice.” For India and for the world, the stakes extend beyond disputed ridgelines or reefs. At issue is the defence of sovereignty, law, and the principles of peaceful coexistence.