A former Tibetan monk has died and another is seriously injured after setting themselves on fire in separate incidents in south west-China.
Activists say at least 14 people have set themselves alight in the past year, demanding an end to tight Chinese controls in ethnically Tibetan areas.
The Dalai Lama has condemned the self-immolations, but says people are being driven to desperation by "cultural genocide" under Chinese rule.
The Philippines has accused China of intruding into its waters around the disputed Spratly islands after three ships were spotted in December.
A remnant of a decades-old Communist Party perks system, the luxe wheels are a conspicuous target of growing public outrage over the privileges of the elite. Angry Chinese have started posting photos.
Reporting from Beijing—Even the police are driving Porsches.
Chinese officials love their cars — big, fancy, expensive cars. A chocolate-colored Bentley worth $560,000 is cruising the streets of Beijing with license plates indicating it is registered to Zhongnanhai, the Communist Party headquarters. The armed police, who handle riots and crowd control, have the same model of Bentley in blue.
And just in case it needs to go racing off to war, the Chinese army has a black Maserati that sells in China for $330,000.
"Corruption on wheels is an accurate description of this problem," said Wang Yukai, a professor at the Chinese Academy of Governance in Beijing, who has been advocating restrictions on officials' cars for years.
Armed with cellphone cameras, angry Chinese have started posting photographs of the expensive government cars — identifiable by their license plates — on a microblog site called Anti-Official Cars Extravagance that was set up in August. (Government censors shut down an earlier version of the same site.)
"No wonder there's no money left for school buses!" remarked one contributor to the car-outrage website. The commentators were particularly scathing about the expensive cars with military plates. "Why does the military need sports cars? Will it help them run faster when there's a war?"
Photographs also showed cars with government, police and military plates clearly being used on personal business: dropping off children at school, at a shopping mall, on a family vacation.
They’re very picky about designer labels. They don’t spend money on DIY or lingerie. And they never, ever buy cheese. Why are Chinese consumers such complicated creatures?
Whether it’s a Louis Vuitton handbag or a bottle of top-flight Bordeaux, watered down with Sprite to disguise the taste, looking rich is incredibly important to China’s new consumers.
There are, in effect, two Chinas and the need to be seen to have arrived, to be one of the 300 million consumers with money to burn, means that it’s worth sitting for hours in a traffic jam just to show off your new BMW. Or spending six months scrimping and saving to afford a Gucci bag.
“For Chinese consumers, Confucian group-think is important and at the moment they are still buying status to show that they have achieved things,” says Paul French, founder of the market research company Access Asia. “So people don’t worry that they have had to spend the past six months eating nothing but pot noodles in order to afford the newest Louis Vuitton handbag.”
Wanting to play it safe and also to make purchases which show clearly where you stand in China’s social hierarchy has its roots in the Chinese concept of “face”. This idea loosely correlates to how your appearance and conduct lead others to assess your status in society.
Here are my views on this.rajrang wrote:Perhaps India should begin stapling visas for all Chinese on the grounds they are not a free people, they live in a dictatorship. (We do not have to do this for people living in other dictatorships.)
. Technically they would want all residents of Aru. Pr. to enter and leave China without visas because they are supposed to be Chinese nationals according to the corner that the Chinese have painted themselves in. The Chinese do not want to leave any mark on a passport of an Aru. Pr resident that could be used "against them" to say "Ha ha you fools - claim the territory but treat its residents as foreigners and issue them visas[/i]" They are trying to have a "consistent policy" of idiotic pinpricks as if that will change anything.A top Chinese diplomat said on Sunday that China would “make concerted efforts” to improve relations with India in 2012. The comments are seen as an attempt to draw a line over recent differences that had strained the ties between the neighbours.
“China hopes that the two sides will support each other and learn from each other, so as to push for better and faster development of the Sino-Indian strategic and cooperative partnership,” said Assistant Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin.
The rare remarks by a Chinese official on relations with India were made in an interview with the state-run Xinhua news agency.
His comments came after a string of recent commentaries in more nationalistic party-run media outlets had taken a hard line on India, accusing New Delhi of being part of a U.S.-led “containment” strategy and looking to provoke China into disputes.
Only on Friday, the Communist Party-run Global Times blamed India's Ministry of External Affairs for being “full of narrow nationalism” for issuing an advisory and “hyping” up a trade dispute that saw two Indian traders being detained in the southern city of Yiwu.
Mr. Liu said both countries had maintained a “growing momentum” in developing the relationship, and had “established effective communication and coordination on significant international and regional issues.”
He said exchanges in 2011, which was marked as the “year of exchanges” between the neighbours, had helped “increase mutual understanding,” citing the visit of a 500-member Indian youth delegation to Beijing.
Two-way trade, he said, had reached US$ 67.28 billion in the first 11 months of last year, a 21.8 per cent year-on-year rise. The past year also saw the first meeting of the newly set up strategic and economic dialogue and the annual defence dialogue, which was held in New Delhi last month after an almost two-year hiatus.
Indian officials said on Saturday that a 15-member military delegation from India will leave for China on a four-day visit on Tuesday. India agreed to send a truncated delegation following Chinese objections to issue a visa to an Indian Air Force official from Arunachal Pradesh, who was slated to travel as part of a 30-member group.
Bade there is no need to play games deliberately. the games are on anyway and it is easy to play them. The Chinese also know it is stupid and pointless but they lose echandee. And it is right for us to make them red faced.Bade wrote:^^^ I have not tried this stunt, but I bet India will have to let you in say if you lose the Green card in transit. You may not be able to leave out of India without a replacement green card.
To irritate the PRC one way is for India to encourage many or even all Arunachal residents to keep applying for Chinese visa. Now what will the Chinese do, will it issue them all stapled visas or will it have to deny them visa on some grounds due to overload of requests for visas and checks that they will have to do. Silly but they cannot deny, as denial implies Arunachal is part of India. One could also step it up furhter and even non-Arunachal residents could be given fake Arunachal residency passports and made to apply for chinese visas. If large number of such fraud cases are rejected by the chinese, then India could claim, see you denied them visas so it means Arunachal is not a part of China, but these are bona-fide residents and we have proof for the same.
Much ado about nothing. I am sure the areas Chinese get to visit in India is already restricted - apart from the fact that they are anyway restricted in their own country. The Indian Express too is run by my fellow Indians onlee who see insults where they should not feel insulted and are demanding that the President should be insulted next. It would be a massive self goal if this issue was taken to the President.Philip wrote:The editorial in the Indian Express demands cancellation of the trip and that the pres. of India should step in.
Actually they will - first the airline itself at checkin will see what valid papers you have for travelling to said destination. so if you have no visa , no GC or stamp or papers, no phoren passport - you will not make it past check in.OT but why should Indian officials at an airport bother whether you are carrying your green card or not? It's your headache and you will be kicked back to India from the US and India will accept you as an Indian citizen. India cannot stop you from travelling if you have a passport but are not carrying your green card.
am not sure which point you mean when you say 'enter". If you do nto have it whilechecking in - you are not going anywhere till you go back to consulate etc and get app papers.Just an off topic query for those in the know. If you hold a valid green card for the USA but an Indian passport, will they let you in minus green card?
Exactly. It is the punishment that airlines face that makes them check. This came from experience where people would reach a foreign destination minus visa, and not be let in and no airline would want to take them back, leaving the burden on the immigration authorities in the foreign port to manage. It is not an Indian emigration requirement. A stapled visa is no insult. It is just stupidity.Surya wrote:Actually they will - first the airline itself at checkin will see what valid papers you have for travelling to said destination. so if you have no visa , no GC or stamp or papers, no phoren passport - you will not make it past check in.OT but why should Indian officials at an airport bother whether you are carrying your green card or not? It's your headache and you will be kicked back to India from the US and India will accept you as an Indian citizen. India cannot stop you from travelling if you have a passport but are not carrying your green card.
The airlines are fined thousands of dollars if they allow someone without the right docs and plus their cost to take them back.
shiv wrote:Much ado about nothing. I am sure the areas Chinese get to visit in India is already restricted - apart from the fact that they are anyway restricted in their own country. The Indian Express too is run by my fellow Indians onlee who see insults where they should not feel insulted and are demanding that the President should be insulted next. It would be a massive self goal if this issue was taken to the President.Philip wrote:The editorial in the Indian Express demands cancellation of the trip and that the pres. of India should step in.
Not surprised that lots of people feel insulted. chinese actions are designed to do that and provoke a rash response that can make India look stupid.rajrang wrote:
Lots of intelligent people including the press see this as irritating or insulting. You may not and that is your choice. Perception also matters even if one assumes for argument purposes that this is not an insult. When you are perceived to be insulted it is also important that the other party is replied in kind.
Why would this be a self goal if this issue was taken to the President? According to my understanding the idea is to have the President cancel the visit.
At this instant in time China is politically in a corner thanks to their antics in the S China Sea and the stepped up pressure from the US and other countries in the Far East. Even TSP's attitude toward India appear to be softening (FTA). India can afford to take a strong stand in my view.
Shyam it should be possible to piss off the Chinese in many easy ways - seeing as they are already pissed off and doing completely idiotic and pointless things like issuing stapled visas or refusing visas to some Indians.shyam wrote:
If India really wants to piss off of PRC, make an Arunachal Pradesh resident the President of India. Let that person make an official visit to China and receive future Hus in India.
Sir,One important aspect about CCP bad and unstable domestic situations make them rabid and agressive on the foreign policy may be attention diversion tactics on the home frontshiv wrote:Sridhar, in the case of an army officer it would be imprudent to send him with no stamp. But what if India were to do a test case. Say a trained intel operative with a real or false passport that puts his birth as Aru. Pr. If China puts no stamp on his passport, send him anyway and see what happens. Are they going to send him back and blame India for sending someone without a visa? Or will they allow him in without a visa? Allowing people into a country without a visa is normal for citizens of many countries in the world. It would be China's policy that is inconsistent. Would they stamp this man's passport at entry and exit? Would they arrest him?
It poses more complications for China no matter what they did. It is a highly silly symbolic thing they are doing - utterly devoid of anything other than juvenile spite, like a petulant child throwing a tantrum. Overreacting to it as if it has deep meaning is unnecessary. It only requires a ROTFL and a hack thoo.
Rajesh back in the 50s, Taiwan held a UN security council seat. That seat was offered to Nehru by the US, Nehru refused. Eventually Taiwan was displaced and China got the seat.RajeshA wrote:
Except for holding the political line about "One China" and keep according PRC formal recognition as de-jure China, etc. lets do everything to treat Taiwan as the real de-facto China.
Individual visas and stamping are not dictated by the CPC. It will be some low level tinpot functionary who wants to look tough and maintain echandee and maybe rise in the ChiCom party competing against 80 million others. So it is entirely possible that some chute is doing this for his echandee. We need to see how must importance this issue is given by MEA and army. They will have inside info and also inside info of how we are needling the Chinese but pretending to be holier than thou. In fact India's holier than thou pretence itself needles enough people as it were - and in fact this post may need to go into the "Indians being attacked" thread.Ashok Gottipati wrote: Sir,One important aspect about CCP bad and unstable domestic situations make them rabid and agressive on the foreign policy may be attention diversion tactics on the home front
The body of a monk who burned himself to death has been paraded through the streets of a town in north-west China by hundreds of Tibetans, it has been reported.
The dead man was the third Tibetan to set fire to himself in three days and the 15th over the last year. The monk – named as 42-year-old Sopa - was from Qinghai province, previously untouched by the spate of self-immolations.
In an indication of the growing anxiety among officials, Xinhua announced on Monday that senior officials in Tibet had promised "stepped-up efforts to strengthen the management of monasteries in the fight against the Dalai Lama group".
India was added to the list that consisted of those other ASEAN countries, sometime in the last year or so. According to their new rules, NRIs working in those nations listed above can enter Taiwan visa-free. Similar rules apply in South Korea too, I believe. Hong Kong and Macau don't require a visa at all for any Indian national (nor necessarily NRI) - you just need a passport.The nationals of India, Thailand, Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, who also possess a valid visa or permanent resident certificate issued by U.S.A., Canada, Japan, U.K., Schengen Convention countries, Australia or New Zealand, are eligible for the visa exemption program, which permits a duration of stay up to 30 days. Those who meet the above qualification and have never been employed in Taiwan as blue-collar workers have to apply to the “Advance Online Registration System for the Visitors of Nationals from Five Southeast Asian Countries to Taiwan” of the R.O.C. National Immigration Agency (website: https://nas.immigration.gov.tw/nase) for an "Authorization Certificate" before coming to Taiwan. After completion, the printed-out Certificate can be used by the foreign visitor for boarding the airplane and the immigration inspection.
paramu wrote:Let the officer, for whom PRC said he doesn't need visa, go to PRC and also visit Tibet. His point of view should be that he doesn't need visa to visit Tibet and he will travel to Tibet using Indian passport.
If that works, India should issue passports to many Tibetan refugees with place of birth marked as Arunachal Pradesh and let them visit Tibet regularly.
The joke here is that the Chinese themselves need permits to go to Tibet.It was much worse than simple refusal. Nehru said that India would not consider an UNSC seat unless China was first inducted into that position. Nehru argued this position forcefully even in the Commonwealth meetings where Australia & South Africa were more anti-communist than even the US at that time. In 1958 India tabled an item to discuss the inclusion of Mainland China and expulsion of Formosa and argued its case bitterly. In July 1959, India once again proposed that the General Assembly of the United Nations should take up the question of admitting Peking China in the place of the Kuomintang representatives, in spite of what had happened recently in Tibet. Soon thereafter, when asked about referring Tibet to the UN, Nehru pointed out that the U.N., “great body as it is, has rather prevented itself from considering such matters in the sense that, when it does not recognise a certain great country, then to pass judgment on it becomes difficult.” While the British wanted both Taipei and Peking to be in the UN, the US did not want Peking at all, it was India that argued forcefully for the expulsion of Taipei from the UNSC and replacing it with Peking. Nehru was the first Asian leader to recognize the rebel Mao-Tse-Tungs seizure of power.shiv wrote:Rajesh back in the 50s, Taiwan held a UN security council seat. That seat was offered to Nehru by the US, Nehru refused. . . Nehru I believe did not want to take something that was "offered " by the US to keep China out for fear of appearing aligned with USA
The Chinese government has tried to delude us by professions of peaceful intentions {It hasn't changed, has it ?}. . .The final action by the Chinese [in Tibet] is little short of perfidy . . .The tragedy of it is that the Tibetans put faith in us; they chose to be guided by us; and we have been unable to get them out of the meshes of Chinese diplomacy or Chinese malevolence. As the External Affairs Ministry remarked in one of their telegrams, there was a lack of firmness and unnecessary apology in one or two representations that he [our Ambassador to China] made to the Chinese Government on our behalf.{Again, don't we see almost similar inconsistency in our approach ? Things might have been slightly better but are not a whole lot better} . . . This feeling [of distrust in us by the Chinese], if genuinely entertained by the Chinese in spite of your direct approaches to them, indicates that even though we regard ourselves as friends of China, the Chinese do not regard us as their friends. With the communist mentality of 'whoever is not with them is against them', this is a significant pointer, of which we have to take a due note.
During the last several months, outside the Russioan camp, we have practically been alone in championing the cause of the Chinese entry into the UNO and in securing from the Americans assurances on the question of Formosa. We have done everything we could to assuage Chinese feelings, to allay its apprehensions and to defend its legitimate claims in our discussions and correspondence with America and Britain and in the UNO. In spite of this, China is not convinced about our disinterestedness; it continues to regard us with suspicion and the whole psychology is one, at least outwardly, of scepticism, perhaps mixed with a little hostility.
I doubt if we can go any further than we have done already to convince China of our good intentions. friendliness and goodwill. Their [the Chinese] last telegram to us is an act of gross discourtesy not only in the summary way it disposes of our protest against the enry of Chinese forces into Tibet but also in the wild insinuation that our attitude is determined by foreign influences. It looks as though it is not a friend speaking in that language but a potential enemy.
Thus, for the first time after centuries, India's defence has to concentrate on two fronts simultaneously. {What a clear conclusion way back in 1950 !}. . . We shall now have to reckon with a Communist China in the north and the northeast, a Communist China which has definite ambitions and aims and which does not in any way seem friendly to us.
The question of the Chinese entry into UNO. In view of the Chinese rebuff, and the method it has followed in dealing with Tibet, I doubt whether we can advocate its claims any longer. The UNO would probably threaten to virtually outlaw Chinain view of its active participation in the Korean War. We must determine our attitude on this question also.
The only issue is if pakis need Chinese help, it is available just across the border but if Taiwan needs our help, it is very long haul. I am not saying it is not possible but the equation paki = Taiwan is not that simple.Shankaraa wrote:As far as India- Taiwan relationship is concerned, we should do what China is doing with Pakistan. If Taiwan belongs to China than Pakistan belongs to us! On this basis, we must create a very strong relationship with Taiwan. Who knows, Taiwan may offer us a military/naval base in time to come!
Thats because it's neither simple, neither makes sense and is plain stupid. We do that we will have a our chaddi's in a twist and look foolish. China and Taiwan both believe they are 1 nation.but the equation paki = Taiwan is not that simple.
I was trying gently to make him realize the truth of his first 3 points but you seem determined on using the sledge hammer to drive home your point.harbans wrote:Thats because it's neither simple, neither makes sense and is plain stupid. We do that we will have a our chaddi's in a twist and look foolish. China and Taiwan both believe they are 1 nation.
pankajs wrote:The only issue is if pakis need Chinese help, it is available just across the border but if Taiwan needs our help, it is very long haul. I am not saying it is not possible but the equation paki = Taiwan is not that simple.Shankaraa wrote:As far as India- Taiwan relationship is concerned, we should do what China is doing with Pakistan. If Taiwan belongs to China than Pakistan belongs to us! On this basis, we must create a very strong relationship with Taiwan. Who knows, Taiwan may offer us a military/naval base in time to come!
Taiwan is not that far from Vietnam and still closer to Philippines, Japan and South Korea. If one were to proliferate nukes to Vietnam and on to Taiwan it basically sets up the same stand-off between China and Taiwan as is between India and Pakistan.harbans wrote:Thats because it's neither simple, neither makes sense and is plain stupid. We do that we will have a our chaddi's in a twist and look foolish. China and Taiwan both believe they are 1 nation.but the equation paki = Taiwan is not that simple.
India's failure with China is Tibet.
No doubt. No one here is talking about not having friendly relations with Taiwan. Open up an Embassy/ consulate whatever. India's core interest and issue with China is it's 7500 km long border with Tibet. Chinese aggression into India, it's influence on Nepal. These have to be tackled head on and not via East Asia in a twisted and slanted way. Only freeing Tibet will reduce Chinese influence in Pakistan.But many Indians believe that India should develop strong relationship with Vietnam, Taiwan, Indonesia, Singapore, Myanmar etc.
So please do identify your strategic goal..it's Tibet as buffer between the Han and us. Taiwan also believes in China's aggression over Tibet. .although they would be more amenable to provide them with a plebiscite. But that is not Taiwans official position.India cannot afford to be a sitting duck! She needs to be proactive to realise her strategic goals!
Apologies, but that is what the response should be. We don't have the balls, that's a different matter. There are no responses available if you've bartered away your core interest. China's weak underbelly is it's claim on Tibet. It's overt aggression on our Northern borders is a result of that weakness. INdia won';t be taken seriously anywhere if we neglect that aspect. That's been our bane.The issue of Tibet is a separate one, but if one wants to stick it up the Chinese as a response to their visa shenanigans, positioning ourselves on Tibet is not the right response.
All of that is good and we should have more contact, trade, etc will these countries. But do you really believe Taiwan will become our lance, so to say, against China that Pakistan is willing or should I say eager to become? For an answer on Taiwan just look at the FDI figures for China. It is the single biggest Invesor in China. That in itself is a huge investment in the China-Taiwan relationship.chaanakya wrote:We have immense goodwill in Taiwan. Either way we would be winner. So RajeshA's idea is worth implementing. Incidently Taiwan is part of APO in which India is founding counry while China is not. Even SOKO is member country while NOKO is not. We can start by giving more importance to NPC and APO activities and cooperation.