Managing Chinese Threat

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.
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10087
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby sum » 05 Nov 2011 21:21

Pratyush wrote:^^^

For some reason the Indian media is very hawkish towards the PRC. It is just that they are serving the interests of some one else. Whenever, the Indian media attacks the PRC.


Had noticed the same thing

Almost all DDM channels seem to be pretty hawkish towards PRC but all ( maybe except TimesNow) go weak in the knees when in comes to Pak. Never been able to figure out why? :-?

Tough to imagine all the channels are only serving US interests( if that is what you implied)

aditya
BRFite
Posts: 144
Joined: 18 Dec 2005 03:15
Location: Sub-sector Jingopura

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby aditya » 07 Nov 2011 18:00

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/rock ... 59042.html

'Rockstar' makes changes as Censor Board gets strict on Tibet issue

The producers of Rockstar told Headlines Today on Monday that they have decided to blur a flag that reads "Free Tibet" to avoid any controversy.


This is the result of the mindset of those who heave in "relief" when some Chinese official denies that they are going to dam the Brahmaputra.

It is one level of servility when the government doesn't want to "irk" the Chinese at an official level(while heaving in "relief" when China issues non-stapled visas and "expressing concern" over incursions). It is something else when the government muzzles its citizens in their private initiatives in order to avoid "irking" a foreign state.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21172
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Prem » 08 Nov 2011 01:19

Southeast Asia: U.s. Completing Asian NATO To Confront China
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Southe ... 06-53.html

The U.S.-dominated military alliance, whose current American ambassador, Ivo Daalder, for years has advocated becoming a full-fledged global NATO (in one instance in an article with that precise title), expanded from 16 to 28 full members in the decade beginning in 1999 and has over forty partners in four continents outside the Euro-Atlantic zone under the auspices of programs like the Partnership for Peace in Europe and Asia, the Mediterranean Dialogue in Africa and the Middle East, the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative in the Persian Gulf, the Contact Country format in the Asia-Pacific region (Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea), Annual National Programs with Georgia and Ukraine, the Afghanistan-Pakistan-International Security Assistance Force Tripartite Commission, the NATO-Russia Council, the NATO Training Mission-Iraq and NATO-Training Mission -- Afghanistan (with a Libyan version to follow), a bilateral agreement with the Transitional
Federal Government in Somalia where NATO has airlifted thousands of Ugandan and Burundian troops for the war there and other arrangements.Formal partnerships with the African Union and ASEAN would gain the world's only military bloc fifty new cohorts in Africa (Algeria, Egypt, Tunisia, Mauritania and Morocco -- the last not an African Union member -- are already members of the Mediterranean Dialogue) and ten in Southeast Asia: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore. Thailand and Vietnam.
In addition, in September U.S. permanent representative to NATO Daalder told Indian journalists visiting the Alliance's headquarters in Brussels:
"I think it is important to have a dialogue (with India) and deepen that dialogue.
"It is through dialogue, through understanding each other's perceptions and perhaps by working on misperceptions that may exist, that we can strengthen the relations between India and NATO."He also bluntly suggested that India, a founding member of the 120-nation Non-Aligned Movement, should abandon its policy of neutrality and collaborate with the U.S. and NATO in the development of an international interceptor missile system.In articles written in the last decade, including the aforementioned "Global NATO," [6] Daalder and fellow Brookings Institution and Council on Foreign Relations officials argued for partnerships between the bloc and nations around the world under Daalder's concept of an Alliance of Democratic States and other mechanisms. The countries mentioned by name include Australia, Botswana, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, India, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, South Africa and South Korea. [7]
Immediately ahead of the NATO summit in Lisbon, Daalder was quoted stating:
"We're launching Nato 3.0.
"It is no longer just about Europe -- it's not a global alliance but it is a global actor. We need to look for opportunities to work with countries we haven't worked with before, like India, China and Brazil."
The month before, in October of last year, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in a video post on his blog, "We should reach out to new and important partners, including China and India."
With NATO as the prime mover and in charge, that is. He added: "We should encourage consultations between interested allies and partners on security issues of common concern, with NATO as a hub for those discussions."n September of this year he told the Xinhua News Agency: "I would very much like to see a strengthened dialogue between China and NATO." China and India were among 47 nations represented at a meeting at NATO headquarters on September 14 to discuss naval operations in the Gulf of Aden and in the broader Indian Ocean where NATO runs Operation Ocean Shield. Other non-NATO nations present were Australia, Egypt, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden and the United Arab Emirates. At the time the last two were supplying warplanes for NATO's Operation Unified Protector assault against Libya.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby ShauryaT » 08 Nov 2011 04:54

Have to do something about the Ukranians supply of materials and technology. They are to PRC/TSP what Israel is to India, maybe more. Should use the Europeans and Russians to rein them in.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby abhishek_sharma » 08 Nov 2011 07:33




RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby RajeshA » 16 Nov 2011 16:02

The best way for India to defend India is to make life difficult for the Chinese in Tibet. We should train Tibetans as if they were Indian citizens. We should be inviting every young Tibetan male to India and giving him combat/commando training as well as training in a Mountain Strike Corps. If Tibetan girls want to get training, they too should get training.

We should be generous with a stipend for the time the Tibetan youth trains in the Indian Army. Every single Tibetan should be able to fight Chinese occupation of their land.

The trained Tibetans need not fight the Chinese right away, but be prepared when the war breaks out!

When India and China go to war on the border, Tibet should be teaming with small Tibetan Special Security Forces attacking the Chinese from behind and sabotaging all their operations there.

In fact, India should be encouraging the Tibetans to procreate rapidly - 6-7 children to a Tibetan woman. We should be giving financial support to the Tibetan families indirectly for every new child. India's security lies in Tibet, and we should spare no effort in seeing to it that every Tibetan is ready to liberate his home!

If China cries, let them be damned! We should not care!

member_20021
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby member_20021 » 16 Nov 2011 18:34

RajeshA wrote:The best way for India to defend India is to make life difficult for the Chinese in Tibet. We should train Tibetans as if they were Indian citizens. We should be inviting every young Tibetan male to India and giving him combat/commando training as well as training in a Mountain Strike Corps. If Tibetan girls want to get training, they too should get training.

We should be generous with a stipend for the time the Tibetan youth trains in the Indian Army. Every single Tibetan should be able to fight Chinese occupation of their land.

The trained Tibetans need not fight the Chinese right away, but be prepared when the war breaks out!

When India and China go to war on the border, Tibet should be teaming with small Tibetan Special Security Forces attacking the Chinese from behind and sabotaging all their operations there.

In fact, India should be encouraging the Tibetans to procreate rapidly - 6-7 children to a Tibetan woman. We should be giving financial support to the Tibetan families indirectly for every new child. India's security lies in Tibet, and we should spare no effort in seeing to it that every Tibetan is ready to liberate his home!

If China cries, let them be damned! We should not care!


A new nation state called "New Tibet" is emerging, with the capital at Dharamsala. Ever heard the story of Kosovo?

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby RajeshA » 16 Nov 2011 18:47

Jimi wrote:A new nation state called "New Tibet" is emerging, with the capital at Dharamsala. Ever heard the story of Kosovo?

Yes and we are Saudi Arabia! :twisted:

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby ramana » 16 Nov 2011 21:11

RajeshA, Please go thru the BK New Jersey talk over the weekend and you will see a different approach is needed.

Jimi, Do you know in New Delhi only Indian states have Houses?

There is a Tibet House. What to make of that?

member_20021
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby member_20021 » 17 Nov 2011 03:02

ramana wrote:RajeshA, Please go thru the BK New Jersey talk over the weekend and you will see a different approach is needed.

Jimi, Do you know in New Delhi only Indian states have Houses?

There is a Tibet House. What to make of that?

What immeidately comes to my mind is "Embassy of New Tibet" or "Embassy of South Tibet".

paramu
BRFite
Posts: 669
Joined: 20 May 2008 11:38

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby paramu » 17 Nov 2011 04:48

That may be your wish. But the best you can hope for is "Embassy of Tibet" because if that remains "Tibet House" with representative from Lhasa, India and PRC could still have border issues. :mrgreen:

Problem for PRC is that, you can not keep territory with you indefinitely, if you don't have people with you.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby svinayak » 17 Nov 2011 04:57

People makes the territory. China cant handle protest from peaceful people.

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9255
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Hari Seldon » 17 Nov 2011 05:00

paramu wrote:That may be your wish. But the best you can hope for is "Embassy of Tibet" because if that remains "Tibet House" with representative from Lhasa, India and PRC could still have border issues. :mrgreen:

Problem for PRC is that, you can not keep territory with you indefinitely, if you don't have people with you.


Ah, the same problem wherein you assume others will deal with a situ acting unbder the typical constraints Dilli faces. Mistaken, assumption, sir.

PRC will eliminate/forcibly assimilate/simple disappear a few million people just like that, without breaking into a sweat or missing a heartbeat. When the people are gone, so is the problem. No?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby ramana » 17 Nov 2011 09:58

http://www.cosmos.com/Product.aspx?trip ... Under_1000

Extra troops along border will raise tensions: Chinese daily
Tuesday, 15 November 2011

[b]Terming India's decision to beef up the security along the border with China by deploying one lakh additional troops as a "sensitive move", an official daily here said it would result in raising tensions harming New Delhi's interests[/b].

"The action is completely not worthwhile. Currently, India has 40,000 troops in the disputed area, and if the further 100,000 is deployed, the total number of the troops will reach 140,000", an article carried by official People's Daily Online said today.

"It will result in a tense situation in the region and harm India's own interests. Increasing troops on the border area is always a sensitive move and it is especially sensitive to increase troops on a disputed border area", it said.

"In an era when precision-guided weapons are developing rapidly, everyone with common sense knows that concentrated troops could be eliminated easily",
it said alleging that India is raising the China threat theory to increase defence spending at a time when its annual economic growth rate is falling.

The article followed People's Liberation Army (PLA) daily, the official mouthpiece of Chinese military, terming India's move was aimed at containing China as it considered Beijing as real competitor.

The People's Daily commentary today said decreasing growth rates in India is making it "very difficult to considerably increase military spending for military build up amid the economic downturn, so India needs to first create a tense atmosphere and transfer domestic problems in hopes of securing more military spending".

"The spread of the 'China threat theory', the increase of troops to the disputed areas near the China-India border, and the display of a tough attitude toward China all aim to make a breakthrough in further increasing military spending", it said.

India has continued to hold joint military drills with China's neighbouring countries over a recent period, showing it "evidently intends" to contain China.

"In addition, the US needs to rely on India to restrict China. India needs to show its value to US by flexing its muscle toward China so that it could gain its military support and help raise its international status", its said.

"India's troop increase on the border between China and India is aimed at meeting the requirements of the United States and then getting support from the United States. :((

"However, will India realise its goal?", it asked.



Looks like its hurting the PRC that they are whining about precision strikes on Indian troops!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby ramana » 18 Nov 2011 07:14

NightWatch For the night of 16 November 2011

China: The Ministry of Commerce said on 16 November that China's exports are feeling pressure from global economic uncertainties. A spokesman said the ministry cannot be optimistic about the export situation during the coming period, citing a downshift in global economic recovery, a downgrade of the US credit rating and the expansion of the European debt crisis. He said that frequent protectionist measures and trade disputes have had a "relatively large influence" on China's exports and that these issues, along with rising costs at home, have complicated China's foreign trade outlook.

Comment: The Xinhua report is significant for several reasons. First it disclosed that the Chinese government expects that the credit rating of the United States will be downgraded. Second, the Chinese economists predict a contraction of the global economy. Finally, the Chinese anticipate a contraction of globalization as the result of protectionist policies, in other words, a reassertion of economic nationalism. The Chinese seem to expect that the export markets for cheap Chinese manufactures will shrink and the prices for raw materials will rise. The apparent Chinese linkage of the US credit rating to the European debt crisis implies that the Chinese know or believe that US banks have much greater exposure to European sovereign debt than they have admitted. The Chinese assessment evidently is that Europe will drag down the US. (consider these as Chinese cards , Unkil &co. know wht cards chinese have ) One Chinese economist, a professor of finance at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, recently wrote that the Chinese banking system is nearly bankrupt already and China's Gross Domestic Product is declining, but the Chinese are hiding the data. He wrote that "every province in China is Greece"; This note is a warning to hedge bets in China in 2012. (these are unkil& co. cards implying pay up for EU or else expect to hear more on these lines about dragon accountancy & economics in Pandaland in short if Unkil & co. go down so will PRC , this time assessment is Unkil won't let PRC come out on top as happened in 2008 ) Its a message Ramanajee from nightwatch guy & others of his club

Afghanistan: President Karzai provided details about Afghanistan's conditions for signing a strategic agreement with the United States on 16 November. Speaking at the Loya Jirga (a grand council to discuss important issues), Karzai said US personnel must stop searching Afghans' houses; they cannot detain Afghan citizens and Americans may not operate prisons on Afghan soil. Karzai said only Afghan justice and interior ministers can manage detention centers.

Comment: Karzai's statements once again reinforce the assessment that he is looking towards the end game: Afghanistan after 2014. His statements represent an official repudiation of the tactics the US considers the most useful in containing the Taliban. While it is good politics for Karzai to put distance between his government and US military operations, his government's conditions also embody the negative judgments of Afghans about the application of US counterinsurgency doctrine to Afghanistan.

Kuwait: Dozens of Kuwaiti protesters "stormed" (sic) parliament late on Wednesday, as hundreds more demonstrated outside. Eyewitnesses said they were demanding that Prime Minister Sheikh Nasser al-Mohammad al-Sabah step down. Hundreds of people, including opposition lawmakers, have been protesting weekly outside parliament over alleged corruption. Some reports said riot police had beaten demonstrators using batons as they gathered outside parliament. Nevertheless, some people managed to get inside. No confrontation happened with the National Guard which is guarding the building," junior doctor Mohammed told the BBC World Service. "People are asking for more reforms, and especially as recently the government has not been going with the spirit of the constitution, which some regard as the absolute minimum of democracy."


Comment: The Arab spring belatedly has reached Kuwait. Some news outlets attribute the delay in its arrival to Kuwait's generous welfare payments system. As in Syria, the initial group of protestors advanced complaints about the pace of political reform. The protestors have not demanded the overthrow of the government system. That is an important benchmark. If protests in Kuwait evolve the way they did in Egypt and Syria, Islamists will emerge to take over the reform movement, escalate moderate demands and call for the overthrow of the political system and its replacement with an Islamic emirate.

For the record: Agence France-Presse reported that "thousands" of people were involved in the protest. Local news services reported a concerted, but much smaller number of activists.

Iran-Syria: Establishing contact with the Syrian opposition is not on Iran's agenda, according to a 16 November statement from the Iranian Embassy in Damascus. Contact will be coordinated closely with Syrian officials if the need for it arises, according to the statement.

Comment: The background for this Iranian comment is not clear, but the meaning is beyond doubt. Iran intends to lend no authority or legitimacy to the Syrian opposition activists. What's more important is that it perceives no need to do so at this time. Despite the action by the Arab League over the weekend, Iran still supports the Alawite regime in Damascus. Iran's statement today provides additional indirect evidence that Syria is a battle ground for a proxy fight between Tehran and Riyadh. Tehran is winning thus far.

Israel-Syria: For the record. The fall of Syrian President al-Asad's regime would put an end to Israel's existence due to the rise of Muslim Brotherhood-led Islamic aggression bordering Israel, senior Israeli defense official Amos Gilad said on 16 November. Asad's regime serves the interest of Israel, Gilad said.

Comment: Major General (reserves) Gilad is the Director of Policy and Political-Military Affairs in the Ministry of Defense.


Egypt: The only female presidential candidate in Egypt accused the Egyptian generals of undermining progress towards a representative, democratic government. Ms. Bothaina Kamel recounted that the top generals initially said they would relinquish power six months after the popular uprising. Instead they have extended the transition period to allow political parties to build support before elections. Parliamentary elections are scheduled for 28 November and presidential elections will be held either at the end of 2012 or 2013. Kamel voiced concern Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi would also stand for president. "And now we have some kind of campaign in Egypt, a campaign for General Tantawi as president," she said. A campaign run by local youth called "Egypt Above All" said it aimed to gather one million signatures to back Tantawi, who heads the 24-member ruling military council.

Comment: The most significant accusation is that Field Marshal Tantawi is running for the presidency, but wants to be drafted by a ground swell of public support. This betrays the Army's promises and reinforces the conclusion that a revolution - a change of government system -- has yet to take place in Egypt.

Kenya-Somalia: Kenya has offered to send troops to help the African Union (AU) force fight against Islamist militant group al Shabaab in Somalia. A meeting between the Somali, Kenyan and Ugandan presidents resulted in the welcoming of Kenya's offer to deploy troops to the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), according to a statement from Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki's office. The statement did not clarify whether the contribution would consist of new troops or whether Kenyan soldiers already in Somalia would join AMISOM. The leaders stressed the need to enhance coordination between AMISOM, Somali government forces and Kenyan Defense Forces to defeat al Shabaab.

Comment: AMISOM consists of 9,000 Ugandan and Burundian soldiers, but is supposed to total 20,000, based on African commitments. Kenya is believed to have deployed a reinforced brigade of about 5,000 soldiers with tactical air support into Somalia. The Kenyans appear to be in Somalia for the long haul. The logistics supplier of the Kenyan operations remains unclear in open source materials. Press accounts indicate the French and the Americans have accused each other of supporting Kenya. Kenyan operations are the main good news from Somalia.

Italy: Mario Monti formally accepted his nomination as Italian prime minister in a meeting with Italian President Giorgio Napolitano on 16 November, a spokesman for Napolitano said. Monti also will act as the Italian economy minister, officials said. Monti did not appoint many "politicians" to fill his Cabinet, La Stampa reported. However, politicians support his government without being a part of it, Monti said.

Comment: Monti is an economist. Apparently, the European Union bankers prefer to have technocrats run the governments of its members. Berlusconi remains involved in politics and will not let Monti compromise Italian sovereignty to the Brussels pan-nationalists. The key question is whether a cabinet of professionals and academics can do better than the elected representatives of the Italian people in implementing austerity measures demanded by an outside power, the European Union. Berlusconi and his political hacks failed. Now it is the turn of the professionals to try to do better. The problems appear to be structural, which means the professionals will have no greater success than did the politicians in stabilizing the Italian financial sector.



shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6881
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby shyamd » 19 Nov 2011 17:23

Myanmar window for Delhi
SUJAN DUTTA
Hillary Clinton in Bali on Friday. She will visit Myanmar in December. (AP)

Bali, Nov. 18: Myanmar has broken out as an open secret from a closed conspiracy, to what should be two cheers from New Delhi and three for Calcutta and Imphal in India’s east and Northeast.

Myanmar has been nominated to head a multi-national body — the Asean — for the first time despite being ruled by a military junta because America and Asia think it is curing itself.

From Bali on the rim of the Indian and Pacific Oceans has arisen a rare opportunity for both Myanmar and India.

This is a window for New Delhi and Naypyidaw — the new capital of the Myanmarese junta — to embrace an opportunity that can translate into real benefits for the marginalised peoples along a border that is longer than India-Pakistan’s.


India can dream of sailing goods and people down the Brahmaputra and the Imphal rivers and transferring them to Mandalay just as Myanmar can envisage sailing its sampans down the Irrawaddy so that they may reach the people of blockaded Manipur.

Even more, Myanmar can actually expect India to look at it as a neighbour with friendship benefits and not just a haven for insurgents that harass the northeastern states.

After years of isolation, sanctions and opprobrium, Myanmar has been recognised by an international body, the Asean, and the US as an infantile democracy-in-the-making.

Leaders of the Asean, of which Myanmar is a member, today decided that the country would get to chair and host the next summit of the Asia-Pacific body.

The rotating presidency of Asean was due to Myanmar in 2006 but it was denied the privilege because of human rights allegations against it.

India physically touches the Asean with Myanmar. The states of Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh share a border with Myanmar that is probably easier to negotiate for bootleggers than armies. Indeed, bootleggers can find the India-Myanmar border more porous than inter-provincial boundaries

New Delhi can still draw comfort, though. Despite western opposition since dissident leader Aung San Suu Kyi was interned, New Delhi kept up a military and strategic cooperation with Naypyidaw.

When India looks east, the first country is Myanmar.

Barack Obama, who met Manmohan Singh here today, later said that secretary of state Hillary Clinton would visit Myanmar in December, a breakthrough by any standard.

The US had sanctions imposed on Myanmar but it has begun seeing a “glimmer of democracy” since the junta released political prisoners last month, at the same time when New Delhi was hosting a junta leader.

Myanmar will get to host the next meeting of Asean heads and the East Asia Summit in 2014 when it assumes the presidency of the body. India and China have been strategic rivals in Myanmar.

The “emergence” of Myanmar has the potential to transform the economic and social life of India’s east and Northeast. On the table, but under the cloth, since Narasimha Rao was Prime Minister is the Mekong-Ganga project, a road highway plan intended to connect India with five countries on the banks of the Mekong River — Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam, apart from Myanmar.

India has persisted with a diplomatic relationship with the Myanmarese junta, despite India-bred dissident leader Aung San, because of insurgents in the Northeast who are suspected to find safe shelters there. That policy now promises rich-payoffs for India.

For Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram and Tripura, Myanmar and Bangladesh are the two key countries for New Delhi’s “Look East” policy to translate from rhetoric to action

Between Manmohan Singh and Mamata Banerjee, over disparate visits between Dhaka, New Delhi and Calcutta, the level of comfort with Bangladesh has increased in spite of the apparent quarrel over the Teesta waters.

Now, from Bali, on a margin in the waters south east of India, is the promise of a hope for India’s perennially disturbed and wide-berthed Northeast. Promises sustain more than hope but hopes outlive promise.

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

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Pranav » 19 Nov 2011 19:45



If one of our major foreign policy goals is to gradually distance TSP from its sponsors, then we should proceed with care.

This might be an effort to apply some "Danda" (as in the classical quartet Sama, Dama and Bheda and Danda). But it has to weighed against possible repercussions. If as we claim, our motivation is purely commercial, it might have been better to wait until sovereignty issues are settled.

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby devesh » 19 Nov 2011 20:06

^^^
waiting is overrated. the "sovereignty" issues will never be settled. that much should be clear by now. PRC has no interest in settling the border issues, in the present status quo. they have no incentive. they need to have an incentive. India's long term activities in Indo-Pac Sea is one arena where this "incentive" can be provided.

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby chaanakya » 19 Nov 2011 20:18

For India Myanmar is pivotal. We should be all out for them whoever rules and if needed have two nation FTA and military cooperation with them. If ASEAN comes with the deal as well then fine.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4855
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby chola » 19 Nov 2011 20:49

Has anyone else noticed the brilliant moves by the US during the East Asia Summit?

US Marines in Australia. Backing Vietnam and the Philippines in the South China Sea. Clinton's trip to Burma next month. Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) with Japan.

The Panda is like a fish trapped in a barrel. Surrounded on all sides. Unlike the "String of Pearl" that Indians like to scare ourselves with, the ring of steel around the chinis is real.

This is power played at the highest level. It is no different than how the US had trapped and destroyed the USSR. The ability of the US to deal with dangerous prey is wonderful to behold. Brilliant.

My one fear is that the US will bring down the communists too soon. Once China goes democratic, this cordon will be lifted and the US will end up creating a giant Japan or South Korea. But as long as the CCP is in charge, it will be strangulation.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby svinayak » 19 Nov 2011 22:22

chola wrote:Has anyone else noticed the brilliant moves by the US during the East Asia Summit?

US Marines in Australia. Backing Vietnam and the Philippines in the South China Sea. Clinton's trip to Burma next month. Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) with Japan.

The Panda is like a fish trapped in a barrel. Surrounded on all sides. Unlike the "String of Pearl" that Indians like to scare ourselves with, the ring of steel around the chinis is real.

This is power played at the highest level. It is no different than how the US had trapped and destroyed the USSR. The ability of the US to deal with dangerous prey is wonderful to behold. Brilliant.

Why did not the US do this 5 years ago before PRC moved its troops to POK and started claiming Arunachal Pradesh. Why not before PRC oppressed Tibetians in 2008 and before. India cannot be a victim because US wants to do business with China and maximise profits for its own companies.

From the other thread

1) There is no way for the U.S. to project the necessary influence into East Asia if Aghanistan and Pakistan are on fire. One major reason is that if India is tied down in a competition with Pakistan, China, and Iran in Afghanistan, it cannot become the kind of East Asian power we wish it to be. The Bush administration's India strategy was designed to help India break out of its squabbles in South Asia and exert influence in East Asia. A hasty pull-out of Aghanistan will reverse that sensible strategy.


All of the India 'squabbles' have been supported by US over the last 30 years. So it is US which is hindering the balance in Asia.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6881
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby shyamd » 20 Nov 2011 01:39

The new road/rail links etc with ASEAN is about the anti PRC alliance. Troops and equipment can be transferred in the event of a crisis. Slowly Myanmar is changing its skins.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby ramana » 20 Nov 2011 01:49

The Myanmar junta are nationalists. Its Indian interests to support nationalists in their countries and not puppets of either PRC or US. The reason is a nationalist will see the benefit of being India friendly in the neighborhood. Puppets will act per the puppeteer's chain.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21172
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Prem » 20 Nov 2011 01:55

xxx-post

http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2 ... asia_pivot
Against the East Asia 'pivot'
There has been much ado in the media and from the Obama administration about a great strategic shift from the Middle East and South Asia to East Asia. Obama and senior administration officials are making the case for this shift by claiming that we have accomplished our Iraq and Afghanistan goals, and that the time has come to focus on the "real problem": China. This week, the president announced the basing of 2,500 marines in Australia and a pushed for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a regional free trade agreement that excludes China. The U.S. military has also released some details on its new AirSea battle concept -- an answer to the dense network of submarines, mines, anti-aircraft capabilities, and missiles that China has created to keep the United States out of China's periphery. All of these moves are to be commended. However, they do not and should not add up to a new "pivot." Here are some reasons why:

1) There is no way for the U.S. to project the necessary influence into East Asia if Aghanistan and Pakistan are on fire. One major reason is that if India is tied down in a competition with Pakistan, China, and Iran in Afghanistan, it cannot become the kind of East Asian power we wish it to be. The Bush administration's India strategy was designed to help India break out of its squabbles in South Asia and exert influence in East Asia. A hasty pull-out of Aghanistan will reverse that sensible strategy.

2) China is exercising more influence in the Middle East in ways harmful to our larger goals (e.g., support of Iran). To compete with China in East Asia, we must retain our influence in the Middle East and South Asia and check destabilizing Chinese diplomacy.

3) The deployment of U.S. Marines to Australia and the highlighting of a military concept to respond to China's military build-up are necessary but insufficient first steps. These developments cannot make up for the fact that our military has faced deep cuts in its budget and will face more. No matter what administration officials say, these cuts will affect our posture in Asia profoundly. We need more ships, more aircraft, more missile defense. To be a bit flippant, we are putting Marines in Australia without sufficient equipment to get out of Australia. Our allies and China need to see and feel our presence. That can only be accomplished with more sea patrols, surges in exercises that promote freedom of navigation, and so on.

4) The AirSea battle concept is a serious effort to meet the China challenge. But based on information released about it, the concept suffers from two flaws. First, the resource question -- how would we shut down Chinese military operations without sufficient platforms and munitions? Second, AirSea battle fails to take into account China's nuclear ambitions. China is already a nuclear-armed country with every incentive to continue its build-up of nuclear forces. That is because we have agreed on a bilateral (with Russia) rather than multilateral basis to cap our nuclear forces. Since China is bound by no important arms control treaties, and because we are openly talking about major conventional strikes on the Mainland, China has every reason to seek nuclear parity with us over time.

5) The TPP is a great idea. In particular, securing Japanese agreement to an FTA would be a great success . The question is, are we serious? It took the better part of Obama's term to ratify the FTA with South Korea. Are we really to believe that he will take on his base and sign more major FTAs?

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby RajeshA » 20 Nov 2011 01:59

Basically turning Myanmar to become pro-India is for India something of the scale of China moving into the pro-American camp in 1971.

Should Myanmar join India, the whole Indo-China moves towards India both because of India and at American facilitation. So Myanmar is crucial.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21172
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Prem » 20 Nov 2011 02:03

http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/1068326
Morning Brief: Clinton to visit Burma next month

Top news: Hillary Clinton will visit Burma next month, the first visit by a U.S. Secretary of State in more than 50 years. The announcement by President Barack Obama followed democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi announcement that she would run for parliament in this year's elections.
”After years of darkness, we’ve seen flickers of progress in these last several weeks,” Obama said at a meeting of ASEAN leaders in Bali, referring to the recent release of some Burmese political prisoners and political reforms that could open the country's political system up to opposition groups. ASEAN has agreed to let Burma chair the regional group in 2014. Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been under intermittent house arrest since her party's victory in 1990 elections was ignored by the military government, has welcomed the recent moves but says more progress is still needed. Her party boycotted the 2010 elections because of an election law that prevented her from running.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby ramana » 20 Nov 2011 02:24

Prem, Those moves look like omababa is repeating JLN's forward basing!

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21172
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Prem » 20 Nov 2011 02:46

ramana wrote:Prem, Those moves look like omababa is repeating JLN's forward basing!

We need to use all the Yelp, material and rest to make up for the losses of last few bad Pre-90s decades .
Seems like Global powers have come to their own right conclusion and realized we are the ultimate balancer with the skill of Natraja. Lets wait for Krishna to visit Mangolia and Bear to keep Dragon busy and entertained,diverting attetion, soothing the feathers etc . Fall of Pak from Cheena Darbar will be the final straw.IMHO,we get 20-30 year window to sharpen our teeth.


chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby chaanakya » 20 Nov 2011 11:21

ramana wrote:The Myanmar junta are nationalists. Its Indian interests to support nationalists in their countries and not puppets of either PRC or US. The reason is a nationalist will see the benefit of being India friendly in the neighborhood. Puppets will act per the puppeteer's chain.

India has maintained lines of communications open in Myanmar in both ruling camps and opposition camps. It is to Indian credit that suu kyi still survives and remains a factor. Military Junta knows this and their only saving factor would be tie with India. China can not save them from Western sanctions.

It is at the level of economy and local people that we have to move forward aggressively. China has borders roads and airports on its borders with Myanmar which does not make economic sense but does make military sense. We need to bring three countries Myanmar, Vietanam and laos within our sphere of strong support base to counter China in eastern and western sectors.

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby chaanakya » 20 Nov 2011 11:38

Prem wrote:
ramana wrote:Prem, Those moves look like omababa is repeating JLN's forward basing!

Lets wait for Krishna to visit Mangolia and Bear to keep Dragon busy and entertained,diverting attetion, soothing the feathers etc . Fall of Pak from Cheena Darbar will be the final straw.IMHO,we get 20-30 year window to sharpen our teeth.

Mongolia has huge mineral/mines recently discovered. Their wind energy potential is phenomenal and 99.99% is surplus i.e. they don't need it. They can't invest in copper mines but foreign companies can and then they may need energy but still it would be surpluss, huge one at that. SO some of that would be exploited to mine copper from the plateu. The initial investment would be huge but then rewards are equally handsome. Mongolia fears China but finds no way out of Dragon grip. Chinese companies are investing heavily in these areas with US funding support. For Wind energy potential utilisation they would face problem of evacuation. China is a ready market but they are playing hardball with them. Therefore we need to propose and push for a regional electricity grid which enables trade in energy accross regions. Tough task but doable. If India can sell power to Pakis that would enable us to propose such a regional / sub regional grids for energy trade.

Our Move on Mongolia would keep China worried for long time. But are Indian companies up to it? We need to think big.

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby chaanakya » 20 Nov 2011 11:41

RajeshA wrote:Basically turning Myanmar to become pro-India is for India something of the scale of China moving into the pro-American camp in 1971.

Should Myanmar join India, the whole Indo-China moves towards India both because of India and at American facilitation. So Myanmar is crucial.

We need to give more attention to our North East region and develop infrastructure to match their/ours need. Junta is not pro China, as such, but it tries its hand at playing one against the other to get best advantage. People from Myanmar and Thailand are more or less follow Indic Dharma which needs to be rekindled.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby RajeshA » 20 Nov 2011 13:18

The visit of Hillary Clinton to Myanmar is very significant. I am not sure if MMS had any hand in convincing Obama at the ARF to go for it.

One reason the Tatmadaw, Myanmarese junta had inclined so much towards PRC was because it was under pressure from the West on many issues like democracy. With USA willing to accept the new "democratic" dispensation in Myanmar, the stranglehold of China over Myanmar ceases to be. Myanmar does not need Chinese veto in the UNSC, or Chinese might to keep back the Western military threat. Myanmar can start to be a normal country again. A very important turn of events.

Now India needs to increase our economic integration with Myanmar. A port to supply our Northeast would be very helpful.

shyamd ji did speak of an upcoming Asian alliance against the PRC with Myanmar part of it, but it sounded a bit optimistic, but with US announcing Hillary Clinton's visit to Myanmar, it looks a lot more possible.

Myanmar and Pakistan were being used to cage in India. One cage seems to be falling apart. The other in the West could happen too if many more voices in the West start speaking of splintering Pakistan as a solution.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4855
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby chola » 20 Nov 2011 18:05

Acharya wrote:
chola wrote:Has anyone else noticed the brilliant moves by the US during the East Asia Summit?

US Marines in Australia. Backing Vietnam and the Philippines in the South China Sea. Clinton's trip to Burma next month. Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) with Japan.

The Panda is like a fish trapped in a barrel. Surrounded on all sides. Unlike the "String of Pearl" that Indians like to scare ourselves with, the ring of steel around the chinis is real.

This is power played at the highest level. It is no different than how the US had trapped and destroyed the USSR. The ability of the US to deal with dangerous prey is wonderful to behold. Brilliant.

Why did not the US do this 5 years ago before PRC moved its troops to POK and started claiming Arunachal Pradesh. Why not before PRC oppressed Tibetians in 2008 and before. India cannot be a victim because US wants to do business with China and maximise profits for its own companies.



Why should the US work with an Indian timetable? Secondly, the chini has been claiming Arunachal Pradesh and oppressing Tibet for 60 years not five and three years ago respectively.

We are our own victims because we continue give the Panda all sorts of mythical dragon powers. China is in an American vise. A real vise of steel. While we pretend a few PLA coolies in POK is "danger" the US surrounds the PRC with alliances and real hard frontline military assets.

The more we talk of dangers from this caged panda then the more power we give them.

All of the India 'squabbles' have been supported by US over the last 30 years. So it is US which is hindering the balance in Asia.


This is the same stupid unreasoning sentiment that left India on the wrong side in the Cold War. Russia has armed China while the US does everything it can to hem in the lizard. Yet we always forgive the Russians.

Without the US, China would have free reign across Asia. True, the US has made China powerful by feeding its economy but that has also made China subservient to the US market. The US has given India a massive boost by opening their high tech market too. Around 70 percent of our heralded outsourcing sector comes directly from the US.

The one country that has stabbed India in the back by supplying China with the instrument of war (instead of the binding ties of economic integration) is Russia. Yet, I never hear a poor word on Russia in BR but many suspicions of the US.

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 773
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby V_Raman » 20 Nov 2011 18:32

this china bogey is raised at this point to keep west in asia. obama making noises from a colonial outpost means exactly that. they want to contine their presence in asia. my humble opinion is that hindi-chini bhai-bhai is of utmost importance now. from that POV having a common set of defence equipment is good. JMT...

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4855
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby chola » 20 Nov 2011 18:46

V_Raman wrote:this china bogey is raised at this point to keep west in asia. obama making noises from a colonial outpost means exactly that. they want to contine their presence in asia.


What is wrong with the West in Asia? Every nation in Asia - Japan, Taiwan, South Korea - that accepted the West is now wealthy beyond our wildest dreams. While the stupidity of Congress and Nehru and his clan had mired the potential of India in the Non-Aligned Movement and in alliance with the Russians.


my humble opinion is that hindi-chini bhai-bhai is of utmost importance now.


Another stupidity from Nehru until reality bit him in his behind.

from that POV having a common set of defence equipment is good. JMT...


The proper way to play this is to help the US hem in the lizard. But do not hype up chini powers in such a way that it makes India look fearful and weak on the world's stage.

For example, we talk continuously of the Cocos being a Chinese base. But in the US it is reported that Obama and Australia are looking at using the airstrip there as another forward base against China. For years, India's spasms about the Cocos raised the image of China by attributing its tin can navy the ability to project force into the Indian Ocean that it did not have.

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

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Christopher Sidor » 20 Nov 2011 18:57

chola wrote:
All of the India 'squabbles' have been supported by US over the last 30 years. So it is US which is hindering the balance in Asia.


This is the same stupid unreasoning sentiment that left India on the wrong side in the Cold War. Russia has armed China while the US does everything it can to hem in the lizard. Yet we always forgive the Russians.

Without the US, China would have free reign across Asia. True, the US has made China powerful by feeding its economy but that has also made China subservient to the US market. The US has given India a massive boost by opening their high tech market too. Around 70 percent of our heralded outsourcing sector comes directly from the US.

The one country that has stabbed India in the back by supplying China with the instrument of war (instead of the binding ties of economic integration) is Russia. Yet, I never hear a poor word on Russia in BR but many suspicions of the US.

I would beg to differ. It is indeed true that Russia has armed the PLA/PLAAF/PLAN with weapon systems which will be eventually used against India. For example consider the following cases
1) The SU-30 fighter. We practically paid this fighter to take to the air, and yet the Chinese were given the same fighter. In fact we should not be surprised at a later date to have PAK-FA flying in PLAAF, if J-20 develops trouble during its development.
2) "SS-N-22 Sunburn" missiles which were supplied to China in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Some have even claimed that these missiles are nuclear capable and have a rated speed of Mach 3.
3) S-300 missile defense systems. The Heritage foundation has claimed that S-300 missiles are used to defend the ballistic missiles bases pointed at Taiwan.

Now consider what America did. In 1971, it practically threatened India with a nuclear option. This led India to drop the plan to annihilate the Pakistani armour on the Western front and decimate its armed forces. The Shimla agreement, which was so soft on Pakistan was also due to the invisible american threat to India. Recently in operation Parakaram, there have been reports which have suggested that Indian forces deployment patterns were passed on to the Pakistan. Now consider the Nuclear deal, in which we promised to keep our nuclear reactors under perpetual nuclear safe guards without any nuclear fuel supply being provided in perpetuity. Or in the nuclear deal America has sought to block the ENR technology via NSG. A repeat of the Tarapur fiasco.
And if China is able to buy weapon systems from Russia then it due to the fact that America has made it rich. A country's defense capabilities are a function of its economic might. And China's economic might is a large extent due to America's doing. That is why we should not fight somebody else war, like Taiwan, and rather stay focused on our interests, Tibet and East Turkestan.

America and Soviet Union/Russia both have harmed our interests immensely. If Russia has harmed our interest, then so has equally America, if not more. This is the nature of international politics. We take what we want from X and disregard the rest.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: morem, sanjayc, sooraj and 66 guests