Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

[SSridhar]

Limits of law in the South China Sea - Paul Gerwitz, Brookings Institution
This is an e-book

The vast South China Sea has become one of the world’s most dangerous hotspots. Through words and deeds, six claimants including China contend for control over numerous small land features and resource-rich waters, with the United States also heavily involved because of alliances and our own security and economic interests. The great geopolitical question of our age, whether the United States as the established dominant superpower can co-exist with a re-emerging powerful China, sits on the sea’s horizon like a huge and taunting Cheshire Cat.

China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei, and Malaysia all claim sovereignty over some of these land features and waters, and the claims conflict {Indonesia must also be included now that China has claimed the Indonesian island of Natuna}. China, through its “nine-dash line” map and many statements, has claimed at the very least sovereignty over all the islands and rocks in the South China Sea and rights over the adjacent waters. China has also boldly undertaken “land reclamations” that build on land features, turning claims into physical structures and threatening further militarization. The other five stakeholders have conflicting claims over land features that in turn produce numerous additional overlapping and conflicting claims over adjacent waters and how they are used. Neither the vastness of the sea nor the smallness of the disputed land specks has prevented an escalation in intensity in recent years. Concerns about security and resources have driven much of the tension, and rival nationalisms in stakeholder countries breathe fire on the waters.

The risk that accidents or small conflicts will lead to dangerous escalations is constant. But there is not yet a path ahead for resolving the many disputes and controlling the serious risks they pose. However, the United States has articulated an approach. We have stated that we do not take a position on the competing sovereignty claims but we have called for a law-based and rules-based resolution of the competing claims. As President Obama has recently said, the United States is committed to “a regional order where international rules and norms—and the rights of all nations, large and small—are upheld. [Disputes] between claimants in the region must be resolved peacefully, through legal means, such as the upcoming arbitration ruling under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Seas, which the parties are obligated to respect and abide by.”

This statement invokes one of the hallmark ideas of President Obama’s foreign policy: International issues should be resolved in a rules-based way through the rule of law. Law-based approaches indeed have many advantages: They are peaceful, offer the promise of fair and impartial application of rules, and can protect the weak as well as the strong. In addition, through application of law, legal tribunals can also provide solutions to issues that are otherwise unavailable because of political stalemate elsewhere.

The point of this essay is both simple and regretful: Although a rules-based and law-based approach in the international arena is an admirable aspiration, law will not solve the dangerous problems in the South China Sea. More specifically, the upcoming ruling in the case brought by the Philippines against China before an arbitration tribunal under the U.N. Convention the Law of the Seas will not solve the problems or even make a major headway in resolving them. An examination of the issues before the tribunal and its most likely decisions demonstrate that the tribunal and law can make only a very limited contribution to resolving the South China Sea crisis. Law will not save us from continuing to focus predominantly on negotiations and power politics.

[Prem]

https://news.usni.org/2016/06/01/india- ... hina-upset
India Set to Sell Super Sonic Anti-Ship Cruise Missile to Vietnam
( Let's hope its True to Teach Talk to Hu )

indian defense officials are set to export one of the world’s fastest anti-ship cruise missiles to Vietnam, according to several press reports.Based on the Russian P-800 Onyx, the BrahMos is a supersonic anti-ship missile, developed in tandem between New Delhi and Moscow for the past decade, and is arguably one of the most deadly anti-ship missiles in any nation’s inventory — almost entirely for its speed.India has been keen to export the Mach 3 missile for years, but met resistance from Russia over intellectual property issues that have since been resolved, according to a Wednesday report from Jane’s Defense Weekly.n 2014, India had floated the idea of exporting the missile to Vietnam during a visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin, reported USNI News, but the idea never gained traction.However if the Vietnam deal goes through, it will be a major win for the Indian arms industry, Eric Wertheim, the author of the U.S. Naval Institute’s Combat Fleets of the World, told USNI News on Wednesday.
“In the past few years India has been making a push as a major arms exporter,” he said.“That’s one of their primary goals in addition to building their domestic capability.”For Vietnam, it would also be a major boost to their ability to take on modern surface combatants as Hanoi looks to expand its maritime capabilities against an ever-expanding Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN).“Vietnam is really in the midst of looking at their capabilities and their major gaps for their maritime forces. And China as forced them to rethink their own maritime security issues,” Wertheim said.A BrahMos buy “shows that Vietnam is looking It’s looking beyond its typical partners.”Hanoi’s largest defense acquisition in recent memory was for six Russian-built Kilo-class diesel-electric attack submarines as part of a 2009 deal with Moscow worth $1.8 to 2 billion.While the BrahMos is currently surface and aircraft launched weapon, the Indians are testing a sub-launched version that could conceivably be used on Vietnam’s Kilos.Additionally, there were concerns from China – a maritime rival with both India and Vietnam – that Indian arms sales would upset the balance of power in the South China Sea.“In the case of Vietnam, China has expressed its reservations against India’s policies to supply weapons. In the South China Sea, China and Vietnam are locked in a conflict over maritime boundaries,” Praveen Pathak, spokesman for BrahMos Aerospace told the Russian TASS news agency last week.“We expect that those friendly nations with whom neither India nor Russia have any conflict would be keen on buying these missiles.”

[SSridhar]

I will believe it only when real transfers take place of the BrahMos. Russia has been standing in the way on the prodding of China though one keeps hearing every now and then that all issues with Russia are also resolved.

[ShauryaT]

Yes, let the real transfers take place, this has been in the news for a long time now.

Now, instead of the LSA with USA, what would make sense is such an LSA with Japan.

Can the Shangri-La Dialogue Fill India’s Defence Diplomacy Void?

Realising the Importance of Military Power

In September 2014 Modi visited Japan and agreed to upgrade the bilateral relationship to a ‘Special Strategic and Global Partnership’. In the two years since, there has been no great progress – other than the Japanese Navy’s participation in the annual Malabar naval exercise along with the US – in fleshing out this “special partnership”. Nor have the consultations that were mooted in Tokyo for joint weapons development achieved much.

Even the finalisation of the sale of the US-2 amphibious maritime surveillance aircraft is proceeding tardily, despite the Shinmaywa Company’s desire to not only fully transfer technology but establish a production line near Hyderabad for this one-of-a-kind aircraft to meet world-wide demand.

Given the institutionalised habit of mind to waste such opportunities, chances are slim that MEA, and the Indian government generally, will suddenly see the light and be galvanised into strategic action. India’s reticence in owning up to responsibility for the defence of distant neighbours does not mesh well with New Delhi’s great power pretensions. This is something that Singapore’s great statesman, the late Lee Kwan Yew, repeatedly stressed. But, frustratingly, New Delhi has not quite cottoned-on to military power as integral to the conduct of diplomacy.

[SSridhar]

Pentagon chief moots Asia-Pacific ‘security network’ - PTI

United States Defence Secretary Ash Carter is proposing to accelerate and deepen defence cooperation in the Asia-Pacific by expanding a “security network” of countries whose militaries would train together and eventually operate together.

Speaking to an international security conference in Singapore on Saturday, Mr. Carter said China would be welcomed in this network. But he also cited frequent American complaints about China unnerving its neighbours with expansive moves to build up reefs, islets and other land features in the disputed South China Sea.

‘The next wave’ in security

Mr. Carter said this security network would represent “the next wave” in Asia-Pacific security.

“It is inclusive, since any nation and any military — no matter its capability, budget, or experience — can contribute. Everyone gets a voice, no one is excluded, and hopefully, no one excludes themselves,” he said, alluding to China.

China remains sceptical

A Chinese official reacted sceptically. Rear Adm Guan Youfei, director of the foreign affairs office of China’s National Defence Ministry, said Beijing welcomed the U.S. establishing close relations with Asian countries.

But he urged Washington to scale back its military exercises in the region and to reduce “provocations” such as operating military aircraft and ships in close proximity to other countries.

“I believe this will help the U.S. play a better role in the region,” he said, speaking through an interpreter.

Mr. Carter emphasised possibilities for cooperating with China while stating that the US will remain the pre-eminent power.

‘China, U.S. military can collaborate’

“America wants to expand military-to-military agreements with China to focus not only on risk reduction, but also on practical cooperation. Our two militaries can also work together,” he said, bilaterally or as part of a broader security network to combat global threats like terrorism and piracy.

Tom Mahnken, president of the Centre for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a Washington think-tank, praised Mr. Carter’s emphasis on developing partnerships.

“Secretary Carter was right to emphasise multilateral approaches in the Asia-Pacific region. Indeed, America’s alliances and partnerships in the region give us an enduring competitive advantage,” Mr. Mahnken said by email from Washington. “By contrast, China’s actions have increasingly isolated it.”

At a news conference later, Adm Harry Harris, head of U.S. Pacific Command, said that while his forces were ready to confront China if necessary, there have been few significant issues with China lately in the South China Sea.

A new SEATO/NATO in the making.

[SSridhar]

US vows 'action' if Beijing builds new structures on South China Sea islet - AFP

Chinese construction on a South China Sea islet claimed by the Philippines would prompt "actions being taken" by the United States and other nations, US defence secretary Ashton Carter warned on Saturday.

Speaking at a security summit in Singapore, Carter said Beijing risks building a "Great Wall of self-isolation" with its military expansion in the contested waters, but he also proposed stronger bilateral security cooperation to reduce the risks of a mishap.

"I hope that this development doesn't occur because it will result in actions being taken both by the United States, and actions being taken by others in the region that will have the effect of not only increasing tensions but isolating China," Carter said when asked about Scarborough Shoal in a forum also attended by senior Chinese military officials.

Rear Admiral Guan Youfei, who heads the Chinese office of international military cooperation, quickly attacked the Pentagon chief's remarks, telling journalists they reflected a "Cold War mentality". He said any sanctions against China will "definitely result in failure".

Hong Kong's South China Morning Post has reported that China plans to establish an outpost on the shoal, located 230 kilometres (140 miles) off the Philippines, which considers it part of its exclusive economic zone. Beijing claims nearly all of the strategically vital sea and has developed contested reefs into artificial islands, some topped with airstrips. Manila says China took effective control of Scarborough Shoal in 2012, stationing patrol vessels and shooing away Filipino fishermen, after a two-month stand-off with the Philippine navy.

Carter declined to elaborate when later pressed on what "actions" Washington might take.

The US warning comes ahead of a ruling from the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague on a case brought by the Philippines against China, which has shunned the proceedings and says it will not recognize any ruling. In a prepared speech, Carter said the US views the upcoming ruling "as an opportunity for China and the rest of the region to recommit to a principled future, to renewed diplomacy, and to lowering tensions, rather than raising them".

The Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia and Vietnam have competing claims in the sea, which encompasses vital global shipping routes and is believed to have significant oil and gas deposits.

Beijing's territorial claims, based on controversial historical records, have also pitted it against the US, which has conducted patrols near Chinese-held islands to press for freedom of navigation.

"Unfortunately, if these (Chinese) actions continue, China could end up erecting a Great Wall of self-isolation," Carter said in his speech. He suggested the US and China would benefit from better military ties to avoid the risk of mishaps.

Pentagon officials say two Chinese fighters last month conducted an "unsafe" intercept of a US spy plane in international air space over the South China Sea. Admiral Harry Harris, the commander of the US Pacific Command, said in Singapore that such incidents were rare, and noted that US and Chinese naval vessels generally have "positive interactions".

Carter's attendance at the summit is part of a broader US diplomatic push, known as the "rebalance", to boost alliances in the Asia-Pacific region.

In a report last month, the Pentagon said China put its land reclamation efforts on hold in the Spratly Islands chain at the end of 2015. Instead, it focused on adding military infrastructure to its reclaimed features. Another regional security concern at the Singapore forum is North Korea's nuclear program and its so-far unsuccessful missile tests.

Seoul and Washington want to deploy the US's sophisticated Terminal High Altitude Area Defence System (THAAD) that would protect against North Korean missiles, though Beijing worries about the system being deployed on its doorstep.

"It's not about China," Carter said. "It's about the North Korean missile threat, which is a clear threat to South Korea, to our forces there and to our allies in Japan."

[SSridhar]

Parrikar at Shangri La Dialogue - The Hindu
Excerpts

South China Sea row

In the clearest articulation of India’s stand on the South China Sea dispute, Mr. Parrikar said half of India’s trade “passed through these waters” and any aggression could disrupt the robust economic growth in the region as a whole.

“All countries in the region need to recognise that our shared prosperity and the enviable rate of growth this region enjoyed in the past decade will be at risk by this aggressive behaviour or action by anyone of us,” the Defence Minister said calling for a regional framework for the peaceful resolution of disputes.

On several occasions in the recent past, India has pledged support for freedom of navigation in and flight over the South China Sea in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Mr. Parrikar said India would support other countries in the region and share its facilities with them, if need be.

“We are not only committed to safeguarding India’s land and maritime territory but we also make our facilities available to other regional countries. Humanitarian assistance and disaster relief or HADR is our major focus,” the Defence Minister said.

[SSridhar]

China hits out at US, Philippines over South China Sea, says 'doesn't fear trouble' -Lee Seok Hwai, Straits Times

A senior Chinese defence official on Sunday (June 5) slammed the United States for double standards and irresponsible behaviour on the South China Sea dispute and scolded the Philippines for taking the spat to an UN arbitration court, saying that China "does not fear trouble" when it comes to upholding its sovereignty.

"We do not make trouble but we have no fear of trouble," Admiral Sun Jianguo, Deputy Chief of the Joint Staff Department of China's Central Military Commission, told some 600 delegates including defence ministers, scholars and business executives gathered in Singapore for the Shangri-La Dialogue defence forum.

"China will not bear with the [UN] arbitration award nor allow any infringements of [its] sovereignty and security interests or stay indifferent to the irresponsible behaviour of some countries in or around the South China Sea," he added, without naming any country.

The US military has conducted several “freedom of navigation” operations in which it sends a ship or plane to pass by a Chinese-claimed island in the South China Sea as a way of showing it rejects Beijing's claims of sovereignty.

Adm Sun's comments came a day after US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter, who is also participating in the three-day forum, urged China to join a "principled security network" in the Asia-Pacific region and stop erecting a "Great Wall of self-isolation" in the South China Sea.

Tension is rising over China's reclamation works on disputed reefs in the South China Sea. China claims some 80 per cent of the waterway, which hosts a vital global shipping route, while the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei have overlapping claims.

Manila has taken China's claim to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague but Beijing has said repeatedly it will not participate in the process nor recognise the ruling.

On Saturday, Mr Carter had signalled that the US will stand with the Philippines, its long-time ally, as well as Vietnam, with which Washington is reestablishing ties 40 years after the Vietnam War, to ensure freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea.

The US military has conducted several “freedom of navigation” operations in which the a ship or plane passed by a Chinese-claimed island in the South China Sea, much to Beijing's displeasure.

Adm Sun pointed a finger at "the provocation of certain countries", saying that "selfish interests" has led to the South China Sea issue becoming "overheated".

He said the Philippines has breached a bilateral agreement with China and violated provisions on territorial issues in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea in its "unilateral" move to take Beijing to court.

"The arbitration is not applicable to the dispute...as the two countries have signed a bilateral agreement and made negotiations the only way to a solution in the declaration of conduct of parties in the South China Sea," said Adm Sun.

He called for Asean to resolve the dispute through dialogue and cooperation, and warned the US and other countries not to intervene.

"China and Asean are capable of preserving peace and stability in the South China Sea through cooperation. Other countries should play a constructive role in this regard not the other way around," he said.

He also rejected Mr Carter's comment that China is isolating itself, saying that many of the Asian countries present at the Shangri-La Dialogue were “warmer” and “friendlier” to China than a year ago. China had 17 bilateral meetings this year, compared with 13 in 2015.

“We were not isolated in the past, we are not isolated now and we will not be isolated in the future,” Adm Sun said.

“Actually I am worried that some people and countries are still looking at China with the Cold War mentality and prejudice. They may build a wall in their minds and end up isolating themselves.”

But while Beijing is keen to downplay its differences with Asean over the South China Sea, the issue remains a contentious one within the 10-nation bloc. China reached a four-point consensus with Brunei, Cambodia and Laos on the South China Sea issue in April, in a development analysts say exposes fault lines in grouping.

Vietnam's deputy defence minister Nguyen Chi Vinh said in the same plenary session as Adm Sun on Sunday that Vietnam does not take sides in the dispute and called for the spat to be resolved in accordance with international laws such as the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea as well as negotiation between Asean and China.

He warned that acts of "unilateralism and coercion" in the South China Sea may lead to militarisation of the region.

"This development, if not addressed, is likely to lead to armed races, rivalry and unpredictable and disastrous consequences," said Snr Lt-Gen Vinh.

[Guddu]

I will believe it only when real transfers take place of the BrahMos. Russia has been standing in the way on the prodding of China though one keeps hearing every now and then that all issues with Russia are also resolved.

Could it be indirect pressure on China, for support on India's entry to NSG.

[SSridhar]

Could it be indirect pressure on China, for support on India's entry to NSG.

It could well be, but the discussion on transfer of BrahMos much predates the NSG developments.

[SSridhar]

Kerry warns China against air defence zone - AP

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday tried his hand at archery, sampled curdled cheese and watched ancient wrestling, all while hailing Mongolia as a modern “oasis of democracy” in its neighbourhood. However, his comments about China in a question-and-answer session, just moments after praising Mongolia, stood in stark contrast.

For Mongolia, sandwiched between undemocratic China and increasingly authoritarian Russia, the desire for deeper relations was mutual.

Mr. Kerry’s stop in this nation of 3 million people included heaps of praise for its unlikely democratic story.

But the top American diplomat also pushed for greater transparency in Mongolia, a sensitive issue given the foreign scramble for its rich resource deposits and questions about how revenue is being shared among the country’s many impoverished citizens.

U.S.-China talks

He travelled later on Sunday to Beijing for annual U.S.-China strategic and economic talks.

With reports suggesting China may establish an air defence zone in the contested South China Sea, Mr. Kerry warned against what he said would be a “provocative and destabilising act”. Such action would raise tension between China and its Asian neighbours, he said, and undermine China’s commitment to diplomatically resolve disputes over islands and maritime claims. The matter is likely to be a major focus of discussions in the next days. — AP

[SSridhar]

Diplomatic tag as countries find new ways of standing up to China - Reuters

When US Defense Secretary Ash Carter spoke at a key Asian summit at the weekend, he used the word "principled" 38 times, floating his vision of a U.S.-backed "security network" of countries in the region.

Several delegations were quick to respond to the idea at the annual Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, but it seemed to evolve into a form of diplomatic tag-team wrestling as a loose coalition of nations lined up to criticise China.

Nations including Japan, India, France and Vietnam joined calls for greater respect for international law to resolve worsening tensions over the South China Sea, a dig at Beijing which has said it will not accept any ruling by a UN-backed court on the dispute.

Chinese officials, meanwhile, stressed Beijing's commitment to being a peaceful, lawful and inclusive nation but said it would not be bullied.

"No one has the right to point their fingers at China," said Admiral Sun Jianguo, deputy chief of the joint staff department of China's Central Military Commission, as he faced a string of questions at one public forum at the summit on Sunday.

"Belligerence does not make peace."

Sun was sharing a podium with Vietnamese deputy defence minister Nguyen Chi Vinh, who said he was cutting short his own responses to allow his Chinese counterpart more time to rebut criticisms raised of Beijing.

Concern at China's assertiveness over the vital trade route was deepening, several envoys said on the sidelines of the summit, particularly given the prospect of Chinese military facilities on new artificial islands built by on reefs in the South China Sea.

Those concerns were forcing regional countries to band closer together to find new ways of standing up to Beijing.

Carter's urging of greater regional efforts, particularly from China, to create his "principled security network" was underpinned by warnings that China risked isolating itself by its actions "on the seas, in cyberspace, and in the region's airspace".

Many militiaries in the region, he said, were working closer together, both among themselves and with the United Sates.

Japan's defence minister, Gen Nakatani, said Japan would seek to participate annually in naval exercises together with the United States and India, similar to drills due to take place off the Japanese port of Sasebo later this week.

"It is very meaningful from the standpoint of securing safety in the wide area of the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean, for Japan, the United States and India to cooperate on security and defense areas and to conduct training," Nakatani said.

GREAT WALL OF ISOLATION

Carter's warnings that China faced a looming "Great Wall of isolation" were rejected by Chinese officials, but some analysts said an "us versus them" divide may suit Beijing in current circumstances.

"It might sound tough talk, but my worry is that China's leaders will simply welcome that kind of view," Lee Chung Min, a professor at Seoul's Yonsei University, told Reuters.

"If its economy slows, China's leaders might welcome the chance for the isolationist talk to stir some domestic nationalism."

Major General Yao Yunzhu, of China's Academy of Military Science and prominent figure during the weekend sessions, acknowledged perceptions that some nations might be "ganging up" on China but said this did not represent "objective reality".

"The South China Sea is not the only security issue in the region, and events like this one are not quite full reality," she told Reuters. "Each nation has to think of its bilateral relations with China as well, and many other security issues, that pull us closer together."

Admiral Harry Harris, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, made clear that while the U.S. military was attempting to engage and co-operate with China's rapidly modernising military, it was prepared for a darker outcome.

"The bottom line is this: we want to co-operate where we can, but we just have to be ready as a military to confront them if we must," he said.

Malaysia defence minister Hishammuddin Hussein spelt out the costs to smaller regional countries if great power rivalries escalate, however.

Whatever happens between major powers must not "leave us on the beach when the tide goes out".

[member_28442]

Could it be indirect pressure on China, for support on India's entry to NSG.

It could well be, but the discussion on transfer of BrahMos much predates the NSG developments.

if the talk is all about NSG pressure, it would send a very clear message to our potential future allies

[SSridhar]

PM Modi in Washington, Kerry in Beijing, China all around - Chidanand Rajghatta, ToI

Would the talks between Modi & Obama on China parallel, ironically, the talks between Nixon-Kissinger & Mao-Zhou in 1972 on India?

Irony and paradox abound in US-India relations. Some of it will be evident when Prime Minister Narendra Modi begins his fourth trip to the US in two years with a visit on Monday evening to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Arlington just outside Washington DC, a monument to the fallen in the many wars America fought, some of which invited New Delhi's skepticism.

Among them was the Vietnam War, the memorial to which is across from Arlington, and is made of black granite imported entirely from Bangalore, at a time India was an American bete-noire because of its mute acquiescence to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Pakistan and China were looked on favorably, but Indian doctors and engineers continued to stream into the United States. Today, the US and India are partners in Afghanistan and beyond, leery of the China-Pakistan axis.

As Modi greets some of Indian-American elites at Blair House across from the White House ahead of his meeting with President Obama on Tuesday morning, US secretary of state John Kerry will be in Beijing trying to persuade China, which even today sends twice as many students to the US as India, to lift its blockade on India's entry to the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Support from the Swiss would have heartened New Delhi as the Prime Minister headed out from Geneva to Washington DC, but NSG membership issue may not rank very high in Kerry's engagement with the Chinese in course of their annual bilateral dialogue that has gotten a little testy of late over primacy and territorial issues in the South China Sea.

In 2008, President Bush picked up the phone to talk to China President Hu Jintao at a crucial moment to swing a waiver that enabled the civil nuclear deal for India. The atmosphere is not as propitious now, with China digging its heels over shepherding Pakistan into the NSG on India's coattails . But if every other country in the 48-member club — which ironically was formed in the aftermath of India's 1974 nuclear test to quarantine New Delhi — expresses its support for India's entry, then it will be Beijing that will have to contend with being isolated.

China threw in the towel in 2008; most analysts think it is less likely now.

All of which points to the China being the elephant in the room - and Pakistan the mouse - when Modi meets Obama in the Oval Office at 11am on Tuesday (8:30pm IST). Although the two sides are expected to engage on a raft of other issues, from discussing nuclear reactors to returning stolen antiques, China will loom large, because, in the words of Ashley Tellis, a Carnegie Endowment scholar who has studied the issue extensively, "US today sees India as a security partner of choice in the broader Indo-Pacific region."

Everything else is subsumed by that great pivot. Even when it comes to trade, an area where US-China engagement has so far dwarfed US-India exchanges by a huge margin, some experts think Washington is starting to look towards New Delhi as China starts to slow down, despite doubts about India own dodgy performance.

Depending on which sector or constituency they belong to, experts break up the agenda for the visit into parts - from securing the NSG membership to military cooperation agreements to purchase of nuclear reactors to defense engagement to trade, manufacturing and jobs issues. A common thread running through everything is managing the rise — and now plateauing of — China.

[SSridhar]

India's Chabahar port plan is to counter China's plan to develop Gwadar port: Media - PTI

The recent Indo-Iran deal to develop the strategic Chabahar Port is part of India's "larger geo-strategic calculations" to gain access to the Middle East and Central Asia and to counter Pakistan-China's plan to develop Gwadar port, a media report said here today.

"Actually, Chabahar is just the tip of the iceberg of India's geostrategic ambitions. Besides building new berths and upgrades to Chabahar, what interests New Delhi more is a comprehensive scheme that can reshape India's geopolitics to the northwest and extend its influence further into the Middle East, Central Asia and the Trans-Caucasus," an article in the state-run Global Times said today.

To this end, India has recently committed $400 million in steel to construction of the railway connecting Chabahar and Zahedan, near Afghan border, the report said.

"Although New Delhi ostensibly highlights economic considerations, such as facilitating trade along the International North-South Transport Corridor and extracting minerals, natural gas and oil from the region, its larger geo-strategic calculations and ambitions are obvious," it said.

"A direct gateway through Pakistan provides the shortest and the most economical access for India to enter Afghanistan and Central Asia," it said.

However, due to long-standing mistrust, Islamabad is reluctant to grant India access.

"The sea-land route of Chabahar Port is designed to bypass Pakistan. With the new route, some Indian strategists suggest that India can take further advantage of its ties with Iran and Afghanistan and gain new leverage and positioning while reducing Pakistan's political and economic influence in the region," the report said.

"Besides bypassing the overland blockage, India also views its investment in Chabahar as a counterweight against Pakistan's Gwadar Port, a Chinese-funded deep sea port 72 kms east of Chabahar," it said.

China and Pakistan are currently building a $46 billion economic corridor linking Pakistan's Gwadar port with Xinjiang to improve connectivity between the two countries.

"Although India's expectations of Chabahar and the sea-land route are running high, especially following the lifting of international financial sanctions against Iran, major challenges remain. India may not be able to meet its generous offers and high-sounding rhetoric," it said.

"Iran may not always align itself with India's geostrategic goals. China is also crucial to Tehran's core interests. Iran never publicly articulated its opposition to the Sino-Pakistani project in Gwadar. Instead, it had aided the project by providing fresh water and fuel," it said.

The report said that if India expected too much from Iran, it is "bound for disappointment".

Chabahar port, located in the Sistan-Balochistan Province on the energy-rich Persian Gulf nation's southern coast, lies outside the Persian Gulf and is easily accessed from India's western coast, bypassing Pakistan.

[Prem]

America, China, India and Japan: Headed Towards a South China Sea Showdown?
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... -sea-16485

What is significant about recent American naval activities in the region is that Washington has chosen to announce them with a blaze of publicity. This suggests a clear intention to confront China and to show the world that the United States is doing so.India added to tensions recently when it sent a force of four naval vessels into the South China Sea for a two-and-a-half-month-long deployment, which includes participation in Exercise Malabar off Okinawa, jointly with the US Navy and the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force. Predictably, Beijing reacted strongly to this naval deployment, saying that New Delhi should not encourage Tokyo and Washington to bring added tensions to the region.Meanwhile a Chinese strike group of three guided missile destroyers, two frigates and a supply ship, in addition to a submarine and aircraft carrier, have been conducting exercises in the South China Sea. This group patrolled off Chinese-controlled reefs in the Spratly Islands, including Fiery Cross Reef, only a day before the American FONOP near that reef.All this is looking like dangerous brinkmanship. All the major powers in the South China Sea are trying to achieve an advantageous outcome by pushing dangerous events to the edge of active conflict.
Anyone who knows China and its history will know that China will go to the brink. But it will not be China that actually goes over the brink. It’s much more likely to be one of the countries taking China to the brink that does so. China, with a ‘home ground’ advantage and numerous military and civil assets in the region, can readily create a situation where one of the other parties will be forced to fire the first shot or to back down. Hopefully, though, current rules of engagement won’t allow a first shot to be fired. But we can’t be sure of that.Significantly, the countries that are taking China to the brink are extra-regional players with often overstated interests in the South China Sea. They are ‘burning their boats behind them’, with nowhere to go other than to back down or fire the ‘first shot’. They have no concept of an end game other than compelling China to back down and follow their ‘rule of law’. But that is not going to happen.
The sad reality is that all this brinkmanship is adding to the strategic distrust that pervades the region at present.Unfortunately, no existing regional forum has been prepared so far to address the implications of greater military activity in the South China Sea and the increased tensions that result. The sovereignty disputes currently attract greater attention. This obsession with sovereignty leads to a situation where sovereignty is not just an obstacle to effective management of the South China Sea and activities within it, but also to any preparedness to address measures to demilitarize the sea.
Demilitarising the South China Sea should be an objective of all stakeholders. To this end, China should clarify its claims in the South China Sea and refrain from activities that might be seen as assertive or aggressive. Japan and India should moderate their activities, and the United States should step back from its current naval initiatives, including by not undertaking provocative FONOPs. These prominent players in the South China Sea should all back off from their current military activities, lest the region continue down a track that could lead to more serious incidents and even conflict.

[Prem]

(CNN)A U.S. Air Force RC-135 reconnaissance aircraft flying Tuesday in international airspace over the East China Sea was intercepted in an "unsafe manner" by a Chinese J-10 fighter jet, several defense officials tell CNN.The Chinese jet was never closer than 100 feet to the U.S. aircraft, but it flew with a "high rate of speed as it closed in" on the U.S. aircraft, one official said. Because of that high speed, and the fact it was flying at the same altitude as the U.S. plane, the intercept is defined as unsafe.The officials did not know if the U.S. plane took any evasive action to avoid the Chinese aircraft or at what point the J-10 broke away. It is also not yet clear if the U.S. will diplomatically protest the incident.Officials said the RC-135 was on a routine mission.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/07/politics/ ... index.html

[svinayak]

India ‘watching’ Chinese defence minister's Dhaka visit closely

Of particular concern is the plan for Bangladesh to buy two diesel-electric submarines from China, which, military experts say, will necessitate the construction of a submarine base in Bangladesh, a base that might play host to Chinese submarines in the future (as Sri Lanka’s Colombo port did last year).

In fact, Dhaka may have won tangible benefits from courting both China and India. In the past two years, Bangladesh has seen long-standing maritime and land border issues with India resolved in Dhaka’s favour, perhaps because New Delhi is eager to make sure its neighbour doesn’t tilt too far in China’s direction, says 'Diplomat' magazine.

[SSridhar]

Chinese hackers may have stolen government info: Experts - Siddharth Tadepalli, ToI

Chinese cyber espionage group Danti may have breached computers of top-ranking bureaucrats in Delhi and elsewhere, according to cyber security company Kaspersky Labs.

While department of electronics and information technology (DeitY) officials admitted a "big" cyber-attack, they refused to divulge details, saying the probe was sensitive. But, an official source, reacting to the report, said there was indeed a breach in a few computers in the Union Cabinet secretariat, but it has been plugged now.

"It was identified during an investigation and requisite steps were taken immediately," the source said, adding "opportunities for misuse" exist in such attacks. "However, this did not seem to be a serious threat," the official said.

According to Kaspersky Labs, one of the world's top cyber-security companies, Danti possibly breached dozens of computers that are used by Cabinet-rank officials in the national capital. Speaking to TOI over the phone from Mumbai, Kaspersky LabsSoutheast Asia managing director Altaf Halde said, "We've been following a trail of malware that was used to siphon away sensitive information from government computers.

"Our team tracked the malware strain to computers used by Cabinet secretariat of the Indian central government. These hackers have a special focus on diplomatic entities. We presume they may already have full access to internal networks in the Indian government," Halde said. He said it delivers the malware through spear-phishing emails and comments written in Mandarin, but in order to attract the attention of potential victims, the email addresses are in the names of several high-ranking government officials.

Once a victim, in this case a bureaucrat, opens the mail, the Danti backdoor is installed and sensitive data is siphoned off from the infected computer. Kaspersky said they tracked several such malicious emails to Indian embassies in Hungary, Denmark and Colombia, which were targeted by Danti. "In the case of the Indian embassy in Hungary, it looks like the original message was forwarded from the embassy to the Indian IT security team in the MEA," Halde added. Experts said they've come across similar complaints and will probe whether it is the handiwork of Danti group.

[JTull]

Slumbering tiger, roaring dragon: How India’s defence stacks up against its biggest regional competitor China

India's defence sector made the maximum buzz this year. It started with Finance Minister Arun Jaitley omitting any allocation for defence in his Budget speech, then came the new, albeit incomplete, Defence Procurement Policy (DPP) that promised to plug holes in manufacturing.

The latest clincher in this list will be Prime Minister Modi's success at getting US, Switzerland and Mexico's approval for India's bid at the NSG. While the move gives India a realistic chance of getting past the door to the world's only nuclear cartel, it raises the country's stake in a region dominated by China.

But does all this give New Delhi an upper hand over Beijing? So where does India's military might stand in comparison to its neighbour China? These four scenarios give us an idea:

Nuclear boost
India recently cleared the hurdle to join Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). This membership will make path for India to achieve high-end technology and also shape its engagement with nuclear proliferation group, which can positively impact India's bid to join elite Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) club.

A membership into 48-nation NSG will open wide-array of nuclear possibilities for India. India can get help from global markets to set up nuclear power plants. Apart from giving India the knowledge of state-of-art technology, it can also solve the problem of nation's energy crisis. Under this membership, India can also commercialize the production of nuclear power equipment. This, in turn will boost innovation and high tech manufacturing and can bring India into level-playing field with its dragon neighbour. Most importantly India's access to advanced nuclear technologies, will help it export power generators to other emerging economies.

However, China is a major stumbling block to country's NSG dreams. Backing Pakistan's membership bid, China asserts that India is not qualified to join the nuclear group, as the latter has not signed NPT.

Miltary modernisation
China's military modernization, capacity-building, infrastructure development in Tibet, and moves into the Indian Ocean pose serious challenges to India's security. The alleged 'String of Pearls', an attempt to bring peripheral states into its circle of influence, only adds to India's geopolitcal concerns.

According to Pentagon 's 2016 China military report, China is aggressively pursuing military modernisation. The report states, "The long-term, comprehensive modernization of the armed forces of the People's Republic of China (PRC) entered a new phase in 2015 as China unveiled sweeping organizational reforms to overhaul the entire military structure. These reforms aim to strengthen the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) control over the military, enhance the PLA's ability to conduct joint operations, and improve its ability to fight short-duration, high-intensity regional conflicts at greater distances from the Chinese mainland."

India on the other hand is grappling to make available to its armed forces cutting-edge mobility, weapons and equipment. In the army, there is an urgent need to acquire approximately 3,000 155 mm/ 52-calibre guns to replace obsolescent guns and howitzers. In September 2015, Larsen & Toubro (L&T), in partnership with Korea's Samsung Techwin (STW), bagged a Rs 4,875-crore ($750 million) order for supplying the Indian Army with 100 self-propelled Howitzers-K-9 Vajra. However, the time of its delivery is still uncertain. The army is yet to acquire 'Dhanush', the indigenously-developed 155mm gun with 45 calibre having advanced features.

An assault rifle is a basic necessity for any military force. The Indian army's decade-long hunt for a new-generation assault rifle is still nowhere near finalization. Moreover, the army desperately needs 3,53,765 new bullet-proof vests. After almost 11 years, it will now get only 50,000 such vests for which it had to sign an "emergency" procurement contract worth Rs 140 crore.

The Indian Air Force (IAF) is struggling with obsolete fighter jets. The MMRCA project to acquire 126 fighter aircraft to replace old MiG-21s is stuck. The deal to acquire 36 Rafale fighter jets from France still awaits finalization. The air force urgently requires AWACS early warning aircraft, mid-air refueller tankers, transporter planes, advance jet trainers, medium-lift helicopters, reconnaissance and surveillance helicopters, surface-to-air missile systems and electronic warfare suites.

It was only recently when IAF admitted that it's fighter squadrons are currently 33, much lower than the required 42 to ward off a joint threat from China and Pakistan.Taking stock of the threat, the IAF has prepared a 10 year modernisation plan. According to an ET report, "The plan is to share details of its requirements — from aircraft tyres to rotor blades and 3D printing technology, with specific quantities needed over 10 years — to enable private sector players to set up manufacturing facilities and replace imports." However, it is likely that we may have to wait for a long time to see the plan reaching actuality.

When it comes to naval fleet, Indian Navy 's strength is not as impressive as its neighbour China. According to the latest Pentagon estimates, China's PLA Navy currently possesses five nuclear attack submarines (SSN), four nuclear ballistic missile submarines (SSBN), compared to India's one functional nuclear Akula-class Chakra. India's indigenously built nuclear-powered submarine INS Arihant is still undergoing performance trials. Also, China has 28 destroyers and 46 frigates, whereas India has 10 destroyers and 14 frigates.





The Indian Ocean region (IOR) is the one of the most contested zones, where both India and China are trying to create a strategic influence. With two-thirds of the global oil, half of the container traffic and a third of the cargo traffic passing through it, the IOR holds a special significance for the entire world. With increasing signs that China is expanding its influence in the region, it is imperative for the Navy to have the best-in-class naval fleet to counter.

India accounted for 15 per cent of the volume of global arms imports in the last five years, more than three times as much as China, according to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

Despite India's status as the world's largest arms importer over the last decade, the modernisation of its armed forces continues to take place at a snail's pace. SIPRI notes that the reason for such large-scale import is that India's arms industry has "largely failed" to produce competitive indigenously-designed weapons.

Defence budget
China increased its defence budget by 7.6 per cent to $146 billion for FY17, citing militarisation of the Asia-Pacific, especially the disputed South China Sea, and deepening tensions with the US. This is almost four times that of India's outlay. At a time when India's armed forces are looking at modernisation, the capital outlay for defence in Union Budget 2016 has been slashed by 8.5% from last year's capital expenditure estimate.

Dissappointingly, an amount of Rs 78,586 crore has been allocated for capital expenditure. FM Jaitley in his last year's Budget speech had proposed a capital outlay of Rs 85,894 crore, which however was revised to Rs 74,299 crore.

The reduction in modernisation funds for the forces can prove detrimental to country's national security. An ET report states that over Rs 11,595 crore or 13.4% of funds earmarked for purchase of military equipment have been returned unspent. This limitation of non-availability and non-expenditure of funds for new procurement is reflected in the fact that the defence ministry has been unable to sign many new major deals this year (Rafale fighter deal, Self-propelled howitzers, M777 artillery guns, and additional P8I aircraft). "Army which is struggling with shortages in several areas ranging from modern assault rifles, bullet-proof jackets and night-fighting capabilities to howitzers, missiles and helicopters, is the worst spender," states the report.

The way ahead
The Centre must make efforts to revamp performance of defence PSUs, DRDO , shipyards, ordnance factories so that they are well equipped to indigenously manufacture nation's defence requirements. Their laggard performance is a roadblock to India's military prowess.

It is to note Modi-led government's 'Make in India' vision allows greater participation of country's defence industry and foreign companies to jointly manufacture warship, submarine, aircraft, helicopter and aero-engine . This gives Indian industry access to international technology and, the offsets policy allows them to export the products. In the new DPP , Indigenously Designed, Developed and Manufactured procurement (IDDM) category under 'Buy Indian', has not only been introduced, but also been accorded the highest priority. This will surely help bolster the indigenous defence industrial base.

Making India self-reliant in production of its military requirements is the need of the hour. Also, a modernisation plan for each service must be created and the government must give high priority and assistance in achieving those goals.

[SSridhar]

To mollify China, India eases curbs on conference visas - Vijaita Singh, The Hindu

In a move aimed at garnering Beijing’s support for entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), India has removed “conference” visas for Chinese participants from the prior referral category {Does China provide a reciprocal facility? If not, this is another blunder in a series of blunders starting with the Dharmashala conference last month. Besides, I do not think we can link up NSG issue with this visa waiver. This is not going to sway the Chinese position.}, a senior government official told The Hindu .

China has, on several occasions, pressed India for lifting restrictions on conference and research visas.

The timing of the move is being seen as an attempt to soften the atmosphere in the run-up to the meetings of the NSG in Vienna.

“Not all categories of visas for Chinese have been removed from the restricted category. The relaxation is only for conference visas as it was a major hindrance for the Chinese to come here and share technological advancements and strategies,” said a senior government official.

[member_27581]

^^Jtull ji the chart is quite comprehensive. However, what also needs to be noted is that India's current position is after 10 years of sleep by UPA. With the way things looking up by this govt and the Indo US bonhomie, the picture can be very different in next 5 years. The only thing that needs to be watched out for is Global economic environment. Seems like unfortunately China is fast closing the window for a settlement to the boundary issue that may be more favorable to it.
Again just my once cent.

[SSridhar]

With China on its mind, India set to export BrahMos cruise missile to Vietnam - Agencies

India has stepped up efforts to sell an advanced cruise missile system to Vietnam and has at least 15 more markets in its sights, a push experts say reflects concerns in New Delhi about China's growing military assertiveness.

Selling the supersonic BrahMos missile , made by an Indo-Russian joint venture, would mark a shift for the world's biggest arms importer, as India seeks to send weapons the other way in order to shore up partners' defences and boost revenues.

The Narendra Modi government has ordered BrahMos Aerospace, which produces the missiles, to accelerate sales to a list of five countries topped by Vietnam, according to a government note viewed by Reuters and previously unreported.

The others are Indonesia, South Africa, Chile and Brazil.

The Philippines is at the top of a second list of 11 nations including Malaysia, Thailand and United Arab Emirates, countries which had "expressed interest but need further discussions and analysis", the undated note added.

A source familiar with the matter would only say the note was issued earlier this year.

New Delhi had been sitting on a 2011 request from Hanoi for the BrahMos for fear of angering China, which sees the weapon, reputed to be the world's fastest cruise missile with a top speed of up to three times the speed of sound, as destabilising.

Indonesia and the Philippines had also asked for the BrahMos, which has a range of 290km and can be fired from land, sea and submarine. An air-launched version is under testing.

Wary eye on China

Unlike Vietnam, the Philippines and Malaysia, India is not a party to territorial disputes in the South China Sea, a vital global trade route which China claims most of.

But India has an unsettled land border with China and in recent years has grown concerned over its powerful neighbour's expanding maritime presence in the Indian Ocean.

It has railed against China's military assistance to arch-rival Pakistan and privately fumed over Chinese submarines docking in Sri Lanka, just off the toe of India.

"Policymakers in Delhi were long constrained by the belief that advanced defence cooperation with Washington or Hanoi could provoke aggressive and undesirable responses from Beijing," {This was an unnecessary fear similar to not establishing diplomatic relations with Israel fearing a backlash from West Asian countries. We are slow & cautious movers in such matters, much to our disadvantage.} said Jeff M Smith, director of Asian Security Programs at the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington.

"Prime Minister Modi and his team of advisers have essentially turned that thinking on its head, concluding that stronger defence relationships with the US, Japan, and Vietnam actually put India on stronger footing in its dealings with China."

India's export push comes as it emerges from decades of isolation over its nuclear arms programme. On June 7, India cleared all hurdles to become a member of the 34-member Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), a non-proliferation regime of which China is not a member. June 6 was the deadline for any member to object to a new entrant, and none had.

BrahMos's range means it falls short of the 300km limit set by the MTCR .

India's accession to the MTCR may also strengthen its case for joining another non-proliferation body, the Nuclear Suppliers Group , a move China has effectively blocked. Both groups would give India greater access to research and technology.

BrahMos Aerospace, co-owned by the Indian and Russian governments, said discussions were underway with several countries on missile exports, but it was too early to be more specific.

"Talks are going on, there will be a deal," said spokesman Praveen Pathak.

India is still a marginal player in global arms exports. The unit cost of the missile, fitted on Indian naval ships, is estimated at around $3 million.

Getting closer to Vietnam

India has been steadily building military ties with Vietnam and is supplying offshore patrol boats under a $100 million credit line, its biggest overseas military aid.

This week defence minister Manohar Parrikar held talks with his Vietnamese counterpart General Ngo Xuan Lich in Hanoi and both sides agreed to exchange information on commercial shipping as well as expand hydrographic cooperation, the Indian defence ministry said in a statement on Monday.

A source at the defence ministry said India was hoping to conclude negotiations on the supply of BrahMos to Vietnam by the end of the year.

The Indian government is also considering a proposal to offer Vietnam a battleship armed with the BrahMos missiles instead of just the missile battery, the source said.{Wow}

"A frigate integrated with the BrahMos can play a decisive role, it can be a real deterrent in the South China Sea," the source said, adding New Delhi would have to expand the line of credit to cover the cost of the ship.

Indian warships are armed with configurations of eight or 16 BrahMos missiles each, while sets of two or four would go on smaller vessels.

A Russian official said exports of BrahMos to third countries was part of the founding agreement of the India-Russia joint venture. Only now India had armed its own military with the BrahMos was there capacity to consider exporting, he added.

[NRao]

"Policymakers in Delhi were long constrained by the belief that advanced defence cooperation with Washington or Hanoi could provoke aggressive and undesirable responses from Beijing," {This was an unnecessary fear similar to not establishing diplomatic relations with Israel fearing a backlash from West Asian countries. We are slow & cautious movers in such matters, much to our disadvantage.} said Jeff M Smith, director of Asian Security Programs at the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington.

"Prime Minister Modi and his team of advisers have essentially turned that thinking on its head, concluding that stronger defence relationships with the US, Japan, and Vietnam actually put India on stronger footing in its dealings with China."

Well, China not wanting to be left out of this party India is holding, had an article in a HK newspaper that told India that non-alignment was the best policy and one that India had successfully followed for decades. Rats. No idea since when these Chinese find wisdom.

India must be doing something right.

[kit]

"Policymakers in Delhi were long constrained by the belief that advanced defence cooperation with Washington or Hanoi could provoke aggressive and undesirable responses from Beijing," {This was an unnecessary fear similar to not establishing diplomatic relations with Israel fearing a backlash from West Asian countries. We are slow & cautious movers in such matters, much to our disadvantage.} said Jeff M Smith, director of Asian Security Programs at the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington.

"Prime Minister Modi and his team of advisers have essentially turned that thinking on its head, concluding that stronger defence relationships with the US, Japan, and Vietnam actually put India on stronger footing in its dealings with China."

Well, China not wanting to be left out of this party India is holding, had an article in a HK newspaper that told India that non-alignment was the best policy and one that India had successfully followed for decades. Rats. No idea since when these Chinese find wisdom.

India must be doing something right.

certainly so .. looks like they are feeling the heat in the right places !

[kit]

Vietnam should get the sub launched variant of the brahmos

things would get pretty much interesting in the south seas if a couple of other countries would get them

[VKumar]

Would be interesting if India were to offer Brahmos to Taiwan and its redundant MiGs to Afganisthan.

[Prem]

Day before ,One Paki Roachhead was claiming Afghan army has deployd Indian missiles on border. Since India has hundreds of Prithvi Missiles, few dozens can be sent to Afghanistan but Vietnam must get Smiling Buddha Prasad and celebrate it's own Buddh Purnima .

[SSridhar]

International community should respect Pakistan’s sovereignty: China - PTI

Backing Pakistan’s stand against U.S. drone strike that killed Taliban chief Mullah Akhtar Mansour, China on Friday said the international community should respect sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan which has made “enormous efforts” to combat terrorism.

“Pakistan has made enormous efforts to combat terrorism and support the Afghan reconciliation process. The international community should fully recognise that and respect Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said.

He was responding to a question over Pakistan denouncing the U.S. drone strike in Balochistan last month as violation of its sovereignty.

Mansour, who was in his early 50s, and a Pakistani driver, Muhammad Azam, were killed on May 21 when U.S. special forces targeted their vehicle in a drone strike in Noshki district of Balochistan.

“The Quadrilateral Coordination Group (QCG) of Afghanistan, Pakistan, China and the US is aiming at creating positive conditions for the reconciliation of Afghanistan, and all relevant parties should make joint efforts to achieve this goal,” he said.

This is the first time that China has poked its nose between the US & Pakistan. The QCG would be frayed now. Slowly, contours of the developing division are taking shape, Insh'a Alla'h.

[SSridhar]

Musings on the IISS Shangri-La Dialogue - Ravi Velloor, Straits Times

It has become something of a set-piece routine lately at the IISS Shangri-La Dialogue, the 15th edition of which concluded last weekend. The United States Defence Secretary delivers a tough speech on his way to Singapore, then comes up with a more reasonable tone on Saturday morning, the only full working day of the annual three-day event. Next day, the Chinese, typically represented these days only at the level of deputy chief of staff, come up with their response.

This year as well the pattern was repeated. Dr Ashton Carter, after laying out a vision of cooperative behaviour in the Asia-Pacific - even noting that the US and Chinese navies would sail together from Guam to Hawaii as they prepared for the annual Rimpac exercise - pointed out that China risked putting itself behind a "Great Wall of self-isolation" with its assertive behaviour in the South China Sea, including militarising the islands it occupies. The Chinese response, however, verged on the truculent.

Warning that "we don't make trouble, but we are not afraid of trouble", Admiral Sun Jianguo complained of Cold War mentalities, denied China was short of friends, claimed that it had agreed with Asean to settle disputes through "bilateral mechanisms" and generally painted his nation as a victim of bullying. Listening to him, Dr Euan Graham of the Lowy Institute thought he hit "Volume 10 on the decibel level" at times. A member of Adm Sun's delegation later told me, half-apologetically, that the officer belonged to a generation that believes it has to shout to make a point. The current crop, he assured me, know that you can be firm without raising your voice.

Adm Sun's performance was reminiscent of an incident a half-century ago when, at the height of the Cold War, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev banged his shoe on the table as he intervened in a United Nations debate in New York. Interestingly, then, as now, the provocation was the behaviour of the Philippines, which Khrushchev described as a "toady of American imperialism". But Adm Sun's speech also had hints of something else: China's nervousness at the impending ruling of the UN Arbitration Tribunal that's been asked by Manila to clarify Beijing's claims over the South China Sea and the validity of its nine-dash line map.

THREE MYTHS

Observing the flow of the weekend discussions, it was impossible to ignore three things that permeated the discussions. First, everyone, the Chinese included, seemed to assume that the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague would rule decisively against Beijing. It might yet, but how can you be so certain? Last week at a World Economic Forum panel on Asean which I moderated, Mr George Yeo, Singapore's former foreign minister, said "it would be a serious mistake to underestimate the legality of China's claims". Likewise, Mr Yeo's successor, Mr K. Shanmugam, said in 2014 that "the situation is a little more nuanced than the way it is being portrayed in the international media".

The other pervasive myth, especially among delegates from the region, was that China, the No. 1 trading partner for most, was somehow more important economically to them than they themselves were to the Chinese.

In truth, the relationship is more symbiotic. China, whose exports are flagging, needs continued access to the big markets of India, Indonesia, Myanmar and Vietnam to keep its economic engines humming. Its biggest source of foreign direct investments lately has been tiny Singapore. Meanwhile, according to the Asean Secretariat, the top source of foreign direct investment into Asean is not China but the European Union, intra-Asean states and Japan. This, by no means, is a one-way street.

There was a third undercurrent.

This was that the US would make a lot of noise but back off ultimately from taking any decisive action against China, should the arbitral panel rule overwhelmingly for the Philippines, and China ignores the decision. Indeed, in private conversation some Chinese were sure that their aggressive tailing of US patrol craft in the air and in the sea had already begun to have an impact on Washington, which did not wish to provoke an incident.

But that, too, may be a miscalculation. Meeting on the fringes of the dialogue with Republican senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham - lawmakers whose influence will only rise should Mr Donald Trump make it to the White House - I was taken aback at the vehemence with which both spoke about China's assertive behaviour.

Senator McCain suggested that the US president should assemble a team of 10 of his best generals and diplomats - including people like Gen David Petraeus, Lt-Gen Sean MacFarland and the diplomats Kurt Campbell and Ryan Crocker - to discuss how best to tackle China. "They'll know what to do," he told me, meaningfully.

Senator Graham, one of the big voices in American security circles, had another tack. He is, he said, considering introducing legislation in Congress that would require the US to name state sponsors of cybercrime, rather on the lines of a similar one that names sponsors of terrorism. Those who get on the list would face consequences.

"We just need them to pay an economic price when they cheat... There are so many ways we could get their attention," Mr Graham said.

Despite the overwhelming attention that the US-China relationship gathered at the dialogue, also called the Asia Security Summit, there were plenty other matters to take note of this time around.

French Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian launched the powerful idea that European navies should coordinate patrols in the South China Sea and fully participate in freedom of navigation operations, or Fonops.

India sent its defence minister after a gap of some years, making it possible thus for Singapore and India to have their first bilateral strategic defence dialogue on the sidelines of the summit.

South Korea, which usually is reluctant to take the floor at the Shangri-La dialogues, chose to make a ministerial speech this year. Minister Han Min Koo clearly felt the need to remind Asia that the troubles in North-east Asia need to be given due airing and that the dialogue should not be dominated by the events in South-east Asia alone. And then there were the statements by the Malaysian, Indonesian and Singaporean defence ministers, all of whom raised concern over returning jihadist fighters unsettling the region.

Backstage, out of the public view, more than a dozen intelligence chiefs from the Asia-Pacific region, including US Central Intelligence Agency director John Brennan, held their own meeting to discuss issues of common concern. From its modest beginnings in 2002, the dialogue organised by the London-based global think-tank International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), has, indeed, travelled an impressive distance.

"The SLD has grown and established itself as the premier defence and security forum in the Asia-Pacific region," President Tony Tan Keng Yam, who was defence minister when the dialogue was conceived in 2002, told the delegates at an Istana reception. "This year, 31 ministers and participants from 35 countries came to the dialogue."

Dr John Chipman, director-general of the organiser IISS, credits the dialogue for having helped foster an environment that led to the establishment of the Asean Defence Ministers Meetings in 2006, and subsequently ADMM Plus, which adds Asean's eight dialogue partners.

"The Shangri-La Dialogue, because it promotes flexible consultations and is not bound down by rules, tries to remain ahead of formal structures," says Dr Chipman. "In the years to come, it is important to fully integrate the key South Asian states into the Dialogue - not just India, but also Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh."

Now that India has formalised its Act East policy, he says, it should ensure that its defence minister turns up for every annual meeting. Also, that the Chinese must raise their level of representation to that of defence minister or, even better, the vice-chairman of the Central Military Commission.

"Technically, the Chinese deputy chief of staff is junior to every other person who spoke in the plenary. So, we bend over backwards to ensure that despite the representation at a more junior level they still have a place in the plenary. This is not a privilege we can extend in perpetuity. The fluency of Chinese defence diplomacy at Shangri-La would be much strengthened by sending a minister."

It's tough to say what the next year will bring. By then the arbitration ruling would have been delivered. On current form, it does not look like any solutions to the region's festering disputes are coming into view. Indeed, the best one can hope for is that the tense regional situation does not get worse, or is complicated by other factors, such as a successful jihadi strike on an Asian state or more wild behaviour from North Korea. One thing is for sure: There'll be plenty to talk about.

[prahaar]

International community should respect Pakistan’s sovereignty: China - PTI

Backing Pakistan’s stand against U.S. drone strike that killed Taliban chief Mullah Akhtar Mansour, China on Friday said the international community should respect sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan which has made “enormous efforts” to combat terrorism.

“Pakistan has made enormous efforts to combat terrorism and support the Afghan reconciliation process. The international community should fully recognise that and respect Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said.

He was responding to a question over Pakistan denouncing the U.S. drone strike in Balochistan last month as violation of its sovereignty.

Mansour, who was in his early 50s, and a Pakistani driver, Muhammad Azam, were killed on May 21 when U.S. special forces targeted their vehicle in a drone strike in Noshki district of Balochistan.

“The Quadrilateral Coordination Group (QCG) of Afghanistan, Pakistan, China and the US is aiming at creating positive conditions for the reconciliation of Afghanistan, and all relevant parties should make joint efforts to achieve this goal,” he said.

This is the first time that China has poked its nose between the US & Pakistan. The QCG would be frayed now. Slowly, contours of the developing division are taking shape, Insh'a Alla'h.

It seems to be the case that no matter what, China does not want Pakistan region to become a free fire zone, not unlike Syria, where different interests are camping with different sides and bombing the hell out of that piece of land. Stable Arabian sea access for a 10T economy, does not exactly sound like that. One would not even buy a Dhaba license, let alone make it the GT road.

[Prem]

http://www.pravdareport.com/world/asia/ ... n_ocean-0/
Indian Ocean: New arena for major international rivalry -

. The projects of Trans-Pacific and Trans-Atlantic partnerships are going through various stages of implementation. In the basin of the Arctic Ocean, the Arctic macro-region is being formed. The region of the Indian Ocean will apparently be the next step. In comparison with other three oceans, the Indian Ocean has a number of peculiar features. For example, this is the only ocean, to which global players - the United States, Europe, Russia and China - have no access to. Therefore, for each of these powers it is crucial to ensure their military presence in the region. ThIt should be noted that the need for non-regional players in strong naval presence in the Indian Ocean has appeared because of the activity of Somali pirates. To ensure the safety of merchant vessels, many countries sent their ship to East Africa, and the fight for the possibility of establishing a long-term base in the region has not stopped since then. The Chinese have proved to be most resourceful at this point. China has obtained access to the NATO-US base in Djibouti and ports in Mozambique. Beijing has been building up its presence in East Africa; for example, in Sudan, Ethiopia and in other states. The Chinese have already created their own infrastructure, the scale of which they will show at the right time. This brings up an episode from April 2015, when foreigners were fleeing the war-torn Yemen. During the time of the crisis, the Chinese landed their commandos in the port of Aden and evacuated all Chinese citizens without any warnings at all. (a The most valuable "pearl" in the necklace of Chinese bases in the Indian Ocean is Gwadar- a port on the coast of Pakistan. In Gwadar, the Chinese intend to build not only a strategic naval base, but a large commercial port that will be connected with the People's Republic of China by direct rail and road communication. The implementation of the Gwadar project is the starting point of the new era in the history of development of the Indian Ocean against the backdrop of growing rivalry between China and India. The joint Sino-Pakistani project is a direct challenge to India - the country that has always considered the Indian Ocean its own ocean. China's ground access to its waters and the appearance of a Chinese base in the region comes as a threat to Delhi. The base at Gwadar will give Beijing an opportunity to take control of sea routes from Asia Pacific to the Middle East and Europe - a dream that India has cherished for long. In this case, China will become the only strategic partner of the United States not only in the Pacific but also in the Indian Oceans, pushing India to a secondary position. India responded by strengthening military cooperation with the United States (India goes together with Vietnam here, as Vietnam also wants to be friends with the USA to counter China. At the same time, Delhi started building up cooperation with Iran, where a similar, Gwadar-like port is to be built. The project in Iran is known as the Port of Chabahar. This project is purely an economic one. The port is to give access to the Arabian Sea for Afghanistan and the former Soviet Asian republics. There is little doubt that the project has a military and strategic constituent. At least, it is clear that its implementation will increase competition between the blocks of Delhi-Tehran and Islamabad-Beijing. Washington will try to interfere by manipulating the unclear picture about the abolition of sanctions against Iran, involving external players such as Saudi Arabia and manipulating such issues as arms supplies, anti-terrorist struggle and human rights protection. Most importantly, both Gwadar and Chabahar are located on the territory of Baluchistan, which can be called the "Kurdistan of South Asia." The Baloch is one of the divided peoples living in Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan. In 1948, upon the proclamation of independence of the former British India, the Baloch had not received the desired independence, and have been struggling for self-determination since then. The fact that the above-mentioned economic and military objects re being created on their territory serves as a first class trump card for the United States. As we can see, there is a serious conflict of interests brewing in the Indian Ocean with the participation of nuclear powers (China, India, Pakistan) and the "circumnuclear" Iran. The United States claims for leadership in the macro region with NATO's support. Under these conditions, Russia may develop cooperation with India, Pakistan and Iran to build a security system in the Persian Gulf. Yet, this is not enough for a large-scale game. The loss of Soviet bases in Yemen (Aden, Socotra), Mozambique and Somalia has not been compensated for yet. -

[SSridhar]

The INC is the spoiler

Modi has made China belligerent, says Cong. - The Hindu

In a scathing criticism against the NDA government’s foreign policy agenda, the Congress on Friday blamed Prime Minister Narendra Modi for turning China “belligerent” towards India and also weakening the country’s ties with Russia.

“China which is extremely crucial and has a sensitive relationship with India but has never been so belligerent in the past 29 years ever since Late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi broke the ice with China in 1987, never ever in the past, almost three decades, China has taken such an absolutely hostile position to India whether on the question of the Nuclear Suppliers Group or even getting the Jaish-e-Mohd. and Maulana Masood Azhar labeled as terrorist entity,” said Congress spokesperson Manish Tewari said at a press conference here.

[RajeshA]

The INC is the spoiler

Modi has made China belligerent, says Cong. - The Hindu

In a scathing criticism against the NDA government’s foreign policy agenda, the Congress on Friday blamed Prime Minister Narendra Modi for turning China “belligerent” towards India and also weakening the country’s ties with Russia.

“China which is extremely crucial and has a sensitive relationship with India but has never been so belligerent in the past 29 years ever since Late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi broke the ice with China in 1987, never ever in the past, almost three decades, China has taken such an absolutely hostile position to India whether on the question of the Nuclear Suppliers Group or even getting the Jaish-e-Mohd. and Maulana Masood Azhar labeled as terrorist entity,” said Congress spokesperson Manish Tewari said at a press conference here.

Congress first needs to explain 1962 and who was at fault.

[SSridhar]

As India's power grows, China's containment strategy will get frenetic - Rajesh Rajagopalan, Economic Times

Nothing that we do not know here in BRf or have not discussed. Worth repeating & reiterating always.

China's decision in Vienna to object to India entering the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) should not come as too much of a surprise. China has been uncharacteristically open about opposing India's membership. This also makes it unlikely that it will change its view in the next 10 days, before the NSG meets in plenary in Seoul on June 24.

China's action has little to do with NSG, but is simply the latest indication of China's containment strategy against India. Understanding this reality is the first step to finding an appropriate strategy to managing India's relations with China.

The NSG membership is important for India but not so much for any material gain. Its importance is mostly that it strengthens the legitimacy of India's nuclear programme and permits India to have some say in making the rules of the global nuclear order, all without joining the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). Since the NSG, under American pressure, had in 2008 already permitted India to engage in nuclear commerce with other countries, what China's veto does mostly is hurt India's pride but not much more.

China's objections have little to do with its fidelity to NSG rules. NSG has admitted members who were not NPT members. Moreover, China's own actions after it joined the NSG demonstrate a completely dismissive attitude towards NSG rules. Against these rules, and its own solemn commitment, China agreed to supply additional nuclear power plants to Pakistan.

China's actions are not about the NSG as much as an attempt to balance and contain India within South Asia. This is why it might not object if India and Pakistan join together, thus ensuring both their hyphenation and having someone inside to use as its cat's paw against India.

But this is not likely to happen for a while because Pakistan's terrible proliferation record makes other NSG members wary of letting it join.

The policymakers in New Delhi need to recognise China's containment strategy against India and respond accordingly. China's behaviour is a reflection of three factors. The first is the balance of power in Asia. It was clear since the 1950s that India and China would be the most powerful countries in Asia.

This led China to form an axis with Pakistan that is based on nothing but their common desire to balance India. India has never fully acknowledged or responded to this axis.

The second is China's rise, which has led to greater aggressiveness with all of its neighbours and with the US.

Though China initially attempted to portray its rise as "peaceful" and different from previous great powers, these are now distant memories. China's behaviour has become increasingly unyielding and pugnacious, as when the Chinese foreign minister told his Singaporean counterpart in 2010, in effect, that small countries should know their place.

It is important to remember this because in the coming days there will be arguments that China's actions are the consequence of India getting closer to the US.

That would be wrong. There is a certain uniformity in Chinese behaviour that applies to all of its neighbours, not just India.

These are, moreover, neighbours with which China has close economic ties, countries that tried hard to engage with China in order to integrate it into the regional order in the hope that this would tame any temptations of power. They have all reluctantly concluded that China's power can only be balanced, not tamed, and are seeking closer security ties with the US because it is the only country that can effectively provide such balance.

The US too tried hard to integrate China into the existing international order, seeking to partner with it rather than contain it. For almost a decade, the US was also diverted by its entanglements in the Middle East, giving China plenty of space to grow.

US President Barack Obama's initial instinct, as befits his liberal view of international politics, was also to frame the relationship as a partnership, the G-2.

None of this has helped keep China's rise peaceful. As China's power grew, its ambitions have also expanded. China, it turns out, is just another great power and its change in behaviour tracks well with its growing power.

Finally, China also has a paranoid strategic culture that automatically sees the world in conflictual terms, which is sometimes short-sighted. Indian leaders should be intimately familiar with this. It is this short-sightedness that unnecessarily antagonised a very pro-China Jawaharlal Nehru, helped cement the Indo-Soviet alliance, forced India to restart its nuclear programme by helping Pakistan's nuclear weapons quest and is driving an instinctively anti-American Indian strategic elite into reluctantly considering an alliance with the US.

Strategic Blindness

That Beijing's behaviour is so self-defeatingly short-sighted should provide no comfort to New Delhi because it has led to a policy that has consistently sought to balance and contain India. China's decision to object to India's entry into the NSG is no different. China is reacting not so much to India's behaviour as much as to India's power. As India's power grows, India should prepare for China's containment strategy to become even more frenetic.

In New Delhi, there is almost a wilful blindness to this. The dangers of such strategic blindness cannot be overstated.

If there is one positive outcome of the NSG issue, it is that it provides a further demonstration of China's containment strategy. If India's strategic community and decision-makers continue to sleep on, they will have no one to blame but themselves.

[schinnas]

I consider PM Modi's embrace of US similar to what IG did with USSR prior to 71 war. Given the current economic trajectory of China, Pakistan and India and the increased tussle between India and China due to CPEC going through Indian territory under occupation (GB and PoK), I expect our western and/or northern border(s) to heat up in about 4 years (either 2019 or 2020). If China's economy continues to slow down for next 3+ years and Indian economy grows faster every year and reaches close to GDP growth rate of 10 per year, war will be the only way for Cheen to slow down India and disrupt our momentum.

Instead of rushing to a partnership when that threat becomes imminent, it was very prudent to get into a strategic alliance with US now itself and build our defenses and international relations accordingly. Given Cheen's numeric superiority in everything, we need to have a qualitative edge in surveillance, intelligence, actual weaponry and tactics / command and control to really win. Partnering with US will help us in several of these aspects if US is really keen to help India.

We do have a capable and pragmatic leadership of Doval, Parrikar and of course PM Modi till 2019. So no dhoti shiver!

[SSridhar]

Red alert issued on cyber threats from China - ToI

The Indian defence establishment has sounded a fresh red alert over the need to ensure cyber security of classified information after renewed online espionage and hacking attempts emanating from China.

Among the threats identified, the alert warns that an "advanced persistent threat" group named 'Suckfly', which is based in Chengdu region of China, has stepped-up cyber espionage attempts against Indian security and commercial establishments.

Having stolen certificates from legitimate South Korean software firms, Suckfly is apparently using them as a cover for its cyber attacks through malware like 'Backdoor.Nidiran'. Incidentally, the Chengdu region also houses the headquarters of the new western theatre command of the People's Liberation Army, which is tasked to handle the entire Indian front from Ladakh to Arunachal along the 4,057-km Line of Actual Control.

Chinese hackers have been regularly attacking -- and sometimes successfully infiltrating -- security and commercial computer networks in India, as also other countries like the US, the UK and Germany.

TOI had reported last week that Chinese cyber espionage group Danti had possibly breached several computers of top-ranking bureaucrats in Delhi and elsewhere, as per cyber security company Kaspersky Labs.

Incidentally, India still does not have a tri-Service Cyber Command, which was proposed by the chiefs of the staff committee over three years ago to deal with the escalating threats in a unified manner. Instead, the government is planning the creation of a much-smaller Defence Cyber Agency (DCA) as interim arrangements till full-fledged commands come up.

The notorious PLA unit 61398, an operational intelligence gathering unit, along with researchers students and faculty of Shanghai Jiaotong University, is at the heart of the cyber-war against India and the West.

[SSridhar]

Recent Transitions in the Leadership of the PLA Rocket Forces - M.S.Prathibha, IDSA

Conclusion

The leadership transition in the Rocket Forces shows that the service is not only integrating with other services but that its officials are increasingly called upon to other services to facilitate joint training and exercises. The reorganisation and restructuring of the Chinese military has reached the Rocket Forces, with the leadership finding ways to utilise one of its efficient forces for future warfare. The Rocket Forces are being modernised to act as a deterrent force in potential conflicts in the South China Sea and East China Sea. In that respect, the efficiency of their warfighting capability has to be enhanced. Therefore, the equipment and command competence becomes integral to the force, leading the leadership’s attention to equipment upgradation and integration of the Rocket Forces. Given this focus, it is not surprising that there is growing focus on the Equipment Department. Already, in another rank promotion in May 2016, Jiang Jinglian, the Chief Engineer of the Equipment Department, has been promoted to the rank of Major General. A year after assuming the post of Political Commissar of the Equipment Department, Ma Li would be retiring now, which is likely to result in a further change in personnel. The importance of the Rocket Forces would ensure that the leadership would implement the reforms more rapidly here than in any other service.

[ldev]

WHAT CHINA’S BIG NATION COMPLEX MEANS FOR THE FUTURE OF ASIA

In two years on the China desk in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, colleagues and I had frequent interactions with China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA). They were our counterparts out of China’s embassy in Washington, and we had a cordial and productive working relationship. Our job was to help manage the defense relationship between the United States and China, which was characterized by growing cooperation and frequent high-level visits. As representatives of our respective governments, we also communicated on thornier aspects of the relationship.

The PLA members sometimes offered clues to their mindset regarding their neighbors in the region. These hints didn’t come off as malicious, just presumptuous, and manifested mostly in asides and off-the-cuff remarks. Of course Vietnam should defer to its “big brother” and be silent. Yes, we can discuss the South China Sea, but the other countries’ claims are a joke. You could feel the frustration coming from our PLA counterparts when we pushed on any number of points. Their response, with varying levels of exasperation —“China is a big country. X is a small country. What more is there to say?” China does not see its neighbors as peers. This thinking is the result of thousands of years of experience and its position as the Middle Kingdom. How does this square with modern concepts of international law and dispute settlement?

The past decade in the South China Sea (whether conceptualized in China as such or not) can also be seen as a giant experiment — a test of the international system. We should consider what lessons China takes from its experience. First, you are strongest when you change the facts on the ground (or on the seas). The map of the South China Sea is physically different now due to China’s extensive reclamation efforts. Other claimants are building, too, but the scale of their construction is miniscule in comparison. Second, you must be willing to lose in other areas in order to accomplish priority goals. China calculates that whatever punitive measures coming its way (if any) are tolerable in comparison to the value it attaches to its South China Sea claims. Third, being the number one trading partner, by far, with neighboring countries provides for significant leverage. And fourth, the international community may organize and may speak out with one voice, but then the years pass and actions, or lack thereof, speak louder than words.

A consideration of these lessons is in order when we contemplate, as France’s defense minister advised, what might come next. Though his statements apply to the international legal system writ large, China’s actions were clearly the focus. China is not rushed. It is deliberate. As it gains strength and capability, and as its interests expand, it has pushed outward. China has core interests, of which the South China Sea is one, but so are Tibet, Xinjiang, and Taiwan. It has been describing them as such for many years. Observing the South China Sea, we see forward motion from China, permitted by the current international system. Why stop when no one is stopping you?

[salaam]

China drives India into the arms of the US

If the dimensions of the strategic partnership worked out by India and the US seem like a grand alliance targeted at you-know-who, China had better realise that it has fathered it,' says B S Raghavan, a long time observer of China.