Managing Chinese Threat

[Altair]

..........
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.

Excellent points. This attitude must be taught to young IFS cadets and JNU wallahs.

[V_Raman]

west has done immeasurable damage to india/china than 1962 and any subsequent incidents. they would still like to grab all our resources from balochistan/AFG. let an asian neighbor use it rathen europeans grabbing it. i am ok with that.

this was suggested in BR as well -- we should let china access ME thru POK/PAK etc and arrive at a stable relationship with pak -- i dont know if we have the capability to allow/disallow anything here. we can always get our oil/gas from BD, pipelines thru PAK, ships from ME, undersea pipelines from OMAN and what not.

let china duke it out with the west. we need to make sure that we dont create circumstances for china to worry about india. again, this no way confers any mythical capabilities on china or that we fear china. if all these moves by india are to make sure that china does not worry about india, then we should go for it. but if china wants to pick a fight with the west, we should encourage it to the fullest extent even if it needs some accomodation by us that can later be reversed.

why create a distraction for our good neighbor when he is taking-on the big boys. we should just watch. with USA being a pacific power and all, the fun has just begun.

absorb as much tech from west as possible. innovate and become good at R&D. improve your industrial capacity. when the time is right, marry such skills with chinese efficiency -- game/set/match asia.

[V_Raman]

i really feel that india will need another 50 years atleast to develop sustainably. get our sanitation right, get our products biodegradable including soaps etc., move to LED/CFL lamps, go for small size captive NPPs for industrial needs, improve transmission grid, implement JJ-TN-Chennai style water project throughout the country. i think for average indian lower to poor class power consumption, modern day solar tech might be good enough. imagine 300 million off the grid and the power availability due to that.

i say all this here because we need peace for the next 50 years. we might choose war to cull our population by 200-300 million. but we are not like that. so making china the enemy is not an option. this is not due to any fear of china. this is due to our self-interest.

[chaanakya]

i say all this here because we need peace for the next 50 years. we might choose war to cull our population by 200-300 million. but we are not like that. so making china the enemy is not an option. this is not due to any fear of china. this is due to our self-interest.

That is very offensive statement. India does not choose war by design or choice. And nobody thinks of culling 200-300 millions of our population. But if war is forced upon us we would certainly cull whole of Pakistan and parts ( significant parts at that) from China too. They are on notice and not us. And it is in our self interest to live with dignity.

[V_Raman]

my apologies if i implied that anyone here is rooting for war. i hold all of you in very high regard and would no way imply that any one has anything other than best interests of india/neighborhood in mind. but picking up a conflict with china is a very wrong move at this stage, that too to help the west -- no way.

as you said -- china is on notice, not us. all our moves are to tell them that if you pick us, then you have the wrong target. we should stop at that and aid china in any issues they have with the west.

[chaanakya]

as you said -- china is on notice, not us. all our moves are to tell them that if you pick us, then you have the wrong target. we should stop at that and aid china in any issues they have with the west.

We should worry for our national interest only. If it serves by cooperating with China that would be done. There are ample examples of this where India has sided with China. But if it serves to be with US that would also be done.

[chola]

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.

How are you differing from my point of view when you provide all the evidence that Russia injures India and the rest of the free world by supplying arms to China? If it weren't for the Russian we would nothing but Mig 21s from China.

Now consider what America did. In 1971, it practically threatened India with a nuclear option.

Inflammatory and unwarranted accusations. The only nations the US ever had it nukes pointed towards are the USSR and Red China.

We continue to believe in wild accusations like that and we will end up on the wrong side of history again. India did what it wanted to in 1971. The US wasn't supportive (and why would it since Congress had allied the nation to the Russians) but it did not stop India from doing what it wanted.

America and Soviet Union/Russia both have harmed our interests immensely.

Absolutely untrue. Russia gave nothing but poor weaponry and high prices for them. The US gave us access to their service market (at much internal political cost in jobs) so that India's growth is among the greatest in the world.

If we make Russia disappear from India's world today, we would see China gets no modern weaponry while India can still buy from the West.

If we remove the US from India's reality today and the most dynamic part of our growing economy with disappear overnight while the chicoms would reign across Asia with no supervision. And with a more virulent strain of Maoism since there will be no restraint resulting from needing to access the US market.

The US contributes infinitely more good than harm though we refuse to acknowledge it. What is this socialist romance that we have with the Russians? There is a no more conniving race. Worse than even the chinis themselves.

[chola]

This is what I mean by conferring unwarranted ability to the lizard with self-inflicted scare stories of "Strings of Pearls" and "PLA Bases in the Cocos."

The chinks never had the ability to reach into the Indian Ocean but yet we build them up in our proclamations of fear so that now our neighbors think this chini ability is real.

It is not. Thankfully, this myth will be dispersed entirely by the US once they create yet another link in the iron chain strangling the dragon.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nationa ... 6200590627

Smith forecasts Cocos Islands joint military base

by: David Uren
From: The Australian
November 21, 2011 12:00AM

THE upgrading of defence ties with the US may include the development of joint military facilities on Cocos Islands.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith said yesterday the first priority would be upgrading the HMAS Stirling naval base, near Perth. "In the future, there may well be some possibility or prospect of greater utilisation of Cocos Islands," he said.

[svinayak]

Why should the West be in this area.

[Christopher Sidor]

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.

How are you differing from my point of view when you provide all the evidence that Russia injures India and the rest of the free world by supplying arms to China? If it weren't for the Russian we would nothing but Mig 21s from China.

My point is that if Soviet Union or Russia has harmed our interest, then equally US has also harmed our interests too. In fact in certain instances even more than Soviet Union has done. We like to believe that if Russia would not supply technology to China we would still be facing Chinese Mig-21 across the McMohan Line. Well there was a fighter-bomber which Russians did not supply to the Chinese, but the Chinese still managed to build a copy of it as they got it from Ukraine. The fighter was SU-33. The Chinese variant is known as J-15. Ditto for their first aircraft carrier. They did not get that from Russians, but again from Ukraine. So Russians are not the only country supplying weapon systems to China.

Now consider what America did. In 1971, it practically threatened India with a nuclear option.

Inflammatory and unwarranted accusations. The only nations the US ever had it nukes pointed towards are the USSR and Red China.

We continue to believe in wild accusations like that and we will end up on the wrong side of history again. India did what it wanted to in 1971. The US wasn't supportive (and why would it since Congress had allied the nation to the Russians) but it did not stop India from doing what it wanted.

I would beg to differ. If required, please read up on the history of 1971 and the threat which USA made by sending USS Enterprise to the Bay of Bengal. And it did that so as to preserve the Pakistani armour and preventing a complete collapse of Paki Armed Forces.
Let us not forget we tested our first nuclear weapon in 1974 not after 1964, when china went nuclear, not after 1967 series of incidents on McMohan Line with China. The decision to go ahead was given in 1972. After the Dec-1971 war with Pakistan had ended with creation of Bangladesh.

America and Soviet Union/Russia both have harmed our interests immensely.

Absolutely untrue. Russia gave nothing but poor weaponry and high prices for them. The US gave us access to their service market (at much internal political cost in jobs) so that India's growth is among the greatest in the world.

Russians supplied us with Mig-29, when US was hell bent on supplying F-16 to the PAF. And when it was supplied, there was no comparable aircraft available on the market. Mig-29 did good service by keeping PAF in check. And consider the fact that F-16 have been upgraded by Block C/D level by US, in spite of US being fully aware that there is only one country against which they will be used, India.
US is not doing charity or a favor to India by keeping its service market open for us. On the contrary, we are doing their companies a service by providing high-quality-low-wages labor so that their companies remain competitive in the international market. Otherwise their so called software market would have been overtaken by Japanese and Korean and to a certain degree european companies long ago.

If we make Russia disappear from India's world today, we would see China gets no modern weaponry while India can still buy from the West.

If we remove the US from India's reality today and the most dynamic part of our growing economy with disappear overnight while the chicoms would reign across Asia with no supervision. And with a more virulent strain of Maoism since there will be no restraint resulting from needing to access the US market.

The US contributes infinitely more good than harm though we refuse to acknowledge it. What is this socialist romance that we have with the Russians? There is a no more conniving race. Worse than even the chinis themselves.

Obviously you have not heard of the Lavi fiasco. It was a fighter which was sought to be built, by Israel with US financing. Or consider the recent statement made by a very senior individual of UK based company BaE, which said that he did not expect the Europe-wide ban on weapon systems to China to last.
If we remove US from India's reality today, we would no longer be hemmed in by NSG restrictions or by the requirement to pay in dollars for oil. In fact just as we coped with Soviet Unions demise pretty well, we will cope with a disappearance of US influence world wide also very well. And come to think of it, it would be a good move too, the demise of US power and influence over the world I mean.
The only thing that US contributes is its self interest. Nothing wrong in that. After all we should also be concerned only with our enlightened self interest. US wants India to trade one hypen, i.e. India-Pakistan for another, i.e. India-China. We should not rule out another tit-bit from history. The first proposal of an India-US strategic partnership was made by the US Pacific commander. It is instructive to note where the US saw our utility, w.r.t its interest in pacific.
We would never allow asia to be dominated by China. But we will do it for our interests and not for American interests. Our interests and American interests diverge significantly.

[ramana]

Very insightful post by pargha

also, we are assuming that strategic choices would drive the tactical ones, it could well be the opposite. the strategic decisions would just provide a very general outline (go to war with India and do damage) and the tactical opportunities will drive the major decisions. so, again, let's forget the why and concentrate on the how.

The Chinese don't fight like that. They plan clearly and objectively to meet their strategic goals. In 1962, they invaded, withdrew and consolidated almost exactly as their logistical schedule dictated. The Paks did not even plan beyond their initial objectives (and missupplied even that).

With the Chinese you have to know the WHY. No, they may not telegram - but they will publish their political objectives (at least their cover story) through all possible media before start of the military campaign, as their new WZC doctrine dictates. Based on how they define themselves, it is politically imperative for them to make such statements ("we will teach you a lesson"). It also opens up a dialog: instead of flaring up ("who are you to teach us anything"), a counter can be thus started to prevent a conflict ("you lesson is incorrect, watch us teach your protege first - you can critique it later"). India, in fact, did use this strategy in 1965 (a war, according to Jung, that was incited by Mao as a two front war that GOI deftly deflected). But in 21st century, India will have to take action in hours - not weeks - and that's where the challenge lies.

Edit: author name corrected to Jung Chang (and Halliday).

Book is " Unknown Mao".

Here is the PRC conspiracy with TSP in 1065 laid out very clearly.

What it means is PRC needs reasons for a fight and gives the message very eraly on. However India due to whatever does not see the message in the rhetoric. A study of statements gives early warning. How many Chinese language scholars does India have?

[Prem]

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/ ... continues/
The Asian Surge Continues
Bases in Australia, opening to Myanmar, uranium deals between Australia and India: the hurricane of China-balancing activity in Asia last week was one of the rare sets of events that can truly be called historic.
And now, as it turns out, it isn’t over. Not only did all but two of the Asian nations present at the latest summit join the US in calling on China to negotiate its South China Sea claims in a multilateral forum, but Singapore is apparently about to agree to host the US Navy as well.Rarely has diplomacy moved so fast and so far. The world will now wait for China’s response

[Pratyush]

In America’s Asia, China is not the all-powerful dragon

[Pranav]

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?

First one needs to know who controls "the west" and what their goals are.

Every nation in Asia - Japan, Taiwan, South Korea - that accepted the West is now wealthy beyond our wildest dreams.

Yes they are rich but it's not because they "accepted the west". Haiti accepted the west but did not do too well, did it?

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.

No doubt Nehru was utterly stupid, but he was installed by "the west" and we accepted him. Perhaps our poverty is because we have accepted the west to a far greater degree than Japan or Taiwan.

[tejas]

^^^^ The west had nothing to do with installing JLN. For that we can thank Mohandas Gandhi. The Congress leadership overwhelming wanted the Sardar but MG wanted Nehru. India was cursed from that moment forward.

[Pranav]

^^^^ The west had nothing to do with installing JLN. For that we can thank Mohandas Gandhi. The Congress leadership overwhelming wanted the Sardar but MG wanted Nehru. India was cursed from that moment forward.

Yes, but why did MKG sideline Patel and Bose? There is a very nice (but somewhat long) article in the MKG thread - see http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 72#p983472

[Prem]

xshy post
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/10 ... dangerroom
China Wants Bases an Endless War in Pakistan

The Asia Times Online story smells like a calculated Islamabad leak, especially since it comes on the heels of last week’s demand by Secretary of State that Pakistan cut off its terrorist proxies in the Haqqani Network. And since the Pakistanis want China to build a naval base on its territory, the Chinese even have leverage to move into the tribal areas. You can expect some thumbsucking think-tank type to lament the decline of American power any minute now.But if the Chinese really are headed to tribal Pakistan, then — as Chris Partlow once said to Marlo Stanfield on The Wire — this is one of those good problems.Fighting for a decade in central Asia has a way of obscuring something basic. The center of that war lies in tribal Pakistan, which is battered by U.S. drone strikes, but the U.S. has fought an exhausting war in the larger area that it’s finding difficult to satisfactorily conclude. That gives the Pakistanis a huge amount of leverage to get U.S. aid — and, accordingly, a disincentive to actually fighting terrorism, lest the aid stop when the mission concludes.
This Central Asian preoccupation — 10 years of war that has cost the U.S. hundreds of billions — has redounded decisively to China’s advantage. The U.S. funded its central Asian wars not buy raising taxes, but by borrowing money from China, and it’s only now turning to the problem of how to reduce its crippling debt. Meanwhile, China, the world’s second largest economy, is ever more assertive in the Pacific, and is modernizing its military with its first stealth jet and anti-ship missile. (Although the U.S. is way more militarily powerful.)

Taken together, all this has U.S. policymakers declaring America’s long excursion in the Mideast and South Asia to be a distraction worth concluding in order to refocus on the vital Asia-Pacific region.And here come the Chinese, ready to take on two birds with one stone.Think about it. The Chinese entangle themselves in a region where the U.S. found itself exhausted in an inconclusive effort. Since it’s China’s backyard, the domestic and internal military pressures to keep fighting there will likely be great. China can batter the residual terrorist presence in tribal Pakistan — its brutal Army will kill U.S. enemies as well as its own, if history is any indication — and also experience the pleasures of dealing with Islamabad, selling it weapons, and being responsible for Pakistani security. Surely Beijing will enjoy an intransigent ally that rejects its advice while keeping its money. And if China really wants a larger role in global affairs, tribal Pakistan is the most advantageous place for the U.S. to pass the baton.
And since Pakistan often says it wants the U.S. to leave it alone, let’s see how it enjoys taking yes for an answer, and losing its American aid. The U.S. can still launch drone strikes into Pakistan as insurance — as it keeps for itself drone launchpads like Jalalabad or Kandahar during and after the Afghanistan troop withdrawals. Surely the Chinese will be generous patrons, since they’re rich and they like funding infrastructure.
Meanwhile the U.S. can draw closer with India — the subcontinent’s economic, technological and military superpower, which both Pakistan and China distrust — and its Southeast Asian friends like South Korea, Japan, Thailand, Singapore and increasingly Vietnam. The U.S. doesn’t even have to wage a cold war with China. It just needs to let the Chinese have the bases it says it wants in an armpit of the globe, covering our withdrawal from it.Speaking of that cold war, there are many, many people in the U.S., China and Pakistan that want to see it proceed, whether out of paranoia or shortsightedness. From Washington’s perspective, a China-Pakistani alliance is a godsend, allowing the U.S. to cease its expensive, bloody Great Game in South Asia and letting a new player compete for a dubious prize. In the words of The Wire’s other great strategist, Marla Daniels: You cannot lose if you refuse to play.

[Klaus]

Why should the West be in this area.

Cocos (Keeling) islands, located SW of Java island was taken by British families, later annexed into the British empire. Its been a Western ELINT post during and after WW2. Its capabilities are probably getting a boost now by joint US-Oz presence.

Personally doubt if these series of islets have been on the minds of Indian military planners. Along with Diego Garcia and Christmas Island, this is another Western outpost which the Indian Navy will run into, possibly impeding its expansion beyond the northern IOR.

All this makes me think that Indo-Pacific and other fancy terminology is just another term to keep a check on Indian and Chinese navies, while aiding separatist movements in Indonesia.

[ShauryaT]

X-Post.

U.S.-India Engagement: Laying the Foundations for a New Asian Security Architecture

The Heritage Foundation is pleased to host a timely discussion on U.S.-India relations prior to the Sixth Annual East Asia Summit to be held November 17-19 in Indonesia. Our program will be led by one of India’s foremost security affairs experts and former member of India’s National Security Advisory Board, Professor Bharat Karnad. Professor Karnad will be joined by a panel of experts to assess India’s growing role in Asia and how the U.S. and India can work more closely to promote mutual interests in the region. Our speakers will examine the opportunities and constraints to furthering U.S.-India cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region, especially in maintaining freedom of navigation on the open seas and shaping the future security architecture in the region.

[ShauryaT]

Where India overlaps with China

The days of exclusive regionalism are clearly over, if ever they existed. The evolving regional security environment will be both complex as well as uncertain, as new players reframe key issues of regional order building. But competitive regionalism per se need not be crisis-prone as is made out to be by pessimistic assessments about Asian security. This will call for India and China to demonstrate a capacity to deal with varying levels of complexity in their relations, and above all, a capability to forge rule-based cooperative structures. It will be as much a mark of Indian diplomatic skills as of China’s to anticipate as well as possibly prevent conflict in the region.

[abhishek_sharma]

China says foreign companiess should keep off South China Sea

[Kanson]

Why should the West be in this area.

Cocos (Keeling) islands, located SW of Java island was taken by British families, later annexed into the British empire. Its been a Western ELINT post during and after WW2. Its capabilities are probably getting a boost now by joint US-Oz presence.

Personally doubt if these series of islets have been on the minds of Indian military planners. Along with Diego Garcia and Christmas Island, this is another Western outpost which the Indian Navy will run into, possibly impeding its expansion beyond the northern IOR.

All this makes me think that Indo-Pacific and other fancy terminology is just another term to keep a check on Indian and Chinese navies, while aiding separatist movements in Indonesia.

As one can see, Cocos islands is located facing Sunda Strait, just as A&N islands facing Malacca Strait. From Deigo Gracia, Cocos, Christian Islands/Australia form a chain. Target is more likely China. It appears more as a containment strategy by naval blockade from Japan, Soko, Taiwan, Philippines, Australia and Singapore - a complete ring of blockade. US provides what China fears the most.

So what will be China's next move. It will be to placate Indonesia. Indonesia plays to every side and reaps benefits from everyone.

[shyamd]

More steps towards alliance.
Indian salute to Bangla army

SUJAN DUTTA
Muhammed Abdul Mubeen (top); VK Singh

New Delhi, Nov. 22: The Bangladesh Army chief will review the passing-out parade of the National Defence Academy next week, in a rare honour to Dhaka on the 40th anniversary of its liberation and symbolic of New Delhi’s reach-out to its neighbour.

General Muhammed Abdul Mubeen has been invited to be the reviewing officer at the NDA, Khadakvasla. He will be only the third foreigner to take the salute after the late Chinese Premier Chou En Lai and the former chief of the (former) Royal Nepal Army, General Pyar Jung Thapa.

In a similar gesture, the Sri Lanka Army commander, Lt General Jagath Jayasuriya, will review the parade of cadets passing out of the Indian Military Academy who will be commissioned as officers in the Indian Army.

The visits by the chiefs of Bangladesh and Sri Lanka over the next two weeks signal a sudden upswing in neighbourhood military-diplomatic exchanges.

The army chief, General V.K. Singh, returned from a five-day visit to Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan last night. General Singh’s visit to the Central Asian countries is part of an effort to prepare for the drawdown of US forces from Afghanistan in 2014.

The last time foreign (Soviet) forces left Afghanistan after occupying it, the Taliban took over and India’s relations with Central Asian countries bordered on the tenuous. This time India is preparing in advance for the imponderables in Afghanistan. This includes reviving a military hospital and helipad at Farkhor in Tajikistan, on the northern border of Afghanistan.

Bangladesh’s General Mubeen will review the NDA parade on November 29 in the course of a six-day visit. He is also slated to visit the Para Training School in Agra and the Eastern Command headquarters in Fort William, Calcutta. In between, in New Delhi, he will meet the service chiefs. Bangladesh and India are planning a series of joint military drills in 2012.

Sri Lanka’s Lt General Jayasuriya was the force commander of the military in the last Eelam war in Vanni in the north-east of the island. Forces under him vanquished the LTTE and neutralised its leadership, including Prabhakaran.

Lt General Jayasuriya is scheduled to visit, apart from the IMA in Dehra Dun, Bodh Gaya, Delhi and Agra.

This week, the chief operations officer of the Bhutanese army, Major General Batoo Tshering, returned to Thimphu after a three-day tour that included a visit to the Central Command headquarters in Lucknow.

Later this month, the Indian Army is also expecting to a host a military team from Myanmar in Bangalore that will visit an army engineers’ centre and participate in sports and cultural events.

[RajeshA]

RajeshA ji, you must also consider that you do not want to give an opening to any of these Chinese trolls to portray Indians as a bunch of hate-filled bigots. They would love to stereotype you as such.......and being cavalier about MAD is the easiest way to lead to such portrayal.

Btw, your statements were OK on any other thread when discussing with Indians or even when having a one-on-one discussion with a Chinese poster...but do consider the PR effect of your statements when they are amplified to hundreds of Chinese who have little knowledge of what nuclear deterrence implies.

Arjun ji,

the Chinese regime may wish to portray India as an enemy, but it would like to control this enemy image. They may like to show that India is an enemy, because we are under the influence of the West, or because we are envious of their progress. They may want to show that we support Tibetan "terrorists" and as such we are their enemies.

But beyond this, what may not be in their interest would be to show that Indian hate of the Chinese would engulf them in fire! They would not be interested to show that Indians hate the Chinese to the core!

It is only once Indian "hate" for the Chinese becomes an existential issue for the Chinese that they would be forced to give it more than a cursory thought. Only then would there be some serious effort in understanding what our grouse is with them. Until the Chinese are not made to face the true threat of Indian vengeance on them, they will look at Indians as simply a side-show, an adversary whose image can be managed. We have to break the control of our image in the Chinese psyche.

Some may say that we can suck up to the Chinese, tell them how we love Bruce Lee, and then everything would be fine. That is the wrong way to go, because that way our grievances would be given short shrift. The Chinese people would not see any need to involve themselves with anything more than the superficial and let their regime look after the management of the India-China relations. It would not solve anything, and the Chinese regime would continue its policy of expansion and intimidation.

So basically we should want to up the ante. The regime wants to show India as an adversary. We help them. But instead we show them that we are a very dangerous adversary. Only if the threat becomes real to the Chinese, would the people want to know what the hate is all about. What have they done to deserve such hate from Indians and India? It is only then that Indian grievances would start percolating down to the people and they will be able to see what dangerous games the CPC and PLA have been playing with India.

So what we need to tell the Chinese is the following:

1) What our grievances are:

1. Annexation of Tibet (a necessary buffer state between India and China),
2. Unprovoked Attack on India in 1962,
3. Nuclear Proliferation to Pakistan (a sworn Indian enemy),
4. Claims on Arunachal Pradesh (when their claims on Tibet are themselves untenable),
5. Deployment of nuclear-armed missiles in Tibet against India in striking distance of Indian cities,
6. Creation of military infrastructure on Indo-Tibet Border even as we did no such thing,
7. Support to Pakistan in the UNSC for its Sheltering of Terrorists, etc. (Hafeez Syed affair)
8. Providing arms to Separatists in India's Northeast.
9. Aiding Naxalite Movement in Nepal and India

2) We have Megaton capable nukes.

3) We will burn China down even if it is the last thing we do! None of their Sun Tzu BS is going to help them because all that BS is more than transparent to us.

4) Our grouse is not with the Chinese people but with the Chinese regime. But if the Chinese people do not force their regime to reform, they will end up as comprehensive collateral damage.

It helps to be cavalier about this, because it enforces the "Political Will" aspect of Deterrence. Do takke ka Pakistan has been able to wage a successful Deterrence Strategy because of their cavalier attitude towards nuclear exchange, because of them keeping their thresholds low. Their attitude of "Jaaneman, hum to doobenge hi, tumko bhi le doobenge!" is perhaps the most effective Deterrence propaganda ever coined.

This is exactly the message the Chinese need to get! Their plausible deniability is just one load of horseshit and it isn't going to work. India has real grievances with China and its imperialist, expansionist and intimidation tendencies. We are not going to be cowed down and we will burn down China if they don't change their ways.

They have to understand, that if they are the bully we are the madman! Madmen don't care about bullies!

Too much enlightenment has killed our instincts, and we need to cultivate those again, in order to face the Chinese.

[Pratyush]

Inferiority complex haunts India: China

[JE Menon]

Hmmm...really? I wonder. But it's alright if they think so. There are advantages to it.

[RajeshA]

Inferiority complex haunts India: China

Here is the original propaganda piece:

Published on Nov 24, 2011
By Li Hongmei
India's undue worry about China results from inferiority complex: Xinhua

[sanjaykumar]

I think there may be something to this Indian inferiority complex: Indians are envious that the Chinaman has been relieved of the responsibility to think, from parroting the Little Red Book into the 70s to having 'guided' internet exchanges currently. Their trouble makers are simply executed en masse such as Tienanmen Square. Indians wish they had the freedom to do that.

Indians should have the freedom to live in caves while newly minted cities lie empty. Indian religious minorities perhaps need to be tortured to see the error of their ways-perhaps the Falun Gong can run seminars in India on the finer points of state rehabilitation.

[BajKhedawal]

Hmmm...really? I wonder. But it's alright if they think so. There are advantages to it.

I doubt if they really think it so. Just looks like some cheap sun tuzpiaish PsyOps to me. They just want to sound like they are ready and willing to decimate India in a '62 replay, whereas they know war with India is the last thing they can afford and want right now.

Typical nukkad ka dada type, a swift cold start kick in the croutch will show him his place.

[member_19648]

^^
If you can't beat them, at least you can yell at them. People who hark too much are the ones suffering from some kind of a complex, they should learn something from India, cool and composed, do what you have to do, let the barkers bark! They say aptly, neighbor's envy, owner's pride!!

[devesh]

Chinese race incapable of articulating well in English: India

[abhishek_sharma]

Sudden glitch: With 2 days to go, India-China border talks off

[abhishek_sharma]

India says can’t gag Dalai, China stalls border talks

[abhishek_sharma]

Talks ‘glitch’: dates mix-up, quiet moves that China got wind of

[rajrang]

India says can’t gag Dalai, China stalls border talks

Too many serious provocations in the last three years - the more serious ones include objecting to Indian PM visiting AP, warning an Indian ship in international waters and now asking India to cancel the Buddist conference. What arrogance! Seems like India needs to quietly accelerate the timelines for the addition 1 lakh troops announced recently.

[merlin]

India says can’t gag Dalai, China stalls border talks

Too many serious provocations in the last three years - the more serious ones include objecting to Indian PM visiting AP, warning an Indian ship in international waters and now asking India to cancel the Buddist conference. What arrogance! Seems like India needs to quietly accelerate the timelines for the addition 1 lakh troops announced recently.

That is standard procedure before every war. Escalate provocations.

[RajeshA]

Continuing from "India-China News and Discussions" Thread

China has illegally occupied Akshai Chin gifted by Pakistan and Chinese military is in POK. Both these territories are our land and on top of that China makes claim on Arunachal Pradesh!

Why are we so defensive? We should also make counter claims on Tibet, Sichuan and Yunnan. If Chinese can make absurd claims, so can we. It also helps in negotiation. I am sure RajeshA would like this approach!

Shankaraa ji,

Welcome to BRF!

That is correct. I have strongly advocated that we start making counter-claims on Tibet, on Greater Tibet that is.

If we stop to ponder on the situation. India recognizes Tibet Autonomous Region as an integral part of People's Republic of China. The fact is we recognize Tibet as part of China. So why do we not give them Tawang as well? What moral right do we have over Tawang?

Just because the British took over parts of Tibet, those parts become ours now as part of the inheritance? Can we keep stolen stuff, stolen land, even if it is part of our inheritance?

The thing is that the Chinese never really enjoyed sovereignty over Tibet. It was never accepted by the Tibetans, but the various dynasties of China continued to act as if they did, especially the Qing Dynasty. They entered into treaties with the Russians and with the British and incorporated their their claims on Tibet within those treaties. Others consented simply to placate the Chinese as both the Russians and the British saw it lucrative to have good relations with Beijing. But that too had nothing to do with the true status of Tibet.

It is like India saying if anybody wants trade with us, they better recognize Indian sovereignty over say some asteroid. Many would agree. Whether India really can assert sovereignty over the area would be considered secondary. Also even if this asteroid had a population and they do not consider themselves Indians, it would not really matter to other powers who enter into treaties with Indians, as trade relations with India would be considered more profitable than the relationship of these powers to the hypothetical population on that asteroid.

So it is basically those old treaties, that China points to make their claims on Tibet, even though those claims were based on nothing concrete on the ground. Even if some Chinese dynasty was able to force some kingdom to pay it some tribute, does that really justify a claim over some area?

If some goonda come around in the street asking for hafta, would that be good enough reason for the goonda some day to lay claims on your shop, on your property?

What the Chinese have done is occupation of Tibet, and they were able to do it only because Bharat was weak and could not come to the aid of an Indian sub-civilization - Tibetans! In the end, Tibet should belong there where the Tibetans desire it to belong; and not the Chinese, nor the British nor the Russians should have any saying in that.

Tibet is part of India because Tibet is culturally, civilizationally an integral part of Indian Civilization. Indian empires never deemed it necessary to demand some tribute from a region (Tibet), which falls under the same civilization (Indian). Is it necessary to humiliate a people with 'tribute' making?

If India accepts Tibet as an integral part of China, then we weaken our historical claims on Tawang too! We will always be forced on the backfoot, and MEA and PMO would keep on trying to play down the issue and not come clear on the border pressure we face in our Northeast from the Chinese! The culture in our babudom and political circles is often overly legalistic and if they themselves feel intimidated by Chinese claims, the babudom and ruling elite may someday give in, calling it burying the hatchet.

What is needed is a complete rethink on grounds on which we assert our claims and rights to some territory. It has to move away from British inheritance! It has to be based on Civilization and Geographical parameters.

We should go ahead and claim whole of Tibet as Indian territory, Tawang being the part we actually control. We can state our policy to be one of 'peacefully encouraging PRC to leave Tibet'.

This would give India the full freedom to use all devices of Tibetan separatism against China, without our leaders and babus getting themselves in a knot trying to defend our territory politically, as well as getting cowed down by Chinese military presence in Tibet!

Tibet should be part of India! Period!

[RajeshA]

X-Posting from "India-Myanmar news and discussion" Thread

Posting in full and without quotes

Published on Dec 01, 2011
By Shyam Saran
The pivot of change in Asia: Indian Express

The efficacy of the latest US “pivot” towards the Asia-Pacific may well be determined by the political dynamics likely to be generated by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s two-day visit to Myanmar (Burma) on December 1 and 2. The visit is the first at this level in over half a century. Its significance should be assessed against the backdrop of recent developments in Myanmar and the region. Myanmar has leapt to the centre of the political and strategic radar screen in the Asia-Pacific over the past year as its new president, Thein Sein, has taken a series of unexpected measures. This has coincided with a push back against China’s more assertive posture in the region, which the US is exploiting.
The leader of the democratic opposition, Aung San Suu Kyi has been released from house arrest and restrictions on her movements and political activities of her National League of Democracy (NLD) have been removed. A regular political dialogue between the government and Suu Kyi has been instituted.

The way has now been cleared for the NLD to register as a political party and for Suu Kyi and other NLD candidates to take part in forthcoming by-elections to the National Assembly. Suu Kyi is likely to be a candidate herself. This will be a major step towards legitimising the new constitution, the National Assembly and the government.

Thein Sein has released over 200 political prisoners and has indicated that those remaining will also be released in stages.

The government has recognised the right to public protest, made labour unions and strikes a legitimate right of workers. Restrictions on access to the Internet have been relaxed and there is greater media freedom. The pace at which these changes have been coming has led even liberal elements to express the fear that there might be a backlash. It appears, however, that Thein Sein has the support of the upcoming and younger military leaders who wish to see a steady political and economic transformation of their country.

On the foreign policy side, the most dramatic development has been the suspension of a major project to construct a series of dams by China on the northern tributaries of the Irrawaddy and in the upper reaches of the main river itself. Preparatory work on the project had already commenced, though there were growing protests in the region, in particular, among the local Kachin tribes.

The Chinese reaction to the suspension was one of shocked surprise. This decision, more than anything else the new government has done, gives notice that the Chinese can no longer have the privileged and virtually unlimited access to Myanmar’s rich natural resources that they have enjoyed over the past 20 years. Myanmar appears determined to diversify its relations away from its inordinate dependence on China. It has been attempting to do so even when it was ruled directly by the generals. The difference lies in the military’s recognition that without political reform at home, more balanced foreign relations would not be possible. {So it seems the only reason why the military junta felt it necessary to institute democratic reforms was to escape the tight Chinese grip}

These measures have already brought a series of diplomatic gains. At its recently concluded summit in Bali, ASEAN announced that it had accepted Myanmar’s request to host the ASEAN Summit in 2014. {Myanmar is looking for wider recognition} This would be the first time since it joined ASEAN in 1997 that Myanmar hosts an ASEAN Summit. It accords the SPDC government the international legitimacy it has craved. Since the ASEAN Summit is also an occasion to hold parallel summits with partner countries, the assemblage of all the world’s key leaders in Naypidaw in 2014 would be an unprecedented event and would mark Myanmar’s return to the international community as a legitimate member.

The three-year run-up to the 2014 summit also provides Thein Sein with the political room he needs to continue and intensify reforms at home.

It was in the mid-1990s that India executed its own “pivot” towards Myanmar, recognising that the policy of isolating the military regime and extending rhetorical support to Suu Kyi only served to create space for China to extend and consolidate its pre-eminence in a strategically significant neighbour. Soon after I took up my assignment as India’s ambassador to Myanmar in 1997, it became obvious from my conversations with the country’s military leaders that they felt acutely uncomfortable with their enforced dependence upon China and wanted to create some wiggle room for the country. ASEAN countries recognised this, and in 1997, admitted Myanmar to their fold, despite considerable opposition from the US and other Western countries. Soon thereafter, our invitation to Myanmar to become part of BIMSTEC (Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Thailand Economic Cooperation) sub-regional grouping was accepted with alacrity.

In our bilateral relations, we began to work on the basis of this changed perspective. The first major breakthrough came in 1999, when General Maung Aye, the then Myanmar army chief and vice-president, came to Shillong as the guest of our army chief, General V.P. Malik. But this was not the usual military-to -military visit. Maung Aye came with a delegation of several cabinet ministers heading various economic ministries. We had our own delegation consisting of eight cabinet ministers headed by the late R. Kumaramangalam, who was then the S&T minister. The bilateral talks held on the occasion led to a major upgradation of India-Myanmar relations, including an assurance from Maung Aye that the Myanmar army would act against several of the camps of Indian insurgent groups located across the border. We also agreed to pursue several important cross-border projects. This first somewhat tentative initiative was followed by a full normalisation of bilateral relations in 2000, when Maung Aye paid a visit to India as vice-president.

The policy of engaging Myanmar has paid off. India has gained a degree of cooperation in tackling Northeast insurgencies and established a modest countervailing presence to China in a sensitive neighbouring country. The rest of the world, particularly the US, has come to recognise the wisdom of India’s approach. The impending diversification of Myanmar’s foreign relations strengthens India’s hand because India, on its own, would have been unable to provide a credible alternative to China’s overarching presence in the country. Despite these significant developments, China will still remain Myanmar’s most important neighbour.

As the winds of political change sweep across Myanmar, India should diversify its own political engagement to include Suu Kyi and the NLD, as also the newly elected representatives in the National Assembly. It would also be worthwhile to engage with the representatives of the various ethnic groups who are in the National Assembly for the first time, some of whom reside in areas across our borders with Myanmar. Some of these ethnic groups, like the Kachins (who boycotted the elections), were earlier close to the Chinese but have now become fierce critics, thanks to the continuing ravage of their homeland by predatory, resource-hungry Chinese companies. We should reach out to them. The recent revival of the Advanced Landing Ground in Vijayanagar, Arunachal, near the Pangsau Pass is a step in the right direction. The region across the pass is inhabited by the Kachins.

The writer, a former foreign secretary, also served as India’s ambassador to Myanmar

[RajeshA]

X-Posting from "India-Myanmar news and discussion" Thread

I believe Hillary Clinton's visit to Myanmar would go a very long way in consolidating India's ties to Myanmar, bringing the two countries closer, very much closer.

The reason for countries in the Indian Subcontinental Region (ISR) to feel aligned to China are either because

1. There are rabidly anti-Indian constituencies there (Pakistan, to some extent Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka in that order)
2. They are hoping for the Chinese veto in UNSC to save their sorry asses (Sri Lanka, Myanmar)
3. They are attracted to Chinese largess in infrastructure building and trade of raw materials

It may take some time before India can neutralize Chinese veto power in UNSC. We are also moving to decrease anti-Indianism in our neighborhood where possible. As we grow we will be able to bind the other countries much more tightly to ourselves. In the mean time, India in combo with Japan can also hope to do something similar.

But the main change among the countries that can be brought about is if these countries do not have the Democles Sword of Western sanctions and UNSC resolutions hanging over them. That is true of both Myanmar and Sri Lanka.

Whereas in Sri Lanka, we would have to negotiate peace between the Sinhalese and the Lankan Tamils so as to credibly blunt that Democles Sword, in Myanmar we have no constraints.

Myanmar have themselves undertaken important political reforms to do away with the threat of sanctions, ostracism, etc. As Myanmar loses its angst of the world, it would not need China any more. Myanmar is on its way to embrace both its past close civilization relations with India as well as warm relations with the West, especially its relations to the Anglophone world.

Myanmar is making a solid claim to being the bridge between India and ASEAN, thereby making it the pivot of Indo-ASEAN integration. The world is going to move in fast into Myanmar with diplomatic relations, political openness, strategic treaties, infrastructure building, and trade, making China just another player, and not the main player. The more Myanmar is welcomed back into the international community, the stronger would India's influence become in Myanmar viz-a-viz Chinese influence.

Geostrategically speaking, the turn around of Myanmar would be equivalent to Pakistan going Indic. It would open up a part of Asia that was semi-closed to India (overland) - namely Southeast Asia, and help in its integration with India. We should try to look for close alliances with Myanmar, Indonesia, Vietnam and Thailand.

[Sushupti]

Evidence of China’s nuclear storage system



http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... aphic.html