People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 21 Oct 2010 03:46

Tony If what you think is correct , then please carry on.I personally have no objections to whatever you do.I am not a Mod but even if I was then also I would not stop your ahem intelligent talks.Kindly understand that I am not against you but just the repetitive ideas that you express which seem to me to be polemics.

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 21 Oct 2010 03:50

Manishw wrote:Tony If what you think is correct , then please carry on.I personally have no objections to whatever you do.I am not a Mod but even if I was then also I would not stop your ahem intelligent talks.Kindly understand that I am not against you but just the repetitive ideas that you express which seem to me to be polemics.

I'll express my opinion until said opinion changes. Like the way you express your ideas repetitively right?

Alas, let's move on.

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 21 Oct 2010 03:51

^ Good Idea.

naren · Post by **naren** » 21 Oct 2010 03:59

TonyMontana wrote: Why is everyone so mean to me?

"In this country, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the women."

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 21 Oct 2010 04:05

naren wrote:"In this country, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the women."

Ha! The Chinese model of growth.

"Orders? You Giving Me Orders? Amigo, the Only Thing in This World That Gives Orders Is Balls. You Got That?"

Also relevent in geopolitics.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 21 Oct 2010 04:07

Tony,

"I'm pretty much a Yankee fan in a White Socks forum". Just for future reference, that's 'White Sox'.

Also, and not that it's bad thing of course, but your syntax doesn't paint you as Chinese. It. er.. sounds more paki which I suspect may be the reason for 'zingers'.

I am glad you intend to stay on. In that spirit, may I suggest IMHO, that no Indian on this forum thinks of Chinese as 'inferior' racially or culturally. Ours is a racially diverse nation and the idea of India encompasses many narratives and all are accommodated in a pluralistic manner.

The antagonism you sense may be related to our reflexive dislike of homogeneous systems such as the PRC that seek to use the One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them. You'll doubtless see that it applies equally to our neighbor (and your ally) to our west.

Individuals do matter in India almost to distraction: a single individual can file a PIL (public interest litigation) with ease and hold up powerful interests. Many times these are frivolous but we understand due process. In contrast, except for the National Geographic moment of the lone Chinese halting the tanks in Tian An Men, the picture we get is of cartoonishly flattened road kill that serve as stark reminders of the inevitable results of opposition who are immediately branded 'splittists' not just by the Politburo but throngs of young Chinese.

JMT

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 21 Oct 2010 04:17

Cosmo_R wrote: "I'm pretty much a Yankee fan in a White Socks forum". Just for future reference, that's 'White Sox'.

I know more about cricket then baseball.

Cosmo_R wrote: Also, and not that it's bad thing of course, but your syntax doesn't paint you as Chinese. It. er.. sounds more paki which I suspect may be the reason for 'zingers'.

Alas, Pakistanis and I both use proper British syntax and grammar.

Cosmo_R wrote: I am glad you intend to stay on. In that spirit, may I suggest IMHO, that no Indian on this forum thinks of Chinese as 'inferior' racially or culturally. Ours is a racially diverse nation and the idea of India encompasses many narratives and all are accommodated in a pluralistic manner.

The antagonism you sense may be related to our reflexive dislike of homogeneous systems such as the PRC that seek to use the One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them. You'll doubtless see that it applies equally to our neighbor (and your ally) to our west.

Individuals do matter in India almost to distraction: a single individual can file a PIL (public interest litigation) with ease and hold up powerful interests. Many times these are frivolous but we understand due process. In contrast, except for the National Geographic moment of the lone Chinese halting the tanks in Tian An Men, the picture we get is of cartoonishly flattened road kill that serve as stark reminders of the inevitable results of opposition who are immediately branded 'splittists' not just by the Politburo but throngs of young Chinese.

I think here lays the fundalmental difference between Indian and Chinese. Indians, IMHO, are idealistic. Principled. Due process etc. Whereas the Chinese is pragmatic and practical. If it's a good idea, we'll beg, steal or borrow it. If getting better for my family means enduring oppression, then priciples be damned.

Thoughts?

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 21 Oct 2010 05:30

TonyMontana wrote: India wants to be like China, not in the political sense, but in terms of clout. But you're angry that a people you sense, is inferior to you culturally, is doing better.

Hopefully not. The last thing we want India is to emulate China. We are doing fine. We don't want to dominate the world and kill millions and billions. If that is what Indian leaders think superpower means, I am pretty sure majority of Indians won't support. Indira Gandhi had more critics in India than any where in the world when she supported LTTE in Srilanka.

What is 'clout' mean to you? Spreading nuclear technology, supporting terrorist nations, supporting Pol Pots, mentally disturbed policies that can kill millions/billions! Does that make you very happy and proud?

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 21 Oct 2010 05:43

vijayk wrote: What is 'clout' mean to you? Spreading nuclear technology, supporting terrorist nations, supporting Pol Pots, mentally disturbed policies that can kill millions/billions! Does that make you very happy and proud?

You know what I mean. Let's be realistic here. China is stronger at the moment. You'll be fooling yourself if you think other wise.

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 21 Oct 2010 06:06

TonyMontana wrote:
vijayk wrote: What is 'clout' mean to you? Spreading nuclear technology, supporting terrorist nations, supporting Pol Pots, mentally disturbed policies that can kill millions/billions! Does that make you very happy and proud?
You know what I mean. Let's be realistic here. China is stronger at the moment. You'll be fooling yourself if you think other wise.

I don't know what you mean! Explain it to me.

Whoo! I am shaking in my boots. Please don't scare me.

Do you think every one gets orgasms looking at the "clout" of their country?

I meet a lot of Chinese socially and at work. But I have not seen this orgasmic behavior from any one.

naren · Post by **naren** » 21 Oct 2010 06:20

TonyMontana wrote:
vijayk wrote: What is 'clout' mean to you? Spreading nuclear technology, supporting terrorist nations, supporting Pol Pots, mentally disturbed policies that can kill millions/billions! Does that make you very happy and proud?
You know what I mean. Let's be realistic here. China is stronger at the moment. You'll be fooling yourself if you think other wise.

Why is "stronger China" letting India keep its "South Tibet" Arunachal Pradesh then ?

Why has "stronger China" not yet absorbed Taiwan yet ?

Since the two have not happened yet, we can conclude "China is not stronger".

Yawn. Objectivity much appreciated.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 21 Oct 2010 06:27

I'm not sure why so many here are treating "TonyMontana" as if he's someone who understands how the Politburo Standing Committee or the CMC works (thanks to censorship there may be more foreigners than Chinese who do!), or why they back the policies that they do. That's certainly does not seem to be the case. Nor does he seem to be in the position to tell anyone "how things work" at the ground level in Beijing or Shanghai or Shenzen, or even Chongqing.

This exchange is largely a distraction from the business of understanding the PRC's past, current and future directions.

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 21 Oct 2010 06:28

naren wrote:
Why is "stronger China" letting India keep its "South Tibet" Arunachal Pradesh then ?

Why has "stronger China" not yet absorbed Taiwan yet ?

Since the two have not happened yet, we can conclude "China is not stronger".

Yawn. Objectivity much appreciated.

vijayk wrote:
I don't know what you mean! Explain it to me.

Whoo! I am shaking in my boots. Please don't scare me.

Do you think every one gets orgasms looking at the "clout" of their country?

I meet a lot of Chinese socially and at work. But I have not seen this orgasmic behavior from any one.

Look. I get this. No one likes it when someone else is better. There's plenty of Chinese nationalists that likes to rank China with America etc. But there's no shame in being realistic.
When I was back in school in China, after every exam your name and score is posted on the black board for all to see. Knowing where you are in the world means you know who you need to beat to move up the rank. We all like to think we're A students, but the hardest part is to rank yourself subjectively.

Pretend we're playing Civilisation 5. Bring up the overal ranking manu. You can't tell me that little red line is not just a little above the little blue line?

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 21 Oct 2010 06:31

Johann wrote:I'm not sure why so many here are treating "TonyMontana" as if he's someone who understands how the Politburo Standing Committee or the CMC works (thanks to censorship there may be more foreigners than Chinese who do!), or why they back the policies that they do. That's certainly does not seem to be the case. Nor does he seem to be in the position to tell anyone "how things work" at the ground level in Beijing or Shanghai or Shenzen, or even Chongqing.

This exchange is largely a distraction from the business of understanding the PRC's past, current and future directions.

I see, to post on BRF one need to be intimiate with the working of their own government and have the ability to influence actual government decision making. I wonder how many Indian posters fit that bill.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 21 Oct 2010 06:37

TonyMontana wrote:
Why is everyone so mean to me?

TonyMontana wrote: But my handle is Cuban! A fellow communist paradise. Besides, after Murugan's expert analysis, I am deeply ashamed of my Chinese heritage. Maybe you can help me find a Indian name. I'm thinking Babu. What do you think?

Err.. suggestion only..Perhaps changing it to "HannahMontana" would do the trick

. usually, it should not invite any "meanness".

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 21 Oct 2010 06:45

JwalaMukhi wrote: Err.. suggestion only..Perhaps changing it to "HannahMontana" would do the trick . usually, it should not invite any "meanness".

Clearly, you're not inimate with youth culture in countries outside of the US. I might as well change it to "Justin Beiber", might get less hate that way.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 21 Oct 2010 06:47

TonyMontana wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote: "I'm pretty much a Yankee fan in a White Socks forum". Just for future reference, that's 'White Sox'.
I know more about cricket then baseball.

Cosmo_R wrote: Also, and not that it's bad thing of course, but your syntax doesn't paint you as Chinese. It. er.. sounds more paki which I suspect may be the reason for 'zingers'.
Alas, Pakistanis and I both use proper British syntax and grammar.

Cosmo_R wrote: I am glad you intend to stay on. In that spirit, may I suggest IMHO, that no Indian on this forum thinks of Chinese as 'inferior' racially or culturally. Ours is a racially diverse nation and the idea of India encompasses many narratives and all are accommodated in a pluralistic manner.

The antagonism you sense may be related to our reflexive dislike of homogeneous systems such as the PRC that seek to use the One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them. You'll doubtless see that it applies equally to our neighbor (and your ally) to our west.

Individuals do matter in India almost to distraction: a single individual can file a PIL (public interest litigation) with ease and hold up powerful interests. Many times these are frivolous but we understand due process. In contrast, except for the National Geographic moment of the lone Chinese halting the tanks in Tian An Men, the picture we get is of cartoonishly flattened road kill that serve as stark reminders of the inevitable results of opposition who are immediately branded 'splittists' not just by the Politburo but throngs of young Chinese.
I think here lays the fundalmental difference between Indian and Chinese. Indians, IMHO, are idealistic. Principled. Due process etc. Whereas the Chinese is pragmatic and practical. If it's a good idea, we'll beg, steal or borrow it. If getting better for my family means enduring oppression, then priciples be damned.

Thoughts?

"I know more about cricket then baseball. "

Wise old Chinese wrote: "You must stay within your knowledge of metaphors Grasshopper!"

"Alas, Pakistanis and I both use proper British syntax and grammar."

Alack, nothing proper about pakis or their syntax or lack of it. BTW, the correct response would be: "English" syntax. "British" not language Grasshopper. Han Ji?

"Thoughts?"

Troll....

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 21 Oct 2010 06:47

TonyMontana wrote:I see, to post on BRF one need to be intimiate with the working of their own government and have the ability to influence actual government decision making. I wonder how many Indian posters fit that bill.

Tony,

I said nothing about influence. However the standard is that people should either share relevant information (links, articles, extracts, videos, etc), or insightful analysis, or both.

Every now and then there is a pointless p!ss!ing contest (like the one you seem to be enjoying), but in general people do really try to live up to that.

Putting personal identity, motives, self-glorification, etc at the centre of discussion is not encouraged.

If you don't want to be treated as a troll please do not openly or tacitly give the impression that you can somehow act as spokesman for a billion Chinese Mainlanders, or for the CPC.

Anyone who defends the PRC is going to have a rough ride here, but there are no medals for simply hanging on in the face of criticism, or avoiding a ban. Please try to add a higher level of value to the discussion if you are going to insist on posting quite so much. If you can do that people will take you much more seriously even they dislike or disagree with elements of what you say. If that means having to learn more about the country of your birth in order to speak knowledgeably, than treat it as an opportunity rather than as an unfair burden.

China would be a better place if more Chinese knew how things actually worked....

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 21 Oct 2010 07:07

Cosmo_R wrote: "Thoughts?"

Troll....

Stop trolling me then.

Johann wrote: Please try to add a higher level of value to the discussion if you are going to insist on posting quite so much. If you can do that people will take you much more seriously even they dislike or disagree with elements of what you say. If that means having to learn more about the country of your birth in order to speak knowledgeably, than treat it as an opportunity rather than as an unfair burden.

Good to see you hold me to a higher standard then some Indian posters. But you're right. This pissing contest is getting old.

Move on guys. I've been trying to move on with the discussion for a while now. Everytime I thought I was out, someone pulls me back in. Respond to my post in a construtive manner first, and I'll stop replying zingers.

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 21 Oct 2010 07:11

Johann wrote:If you don't want to be treated as a troll please do not openly or tacitly give the impression that you can somehow act as spokesman for a billion Chinese Mainlanders, or for the CPC.

I take particular offense to this. How many "in my humble opinion" do you need in one of my posts? When did I every tried to speak for anyone else but my own humble self?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 21 Oct 2010 07:30

Cosmo_R wrote:
"Thoughts?"
^^^
Troll....

Stop trolling me then.

Transitive versus intransitive?

Admins: ????

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 21 Oct 2010 07:35

Tony,

Your posts are heavy on opinion, and thin on facts and analysis of those facts.

About the only thing they have going for them is the way they draw attention to your Chinese-ness as a distinct quality in contrast to (almost) everyone else's Indian-ness.

It doesn't matter how often you say "IMHO" the effect is the same - "I am Chinese, so listen to me you Indians!". Some people buy in to that, and for the most part you encourage them even while whingeing on about it.

Now please stop doing what you are doing - I'm tired of wasting time talking about you and your enormous ego.

TonyMontana · Post by **TonyMontana** » 21 Oct 2010 08:19

Johann wrote:Tony,

Your posts are heavy on opinion, and thin on facts and analysis of those facts.

About the only thing they have going for them is the way they draw attention to your Chinese-ness as a distinct quality in contrast to (almost) everyone else's Indian-ness.

It doesn't matter how often you say "IMHO" the effect is the same - "I am Chinese, so listen to me you Indians!". Some people buy in to that, and for the most part you encourage them even while whingeing on about it.

Now please stop doing what you are doing - I'm tired of wasting time talking about you and your enormous ego.

This will be my last OT post. I have moved on. I hope you do the same. But I would like you to take a piece of advice another poster has given me. Go easy on the psychoanalysis, it's heavy on opinion, and thin on facts and analysis of those facts.

Venkarl · Post by **Venkarl** » 21 Oct 2010 08:31

Our job is to do psychoanalysis...based on facts and then frame an opinion. In this case you were the target and you proved yourself.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 21 Oct 2010 08:50

TonyMontana, you do not seem to have taken my warning seriously enough and continue to engage the thread in the same way as before. I am issuing another warning to you now. Next will be a ban.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 21 Oct 2010 12:09

China G.D.P. Grew 9.6% Despite Cooling Efforts

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/busin ... 2yuan.html

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 21 Oct 2010 16:27

China would be a better place if more Chinese knew how things actually worked....

This rings so true specially when one reads of the recent reports by top ex party bosses asking for freer speech in China. Anonymous phone call to remove articles, blogs etc. It's completely unclear who editied the Premiers speech. Invisible hands pulling strings. It points how closed the system is when even top CPC bosses don't know who orders them and virtually impossible for ordinary Chinese folk to have an idea what power strings really run their society. Most posters of Chinese origin would possibly have only one side to the story they've been exposed to.

Take WAB for example, it was sort of a good international forum 5-6 years ago, but last couple of them many moderators of Chinese origin have twisted the entire focus. The Dalai openly gets ridicule and posters supporting those views banned with impudence. Complete denial of reports on Chinese soldiers of PLA is accompanied with the statement these are falsehoods coming from the Indian media. This was the same operandi when it was exposed that proliferation was ongoing between China and Pakistan in the 90's. Deny, slowly when the truth surfaces, change tack..

It's almost as if one party does'nt mind the means (China) to get to point X and another is awfully and awkwardly handicapped by trying to stick to proper means (India). Many Chinese posters gloat on China's success, power, strengths with little sensitivity to the means of going about development goals and why it's important in India's context. I remember not too long ago when Pakistani's used to ridicule India fiat and Amby, Alwyn and Kelvinator, Vespa and Bajaja..while their elite had swank imported Toyota's, Fords and GM vehicles. Though not supportive of India's means and developmental model in those days, it does indicate things change. Looking back it also indicates if our development aim or Point X is same or different..and Chinese posters do reflect it is the latter.

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 21 Oct 2010 19:31

Deleted

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 21 Oct 2010 20:26

For some Chinese college students, sex is a business opportunity

"Most of the girls are financially comfortable, but they see their classmates carrying Louis Vuitton or Gucci bags, and they're jealous," he said on the phone from Shanghai. "These girls want to have better lives."

"Years ago, when people heard somebody was a prostitute, they would criticize her very harshly, so girls who might want to copy her would change their minds," she said. "These days, people's attitudes have totally changed. They laugh at poor people, but they don't laugh at prostitutes."

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 21 Oct 2010 20:32

Laying out the Red carpet

Some enlightening reminiscences from Inder Malhotra's review inspired by recently-released Selected Works of Nehru.

However, greatly impressed by China though he was, he wasn’t overawed. To quote his speech to the Congress parliamentary party again, “I am impressed by China. Having said that, let me also tell you that, having been to China, I am very much impressed by my own country.” In today’s circumstances, it surely looks highly ironic — but, at that time, Nehru also assured his party that India was “unlikely to be outstripped by China economically.”

What stunned Nehru was Mao’s utter insensitivity about a nuclear war. Atomic weapons, Mao argued, had made “no basic change” in warfare except that more people would be killed. Nehru disagreed strongly. Atomic warfare, he said, was not a matter of a greater quantity of deaths but of a “qualitative change in killing.” A third world war would be very different from earlier wars. Mao contended that even if half the population died in a nuclear war, the other half would build socialism, and imperialism would be dead for ever.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 21 Oct 2010 21:39

The Chinese Threat To India

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 21 Oct 2010 21:48

Countering China's Strategic Encirclement
The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Opinions

Countering China's Strategic Encirclement
Brig Kartar Singh (Retd)

The Defence Minister and Army Chief have voiced concern over China’s increasing assertiveness on the political, diplomatic and military fronts. Though there is no cause yet to sound an alarm, the Indian establishment should be prepared to checkmate the Dragon’s moves

DRAGON’S FIRE: Chinese self-propelled rocket launchers during a field exercise

Look at some of the past and recent developments and then perceive the scenario of a Sino-Indian thaw. The occupation of Aksai Chin by China since 1962, construction of the Karakoram Highway connecting Pakistan, supporting insurgency in India's North East since 1965 and claiming areas like Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh have been some of the direct interferences of China in Indian affairs.

A few recent developments, however, are more disturbing then the earlier ones. These include :

• A proposed rail link, via Myanmar, to Chittagong port in Bangladesh
• Construction of Sona deep sea port at Cox Bazaar in Bangladesh
• Construction of Hambantola port in Sri Lanka
• A full facility at Gawadar port, west of Karachi, in Pakistan
• Occupation of northern areas of Gilgit by regular Chinese troops
• Interference in internal politics of Nepal
• Intruding in various places along the borders in the guise of herd-grazers
• Construction of nuclear power plants in Pakistan

Sino-Indian relations started on a warm note after independence. Both countries were in search of their place in the new World Order and trying to find bread for their people. All this changed in the aftermath of the 1962 Sino-Indian war, which has left China and India in state of flux that continues till today. China started her economic development in late 80's and became a popular investment destination for Americans and Europeans.

Today she is poised to become an economic superpower and is in close competition with the US and Japan, leaving India far behind. China knows it well that after Japan and United Korea, no other country can compete with her. With India waking up very late to the new realities of economic developments, China now perceives India as a potential competitor in Asia and Afro-Asian regions. China has become the largest user of oil in the world overtaking USA. Her growing economy has also become the third largest economy of the world and she is fully a developed nuclear state with the largest Army in the world.

It is reported that China consumed 2,200 million tons of oil in 2009. Her consumption of energy in future is well perceived and in order to maintain future import requirements, she definitely requires a supply chain management system from the Gulf countries. Gawadar-Xinjang highway, gas pipeline from Myanmar and intermediate refueling facility at the port of Hambantola in Sri Lanka may be her genuine requirements.

These facilities may legitimatise as geo-economic necessities for the future. But her regular troops occupying Gilgit region in POK, direct support to the Maoist party in Nepal and openly declaring Kashmir as a disputed area prove her hidden intensions of deploying herself in the geo-strategic encirclement of India.

Recent developments in the Indo-US relationship paradigm may have also irked Beijing. US civilian nuclear deal with India, enhanced mutual trust between the two democracies, Obama's forthcoming visit to India, purchase of defence hardware by India from the US and Obama's clear indications of upgrading mutual relations with India could be seen as unwelcome developments by China.

China follows well-practiced strategies with her neighbours, like "teaching them a lesson", as she did with Vietnam in 1978. She also follows a strategy of "tactical arrogance", which she repeats with India, Nepal and Bhutan over and again during the livestock-grazing season. She also believes in the strategy of "bullying"' neighbours by actions more than words. Recently she denied a visa to one of our Army Commanders posted in Kashmir.

These postures and actions prove yet another point that China has grown so powerful that it does not bother about anyone, including Uncle Sam. She believes in having its cake and eating it too.

One of the biggest and saddest event that has gone in favour of China is downfall of the erstwhile USSR. The present Russian federation cannot engage China due to its internal problems and weak economy. So, what does it boil down to? What should India do to engage her bullying neighbour meaningfully?

One of the options available to India, as our economist Prime Minister stated, is that our engagement with ASEAN countries is a key element of India's vision of an Asian economic community. If we can meaningfully engage ASEAN countries in economies ties, then these countries will definitely look up to New Delhi in a supportive and friendly gesture. These countries will definitely upgrade India in their priorities over China. India should also keep close watch on SAARC countries and help them in their genuine economic development. This would remove their fear of India's big brother attitude and bring about an economic change in the region. We, therefore, must agree upon an economic development programme for SAARC countries to enhance their confidence in India and not leave them to any vulnerable threat from outside.

China knows it well that India today is not what she was in 1962. With a credible nuclear deterrence, a fairly well trained and well deployed army, India cannot be bullied or treated with arrogance. India could do well by organising some sort of offensive capabilities along the north-eastern borders. Indian defensive capabilities are fairly well developed and she is capable of countering any limited misadventure by China. A large-scale Chinese offensive, of course, would dictate different options for India.

In all fairness, China is definitely not an irresponsible state and recognises India's regional and international aspirations. If New Delhi and Beijing can settle their long-standing border disputes and engage in economic development between themselves as well as ASEAN and SAARC countries, then the 21st century definitely belongs to these Asian giants. After all, Panchsheel, the basic document guiding India's foreign policy, was first signed by these two countries.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 21 Oct 2010 21:51

Ominous Moves Across the Himalayan Borders
The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Opinions

Ominous Moves Across the Himalayan Borders
Wg Cdr N.K. Pant (Retd)

Much water has flowed down India's rivers ever since former defence minister George Fernandes declared that the 1998 Pokharan nuclear tests had been aimed at the Peoples Republic of China (PRC). In 2008, Pranab Mukherjee, the external affairs minister, repeated this, calling the security challenge posed by Beijing as an important priority for New Delhi. These were not off-the-cuff remarks by politicians, but a clear comprehension of the impending threat looming large on our northern mountainous borders since 1950 when the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) overran Tibet.

Tibet had racial, cultural and religious characteristics entirely different from China. It was rightfully emerging on the world stage as an independent nation, but PLA's brutal military occupation and human rights abuses altered the course of history. Subsequently, mass migration of Hans to the so-called Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) from the Chinese mainland rendered Tibetans a minority in their own homeland.

The myopic leadership in New Delhi, with exception of then deputy prime minister Sardar V. Patel, at that crucial time failed to see the writing on the wall and went ahead to recognise China's sovereignty over Tibet. This shortsighted approach to China's Tibetan invasion has cost the country dearly in terms of the defence of our Himalayan borders. After strengthening its grip on Tibet and improving road communication till the Indian borders, Beijing invented a thorny boundary dispute with New Delhi, which it is unwilling to resolve. In 1962, Communist China, that lays claim on vast areas in the Himalayas and refuses to recognise Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim as integral parts of India, launched a humiliating military attack on India.

That China's hostile policy towards India is not going to change, is clear from a recent online poll conducted by a Chinese website, huanqiu.com, which stated 90 per cent participants believed India posed a big threat to China. About 74 per cent said China should not maintain friendly relations with India anymore, while 65 per cent thought India deploying additional troops in Arunachal was damaging bilateral ties.

Recent reported confiscation of tourism brochures by the Chinese police from the Indian pavilion at the Shanghai Expo because these showed Arunachal Pradesh as part of India is perhaps a forewarning of a military blitzkrieg across our Himalayan frontiers. New Delhi must take foolproof countermeasures to avoid a 1962 type fiasco.

Despite rapidly rising trade relations, China has, off and on, been provoking India on military and diplomatic fronts. The year before, there were media reports about increasing incursions by PLA along the borders. China has now reportedly deployed 11,000 regular troops in Gilgit-Baltistan region of Jammu and Kashmir that is under Pakistan's occupation. China is the only country that issues stapled visas to Indian citizens from J&K and Arunachal on the pretext that these territories remain disputed. Last year it raised objections when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visited Arunachal Pradesh. As quoted in the media, Singh now rightly wants the nation to be prepared in view of the new assertiveness among the Chinese, which "is difficult to tell which way it will go".

Beijing's refusal to issue visa to Lt Gen B.S. Jaswal, the Northern Command chief, for a high-level military exchange visit on grounds that he commanded troops in the disputed area of J&K has added salt to the injury, leading New Delhi to cancel defence exchanges with China. Indian officials found China's behaviour particularly provocative because in August 2009, Gen V.K. Singh, currently the Army Chief and then the Eastern Army Commander, had visited China for a similar exchange. If territorial sensitivity was the issue, then Gen Singh's visit should have been even more problematic because, as the Eastern Army Commander, he had jurisdiction over Arunachal Pradesh, which China has provocatively started calling South Tibet.

It now transpires that besides amassing troops along the 1,700-km Indo-Tibet border, China has menacingly deployed nuclear-tipped missiles aimed at the Indian mainland. Last year when India decided to bolster defences in Arunachal, Global Times, China's English language mouthpiece, in an editorial termed it "dangerous if it is based on a false anticipation that China will cave in". It also commented India's current course can only lead to rivalry between the two countries and cautioned that India "needs to consider whether or not it can afford the consequences of a potential confrontation with China". The bottom line, unambiguously, was India should not have any illusions as China would neither make any compromise in border disputes nor would sacrifice its sovereignty in exchange for friendship.

Should India not revisit its policy on the Tibetan issue in view of China's continued aggressive intransigence? Sometimes in the middle ages, China may have had "suzerainty" over Tibet, but the territory has always functioned as a free nation till Mao's army annexed it in 1950. In fact, the region, in cultural, trade and religious spheres, was much closer to India than to China. Some imperial dynasties ruling Chinese mainland in the distant past had association with Tibet that can be loosely compared to the British monarch's connections with some Commonwealth countries like Canada and Australia. However, present-day Britain never laid territorial claims on these sovereign nations that had once been its colonies. New Delhi, besides bolstering defences on the Indo-Tibet border, must strive to create a strong international opinion for creating a genuinely autonomous Shangri-La where indigenous Tibetans can preserve their vanishing cultural and religious identity.

Rajdeep · Post by **Rajdeep** » 21 Oct 2010 22:40

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36672

UN Report: China sent ammunition to Darfur despite embargo.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 21 Oct 2010 23:45

India's China Syndrome
Indian Defence Review
By Air Marshal RK Nehra, Author of Hinduism & its Military Ethos

praksam · Post by **praksam** » 22 Oct 2010 00:42

China is no comparison to India when it comes to religious freedom and Human Rights.

China's Underground Christians
The continued plight of unregistered house churches.

China's constitution states that citizens "enjoy freedom of religious belief," but the experience of Buddhists in Tibet, Muslims in Xinjiang and members of Falun Gong across the country suggests otherwise. Christians can also attest to the bullying that the faithful in China must endure.

Last week more than 200 Chinese Christians were barred from leaving the country to attend a religious conference in South Africa. The delegation represented China's "house churches," or unregistered private assemblies. A Foreign Ministry spokesman said the conference's organizers had subverted the official Chinese church by only inviting the underground leaders, calling this "a flagrant interference in China's religious affairs."

It's hard to see how this is true, given that China bans proselytizing only in public places and not in the private homes where these congregants meet. What officials more likely object to is the church's threat to the Communist Party's authority. According to the Pew Research Center, 20 million Chinese Protestants and more than five million Catholics attend government-sanctioned services. But between 50 million and 70 million Christians now worship in the more popular house churches. The Communist Party has only some 60 million members.

Before the 2008 Beijing Olympics, many of the city's estimated 2,000 house churches reported harassment from authorities telling them not to meet during the games. But most of the persecution happens under the public's radar, in cases where, for instance, a priest is jailed without fair trial. None of that deterred the 200 Christians last week from trying to live their faith. As they put it in an open letter, "We earnestly long for a China that is founded on love, justice and peace."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... ia_opinion

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 22 Oct 2010 17:37

MEA blocks Dalai Lama PhD

http://www.hindustantimes.com/MEA-block ... 16194.aspx

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Oct 2010 18:38

Rajdeep wrote:http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article36672

UN Report: China sent ammunition to Darfur despite embargo.

China simply is unruly and roguish.

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 22 Oct 2010 20:07

Communist China stops issuing plates with 'unlucky' 4 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 784230.cms

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 22 Oct 2010 22:43

X-Post

The Chinese are Coming !
Indian Defence Review

General JFR Jacob, the Hero of the 1971 India Pakistan War
J. F. R. Jacob - Wikipedia
India's Jewish General Who Beat Pakistan

(Double Whammy)

The Chinese are Coming !
By Lt Gen JFR Jacob
2 September, 2010

The Dragon has emerged from its lair with a vengeance.

A senior Indian army officer was denied an official Chinese visa on the grounds that he was commanding in Jammu and Kashmir, a disputed territory according to the Chinese.

The Chinese occupy considerable amount of territory in Ladakh, which they captured in 1962. They are now slowly making inroads into the Indus Valley and other areas. In 1963, Pakistan had illegally ceded some 5,000 square km (2000 sq miles) in the area of the Karakoram to China.

Pakistan is now reported to have handed over control of the major part of the northern territories to China. Media reports indicate that there are some 10,000 Chinese soldiers based in Gilgit on the pretext of protecting the widening work on the Karakoram Highway and the construction of a railway line to link east Tibet with the Pakistani port of Gwadar in the Gulf of Oman.

The Russians in the 19th and 20th centuries dreamt of a getting warm water port on the Arabian Sea. The Chinese seem well on the way to fulfilling this Russian dream.

In a Further Move to Encircle India by Sea, the Chinese are Establishing Naval and Air Bases on Myanmar’s Ramree Island in the Bay of Bengal. (Incidentally, I took part in the amphibious assault on Ramree Island during World War II). These Bases on Ramree Island will help the Chinese in their Endeavors to Control the Upper Bay of Bengal and Pose a Threat to Kolkata, Vishakapatnam and the Andamans.

The presence of Chinese troops in Gilgit is a matter of great concern. During the Kargil conflict, the five battalions of the intruding paramilitary Northern Rifles were maintained from Gilgit and thence from Skardu. There is a good road from Gilgit to Skardu. In pre-Partition days, road communications to Gilgit were along the Kargil-Skardu-Gilgit route. This section can easily be restored in a short period of time.

The reported presence of Chinese troops in Gilgit poses a serious threat to Indian road communications to Ladakh running through Kargil.

Another matter of concern is the increased Chinese interest in the Indus Valley. The easiest approach to Leh is along this valley. The Chinese have not only shown interest in the Indus Valley but also the Karakoram Pass between India and China.

Any Chinese move through the Karakoram Pass will threaten our troops in Siachen and our base at Thoise. In the contingency of any future conflict with the Chinese, new areas of conflict in Ladakh will open up. I served in Ladakh for two years immediately after the Chinese invasion of 1962, and it also fell under my purview subsequently as Chief of Staff and Army Commander covering the northeast. During this period there were many incursions and incidents.

Keeping these factors in mind, there is an urgent requirement for another division and supporting armour to be raised for the defence of Ladakh and two more for the north east.

In the northeast, the Chinese may, after negotiations, reduce their claims from the whole of Arunachal to the Tawang tract and Walong.

Major Bob Kathing and his Assam Rifles platoon only moved to take control of Tawang in the spring of 1951. The Chinese had placed a pillar in Walong in the 1870s. They have built up the road, rail and air infrastructure in Tibet. It is assessed that the Chinese can now induct some 30 divisions there in a matter of weeks.

We are committed to ensure the defence of Bhutan. We need at least two divisions plus for the defence of Bhutan. In West Bhutan, the Chinese have moved upto the Torsa Nulla. From there it is not far to Siliguri via Jaldakha. This remains the most serious potential threat to the Siliguri corridor.

The Chinese have developed the infrastructure in Tibet to enable them to mount operations all along the border. We are still in the process of upgrading our infrastructure in the north east. It will take many more years before the infrastructure in the north east is upgraded to what is required. Thus we need to raise two more divisions and an armoured brigade for the north east.

There is an urgent requirement for more artillery, firepower and mobility. More helicopters are also needed to ensure mobility. Mobility is a key factor in military operations. Mobility is necessary to obtain flexibility as also the ability to react in fluid operations. In order to ensure the means to react, we need reserves. These reserves have yet to be created.

The Air Force needs to deploy more squadrons in that region, since, unlike 1962, the Air Force will play a decisive role in any future operations.

The Chinese are also said to be re-establishing their earlier links with the Naga insurgents.

In 1974/75, I was in charge of operations that intercepted two Naga gangs going to China to collect weapons and money. The Nagas were then compelled to sign the Shillong Accord, and Chinese support for the Naga insurgents was put on the backburner. Twelve years of peace followed. But now, the Chinese, in collusion with the Pakistani ISI, are said to be in the process of re-activating their support of the Naga insurgents as part of an overall scheme to destabilize the north east.

The increasing military collaboration between China and Pakistan is of growing concern, but we seem woefully unprepared for this contingency.

The government urgently needs to expedite the induction of land, air and naval weapons systems and to build up the required reserves of ammunition and spares. In any future conflict, logistics will be of paramount importance.

During the 1971 war, it took me some six months to build up the infrastructure for the operations in East Pakistan. The requirements now are far, far greater. Modern weapons systems take a long time to induct and absorb. The induction of new weapons systems and build up of logistical backing should be initiated on an emergency footing.

At the moment, we seem to have insufficient resources to meet this contingency.

We are critically short of modern weapons systems and weaponry. No new 155mm guns have been inducted for some two decades.

During the limited Kargil conflict, we ran out of 155mm ammunition for the Bofors field guns.
Fortunately for us, the Israelis flew out the required ammunition.

New aircraft for our Air Force are yet to be inducted. The navy is short of vital weapons systems. These shortages need to be addressed at the earliest.

There is no Soviet Union with its Treaty of Friendship to help us now [in 1971, the Soviets moved 40 divisions to the Xinjiang and seven to the Manchurian borders to deter the Chinese]. We have to rely on our own resources. We must show that we have the will and wherewithal to meet the emerging contingencies.

It is High Time the Government Reappraises the Emerging Situation and puts in place the Measures Required to Meet the Developments, Before it is Too Late.

When an 87 Year Old Retired General Realises the Grave Gravity of the Situation & the very sorry State of Affairs of Military Acquisitions, Why can't the Serving Big Generals, the Politicians & the goddamn Government