Re: Managing Chinese Threat
Posted: 25 Apr 2013 22:12
Trade action take one day. Also China has been building infrastructure for 30 years, we have been importing foreign weapons to fund Italian family.
Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/
+1. ArP is BJP and completely Pro-Indian. Bhutan is completely Pro India. And they are the ones that border China.I am from the north east - what problems do we have there. arunachalis , assamese, refugee tibetans would like nothing better than to beat cheen with a stick. nagaland has been outsourced to the nscn to rule as they please so long as the INC remains the official power. the rest also will strongly support any indian move.
there are more anti-india elements in the metros than in NE.
Now, Chinese choppers enter several hundred kilometres inside India {Does TOIlet know the meaning of "enter several hundred kilometers inside India" ?}
LEH/NEW DELHI: As the intruding Chinese soldiers refuse to budge from their occupied position in Daulat Beg Oldi(DBO) sector in Ladakh, two Chinese military helicopters have violated Indian airspace at Chumar, several hundred kilometres southeast of Leh, adding to the prevailing tension. The Chinese choppers entered the Indian airspace on April 21 and hovered over the area for quite sometime and returned after dropping some food cans, cigarette packets and notes written in their local language, official sources said today.
The incident happened five days after a platoon-strength contingent of China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) had come 10km inside the Indian territory in Burthe in the DBO sector on the night of April 15 and established a tented post there.
Chumar, which is about 300km from Leh, provides another access to Aksai Chin, an area which is under illegal occupation of China, besides from DBO.
After the incursion incident, Indo-Tibetan Border Police, the border guarding force, has beefed up its strength in the area and Army from the nearby location had increased its surveillance.
Last September, Chinese helicopters flew over Chumar with some of its troops even getting onto the ground. The troops destroyed bunkers and old tents of the Indian Army before returning to their own air space. The situation in the DBO sector, meanwhile, continued to remain tense with the PLA personnel, who have come with some dogs and vehicles, refusing to budge from the area.
After the flag meeting on Tuesday, India asked China to revert to the status quo position in Depsang Valley in Ladakh where troops of both countries were in a face-to-face situation after Indian military alleged that Chinese forces intruded nearly 10km inside Indian territory.
Apart from the flag meetings between the local military commanders of the two countries, the issue has also been taken up by the officials of the foreign ministries under a working mechanism that was established to address problems faced by the two armies on the ground while patrolling the vast tracks of disputed boundary.
The incident has thrown out of gear a flurry of engagements at the top between the two countries before the planned visit of Chinese Premier Li Keqiang's visit to New Delhi next month.
Li, who took over from Wen Jiabao last month, chose India to be his first trip abroad as Prime Minister to send a message of friendship as well as importance China attached to improve relations with New Delhi.
From India, Li plans to go to Pakistan, China's all weather ally.
The new Pakistan government, which is expected to be formed after elections next month, is expected to be in place when his visit take place.
Here is the link you gave for the Burtse camp - http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.10 ... 0&z=18&m=brohitvats wrote:As per news reports, the PLA is sitting at Burtse or thereabout. please go back some pages, I have posted a map with all important landmarks. Plus there are couple of posts with URL links to important locations for reference.Pranav wrote:Has somebody already posted the coordinates of the Chinese camp, so one can look at the area on Google Earth? Would also like to see a map of Indian and Chinese perceptions of LAC in the area.
Banned in all border states. Notice issued last yearvic wrote:What happened to the demand to ban Chinese telecom & power equipment, is well known in all circles but cannot be posted here. Some BR members have been saying for 2 years that China is preparing to take some action to rub Indian nose in dirt. Will the Italian go and hide in Italian embassy as in 1971?
US tried that, the Italians tried that... Did it work? Nope. Chinese can try and fail toohabal wrote:
Don't push hopes up too high. Chinese may have some leverage over upavasis in 2G scam. That is why they are blackmailing now.
Yes via heli. They conducted a fly over Indian camps in that area as surveillance of our moves. Pretty brazenPranav wrote:Is resupply of the Chinese camp by trucks / helicopter being permitted?
Hmm ... is our Burtse camp manned by IA?shyamd wrote:Yes via heli. They conducted a fly over Indian camps in that area as surveillance of our moves. Pretty brazenPranav wrote:Is resupply of the Chinese camp by trucks / helicopter being permitted?
List the states and the conditions of ban! You will find the ban as negligible window dressing.shyamd wrote:Banned in all border states. Notice issued last yearvic wrote:What happened to the demand to ban Chinese telecom & power equipment, is well known in all circles but cannot be posted here. Some BR members have been saying for 2 years that China is preparing to take some action to rub Indian nose in dirt. Will the Italian go and hide in Italian embassy as in 1971?
Equal-equal, eh?Pranav wrote:Because it is the right time. World opinion is against PRC or neutral to PRC right nowAcharya wrote: chellaney says India needs to reopen the 'core issue' of tibet.
What is needed is firmness and strength, but without unnecessary hostility. Maybe Namo would be able to handle it right.
In the past both India and China have been manipulated by west for their own interest.
+1 rubber chappal vietnamese also kicked out khmer rouge and taught a lesson to chinese lesson-teachers.Singha wrote:any amt of shiny hw is useless if political spine is lacking. kurshid's body language and govt's manner is defeatist in extreme. writing is on wall. retreat, shame and defeat are familiar companions whenever india has been ruled by weak pleasure seeking ruling class.
on other hand the rag tag equipped vietcong first defeated the french and then the US because they were ready to fight with whatever they had - rubber chappals and knockoff ak47, regardless of the B52 and napalm raiding death on their villages. cheen also fought US to a standstill in Noko and gave birth to that puppet state. even the iraqi insurgents with crude IEDs gave a strong fight to khan army and are now busy killing each other.
muscles without a heart is just a limp corpse.
The TOI article sounds more reassuring but we had better make concrete plans for interception of any attempts to resupply by land or air.shyamd wrote: Another must read. Entire 14 corps (35k troops) plus an arty brigade placed on high state of operational readiness. Will escalate in a calibrated manner based on PRC moves and provide time for diplomacy to work. The Toilet article contradicts earlier articles talking about helicopter sorties supporting these troops.
SF and UAVs conducting missions of monitoring PLA and their force levels.
Pranav's post is valuable and should be archived under good posts. It is a great reference for the specious rationalizations that Indian ruling class routinely exhibits.Pranav wrote:
One should listen to and understand the other side. The Chinese may have had their own perceptions of Nehru's policies of allowing the CIA to train Tibetans, for example.
One has to understand the differences between the outlook and long-term objectives of the Sinic civilization vs. those of the western power structure. China is important because it is one major power which is least subverted. Far more independent than India.
From Indian POV, the policies of the western power structure have arguably been more damaging. Are those advocating hostility willing to show at least as much hostility towards the west?
Not that I am advocating hostility towards anybody ... ultimately one has to do whatever it takes to advance national interest, including cooperating with the west where necessary. Strength and vigilance, with understanding, is the best approach.
Hello, what are you disputing.KLNMurthy wrote:Pranav's post is valuable and should be archived under good posts. It is a great reference for the specious rationalizations that Indian ruling class routinely exhibits.Pranav wrote:
One should listen to and understand the other side. The Chinese may have had their own perceptions of Nehru's policies of allowing the CIA to train Tibetans, for example.
One has to understand the differences between the outlook and long-term objectives of the Sinic civilization vs. those of the western power structure. China is important because it is one major power which is least subverted. Far more independent than India.
From Indian POV, the policies of the western power structure have arguably been more damaging. Are those advocating hostility willing to show at least as much hostility towards the west?
Not that I am advocating hostility towards anybody ... ultimately one has to do whatever it takes to advance national interest, including cooperating with the west where necessary. Strength and vigilance, with understanding, is the best approach.
Rascal acts like a disinterested party inside India advising restrain to both sides! When China is recalictrant how does India get tagged by Indian elite?The Line of Actual Control is crossed many times each year as if to underline the fact that India and China do not agree fully on its contours, but the latest incursion by Chinese troops in Ladakh has cast a shadow on the new warmth in ties between New Delhi and the new leadership in Beijing because the troops have stayed put and not returned. Just a month ago, at their meeting on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in Durban, Chinese President Xi Jinping told Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that the two countries must “broaden exchanges and cooperation between their armed forces and deepen mutual military and security trust.” President Xi also talked about both sides striving towards “a fair, rational solution” on the border issue “as soon as possible.” Further, he said both countries should “continue to safeguard peace in their border areas and prevent the issue from affecting bilateral relations.” The developments in Daulat Beg Oldie, 10 km inside Indian territory, near Burthe in eastern Ladakh, are contradictory to the spirit of the sentiments expressed by the Chinese President. A flag meeting between the two sides on Tuesday, the second in a week, failed to resolve the issue, and the PLA soldiers continue to camp on the Indian side. To their credit, both governments have seen the wisdom of not allowing the matter to escalate, and have been restrained in their statements.
In the last decade or so, both sides have tried to quarantine the border issue from the rest of the bilateral relationship, succeeding in large measure. India and China have held 15 rounds of talks on their border dispute since 2005; additionally, in 2012, a border management mechanism was set up to sort out potential threats to ‘peace and tranquillity’. Meanwhile, trade relations have grown to a point where they are routinely cited as a model in how nations with a border dispute can still have civil ties. Despite many other irritants, there have been high-level contacts to widen engagement to strategic and security related issues, including a bilateral dialogue on Afghanistan, and an agreement on maritime co-operation. On the military front too, there has been interaction. Army exercises are planned and there is greater coordination on anti-piracy measures. Unfortunately, incidents such as the one in Ladakh take away from these successes, feeding into unhelpful popular perceptions about India-China relations. The scheduled visit by Premier Li Keqiang next month, in itself significant as it is likely to be his first tour abroad after assuming office, is now likely to be dominated by the border issue. It is essential that both sides work swiftly to clear the air.
Meanwhile just like in 1962,China's intrusion into the Daulat Beg Oldi (DBO) sector, at the northern tip of India just below the towering Karakoram Pass, is a demonstration of anger - certainly that of the People's Liberation Army (PLA), and possibly that of Beijing as well - at the Indian Army's third surge towards the Sino-Indian border.
The first Indian move to militarily occupy the Sino-Indian border began after 1957, when New Delhi discovered that China had built a nearly 200-km highway through the Aksai Chin, a high altitude desert that abuts Ladakh on the east. Belatedly realising the need to establish a presence along its claim lines in Ladakh and the North East Frontier Agency (NEFA, now Arunachal Pradesh), New Delhi rushed troops into these unknown areas in what was known as the "Forward Policy". With the PLA fearing that India was backing a massive Tibetan rebellion, and with that apprehension inflamed by the refuge that New Delhi granted the Dalai Lama in 1959, the Indian move forward degenerated into war.
{Idiot how is responding to China's illegal and surreptious building of Aksai Chin road an Indian troop surge?}
The second Indian move to the border began in 1982. Army chief, General KV Krishna Rao persuaded prime minister Indira Gandhi that 20 years of fearful holding back had to end and the Indian Army moved forward again, deploying in strength over the next four years in Tawang and Chushul. In 1986, a Chinese patrol pitched tents in a disputed area called Wangdung, north of Tawang, triggering a furious Indian Army build up that came close to actual hostilities. China sought a flag meeting; the PLA realised that it was dealing with a very different Indian Army from the one it had whipped in 1962. Diplomatic engagement led to Rajiv Gandhi's 1988 visit to China. In 1993, prime minister Narasimha Rao visited Beijing and signed an "Agreement on the Maintenance of Peace and Tranquility along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the India-China Border Area," which maintains a largely peaceful border even today.
{Again refer to previous comment. How is responding to Chinese pitching tents on Inidan side of LAC a troop surge?}
We are now in the middle of the third Indian surge to the border and, like the previous two, it is being contested by China. It began with the raising of two Indian mountain divisions for the defence of Arunachal Pradesh and with the activation of three Sukhoi-30 fighter bases in the Brahmaputra valley. Simultaneously, seven Advanced Landing Grounds in Arunachal were refurbished, permitting their use for forward replenishment and for heliborne operations. Two armoured brigades are being raised and a mountain strike corps will begin raising shortly. The improvement of road infrastructure forms a part of this effort.
In Ladakh, too, India is thickening its presence on the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the de facto border with China. The arrival of 8 Mountain Division in Kargil during the Kargil War freed a full brigade for the LAC. With militancy reducing in Kashmir, another brigade moved out to Chushul. Landing grounds were activated in Nyoma and DBO and roads started coming up to connect isolated posts.
All this raises China's hackles. Road building near the LAC, especially in the areas of Chushul-Demchok and a new alignment that will connect DBO, has been steadfastly resisted by the PLA. Chinese patrols objected to new bunkers built by the Indian Army near Chushul several years ago; like today, the PLA retaliated by establishing a camp on India's side of the LAC, forcing the Indian Army to negotiate a settlement. The current PLA encampment at DBO is again retaliation for Indian Army defences constructed elsewhere.
{Throughout the sixities thru 80s the Communists of all shades used to blame the 1962 Chinese agggression on India. This man is doing the same here.}
The Indian Army has no good options in DBO, unlike in 1986 during the Wangdung intrusion. Then, the army was close to its road head and the helicopter base at Tawang, permitting a massive build up that quickly dominated the Chinese camp (that the Chinese are still there is another matter). Today India has no surface link to DBO, and the DBO landing ground permits only a limited build-up. In contrast the Chinese enjoy a road link to their camp across the wide Depsang Plain. Like in 1962, India's logistical build up has not kept up with the operational build up. Now, there is little option but to negotiate a Chinese withdrawal.
China has clearly signalled its discomfort with India's troop build up, submitting a draft proposal for a freeze on troop levels that will solidify and make permanent India's disadvantage along the LAC. The ministry of external affairs (MEA), eager to create "deliverables" that could create an air of success around Chinese Premier Li Keqiang's visit to India next month, is studying the proposal.
China's strategy is evident: to confine Indian strategic attention to the Sino-Indian border, preventing New Delhi from looking beyond at Tibet and Xinjiang, China's most sensitive pressure points. Beijing apprehends - with the fearfulness of a state that knows its weaknesses - that signing a border settlement would free India from the burden of having to continually lay claim to, and physically defend, a challenged border. China realises that a settlement would change the fundamental nature of the New Delhi-Beijing engagement. No longer a supplicant, India could raise the issue of Tibet, a lead that western democracies would quickly follow.
So far, India's military, bureaucracy and political elite have fallen for China's game, directing their energies into placating China in the hope of a border settlement. Realising our ill preparedness to defend our territorial claims has created endemic strategic defensiveness. New Delhi remains disinclined to change the game by challenging China on Tibet.
This remains so despite frequent reminders of China's vulnerabilities. On Tuesday, 21 people were killed near Kashgar, in Xinjiang, in a violent armed stand off. The anger against Beijing in its restive border regions was again underlined on Wednesday when two Tibetan monks in Sichuan set themselves afire, adding to the gory tally of more than 100 self-immolations since 2011. China has flooded Xinjiang and Tibet with black-suited armed militias, whose members now carry portable fire extinguishers to douse Tibetans who are attempting self-immolation. But there remains widespread resentment at Beijing's increasingly colonial presence in these areas.
In contrast, India's border population along the LAC remains heartwarmingly Indian. In Ladakh, Himachal, Uttarakhand, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh, despite New Delhi's inexplicable neglect, pro-India sentiment is high and China is regarded with distrust and suspicion that is constantly reinforced from across the border.
{i]{Later part of his article is good.}[/i]
NEW DELHI: A major reshuffle is expected in the top Army brass with several new appointments being made in key formations, including the Udhampur-based Northern Command of the force.
Present western Army commander Lt Gen Sanjiv Chachra has been recommended to be shifted to head the Northern Command to succeed Lt Gen KT Parnaik, who is retiring on June 30, officials said.
Lt Gen Chachra is expected to be replaced by Lt Gen Philip Campose, who is currently heading the perspective planning (PP) directorate at the Army headquarters here.
Present Director General (IT) Lt Gen Sanjeev Madhok is expected to be elevated as the chief of Army's Shimla-based Training Command, the officials said.
Central Army commander Lt Gen Anil Chait is expected to be shifted to head the tri-services integrated defence services headquarters in Delhi while he is expected to be succeeded by Lt Gen Rajan Bakshi, they said.
Bakshi is presently heading the Leh-based 14 Corps. The defence ministry has given its approval to the new appointments and has forwarded the proposal for final clearance by the appointments committee of the Cabinet.
TNN Bangalore: April 5, 2039: The Shahi Imam of the Islamic Republic of Uttar Mughalistan (formerly known as Uttar Pradesh and Bihar) announced the taller than oceans and deeper than mountains relationship with China on the 20th anniversary of Chinese reclamation of Bodh Gaya . The announcement came from the rebuilt ramparts of the Grand Babri Masjid destroyed by Hindu fanatics decades ago at Islampur (formerly Ayodhya) at a function held for the Chinese Ambassador to Uttar Mughalistan. 20 subversive Nepalese leaders were handed to Chinese police at a border checkpost South of Kathmandu, highlighting close anti terrorist cooperation between China and Uttar Mughalistan.
The President of UM endorsed the controversial move of handing over Mukteshwar, Ramgarh and upper reaches of Uttaranchal to the Chinese in a deal done last decade. India's aggressive takeover of Noida in a pre-emptive military maneuver prior to formation of Mughalistan and subsequent building of an electrified fencing is one of several major disputes with Uttar Mughalistan. Britain and US have condemned India's aggression over the NOIDA territory. China endorses a peaceful resolution of the NOIDA dispute. Both countries claim that territory.
The President also opposed the electrified fencing off Jharkhand, Chattisgarh with Mughalistan by India and requested China to supply 200 J XX fighters to help maintain the balance of power in the region. Many parts of Chattisgarh, MP and Rajasthan borders are disputed. Artillery firing over several sectors has made life for local villagers unbearable. Respected peace Laureate Aruna Roy in Guardian mentions increased defense spending on both sides to be a major cause of poverty in both feuding nations.
Reports also mentioned the Chinese leadership displayed disappointment with Indian leadership over misuse of Chinese myths by Indian citizens, specially naming people and places after Shiva and Vishnu. Prof Ravichandran Guha, a leading expert in China studies has argued credibly that the Chinese have a point. Just like companies in China are not allowed to brand products as Apple, or Appal or Appel, brand equity for Chinese ownership over the Myths of Shiva and Vishnu is diluted. The Indian Foreign Minister Salman Khurram says constructive talks with Chinese leaders are on this issue. WHen pressed by reporters on Chinese issuing staple Visas to those whose names are are Vishnu, Shiva, Gautam he was emphatic that India has taken a strong stance and had issued a Demarche to the Chinese Ambassador in the Capital city of Bangalore.
Foreign Minister Khurram urged the visiting Chinese Minister to use his good offices to request Uttar Mughalistan to issue visas to pilgrims for the Kumbh Mela at Allahabad, a practice discontinued for 2 decades. Last year Mughalistan executed 7 Indians who crossed illegally to take a dip in the Ganges. The Minister said India had strongly protested the outrage and also then given a demarche to the Mughalistan Ambassador and presented a 300 page dossier.
Mani Swamy Aiyer since has made several trips on track 2 diplomacy and says "the hospitality received in Mughalistan is over whelming and the people are just like us. We need to engage with the peace lobby in Mughalistan. Religion and politics must not come in the way of brotherly relations between the two nations."
Meanwhile India has received a loan from IMF to put storage tankers at sea and produce much needed fresh water. Under the Ganges Yamuna Treaty of Mughalistan, India gets 5% of waters which are not enough for it's need. Even that Indians claim is being violated. Indian Foreign Minister Salman Khurram thanked China for voting in India's favor and thus helping secure the IMF loan. There were no negative votes for India. Even Mughalistan did not vote against the loan for India, though experts off the record say is due to Chinese pressure. Leading GCC experts have pointed that a sign of growing maturity in diplomatic behind the scene consultations between the GCC, Islamabad, Islampur and China with Bangalore. A sign many in the Indian media and establishment say point to the fact that despite Indo-Chinese differences, we can work together to solve our problems. IN that light Guha has acknowledged the success of the border treaties with China South of Simla. The Indo-Chinese borders south of Dharmasala and The East-West Siliguri belt are cited were cited as examples of mature cooperation between the 2 nations after a century of mistrust.
Hardline Hindu nationalists demanded in the Indian parliament taxing the Mughalistan-Pakistan Road corridor in lieu of more water rights. India which had acknowledged the demand and provided a transit fee free corridor between Mughalistan and Pakistan decades ago said there was no question it would dishonor the treaty of free transit. Talks were on also between Islamabad, Islampur, Bangalore on the question of illegal immigrants misusing the free tranist corridor. Both Pakistan and Mughalistan maintain there were no illegal migration and misuse. They blame India for blocking the passage of 40 Tanks and 136 heavy artillery vehicles from Islamabad to Mughalistan. The case has been taken to the International courts. Indian sources say they have a strong case of blocking the artillery and tanks. The ruling they say will probably be restricted to 2 tanks and 20 heavy artillery pieces every week as a face saving gesture for Islamabad and Islampur at the maximum.
Indian Hindu nationalists also created an uproar in parliament on news that the Indian PM decided to de link talks and terror. Coming soon after the massive attacks in Chennai, Vizag, Cochin the leadership stressed that we will have to continue to live as neighbors and terror affects both countries. Aruna Roy in landmark article in the Guardian had earlier stressed that Saffron terror and misuse of Chinese symbols was a major cause of distrust between these neighboring nations. Many Indians have stopped naming Children after Shiva and Vishnu. Noted leftist Mr Bannerjee in the Hindu even suggested making a list of names and seeking approval from Chinese authorities which ones would be acceptable. Mr Guha approves of such venture and talks as they will bring trust and show China, that India is sensitive about Chinese legacy issues on misuse of names like Gautama and Shiva. Leaders and experts are of the opinion that violence and war are not an option or solution to the development and improvement of ties.
Okay. Then what? Attack? Do you honestly believe Congress will stick it to the Chinese? We can't even deal with the Pakistanis or Sri Lankans.Pranav wrote:The TOI article sounds more reassuring but we had better make concrete plans for interception of any attempts to resupply by land or air.shyamd wrote: Another must read. Entire 14 corps (35k troops) plus an arty brigade placed on high state of operational readiness. Will escalate in a calibrated manner based on PRC moves and provide time for diplomacy to work. The Toilet article contradicts earlier articles talking about helicopter sorties supporting these troops.
SF and UAVs conducting missions of monitoring PLA and their force levels.
Also, IMO gradual but steady build-up of force levels needs to start immediately.
can it really be that China wants to flex its muscles against India in a repetition of the Sino-Indian border war of the fall of 1962 that resulted in at least 2,000 killed, two thirds of them Indian? Almost without anyone noticing what was going on, two dozen Chinese troops have moved about six miles beyond the “Line of Actual Control” that’s viewed, at least in New Delhi, as India’s de facto northernmost border.A few dozen Indian troops have set up camp several hundred meters from the Chinese in a confrontation that no one quite expects to burst into bloodshed. Should not loudspeaker demands to get out, and banners strung up bearing the same message, be enough to persuade the Chinese to decide, We’ve made our point and now we can leave. That’s how it’s been in hundreds of such “intrusions,” as they’re delicately called, over the decades since the two sides were actually shooting at one another in a contest in which the Chinese definitely proved their prowess.
This time, though, the Chinese are staying much longer than usual in a most inhospitable region covered with snow and ice at altitudes of several thousand meters. Much to the consternation of Indian policy-makers, the Chinese commander has refused to come to any agreement or understanding with the Indian commander. This time around, the Chinese seemed more determined than usual to nip away at the Indian lines — and Indian self-esteem.The Chinese would seem to have already amply proved their military superiority by refusing to consider abandoning a virtually uninhabited region called Aksai Chin that the Chinese took over in 1962 and have held ever since. The region is so desolate, so difficult to defend and of so little immediate value that India virtually ceded it while still claiming it. The Line of Actual Control, as far as the Indians are concerned, is the border separating the territory the Indians still hold from Chinese-held territory.There is a feeling in Delhi of, this can’t be, and won’t this latest hassle go away. That’s partly because China’s premier, Li Keqiang, is due to come to Delhi next month to meet India’s Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh. They should have a lot to talk about, including the problem of China diverting precious waters by damming the enormous rivers that flow out of China through northern India and neighboring Bangladesh. The Indus River flows out of Tibet, through northern India south of the disputed line with China before cutting through Pakistan.The Chinese and Indian leaders may decide they have much more to worry about than the latest Chinese incursion. China is Pakistan’s biggest arms supplier. India imports arms from Russia and the U.S., not from China. The image of Chinese troops hanging out in tents way up there on the roof of India is just a symbol of much larger problems.In a larger sense, the Chinese intrusion symbolizes Chinese muscle-flexing from the South China Sea, which it claims as its own, to the East China Sea, where the Chinese face off against Japan’s hold over an island cluster known as the Senkakus to the Japanese, Daioyu to the Chinese. And then there’s China’s complex relationship with North Korea, which China keeps on life support with fuel and food while North Korea threatens South Korea, Japan and the U.S. with nuclear war.On the periphery of China, two dozen Chinese troops huddled in tents at an altitude of nearly 6,000 meters are at the tip of the point of China’s expansionist aims throughout Asia.
Incursion acne, can be cured with ointment, says Khurshid
"Somebody asked me is the standoff with China going to dilute your friendship, will it derail your relationship with China, will it mean you will not visit China, will it mean the premier of China will not visit India?" Khurshid said at a FICCI function Thursday.
"Doomsday predictions are absolutely absurd. It's absurd not so much for China as it's absurd for us," he said. "We shouldn't destroy years of investment, years of contribution that we have made to this relationship because somewhere some little thing goes wrong. One little spot is acne, which cannot force you to say that this is not a beautiful face... that acne can be addressed by simply applying an ointment," he said, adding this should not be considered as surrender or admission of defeat.
"Ointment is part of the process of growing up, just as acne is part of the process of growing up. And the relation between India and China is a relationship which is growing up. We started off as children who fought over something they needed, demanded or believed were theirs. They have grown up into two beautiful adults who can talk about these things and who can find a solution," he said.
Apparently the tactic of crowding them out has been used with success on previous such occasions. Preferable to push them back without any shooting, as far as possible.RoyG wrote: Okay. Then what? Attack? Do you honestly believe Congress will stick it to the Chinese? We can't even deal with the Pakistanis or Sri Lankans.
Seems to have some inaccuracies -Singha wrote:editor of orbat.com is scathing as usual
As per Kanwal Sibal on timesnow, it is the Chinese that are resisting demarcation.· Now, while the Indians are the biggest cowards in the known universe, they are not morons. They have steadfastly insisted that the border can be satisfactorily demarcated – once China vacates the parts of Indian Ladakh that they seized in 1959-1962. In other words, the demarcated border will become the line of control as it existed before 1959.
Practically speaking, from their side they have a wide, mostly flat plain, with good roads, whereas from our side we have very mountainous terrain to cross and a toehold on the said plain on the other side of the mountains. It would probably be much easier for them it bring tanks to Daulat Beg Oldi than it would be for us. Not that these disadvantages cannot be handled with good planning and technology, but these statements smack of emotionalism.It is a complete fantasy to think the Chinese can take on India in the north. It does not help this fantasy is perpetuated by India itself.
Chinese officials told TOI that they appreciate the calm and mature response of the Indian foreign ministry, which discussed the problem without calling it an invasion. It's the Indian media, particularly television, which was raking up the issue and forcing New Delhi to take action, the official said.
There are clear signals that China is looking for a face-saving solution to the problem but would not publicly backtrack from its formal position that Chinese troops "have not crossed the line".
"I don't agree with your allegation that it is the Chinese side which provoked confrontation between border troops," ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying told TOI at a regular briefing. However, she went on to say, "We believe this incident can also be properly handled and will not affect peace and stability of border areas as well as the normal development of India China relations."
Hua also said she did not have much information about the proposed visit of minister of external affairs Salman Khurshid's visit to Beijing. Khurshid is expected to visit Beijing on May 9, to be followed by the visit of Chinese premier Li Keqiang to India.
The Chinese foreign ministry seemed to speak in two voices saying the country's troops have not crossed over to the Indian side but also expressing its readiness to discuss what may be a "nonissue".
"With the boundary not demarcated yet, it is inevitable for problems to crop up," Hua said. The ministry, which earlier said the Chinese troops did not cross the LAC, has now replaced 'LAC' with the word 'border'.
A source in New Delhi said the LAC is a more definite line and incursions can be proved while there are differing perceptions about what is the 'border'.
"When there is a problem in border areas, the two sides should resolve it through friendly consultations through existing mechanisms and channels," Hua said. {Then the question is why did PLA launch this incursion ? By claiming that they have not incurred, China is setting up a circular argument here}
With its worst fears allayed, New Delhi seems prepared to address Chinese concerns about aggressive patrolling by Indian troops in the area, repeated air violations by Indian helicopters and some constructions including one in Phukche area whenever the next significant interaction takes place.
While there are no demands for demolition of structures, the Indian side could well accommodate some of the Chinese demands on patrolling and air violations, sources indicate.
{If there is no demand for demolition of structures, why is India offering to do so ? Do we want to generous to kindle kindness in the Chinese ?}
The assessment, shared even by Indian army which is supposed to be more realistic in its assessment about the Chinese and their intent, coincided with clear signs that both countries could be seeking a de-escalation in eastern Ladakh.
"I think the important thing is that both sides should know that this must remain an isolated incident. This should not spill over into a larger spectrum," said external affairs minister Salman Khurshid in New Delhi. Although it was along the lines of his earlier statement , Khurshid's remark appeared more significant in the light of government's assessment that China was not really spoiling for a fight over the boundary issue/
In Beijing too , both the foreign ministry and the army establishment played down tensions saying the matter is likely to be resolved through effective communication.
Urging the media to be patient, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said, "We also believe the two sides continue to solve the issue in a friendly manner and we will not let the issue affect border peace and security and normal development of China-India relations".
The Chinese defence ministry also refuted reports that it troops and aircraft crossed the LAC. Denying violations, a ministry spokesman Yang Yujun said media reports on Chinese border troops, military planes and helicopters crossing the line of actual control are "not true".
While the Chinese claim that its troop or helicopters are not violating the LAC might be based on its view of what is its territory and this may not match India's assessment, the mood seems to be conciliatory.
Khurshid said he is going ahead with his trip to China on May 9 and said, "Let us allow that (border) mechanism to find its solution and repeatedly it has found. And we have good reasons to believe that it should be able to do it again."
Hua also put the incident in a more modest light. "It is inevitable for problems to prop up in border areas. When there is a problem it should be resolved through friendly consultations though existing mechanisms and channels...We believe this incident can also be handled and will not affect the peace and stability of the border areas as well as the normal development of China and India relations," she said.
The China Study Group, headed by National Security Advisor (NSA) Shiv Shankar Menon and comprising cabinet secretary along with secretaries of key ministries, is believed to have conveyed their assessment to the political leadership, while advising restraint.
Based on its recommendations, the government is willing to wait out a few more days for the 30 odd Chinese soldiers to pull back from Burthe in Daulat Beg Oldie.
The assessment that the PLA's temporary tents had no political message is not just a deduction but based on credible inputs received by the government from Chinese contacts. And this also means New Delhi is not thinking about escalating the issue, and has made up its mind that the local border management mechanisms such as the flag meeting must find solution to the stand-off.
Dependable sources said this deduction does not compromise New Delhi's stand that the latest act of PLA was a violation of the April 2005 agreement between the two sides on the "political parameters and guiding principles for the settlement of the India-China boundary question." Among other things the treaty commits that "neither side shall use or threaten to use force against the other by any means."
With the broad parameters of its response to the PLA provocation clear, New Delhi has decided to let a flag meeting of the brigade commanders, or the 'working mechanism for consultation and coordination on India-China border' between a joint secretary of the ministry of external affairs and a director-general of the Chinese foreign ministry to deal with the subject.