China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

Don · Post by **Don** » 22 Jul 2012 10:09

Venezuela: 17 K-8W and 5 tucanos:

About 340+ K-8 now have been exported...

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 23 Jul 2012 05:10

China Approves City Council, Military Base in Disputed Islands

:
:
China says it has formed a municipal council for a newly established city in a disputed part of the South China Sea, and has authorized the deployment of a military base in the area.
:
Xinhua also says China's Central Military Commission has approved the formation of a Sansha garrison command responsible for "national defense" and "military operations."

The Chinese government declared the establishment of Sansha last month, saying its role is to administer the disputed Paracel and Spratly archipelagos and surrounding South China Sea waters, which are believed to hold oil and natural gas deposits. The islands are claimed in whole or in part by Brunei, China, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam.

In a statement Saturday, the Vietnamese government said it opposes the establishment of Sansha. It called the move a "serious violation" of Hanoi's sovereignty over the Paracel and Spratly chains, which it claims as part of Danang city and Khanh Hoa province respectively. The state-run Voice of Vietnam quotes authorities in Danang and Khanh Hoa as saying Beijing risks harming the friendship between the two neighbors.
:

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 23 Jul 2012 05:13

US missile shield to encircle Chinese economic tiger

American plans to develop a missile shield in Asia have alarmed Beijing. With 250 million Chinese officially considered poor, spending billions to challenge the US military could sink China’s economy without firing a single shot.

The Chinese military has voiced concern that the US missile shield plans to destabilize the military balance on the continent.

In March the Pentagon revealed plans to deploy elements of its global antiballistic missile defense system in Asia and the Middle East. Such a shield would include deployable ship-based interceptors and land-based missile interceptors located in the United States’ western territories.

:
:

Don · Post by **Don** » 23 Jul 2012 19:00

http://www.americaspace.org/?p=22881

First Look: China’s Big New Rockets

By Craig Covault

Images illustrate the diversity of activity under China’s heavy lift rocket program. Top graphic depicts a Long March 5 mission with liquid booster and satellite separation. Chart highlights Long March 5 and Long March 9 vehicles, while a Long March 5 propellant tank is at right. Image Credit: CALT

Images from China’s new heavy rocket development program show spotless production facilities with advanced tooling to build China’s new Long March 5/CZ-5 heavy rocket, along with even more advanced launchers to come.

In addition to CZ-5 hardware development, China is completing design studies on two 11 million lb. thrust Long March 9 maximum heavy lift rocket configurations. If approved for final development, one of the designs would emerge for flight in 2020-2025 with the capability to launch Chinese astronauts to the surface of the Moon.

The concepts mean that China is designing “a Super Saturn V rocket,” says Charles P. Vick, a highly experienced analyst with GlobalSecurity.Org.

The two options for China’s “Super Saturn V” rocket are the favored “Option A” oxygen/kerosene version at left and less favored oxygen/hydrogen “Option B” with solid rocket boosters on the right. Image Credit: CALT

The Long March 5 and other future planned vehicles are shown here in context with each other for the first time in a major news article.

Images of the construction underway at China’s new Wenchang Satellite Launch Center on Hainan island are also shown as the site is readied to fire Long March 5’s into space by 2014.

Currently, six Long March 5 vehicle configurations are planned for different missions, with a maximum payload capacity of 55,000 lbs. to LEO and nearly 31,000 lbs. to geostationary transfer orbits. This makes it more powerful than a Delta IV Heavy, depending upon the mission configuration.

Details emerging from largely secret Chinese rocket projects point up the importance of the Long March 5 to future far more powerful Chinese rockets.

Whether the timing of China’s Long March 9 development is a deliberate challenge to the U. S. is unknown. But while neither China nor the U. S. professes to be in a new space race, they may well already be in one.

The most powerful version of the new U. S. Space Launch System (SLS) rocket currently under development is scheduled to be ready for flight at the same time as the CZ-9 to carry NASA astronauts beyond Earth orbit to the Moon, Lagrangian points, asteroids and eventually Mars.

The new Long March 9 details were revealed by Liang Xiaohong, the Communist Party Chief at the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology (CALT), China’s largest rocket contractor. Vick at Global Security did an extensive review of Liang’s revelations.

Liang outlined several new Long March versions, virtually all of them testing elements that would eventually find their way into the Long March 9 that has 4 million lb. more of liftoff thrust than the 7.5 million lb. thrust NASA Saturn V. Forty-three years ago this week a Saturn V propelled the Apollo 11 astronauts to the first manned landing on the Moon on July 20, 1969.

The Long March 5 appears positioned in the development flow to function like the U. S. Saturn 1B rockets did in relation to the Saturn V in Apollo. That role was to use a powerful, but smaller launch vehicle to launch key elements of the program like the Apollo Command/Service modules and Lunar Modules for test in Earth orbit.

There is one major difference with the Long March 5 however. It is powerful enough to launch a Shenzhou manned spacecraft on a lunar orbit flight, a mission the Saturn 1Bs could not duplicate.

For the massive Long March 9, the Chinese have both an “Option A” oxygen/kerosene powered launcher and an “Option B oxygen/hydrogen rocket. The detailed specifications for both rocket concepts are at the bottom of this article.

Option A appears to be the preferred of the two options because its first stage uses liquid propellant strap on boosters, compared with ”Option B” that combines an oxygen/hydrogen core with solid rocket boosters, an area where China lacks experience.

The Option A concept would stand 321 ft. tall and have a design payload to low Earth orbit of 130 metric tons (286,601 lb.) exactly the same as the largest of two SLS versions

As part of an oxygen/kerosene Long March 9 project, China has already started development of a large new oxygen/kerosene rocket engine called the YF-650 that stems directly from the Long March 5 in advanced production.

“The YF-100, oxygen/kerosene engine with 120 metric tons of thrust for the new Long March-5 debuting in 2014 forms the technical basis for 330 metric tons thrust YF-330 single thrust chamber engine,” said Vick.

“It in turn is being combined with a second identical thrust chamber engine to create the YF-650 engine with 650 metric tons thrust,” he said.

This is similar to the Russian Energomash RD-180 design used on the Russian Zenit. The same engine was essentially cut in half to power the Atlas V.

“The Chinese will combine several of them to achieve 5,200 metric tons of liftoff thrust. That equates to an 11.46 million lb. thrust ‘Super Saturn V’ class rocket,” said Vick.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Jul 2012 19:07

you can see a photo of the island here. gives me hope that some place in the laccadive can also be used similarly.....note the runway is artificial.

http://chinesemilitarymodernizationthre ... 0_174.html

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 24 Jul 2012 22:19

hnair wrote:Hu is a geek. He, his team and his alleged successor bunch are geeks too. All of them are either of the Tsinghua Clique or graduated as engineers. Other than college level politics (which in China, seem more or less a non-competitive affair shorn off attracting of hearts-n-minds of free and finnicky voters who would rather paw each other or get high), these guys seem to be administrators and policy-implementers all their career. They will certainly have problems in saying "no" to the jocks of CPC. Their separation of geeks and jocks are way too rigid and precise. Their jocks will not listen to a geek and their geeks do not have a constituency of the jocks, that they can use for influence.

Besides the geek vs jock distinction, there's one further refinement - the geeks are divided into the princeling and non-princeling kinds. Hu did not come from a background of patronage or influence, and made his way up on his own. Such types tend to have a greater desire to work unobtrusively and stamp their legacy. In that regard he already states his external affairs dictum as 'Pissful Rise', which of course is a non-starter because he doesn't have much influence over PLA.

His heir-apparent Xi Jinping, while a fellow Tsinghua geek, is also a princeling (his dad was the former vice-premier), just as the disgraced Bo Xilai is. He didn't have to work his way up the hard way. Xi is more flamboyant, as is his wife. I would not be surprised if he starts resorting to overt populism to win over the domestic audience, the way Bo did in Chongqing. In the process, the PRC may be up for a much more tumultuous domestic situation in the next decade than in the just past one.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Jul 2012 00:44

http://www.thehindu.com/news/internatio ... epage=true
They want to sell z9 to us now

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 25 Jul 2012 01:54

LoL aptly summarized. "Home made but Outdated". With IA and IAF getting LCH and Apaches no one sensible would look at these low quality knock-offs.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 25 Jul 2012 11:14

That's one of the most facetious articles i have seen.

There's no mention of the Dhruv and its variants which is more advanced than China's Dauphin knockoffs.

What is more a comparison between Dauphin and Ecureuil derivatives is being made with the Apache.ridiculous.

keshavchandra · Post by **keshavchandra** » 25 Jul 2012 12:02

China offers Z-9 helicopter to India
SOURCE: THE HINDU

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 25 Jul 2012 17:49

PLAAF force report from Jul/Aug AFM

http://www.filefactory.com/file/53o0we7 ... REPORT_zip

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 26 Jul 2012 04:25

Suraj wrote:Besides the geek vs jock distinction, there's one further refinement - the geeks are divided into the princeling and non-princeling kinds.

Indeed - the princeling vs grassroots is an evolving story, as China gets it own constituency of second-gen rich elites. Of course, the princelings have to be savvy about their position in a country that has been constantly drenched with Mao's silly red books, as Bo found out.

Errata in my post -> substitute CPC with CMC. I meant CMC when I typed CPC

eg:

He never really recovered from the Tianenmen fiasco and had to overcompensate in other areas towards the end. One area seem to be the control of CPC.

should be

He never really recovered from the Tianenmen fiasco and had to overcompensate in other areas towards the end. One area seem to be the control of CMC.

And here

They will certainly have problems in saying "no" to the jocks of ~~CPC~~ CMC

Johann, the thing about geek-PAP interface is that they seem sort of an administrative level networking, rather than a "electorate answerable" one and doubtless, will gain them valuable experience. Kind of like India's civil service cadre and their daily interaction with India's internal security organizations. Indian cadre too join as geeks (more often since 80s, with more science grads), but they report to Indian political-layers at all levels, which are filled with Deng-type politicians in setting policies in a fluid and mature representative political system.

For anything external, the jocks of CMC and its military/para-mil orgs are in a world of their own! That recent news about the new prefecture is one of the hazards of geeks writing cheques to CMC's jocks. This is a reason for concern to its neighbours.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 26 Jul 2012 11:10

Hi Andy,

Nothing happens after the compulsory download wait time ends.

Thanks.

andy B · Post by **andy B** » 26 Jul 2012 11:20

Not sure whats going on mate I am happy to upload them again gimme a few hours.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Jul 2012 20:31

Singha wrote:you can see a photo of the island here. gives me hope that some place in the laccadive can also be used similarly.....note the runway is artificial.

http://chinesemilitarymodernizationthre ... 0_174.html

From the article

As we all know, the Soviet Union 30mkk is a heavy duty twin fighter.Tonnage of larger and larger, more fuel consumption, which means that the load-bearing capacity of the runway, demanding, on the apron and hangar size requirements are higher

Exactly the same issues affect an aircraft carrier that operates Su-30 class aircraft. Let us remember this the next time the Varyag is compared with carriers that take smaller aircraft. Even in a wartime patrol, 70% or more of sorties may not see any action, but will burn fuel.

prashanth · Post by **prashanth** » 26 Jul 2012 20:51

^
I don't know much about aircraft carriers. But it appears having medium sized fighter on carriers makes sense. Its better to have a medium fighter with max weapons load and range (using catapults if required) rather than a large aircraft with reduced load and range.
Wonder how effective those MKKs are without catapults.

kit · Post by **kit** » 27 Jul 2012 23:57

Saudi cash + oil for Chinese Nuclear Missiles

The Saudis offered Beijing $60 billion plus an oil bonanza for a single nuclear warhead. China has agreed in principle to sell the Saudis medium-range Dong-Feng 21 ballistic missiles in return for the cash and/or having its oil requirements for the next 23 years guaranteed by Riyadh. The deal was negotiated by Saudi National Security Adviser Prince Bandar bin Sultan and Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie.

source debka.com

kit · Post by **kit** » 31 Jul 2012 09:48

Chengdu J-20 could enter service by 2018

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... 18-372082/

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 31 Jul 2012 10:01

kit wrote:Saudi cash + oil for Chinese Nuclear Missiles

The Saudis offered Beijing $60 billion plus an oil bonanza for a single nuclear warhead. China has agreed in principle to sell the Saudis medium-range Dong-Feng 21 ballistic missiles in return for the cash and/or having its oil requirements for the next 23 years guaranteed by Riyadh. The deal was negotiated by Saudi National Security Adviser Prince Bandar bin Sultan and Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie.

source debka.com

debka Crap .....

Why would Saudi pay chinese when they have bankrolled the entire Pakistan Nuclear program in 80's and 90's , Saudi just need to tell the Pak and it would be delivered at their door step

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 Jul 2012 10:19

wel..the saudis might want some assurance the device will actually work in the hour of need. which means avoiding pak 'gifts' and buying chinese.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 31 Jul 2012 10:30

Well the Pakis Nuclear weapons is just a Chinese design fission bomb of 70's or 80's , Saudis simiply funded the development of infra like reactors and other stuff , probably with the assurance that they would buy it out if Shia Iran gets the bomb , Saudi Sunnis must have it as well.

More ever debka is just rumour mongering types so take any news from them with loads of salt.

Boreas · Post by **Boreas** » 31 Jul 2012 11:23

kit wrote:Saudi cash + oil for Chinese Nuclear Missiles

The Saudis offered Beijing $60 billion plus an oil bonanza for a single nuclear warhead. China has agreed in principle to sell the Saudis medium-range Dong-Feng 21 ballistic missiles in return for the cash and/or having its oil requirements for the next 23 years guaranteed by Riyadh. The deal was negotiated by Saudi National Security Adviser Prince Bandar bin Sultan and Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie.

source debka.com

for $60 billion unkil will give them two

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Jul 2012 11:42

The high production rate of the Paki N-arsenal can be explained when you factor in the Saudi requirement.The Saudi's secret arsenal,hich some analysts believe has been in existence for a long time (why would the Saudis need the Dong Fengs?) ,was originally meant to deter Israel.However,it is now an arms race between the Saudis and the Iranians,the Saudis not anting to be at a disadvantage and lag behind when the Persian sh*t hits the fan!

The US would never rat on the knowledge of the Saudi N-deterrent,as it needs to protect the Saudis from Iran plus ensure oil supplies from the Saudis and the Gulf states.Just as it did with Pakistan,it has turned a Nelsonian eye to the Saudi N-deterrent (made in Pak)!

Sabyasachi · Post by **Sabyasachi** » 31 Jul 2012 12:35

Pakistan's nuclear weapon program is an extension of China's nuclear weapon program.

At some stage (may be in next 10-20 years) China will need/develop nuclear war fighting arsenal, better without/less alarming USA or Russia at this stage.

satya · Post by **satya** » 01 Aug 2012 15:39

China Conducts Missile Tests In Tibet

adityadange · Post by **adityadange** » 01 Aug 2012 16:08

satya wrote:China Conducts Missile Tests In Tibet

just deploy couple of brahmos regiments in the area.

kit · Post by **kit** » 01 Aug 2012 23:22

China's Long March-5 carrier rocket engine undergoes testing

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/China ... g_999.html

120-tonne-thrust liquid oxygen (LOX) and kerosene engine

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 17 Aug 2012 03:08

The Beast of Kandahar draws the Chinese to Iran

http://t.co/MZQsikGU

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 17 Aug 2012 14:47

Singha wrote:wel..the saudis might want some assurance the device will actually work in the hour of need. which means avoiding pak 'gifts' and buying chinese.

The US and rest of the world fears the Islamist Ghazis taking over of the Paki Nukes (even if only a part).
Much the same way Saudis can be expected to fear a US take over of the Paki Nukes (even if only a part).

Makes sense. If I were a nut job Ghazi King in Middle East having to rely on a doubtful ars-se-nal, I would want to secure supply of my Nukes from a country that US and rest of the world has little handle on. Besides 60 Billion could be the cumulation of some easy payment EMI.

An actual nuke usage (by whoever) in gulf is also a big no no for US.

aniket · Post by **aniket** » 19 Aug 2012 23:27

ravi_g wrote:
Singha wrote:Makes sense. If I were a nut job Ghazi King in Middle East having to rely on a doubtful ars-se-nal, I would want to secure supply of my Nukes from a country that US and rest of the world has little handle on. Besides 60 Billion could be the cumulation of some easy payment EMI.

Would China be this country ?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 20 Aug 2012 00:58

ravi_g wrote:
An actual nuke usage (by whoever) in gulf is also a big no no for US.

Actually it will break the global system.
It is geo political advantage for India for a long time if this happens. It will keep the world powers occupied

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 20 Aug 2012 13:19

^ Acharya, how?

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 20 Aug 2012 14:44

aniket wrote:
ravi_g wrote:Makes sense. If I were a nut job Ghazi King in Middle East having to rely on a doubtful ars-se-nal, I would want to secure supply of my Nukes from a country that US and rest of the world has little handle on. Besides 60 Billion could be the cumulation of some easy payment EMI.
Would China be this country ?

Well yes

Acharya wrote:
ravi_g wrote:
An actual nuke usage (by whoever) in gulf is also a big no no for US.
Actually it will break the global system.
It is geo political advantage for India for a long time if this happens. It will keep the world powers occupied

Acharya ji, tried to make my own list (pls let me know what I am missing):

1. ME does not have the rural presence to take even a reasonable sized hit and then come back esp. if somebody take out Mecca+2/3 urban centers.
2. ME would still need to eat and then they have only Oil to sell for that.
3. ME would definitely get tribalised after the nuke hit.
4. US will never be able to nuke Persians full scale.
5. Shiaism comes up as a religion in its own right.
6. Instead of US controlling ME it will in all likelihood be US+Chin+Rus+EuroConsortium+India controlling it or parts of it that are controllable.
7. All the Indians in ME on work will be coming back.
8. ME donations to Indian Muslims and across the world will cease but then west could come in to take their place. INR 4000 Cr in FCRA funds has only half of it from ME related entities.
9. Hindu-Muslim riots in India.
10. Israel or whatever remains of it becomes the power broker in ME and working entirely for money.

Looks like a Chinese dream.

Sabyasachi · Post by **Sabyasachi** » 20 Aug 2012 16:22

Oil is a better deterrence than a working nuke. Its been proved after 9/11 when SA nationals were found as perpetrators.

Just for argument sake; ME would need Wheat, Rice and live stock after being hit. India, Pakistan and China being the nearest would use this trade opportunity. Oil is already flowing more eastwards, it will remain the case as it is. Their dependency on us will prevail longer because of less rain fall they have.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 20 Aug 2012 18:59

abhischekcc wrote:^ Acharya, how?

By keeping the Islamic world in confrontation with the west. Both get weakened by the process of a multi generation war. Oldest trick in the world to let your competitors fight it out - provided no one side can win totally.

Don · Post by **Don** » 20 Aug 2012 19:34

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 562650.cms

India upset over prime plot in Colombo being sold to China

DELHI/COLOMBO: As India looks at China's growing involvement in Sri Lanka with unease, a Rs 100 crore plot in the heart of Colombo has turned into the latest bone of contention between the two Asian giants in the island nation. While the plot on the prestigious Galle Road, owned by a private agency, was said to have been promised to the Indian high commission, it turns out that the same plot has been allotted to a Chinese state-owned aviation company which also maintains close links with Pakistan, leading India to strongly take up the matter with the Sri Lankan foreign ministry.

The Indian high commission had completed all formalities and was in touch with the Sri Lankan foreign ministry, which has to clear such purchases by any foreign mission, for the sale of the plot as it wanted to build a cultural centre there. It came as an absolute surprise to Indian authorities when they learnt that the plot was being sold to China National Aero Technology Import and Export Corporation (CATIC), China's aircraft manufacturer.

In fact, Colombo has been set abuzz by reports in the local media about how angry India was and how it had even summoned Sri Lankan high commissioner Prasad Kariyawasam to make its displeasure known. Without confirming or denying it, Indian officials said they will soon come up with a response. They also said that they were still waiting to hear officially from Sri Lanka about the sale to China.

While CATIC is essentially a defence contractor with aviation being its core interest, it has also made forays into the hospitality industry and is likely to build a 5-star hotel on the plot. It is also responsible for the China-Pakistan joint venture to manufacture JF-17 fighter aircraft which is seen as Pakistan's answer to India's Tejas.

While the sale of a plot to the Chinese may seem innocuous, the fact that it may come at the expense of India is likely to further exacerbate India's growing concerns over Beijing successfully expanding its base in Sri Lanka. India is worried that the Chinese may acquire operational control of projects in the strategic sector like the Hambantota port and airport.

In an interview to TOI earlier this month, President Mahinda Rajapaksa made his displeasure over India's vote at the UN Human Rights Commission against Sri Lanka known by calling upon New Delhi to have a relook at its dealings with its neighbours. The president, in fact, didn't answer the question about China getting operational control of projects saying it was a hypothetical query.

While he insisted that there was no strategic drift in Sri Lanka's position and that it will continue to remain a non-aligned country, he acknowledged increasing investments from China and also help from the Chinese in ending the conflict three years ago. "When we had to fight the most brutal terrorist outfit in the world, we had to buy arms and ammunition from legal entities that were ready to sell them to us at the best terms," he said.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 20 Aug 2012 20:46

ShauryaT wrote:
abhischekcc wrote:^ Acharya, how?
By keeping the Islamic world in confrontation with the west. Both get weakened by the process of a multi generation war. Oldest trick in the world to let your competitors fight it out - provided no one side can win totally.

Had the context been a see-saw attrition battle, this line of thought would have stood. From China's perspective too this is good.

But Acharya ji said the actual nuking could be good. My view is after just the first salvo there would not remain a ME worth the trouble. Sheiks themselves will run with their money and lifestyle to safer Bahamas.

And US has a better grip on Oil at present and in any likely future compared to their OPEC counterparts. They control the market

(occupy is perhaps a better word). Opec controls only the supply side. Asia controls only the demand, rather part of it. The part that is meant to supply US with cheaper production.

This way or that way China wins. A gray zone for India both ways. Dead loss for US vis a vis China and their greater investments in occupying the market.

I think we can avoid thinking of nuke usage. Nuke detergent is however a valid angle.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 20 Aug 2012 21:34

ravi_g wrote: But Acharya ji said the actual nuking could be good. My view is after just the first salvo there would not remain a ME worth the trouble. Sheiks themselves will run with their money and lifestyle to safer Bahamas.

This is a speculative discussion with high improbabilities but in that context, so what if ME gets nuked and ME turns tribal and some sheiks land up in Bahamas or France? What ME is good for is Oil, which is below ground and after a few years (not even decades) the oil can still flow out. Maybe TFTA EU/US will not go in for this dirty oil, but SDRE will?

Anyways from a purely Indian interests perspective, no matter which way it turns out a confrontation by ANYONE with ME is good for India.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 21 Aug 2012 16:19

^^^

It is good for India as it destroys post Hiroshima consensus and makes Indian nuke usage that mush easier. Not that India will contemplate such a usage.

sum · Post by **sum** » 21 Aug 2012 19:07

Dances with dragons

On June 21 this year, during a meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations Rio+ 20 conference, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao met Bhutanese Prime Minister Jigmi Y. Thinley for the first time. The Hindu dated June 27, quoted Wen Jiabao as saying that China was “willing to complete border demarcation with Bhutan at an early date.”

The history of the Bhutan-China border dispute starts from 1950 when China published a map claiming areas in the west and north of Bhutan though bilateral talks started in 1984.

Twenty-eight years and 19 rounds of bilateral talks have resulted in a package deal offer from China (a) conceding claims of 900 sq.km in the north of Bhutan, (b) insisting on 400 sq.km of territory in the west, (c) offering to establish diplomatic relations, initiate trade and pilgrimage, (d) making it clear that any further negotiations would be on acceptance of package deal with “minor adjustments within it.”

It is noteworthy that over the years, the Bhutan government had been quite vocal in keeping its citizens and the National Assembly informed of the difficulties in negotiating with China. Regular deep intrusions by Chinese troops right up to Royal Bhutan Army border posts, road extension work in Zuri and the Phuteogang ridge that overlooks the disputed Charithang valley are in violation of the 1998 China-Bhutan agreement for maintenance of peace and tranquillity, for which protests have been made. Four areas in the western sector claimed by the Chinese are Doklam, Charithang, Sinchulimpa and Dramana pasture land. In the National Assembly, many chimis (district representatives) have claimed “that traditionally, the land always belonged to Bhutan and historically there has been no precedence of Bhutan paying taxes to the Tibetan Government for any of the disputed claims.” The rich pasture lands in the west are intricately linked to the livelihood of yak herders of the border regions.

From the foregoing, it is clear that the Chinese are unlikely to give up their position in the four areas of western Bhutan except for minor adjustments. It is confirmed by the pattern of intrusions sssssand road building activities by Chinese in areas overlooking this sector that Beijing wishes to gain strategic advantage in the Chumbi Valley and put pressure on India for settlement — having settled borders with Pakistan, Nepal and Myanmar.

Vital tri-junction
The narrow and vulnerable Chumbi valley between India (Sikkim) and Bhutan has a single artery from Shigaste, a major Tibetan city, to Yatung with plans to extend a railway line. The lack of space restricts the deployment of troops. The Chinese strategy of claiming areas in western Bhutan is to widen its shoulders to facilitate military manoeuvres in the Chumbi Valley.

The recent development in infrastructure in Tibet has made it possible to induct a sufficient number of troops with adequate logistic back-up at short notice. The limitation is in restricted deployment space; there is no other place on India’s northern borders which severely limits military manoeuvres as the Chumbi Valley does.

The Siliguri Corridor, a vital tri-junction between Bhutan, Bangladesh and Nepal, is a narrow hub of rail, road and air arteries known as the “Chicken neck,” the narrowest stretch of which is just about 30 km wide. India is vulnerable in this corridor as it is the only access point to the northeast. The Siliguri Corridor is about 500 km from the Chumbi Valley.

India-Bhutan relations
According to the media, Premier Wen Jiabao had met the Indian and Bhutanese Prime Ministers separately at Rio before making the announcement to the press. Some Chinese scholars have made this comment: “Without India’s permission Bhutan would not have thought about establishing diplomatic ties with China.”

India-Bhutan relations have been experiencing the winds of change. From 1949 onwards they were governed by a Treaty of Perpetual Peace and Friendship of 1949. Article 2 of the treaty was significant wherein “the Government of Bhutan agrees to be guided by the advice of the Government of India in regard to its external relations.”

However, much has changed. The isolation of Bhutan is a matter of the past. The nation has changed from monarchy to a democratic set-up. Article 2 had been a matter of concern for the Bhutanese so much so that some of them called themselves “half independent.” The 1949 Treaty was revised in 2007. Article 2 was replaced with: “In keeping with the abiding ties of close friendship between Bhutan and India, the Government of the Kingdom of Bhutan and the Government of Republic of India shall cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests. (emphasis added). Neither Government shall allow the use of its territory for activities harmful to the national security and interest of the other.” The 2007 Treaty has begun a new era in bilateral cooperation.

Despite the new Article 2, New Delhi will remain Thimpu’s most important friend and a partner. These figures speak for themselves. Bhutan is the largest recipient of Indian development aid and India accounts for a total of 79 per cent of Bhutanese imports and 95 per cent of its exports. India trains the Bhutanese army through the Indian Military Training Team (IMTRAT), in Bhutan. Simply put, Bhutan’s dependency on India will not match with any other country for many years.

Bhutan has every right as a sovereign country to establish diplomatic relations with any country including China. The opening of trade and tourism with China would usher in development and investments from there. However, a lack of discretion may also result in the dumping of goods, undermine a unique culture and affect the policy goal of “gross national happiness.”

Chinese claims do not seem to have historical evidence. The pasture lands would also deprive the livelihood source of their border people. Western Bhutan is not barren. It may be recalled that in 2006, China-India framed “Political Parameters and Guiding Principles” to resolve their long-standing border dispute. The important principles that need highlighting are that due interest of “settled populations in border areas” would be safeguarded and “historical evidence and sensibilities of border areas” taken into account. These guidelines are worth inculcating by China and Bhutan. The border settlement will require approval by 3/4th majority in the Bhutan National Assembly.

It is hoped that all aspects including India’s interests will be truly considered by Bhutan before accepting the border package. Bhutan should refrain from deepening ties with China beyond a self-imposed minimum limit in their own interest.