People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.


Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3348
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Rony » 15 Sep 2011 16:24

The ruling Kuomintang party in Taiwan which is mainly composed of immigrants from China wants to move closer to China but the majority of Taiwanese oppose it. Majority of Taiwan people consider themselves as 'Taiwanese' and not as 'Chinese'. The Opposition Democratic People's Party is representing the Taiwanese opinion.

Taiwan Leader’s ‘Surrender Tour’ to Beijing?

On Monday, President Ma Ying-jeou’s office denied that the Taiwan leader would go to China should he be re-elected in January.

After inaugurated in 2008, Ma quickly signed a raft of agreements with China, including last June’s sweeping Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, but Taiwan’s voters evidently feel that the new relationship with Beijing has not yielded promised benefits. Perhaps as important, the electorate generally marks down Ma for not protecting Taiwan’s fragile international profile. Many suspect the closer economic link to China the president favors is the prelude to a surrender of the island’s independent status to Beijing.
In late 1949, Mao Zedong’s Communist Party drove Chiang Kai-shek’s Kuomintang, or Nationalist Party, from the Chinese mainland to Taiwan during the latter stages of the Chinese civil war. Since then, the Kuomintang has maintained its claims to “the Mainland” and considers Taiwan a province of a larger nation, the Republic of China. Beijing similarly views Taiwan as a part of “China,” but in this case the People’s Republic of China. Tsai’s opposition Democratic Progressive Party, on the other hand, generally rejects the notion that there is a greater Chinese nation and sees the island as simply “Taiwan.”
In a poll last month, a slight majority of the island’s citizens identify themselves as “Taiwanese” and not “Chinese,” while only 3 percent see themselves as Chinese and not Taiwanese. Given the high Taiwan identity on the island, it is not surprising that, according to polls, support for unification of Taiwan and China is almost always in single digits.

A Ma visit to Beijing would probably not be popular in Taiwan for various reasons. As an initial matter, the trip, the first time for either side’s leader to cross the Taiwan Strait, would be perceived as an admission of weakness because, especially in Chinese culture, supplicants travel to meet their masters. More important, virtually no one believes that China’s Chinese would be willing to accord Ma the respect due to a head of state. After all, in Beijing’s view he is nothing more than a provincial governor.
And that is why Tsai’s DPP thinks it can score points with the voters. Its immediate response to King’s words was to argue that, if Ma were to go to China, he should do so only in his capacity as head of state. “If he cannot visit in that capacity, that would mean he cannot uphold the nation’s dignity,” said DPP spokesman Chen Chi-mai.
Tsai has fallen back in the latest polls after drawing even with Ma in recent months. Yet her party has done extremely well in the off-year elections, and its successes point to the widespread concern that, among other things, Ma is selling out Taiwan to the Chinese.

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Pranav » 15 Sep 2011 19:07



IMHO India should stay under the radar on this issue. There should be an institutionalized India-China strategic dialog mechanism. The success will depend upon China's accommodation of Indian interests in Af-Pak, J&K and Arunachal.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby JE Menon » 15 Sep 2011 22:13

^^I agree. There is a lot of media focus on the issue, much of it unwarranted and probably more than a little motivated. We should be extremely wary.

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4103
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby hnair » 15 Sep 2011 22:29

There is only minimal people-to-people contacts (including tourists) between India and China. Has to increase by leaps and bounds. The current exchange in academia is predominantly of a geriatric, left-leaning sort. The Indian codgers embarrass the chinese hosts by hugging Mao far too closely. Hope that also gets corrected.

Added later: we need more than one avenue of communication between two big nations.


Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2500
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Jarita » 16 Sep 2011 08:45

Babus block Indian Army’s plans to counter China’s PLA

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_ba ... la_1587622

Indian Army’s plans to beef up presence on the Indo-China border have met with fierce resistance from two unexpected quarters — the finance and the environment ministries.

The finance wing of the defence ministry in consultation with the ministry of finance is not agreeable to spend a whopping Rs12,000 crore to set up a Mountain Strike Corps even as a plan to create an alternate, all-weather route from Siliguri to North Sikkim to rush troops to the Indo-China border has been rejected by the ministry of environment and forests on the grounds that the alignment passes through eco-sensitive areas.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24263
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby SSridhar » 16 Sep 2011 08:56

There is a possibility that the US may be trying through various means to sharpen the situation in South China Sea and India has to be wary therefore. However, the fact remains that India has a far, far more legitimate claim to POK (which includes Gilgit-Baltistan) than the Chinese to the South China Sea. If, as PRC claims, that foreign powers should not vitiate the situation in South China Sea through oil exploration, how is it that PRC thinks it fit and right to station the PLA along the POK or engage in construction and mining activities there ?

While India must be prudent, the various acts of China have been plainly inimical, blatantly violative of Indian sovereignty and provocative to say the least.

Sri
BRFite
Posts: 1327
Joined: 18 May 2005 20:19
Location: Earth

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Sri » 16 Sep 2011 12:34

SS Sir, Chinese will negotiate now. I feel there is some Chankiyan in the South China sea move. Hopefully we negotiate harder.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby vishvak » 16 Sep 2011 14:10

Sri wrote:SS Sir, Chinese will negotiate now. I feel there is some Chankiyan in the South China sea move. Hopefully we negotiate harder.


What is there to negotiate?

We can offer even nukes and tell Chinese that protests are no good, considering how Chinese have been proliferating to pak. Hitting more than how much we are hit is very civilized when the opponent is not too straightforward.

Just saying how absurd it is to offer == to everyone as Indians.

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Agnimitra » 16 Sep 2011 19:22

MKB chimes in:
India picks a quarrel with China
Planned exploration of Vietnamese offshore oil blocks by a state-owned Indian firm is Delhi's calculated provocation of South China Sea sensitivities, and the actual target: Beijing's burgeoning alliance with Pakistan. China's stepped up involvement in Kashmir has not gone unnoticed in the Indian capital. Drumming up a sea territories spat also proves a timely distraction from domestic woes.

[...]

India, which has been wetting its toes sporadically in the South China Sea in the recent years, is apparently taking the plunge to wade waist-deep into the troubled waters. It is a historic move - be it there is no clarity whether merely tactical or strategic. But it is historic; India's "Look East" policy acquires swagger. The Sino-Indian geostrategic rivalry is not going to be the same again.

[...]

ONGC Videsh has been active in Vietnam for some years already and is now expanding its activities. The subject is on Krishna's agenda of talks in Hanoi. Meanwhile, other private Indian companies are also beginning to scout around for exploration work in the disputed offshore fields. The ball is now on Krishna's court. How he takes the discord forward, whether he pushes the envelope, how assertively he is going to do that - all this is going to set the tempo for Sino-Indian interactions in a near future.

This is by no means a quarrel over energy security or international law. It is a carbon copy of the triangular equations involving China, Pakistan and India. Replace Vietnam with Pakistan and the South China Sea spat is almost a replay of the Indian disquiet about the burgeoning Sino-Pakistan alliance. That alliance is virtually cascading in front of Indian eyes and Beijing blithely pretends it doesn't notice. Not a month passes without some Pakistani dignitary or the other cogitating with the Chinese political and military leadership.

[...]

Far more important is China stepping up its involvement in the disputed part of Kashmir that India claims as its territory but which is under Pakistani occupation and Delhi has named 'Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir' [POK]. :roll: A recent Chinese commentary attributed to an influential strategic thinker, Pan Guang, Director of the Shanghai Center for International Studies and Institute of European and Asian Studies and concurrently the Director of SCI Studies Centre in Shanghai suggested that China might be on the brink of using the Karakorum and the POK territory for developing communication links with Afghanistan. Pan claimed that the matter was under the active consideration of the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization following discussions with Beijing.

Pan wrote in an article in China-US Focus titled ''China and US in Central Asia: Role of the SCO and Possibility of Cooperation in Afghanistan'':
''Even though China has not sent its troops to Afghanistan, the Chinese support for the allied forces in the country is widely observable.


''At present, the United States and NATO are considering three options for involving China in the logistic replenishment for Afghan actions. First, China is required to open the Wakhan Corridor on the Sino-Afghan border as a channel for providing logistic support for NATO troops. But the corridor, over 5,000 meters in altitude, has very challenging topography and climate, posing serious technical difficulties to any passage. Second, highways and railways in China are used for transporting goods into the Pakistani Part of Kashmir, to be further trans-shipped into Afghanistan. Third, Goods are to be shipped to Gwadar, the Pakistani port constructed and managed by the Chinese companies, before they are transported into Afghanistan on land. For the moment, the second option is being focused upon by the two parties in negotiation.''

Conceivably, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. What is absolutely clear is that Delhi took a calculated decision to nudge Beijing. Vietnam is a unique strategic option for Delhi to make Beijing comprehend the depth of Indian feelings about China's ties with Pakistan. The parallel is almost complete insofar as there is a lot of empathy that India would have from other Southeast Asian countries with involvement in the South China Sea dispute - and from Japan - just as China enjoys in the South Asian region among the small countries surrounding India with which India has had difficult relationships.

India has shied away from the US attempts to get it onto a bandwagon along with its other Asian allies but has preferred to go it alone so that the current spat is strictly 'bilateral' and its resolution would have to be within the Sino-Indian framework. Delhi could be probing the scope for ground rules with Beijing guiding their behavior in each other's 'spheres of influence' that are equitable and sustainable and based on mutual advantage. The issue here is whether China would see things that way.

For China, its ties with Pakistan or any other South Asian country are not necessarily "India-centric". Nor can India openly claim the South Asian region to be its "sphere of influence" where China is obliged to calibrate its behavior to suit Delhi's sensitivities. Over and above, China's expanding interest in the Indian Ocean region is of such far-reaching consequence to its global strategies that it will be hard-pressed to curb them in order to accommodate the Indian sensitivities. In sum, therefore, a new chapter is commencing in the Sino-Indian geostrategic rivalry.

The pattern of conflict and cooperation inherent in the Sino-Indian relationship is acquiring a new template. In a masterly recent work on India's foreign policy, Does the Elephant Dance?, David Malone, who served as Canada's High Commissioner to India during 2006-2008, wrote with great prescience:
''While there can be no certainty with respect to either possible future conflict or sustained cooperation between India and China, the likelihood is a mix of security-related tension and economic cooperation. Outright war is highly unlikely - both sides have too much to lose. But the two nations will continue to rub against each other, with unpredictable outcomes, as they seek to expand their respective spheres of influence.''
Indeed, the economic relationship is rapidly growing. Ironically, on the same day that the Indian foreign-policy establishment chose to "prick" the Chinese sensitivities over South China Sea, the Indian finance ministry took a huge leap forward to encourage Chinese investments in India.

The Indian government decided to allow Indian companies to borrow in yuan up to a new ceiling of US$1 billion. The move aims at facilitating borrowing from China whose cost of credit is low for India's infrastructure development.

So far India allowed overseas borrowing only in US dollar, euro, yen or pound sterling. In essence, Indian private companies are being enabled to place big orders with Chinese suppliers, especially for power-generation equipment.Arguably, the rapidly developing trade and economic ties between adversaries could have a calming effect on their choler and passions.

[...]

One thing is for sure. All major foreign policy moves and most minor moves in Delhi are directly handled in the prime minister's office in Delhi with the foreign ministry taking a back seat in the recent past and confining itself to articulating policies rather than crafting them. Put simply, the current spat carries the imprimatur of the Indian prime minister's office.

That brings up a tangential question. It is widely perceived that Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is currently at the lowest point in his trajectory as a politician. A sense of exasperation is growing with his government, which seems to exist for no greater logic than that politics is about power. His trusted mandarins are keenly looking for ways to put a feather on the boss's cap. A last-minute decision by Manmohan to attend the United Nations General Assembly session in New York next week is seen as an exercise in "image-building".

However, he is yet to get an okay from US President Barack Obama for a "one-on-one". The Americans apparently plead "scheduling difficulty", which is often a diplomatic metaphor for disinterest. Would the fables streaming in from the South China Sea in the past 48 hours incentivize a last-minute change of heart in the White House?
Last edited by Agnimitra on 16 Sep 2011 19:33, edited 1 time in total.

Varoon Shekhar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2036
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Varoon Shekhar » 16 Sep 2011 19:29

Total absence of any outrage by MKB about the difference in India's relationship with Vietnam, and China's with Pakistan. Or of the great difference between Vietnam and Pakistan to begin with.

Hence it is massively incomplete!

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Agnimitra » 16 Sep 2011 19:34

^^^ Also noteworthy is the part about China-US understanding over ceding Af-Pak to Chinese control. Its something that's been suggested here on BRF regarding Chinese boots on the ground in PoK and TSP.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6935
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby shyamd » 17 Sep 2011 02:48

So... whats going on? The answer is exactly what nightwatch says - PRC enters PoK, India enters PRC backyard - so this means capacity building for Vietnamese Military. Regular naval visits to Japan and SK.

Todays conclusion of an agreement to train the Vietnamese navy on submarines is also an excellent move. More warships will be sold. Hopefully we can provide viets with intel equipment and setup strong intel cooperation. This would be a serious coup for us.

So, whilst on one front we are pursuing an economic policy with PRC - this is oin order ward off the threat of war through changing the environment from one conducive to war and conflict to peace and cooperation. This is what we are pursuing. However, we do not surrender our defence hence continued tests of BMs, AADs,PADs until a comprehensive security system is in place. However, in the 90s the hope was that PRC would bury the hatchet, in the 2000s we found that it doesnt want to. We realised as a result of lessons from 62, that the geopolitcal environment is becoming similar to 62 situation. So we are expanding our defensive capability to prevent a 62 type incident - mountain warfare offensive corps (mountain warfare strategy has evolved from 150 years of experience) amongst other moves and we have been trying since mid 2000s to open up another front against both parties (Pak PRC). It also appears that India's IPKF involvement has been playing on the mindof strategists of the PRC. THey think that India might intervene in the neighbourhood if it has to and that they are a little worried - they saw what we did recently in SL too and they know how instrumental we were in destroying the LTTE.

This is also the same as what we are trying with Pak, Bangladesh, SL and other neighbours. Of course with Pak - things get complicated and we stop when there is a terror strike. I'll talk about this in the Pak thread

Chinese warning fails to deter India and Vietnam
Jayanth Jacob & Reshma Patil, Hindustan Times
New Delhi/Beijing, September 17, 2011
Email to Author

Ignoring Chinese warnings on Friday, India and Vietnam decided to focus on oil and gas exploration in the potentially oil-rich South China Sea while deepening their bilateral relations.

China Sea by India's ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL), state-run Chinese news agency Xinhua said the activities could "poison" China-India relations.

However, external affairs minister SM Krishna and his Vietnamese counterpart Pham Binh Minh decided in Hanoi that they would extend their cooperation to defence and various economic sectors for the next three years.

HT had broken the story on Thursday that India would go ahead with OVL's exploration in accordance with international rules and conventions.

Though the Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson declined comment on Friday, Xinhua said, "Aggressive overseas explorations from the Indian side in the highly sensitive sea, over which China enjoys indisputable sovereignty, might poison its relationship with China, which has been volatile and at times strained."

"The Indian government should be cool-headed and refrain from making a move that saves a little only to lose a lot," it said.


Kanishka
BRFite
Posts: 330
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 06:44
Location: K-PAX

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Kanishka » 17 Sep 2011 09:32

Chinese Warning to India: The Latest Sign of China’s Disturbing Ambitions

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/09/16/chi ... ambitions/

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24263
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby SSridhar » 17 Sep 2011 11:48

Varoon Shekhar wrote:Or of the great difference between Vietnam and Pakistan to begin with.

That's the trap many fall into. While India may be trying to administer a bitter pill to PRC, there is a qualitative difference between China-Pakistan and India-Vietnam relationship. Starting from occupying Indian territory ceded by Pakistan to it, to transferring nukes and missiles to ongoing support for India-directed terrorism, China's engagement with Pakistan is of a roguish behaviour inconsistent with international norms and conventions. It cannot even be spoken of in the same breath as India's relationship with Vietnam. That was the import of the Indian spokesman Vishnu Prakash's statement when he said "Our cooperation with Vietnam or with any other country for that matter in the world is always as per as international laws, norms and conventions".

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Christopher Sidor » 17 Sep 2011 19:28

Jarita wrote:Babus block Indian Army’s plans to counter China’s PLA

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_ba ... la_1587622

Indian Army’s plans to beef up presence on the Indo-China border have met with fierce resistance from two unexpected quarters — the finance and the environment ministries.

The finance wing of the defence ministry in consultation with the ministry of finance is not agreeable to spend a whopping Rs12,000 crore to set up a Mountain Strike Corps even as a plan to create an alternate, all-weather route from Siliguri to North Sikkim to rush troops to the Indo-China border has been rejected by the ministry of environment and forests on the grounds that the alignment passes through eco-sensitive areas.

Finance ministry's objection i can comprehend. Even if I don't agree with it. From the finance ministry view point, our deficit is sky high, asking so spend 12000 crore for a mountain strike corps is way too much.

But the environment ministry's decision is a pure bouncer. Will these forests be protected if the PRC/PLA have a cake walk over sikkim. Dont the dick heads in Environment ministry know that the shortest distance between Lhasa and India is via Sikkim. Any alternative routes, which allow us to carry our troops into Tibet will be god send.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2500
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Jarita » 17 Sep 2011 20:20

^^^ This is the same environment ministry that cleared thousands of acres of forest land in MP for diamond mining

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24263
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby SSridhar » 18 Sep 2011 08:09

^^ And, this the same Finance Ministry that is not taking efforts to bring back the hundreds of thousands of crores of blcak money stashed away in Swiss & Liechtenstein banks. What hypocrisy ! And, if we do not want a repeat of 1962, and if we have to spend even double or treble that amount, then so be it.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3859
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby suryag » 18 Sep 2011 08:17

Doesnt the finance ministry always dole out that customary line in the budget speech that they will give whatever is necessary for the defence of the country ?


merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby merlin » 18 Sep 2011 11:57

suryag wrote:Doesnt the finance ministry always dole out that customary line in the budget speech that they will give whatever is necessary for the defence of the country ?


That's for public consumption only. Its not reality.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6935
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby shyamd » 18 Sep 2011 15:03

Interesting article. Effort to de-escalate, the chance of confrontation was quite high as I had said earlier. There is an attempt on both sides to reduce the chances now.
India, China seek to remove LAC wrinkles
Sandeep Dikshit
Share · Comment (1) · print · T+

They will hold talks on mechanism to solve issues arising out of military patrols

Even as the media focus on last month's alleged confrontation between Chinese and Indian naval ships, dismissed by diplomats here as a non-event, both governments are quietly working on removing the occasional wrinkles that affect the largely tranquil Line of Actual Control (LAC), which serves as the boundary.

China and India have an agreement ensuring that heavy military equipment stay away from the border. Also in place in a pact prohibiting military exercises very close to the LAC to avoid misinterpretation of the actual intentions in case a large body of troops suddenly descends there for war games.

India and China will soon open talks on a mechanism that would solve issues arising out of military patrols coming face to face on the LAC. The negotiating brief will be taken up by the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) before the two sides get down to hammering out an agreement on a “Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on Border Affairs.” This will be one of the few occasions when the draft of the negotiating text is first sent to the CCS for approval, say official sources.

Increased patrols

Explaining the need for such an agreement, officials pointed out that when patrols came face to face on a piece of territory claimed by both sides, the issue would be resolved by border commanders. But there was no solution to resolve “trends” that appeared in certain pockets of the LAC. Giving the example of a lake in Ladakh, the sources said increased patrols by either side increased the possibility of their coming face to face. Such a trend stepped up the possibility of confrontation as also of the situation taking an ugly turn.

The proposed mechanism will examine these trends after the other side has lodged a strong protest and suggest toning down patrol frequency by one of the militaries. The option of complaining to the embassies has been tried in the past but has not been found workable in the absence of a specialised mechanism, which the proposed agreement seeks to put in place.

Explaining the mechanism, the officials said: “If India sees a pattern behind the patrols, it will strongly protest. Both sides need a specialised mechanism, where the other side's protest can be handled and examined. One example is Pangong Tso in Ladakh, where this issue occurs frequently. In such a case, the working mechanism can be activated and India can tell them, without prejudice to the perception of the LAC, [about] the need to reduce their patrols. The danger is without such a mechanism, patrols coming face to face too frequently could lead to an escalation.''

India and China have already activated a hotline between the Prime Ministers. However, it has not been used much because there has hardly been any issue that has necessitated their holding immediate consultations. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has used the hotline only once when he spoke to his counterpart Wen Jiabao just before the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, Indian, China and South Africa) summit at the Chinese sea resort of Sanya in April this year. “After that, there has been no occasion for them to speak on an urgent basis,'' maintained the officials.

Once the CCS clears the negotiating brief, it is expected, an agreement could be signed at the next summit meeting between leaders of both countries.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16003
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby RajeshA » 18 Sep 2011 15:45

I have a request to all BRFites. There is a thread "Managing Chinese Threat", that deals with all the threatening postures, capacity, and moves of China w.r.t. other countries, especially India.

If people keep on posting such news here, it becomes a laborious task to cross-post it all the time to the Managing Thread.

It is a very useful thread, with good discussions and news links, and it would be a pity if it is simply discarded.

It is just a request! Rest is up to you!

gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4475
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby gakakkad » 18 Sep 2011 16:38

^^is not this chap sheela dikshits son ?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24263
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby SSridhar » 18 Sep 2011 17:31

China to expand significantly the scope of its sea-bed mining project in the Indian Ocean
Tit-for-tat ?
Beijing has approval to explore in a 10,000 sq km seabed area in southwest Indian Ocean for the ore and now it plans to invest more to expand the “depth and scope of oceanic research”.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3348
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Rony » 18 Sep 2011 17:50


SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24263
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby SSridhar » 18 Sep 2011 18:15

From the above,
"In recent years, China has also been building up relations with countries like Myanmar that neighbor India, not to mention that Pakistan invited China to provide safety protection, {PLA in POK ?} and offered China a naval port on the Indian Ocean."

nithish
BRFite
Posts: 437
Joined: 02 Oct 2009 02:41

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby nithish » 18 Sep 2011 22:45

Chindia JVs ahead as CEOs talk third-nation forays

Industry captains from India and China will shortly kick-start formal discussions under the recently set up CEOs forum to hammer out the contours of a strategy on a wide range of issues including possible joint ventures in new growth hotspots such as Africa. The Indian government has mandated the CEO’s forum to “develop synergies to explore business opportunities in third countries,” besides promoting bilateral trade and investment between the world’s two most populous nations.

The CEO’s forum, co-chaired by Reliance ADAG chairman Anil Ambani with Mahindra & Mahindra’s Anand Mahindra, also include Essar Group’s Prashant Ruia, Ashok Leyland’s R Seshasayee and many others as members.

The forum, first announced during Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit to India in December last year, has been asked to look for opportunities where companies from both the countries can jointly invest rather than competing against each other on new areas.

The dialogue among industrialists will feed into the larger government-to-government ‘Strategic Economic Dialogue’.

Planning Commission deputy chairperson Montek Singh Ahluwalia will lead a delegation to Beijing later this month to begin the first round of discussions aimed at doubling bilateral trade to $100 billion (R4,60,000 crore) by 2015.

India has already allowed Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) to set up commercial operations in India.

ICBC is among China’s “big four” government-owned commercial banks that also include Bank of China, the China Construction Bank and the Agricultural Bank of China, which were pressing for regulatory approval from India to set up branches and start commercial operations on grounds of the “reciprocity principle,” a government source, who did not wish to be identified, said.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3348
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Rony » 19 Sep 2011 05:02

Did the US buckled to Chinese Pressure ? No new F-16s to Taiwan. For the US, anything or anyone can be a sellout if the price is right. MMS should be careful .

No New F-16’s for Taiwan, But U.S. to Upgrade Fleet

The Obama administration has decided not to sell F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan but instead to help it refurbish its existing fleet, prompting criticism in Congress that the United States is buckling to pressure from China.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby vishvak » 19 Sep 2011 12:52

Rony wrote:Did the US buckled to Chinese Pressure ? No new F-16s to Taiwan. For the US, anything or anyone can be a sellout if the price is right. MMS should be careful .

No New F-16’s for Taiwan, But U.S. to Upgrade Fleet

The Obama administration has decided not to sell F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan but instead to help it refurbish its existing fleet, prompting criticism in Congress that the United States is buckling to pressure from China.


How about some LCA lines for Taiwan? If they need so.

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Klaus » 20 Sep 2011 16:00

China picks Hong Kong's new boss.

Tang would be Hong Kong's third post-handover leader.

His reported appointment comes after critics also called for the ouster of Hong Kong's police chief, claiming authorities used excessive force to keep protesters away from Li, who is himself slated to be China's next premier.

Rights groups in Hong Kong have accused police of violating the right to assembly in the incident.

In recent years activists have expressed concerns over the city's lower tolerance of dissent, including the denial of entry to high-profile critics of China such as 1989 Tiananmen Square student protest leader Wang Dan.


shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby shiv » 22 Sep 2011 09:02

menon s wrote:Polio strain spreads to China from Pakistan

Polio has been found in China for the first time since 1999 after spreading from Pakistan, the World Health Organization (WHO) has confirmed.
It said a strain of polio (WPV1) found in China was genetically linked with the type now circulating in Pakistan.
At least seven cases have now been confirmed in China's western Xinjiang province, which borders Pakistan.


7 cases of polio is not a joke!


Let's face it. The friendship between Pakistan and China is taller than the tallest mountains and deeper than the deepest oceans. China exports aircraft and nuclear weapons to Pakistan, and Pakistan exports Islam and polio to China.

Conglaturations, my Chinese friends.

Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby Christopher Sidor » 22 Sep 2011 22:24

^^^^^
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

One is judged by the company one keeps.


BijuShet
BRFite
Posts: 1575
Joined: 09 Jan 2008 23:14
Location: under my tin foil hat

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby BijuShet » 24 Sep 2011 00:57

From Yahoo News (posting in full).
China luxury watch blogger forced to stop posting
AFP – 6 hrs ago

A Chinese blogger praised for posting pictures of Chinese officials and their luxury watches online said Friday he had been forced out of action due to outside "pressure".

The Internet activist, known by his account name "Huaguoshanzonshuji" on Sina's Weibo -- a Chinese equivalent of Twitter -- has been posting pictures of government officials, stating the brand and the value of their wristwatch.

His commitment to exposing the officials was even praised by the state-run Xinhua news agency earlier this month which said the fight against corruption should follow his method.

But he told AFP his Sina accounts were shut down this week and accounts he registered afterwards with other Chinese microblog service providers had either been closed or had their names changed.

"I believe (the service providers) did not mean to do it. They may have come under some pressure," said the activist, who identified himself as Daniel Wu.

It is unclear who the pressure came from, but China, which has the world's largest online population with nearly 500 million users, regularly blocks content it deems politically sensitive as part of a vast censorship system.

Wu said he would stop surveying watches "for now", hinting that it may be for self-protection.

But he said he would resume the practice once the dust had settled.

"I am not a corruption fighter... but I think this (survey) is a personal choice that should be respected," he said.

"Also I believe transparent information is the best solution to problems."

The idea for the survey came to Wu after a deadly high-speed rail crash in July in eastern China which killed 40 people and prompted a storm of public outrage.

In a report on the accident, the activist noticed railways minister Sheng Guangzu wearing a 70,000 yuan ($11,000) Rolex and one of his deputies, Lu Dongfu, sporting a 50,000 yuan model.

Wu also posted a picture of Sun Jingmiao, president of the National Development and Reform Commission in the eastern province of Zhejiang, wearing a Rolex worth 70,000 yuan.

And Zhou Wenzhang, vice president of the China National School of Administration, was seen wearing a watch identified by Wu as a Piaget Emperador estimated to be worth 100,000 yuan.

ranjbe
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 12 Apr 2011 21:25

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Postby ranjbe » 24 Sep 2011 06:38



Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AnimeshP, aylamrin, Manish_Sharma, Shwetank and 62 guests