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.
Mahesh_R
BRFite
Posts: 181
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 00:46

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Mahesh_R » 01 Dec 2013 11:42

devesh wrote:the Chinese tactic of always maintaining an offensive diplomatic position has obvious advantages. there is no question in any India's mind that Arunachal is an Indian State. we are taught from the first civics course about the States of India, and Arunachal is one of them.

so when the PRC protests the Indian Head-of-State visiting that State, we are left astounded and are forced to respond to a downright ridiculous notion that we somehow need PRC's permission to have our own leaders visit AP.

in terms of psy-war, keeping a purely defensive posture against such an enemy will fail eventually, b/c the enemy can simply claim entire swathes as their territory and we are left huffing and puffing about such comically ridiculous outpourings. to the common janta, to politicians, babus, leaders, etc, this is a disadvantage b/c they cannot repay PRC in its own dime.

it's time to take another look at India's policy wrt Chinese occupied territories.

Well said sir...exactly my pov....hopefully the goi shld change the perception and start being offensive to prc also start pairing up against it in international community...well if PRC can openly protect TSP interests in international community they why can't we do the same by taking sides with Japan ...the logic used by GOI doesn't make sense to me..agreed they are much stronger in terms of economics but we are not that that much depended on exports to PRC...infact the imports are close to double than exports from PRC they shld be worried not us ...any gyan on this topic would be appreciated...

RSoami wrote:Mahesh_R
Even if the Japanese and the Americans accept this, it doesnt change anything. In fact it only makes other countries in the pacific south east Asia more wary of China. Technically this ADZ will ead to worsening of an already complicated relationship between japan and china.
.

Sir..I am not worried abt the islands but my worry is abt prc getting away with aggressive diplomacy in international community and no one is dare enough to call the bluff....including the so called mighty super power...even having a treaty with them is not helping ...so what abt other neighbors who have are on their own..

China scrambles jets; US softens stance

I am worried they might repeat the same with us..well after the dust settles with Japan may be after 5 yrs...and again no one will be voicing their concern and we are left to defend ourselves...which we will but at a much higher price :cry:

rajrang
BRFite
Posts: 415
Joined: 24 Jul 2006 08:08

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby rajrang » 01 Dec 2013 13:06

Mahesh_R wrote:I am worried they might repeat the same with us..well after the dust settles with Japan may be after 5 yrs...and again no one will be voicing their concern and we are left to defend ourselves...which we will but at a much higher price :cry:


Bound to happen, not in 5 years but in months in my opinion and India is likely to be alone.

Look Japan has sent a clear signal to China in the link below
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 650935.cms
The above signal is significant since it comes in the midst of a serious challenge to Japan from China!

Some months back, when the US VP Biden visited India, the above message was repeated numerous times by the US.

Mahesh_R
BRFite
Posts: 181
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 00:46

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Mahesh_R » 01 Dec 2013 14:14

Please enlighten me why everyone on the mother earth are sh!t scared of prc....including the super power not able to say a word against them.
Is it due to the US govt holdings by PRC or do they actually control the world economy like some news media articles...

Its like in a movie baddie gets away what ever he wants...no international community raising a voice against them...whether its tibet issue, human rights, currency manipulation what not....well we have one more example TSP but atleast TSP doesn't behave like a bully ...though its a mad dog...

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 01 Dec 2013 19:30

No Change in Japan's Commercial Flights Policy towards Chinese ADZ - JT
Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera indicated Sunday that Tokyo won’t change its stance on urging Japanese airlines not to submit their flight plans as requested by China for its new air defense identification zone over the East China Sea, labeling the demand a “one-sided action” by Beijing that deviates from international rules.

U.S. media have reported that Washington, in an apparent partial about-face, has urged U.S. airlines to submit their flight plans to avoid any unintended confrontation, while stressing that the U.S. has not accepted the ADIZ and that it will not avoid sending military aircraft into the area.

Interest has been keen on whether Japan will follow Washington’s lead.

“After all, (Japanese carriers) including commercial airlines are usually not obliged to report such things to respond to what China is (demanding) one-sidedly. We will handle this issue with a resolute attitude,” Onodera said in a recorded interview with NHK that was aired Sunday morning.

He also said he is concerned Beijing may be trying to set up a similar zone over the South China Sea. That would greatly raise tensions between China and the countries in that area, he said.

“The international community should not allow (a country) to take such a unilateral approach,” he said.

Tokyo is trying to garner support from other countries for its stance. On Saturday, officials proposed to the International Civil Aviation Organization that its member countries discuss how to react to China’s establishment of the zone.

The U.S. may be sending a mixed message to China.


While making clear it will not make any compromises in maintaining its military operations in the ADIZ, set up over the high seas, Washington also said it “generally expects that U.S. carriers operating internationally will operate consistently with” requirements “issued by foreign countries.”

According to CNN, U.S. airlines United, American and Delta confirmed Saturday that they have notified Chinese authorities of flight plans in the zone.

During Sunday’s interview, Onodera said Japan still believes Washington has maintained the same stance as Tokyo, saying that the U.S. government told Japan through diplomatic channels that it has not “requested” U.S. commercial airlines to follow the Chinese demand.

“We believe the U.S. has maintained the same stance as Japan,” he said.


Japan, the U.S. and many other countries have ADIZs, but they only “request” that foreign aircraft notify them of flight plans when they fly toward the territorial airspace.

China has said all aircraft flying through its zone must comply with the aviation rules set by Beijing and that it might take “defensive measures” if they do not comply.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 01 Dec 2013 19:39

China's ADZ atop of Agenda for Biden's Visit to Tokyo - JT
When U.S. Vice President Joe Biden arrives in Japan on Monday to start a three-nation tour that will also take him to South Korea and China, his most urgent task will be to assure Prime Minister Shinzo Abe that the U.S. stands firmly against China’s new air defense identification zone, which encompasses the Senkaku Islands, even as he prods Tokyo to help ease tensions with Beijing.

It’s an important visit for the longer term as well. Biden faces the further challenge of convincing Tokyo, Seoul and Beijing that the Obama administration’s touted pivot to Asia won’t fail due to budget constraints in Washington that will likely impact the U.S. military presence in the region or to growing skepticism in Congress regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agreement.

Though previous U.S. administrations emphasized Asia, the idea of a U.S. pivot, shift or rebalance dates back to autumn 2011, when the Obama administration announced that as wars in Afghanistan and Iraq wind down, U.S. military assets would be relocated to the Asia-Pacific region. In August 2012, Ashton Carter, deputy secretary of defense, offered specific examples of what a rebalance would look like.

“We intend to have 60 percent of our naval assets based in the Pacific by 2020. We will have a net increase of one aircraft carrier, four destroyers, three Zumwalt destroyers, 10 littoral combat ships and two submarines in the Pacific in the coming years,” Carter said.

In addition, B-1 bombers and reconnaissance planes, manned and unmanned, would be relocated to the Pacific. But amid speculation of a reduction in the number of army personnel or major shifts around Asia of marines in the coming years, Carter said only that the army in South Korea would be protected from budget changes and that there would be no reduction in the Marine Corps’ presence west of the international date line.

That was the plan. But with the passage of the Budget Control Act in 2011, the Pentagon must cut a total of $500 billion over a 10-year period, unless Congress can reach a deal that reverses some of the planned military reductions.

Congress has until the end of this month to reach agreement on stopping the latest round of defense cuts — worth $19 billion — that are set to start in January. Under the 2011 act, the size of budget cuts is expected to rise substantially from about 2015 onward.

In August, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said that in the worst-case scenario the army would be reduced by 380,000 troops and the marines from just under 200,000 to 150,000. Pentagon officials admit that it would be very challenging to maintain current Asia rebalancing plans in that case.

Administration officials from President Barack Obama on downhave rushed to reassure Asian allies, including Japan and South Korea, that the budget problems in Washington will not affect America’s military commitment to the region. Biden will likely make similar noises to Abe on Monday.

The other part of the U.S. rebalance to Asia is the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement. On Dec. 7, trade ministers from the 12 nations involved in the TPP negotiations will meet in Singapore, where they hope to finalize an agreement. Biden and Abe are expected to discuss the TPP in some detail.

Obama wants the negotiations concluded by the end of this year. He is pushing for Congress to give his administration fast-track negotiation authority, meaning it would not be able to amend or filibuster any agreement brought to it for approval.

But over the past six months, opposition to the TPP has grown in the U.S., and clashes with Congress over the budget forced Obama to cancel a trip to Asia in October, where he had hoped to personally push leaders to conclude the TPP negotiations.

Then, in mid-November, 151 congressional Democrats and 25 Republicans told the Obama administration they were opposed to granting fast-track authority.

“While your administration’s goal was to sign a TPP free trade agreement at the October Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, we believe that to date the process has failed to provide adequate consultation with Congress. Twentieth-century ‘fast track’ is simply not appropriate for 21st-century agreements and must be replaced. The U.S. cannot afford another trade agreement that replicates the mistakes of the past,” the House Democrats said in a letter to the president.

Both parties and houses of Congress are growing skeptical in particular of the TPP’s ability to prevent currency manipulation. Some 230 members of the House and 60 members of the Senate are demanding that the TPP provide measures to counter such manipulation. But there was no discussion of that issue at recently concluded talks in Salt Lake City. TPP opponents noted that this was just one of numerous issues left unresolved.

“Controversy is growing in many TPP nations about demanded trade-offs relating to medicine prices, Internet freedom, financial regulation and other sensitive matters,” said Lori Wallach, director of the Washington-based Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, following the Salt Lake City talks.

Biden and Abe may comment on the next round of TPP negotiations in Singapore starting on Dec. 7. But since the vice president’s schedule will likely be dominated by defusing the crisis and increasing regional cooperation to prevent conflict, the timing of his trip to East Asia is particularly relevant.

However, he will not visit Taiwan, which has a huge stake in the ADIZ controversy. Misato Matsuoka, a doctoral researcher in political science and international studies at the University of Warwick, said it was unlikely Japan would want to discuss what Taiwan’s role might be in the latest clash over the Senkakus, at least not directly.

“While China has been expanding its ADIZ, it seems to be difficult for Abe’s government to suggest new initiatives to cooperate with Taiwan, due to Taiwan’s delicate position among China, the U.S. and Japan. But there is a possibility to propose a bilateral air transport agreement, for instance,” she said.

Ultimately, however, the future U.S. role in Asia, particularly East Asia, rests on convincing the region that Washington is not going to reduce its presence and can still provide leadership in the face of a growing China.

With Congress demanding budget cuts and midterm elections in November, the Obama administration will have its hands full domestically in 2014.

Biden, who is considered exceptionally well-versed in Asia, has his work cut out for him in convincing leaders in the region that the administration will not get distracted with domestic politics and back up with action its rhetoric about an Asian rebalance.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Victor » 01 Dec 2013 21:28

harbans wrote: Revoke recognition of Indo-China border.

This should be easy to do. China does not recognize the current Indo-China border and we can simply agree with them.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 02 Dec 2013 20:24

Amid Tension, China Hopes for Conducive India-Japan Ties - Ananth Krishnan, The Hindu
China on Monday said it hoped India’s relations with Japan would be “conducive” to regional peace and stability, against the backdrop of rising tensions between Beijing and Tokyo and a high-profile visit by Japanese Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko to India.

The on-going week-long and rare visit to India by the Japanese Royal couple has underlined the deepening ties between the two countries. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who took office in December 2012, has made clear his intention to not only boost economic ties and investment, but also expand the strategic relationship. Mr. Abe is expected to visit India next month.

The Abe government's keenness to push ties with India comes amid renewed tensions with China over the disputed Senkaku or Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea. In recent days, China’s move to set up an Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) that includes the disputed islands has further strained ties.

Asked how China viewed the on-going visit by Emperor Akihito and recently warming India-Japan ties, the Chinese Foreign Ministry here said it hoped the relationship would be favourable to regional stability.

“We hope that development of bilateral relations by the relevant countries will be conducive to regional peace, stability and development,” spokesperson Hong Lei told reporters at a regular press-briefing.


India has, so far, not commented on the rising tensions between China and Japan. China, on Monday, continued to strongly defend its move, announced last week, to set up an ADIZ, pointing out that several countries, such as the United States and Japan, had already established such areas beyond their territorial airspace to track aircraft.

ADIZ areas are not territorial claims, but defined zones in international airspace within which countries monitor aircraft heading towards their territorial airspace, which extends 12 nautical miles from coastlines.

Mr. Hong said the “Japanese ADIZ, established in the 1960s [in 1969] illegally included the Diaoyu islands, and China is firmly opposed to it”.

He said China was willing to “increase dialogue and communication to safeguard flights in overlapping areas” of the two countries’ defence zones, but hit out at Japan for refusing dialogue, “creating frictions" and "undermining" regional stability.

Japan has, on the other hand, warned that China’s unilateral move to set up an ADIZ over disputed areas could trigger “unexpected incidents”.

China’s ADIZ announcement has concerned several countries in the region, including Japan and South Korea, as the air defence zone stretches over strategically important areas in the East China Sea. Both countries, as well as the United States, have made clear that their air patrols will not follow Chinese demands of filing flight plans in advance.

On Monday, Taiwan said its military jets had made around 30 flights into the Chinese ADIZ, indicating that it would also not comply with the rules. Meanwhile, South Korean media reports said the government in Seoul now plans to widen its air defence zone to include the Leodo reef, which is under South Korea's control but falls within both the Japanese and newly set up Chinese air defence zones.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52603
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby ramana » 02 Dec 2013 22:51

I think the PRC will soon have to slap some one to show they mean business.
I think it will be the Taiwanese and failing which the Japanese.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13271
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Lalmohan » 02 Dec 2013 23:02

they'll pick on the philipines - least likely to be able to resist

devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5126
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby devesh » 02 Dec 2013 23:23

Philippines will involve some form of retaliation by US. if US doesn't act, they loose all credibility. remember, Philippines is supposed to be pretty tightly involved with the new American Base opening up in North-West Australia.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2435
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby darshhan » 02 Dec 2013 23:40

ramana wrote:I think the PRC will soon have to slap some one to show they mean business.
I think it will be the Taiwanese and failing which the Japanese.


If I were the CCP, I would have most probably attacked Laos. A weak country which shares borders with PRC. No navy is required. Quickly teach them a lesson and send a message to the world. Against no other neighbouring country PRC will have such an easy ride.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13271
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Lalmohan » 02 Dec 2013 23:49

but is there an open panga with laos?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52603
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby ramana » 02 Dec 2013 23:51

Exactly. No Panga with Laos.

Also Taiwan has no support except with US.
That way it shows up two.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby RoyG » 03 Dec 2013 00:01

Laos? China is not going to pick on such an insignificant country. The Chinese are just flexing after the Iran deal was reached. Their central bank has also committed in principle to stop buying american debt. They are covertly attacking the dollar along with the Russians and keeping the Americans at arms length. They've also got the Americans to notify them of passenger carrier overflights of the air defense zone hence unofficially legitimizing their claim to the territory. When the roti is hot you nibble on the edges. It will take you longer to finish it, but you wont burn your tongue in the process.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Cosmo_R » 03 Dec 2013 04:50

"Walking a tightrope, India has kept a studied silence over China's announcement of an Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea while stepping up engagement with regional countries that don't see Beijing's rise as benign."

Though the possibility of long-term strategic tensions are brewing with the US already sending two B-52 bombers to fly through ADIZ without notifying China, New Delhi isn't keen to take a position on the issue.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... 58437.aspx

Sigh! When the PRC declares 'Southern Tibet' an ADIZ, the Khurshi#ts of the MEA will beg others on India's POV re AP

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21045
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Prem » 03 Dec 2013 06:29

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/02/world ... ted=2&_r=0
In the East China Sea, a Far Bigger Test of Power Looms
For China, it appears to be an effort by President Xi Jinping to exercise a degree of control over all sources of national power that his immediate predecessor, Hu Jintao, never fully mastered. Interestingly, as China sent its aircraft carrier to another potential trouble spot, the South China Sea, its path avoided the disputed islands, perhaps a sign that the Chinese realize they may have overplayed their hand. But one of Mr. Obama’s current advisers said, “It’s pretty clear this isn’t really about the islands.” Declining to speak on the record about a sensitive strategic issue, the official added that it was about a desire by some in China, including the People’s Liberation Army and perhaps the new political leadership, “to assert themselves in ways that until recently they didn’t have the military capability to make real.”
Mr. Obama’s immediate response was to send two unarmed B-52 bombers on what the Pentagon called “routine” runs over the territory; they were routine, but the timing and symbolism were lost on no one. Now the White House faces the more complex task of its longer-term response. To make the promise of his “Asian pivot” real, the president will have to convince Congress, and allies in the region, that he means to devote more military, diplomatic and economic attention there — not to contain China, he insists, but to preserve and extend America’s longtime role as a keeper of the peace in the Pacific. That will be challenging at a time of Pentagon budget cuts, a national mood to focus on problems at home and a national security apparatus focused on Iran, Syria and the future of the Middle East.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 03 Dec 2013 06:30

China's ADZ in East China Sea has to be seen in the overall context of its desire to control all sorts of navigation, whether it is the South or East China Sea. The INS Airavat incident was one such. In the ASEAN meetings or in the ARF in the last few years, almost all countries have insisted on 'freedom of navigation' and adherence to international laws by China. After the INS Airavat incident, China said, “Other countries can't denote one country's territory as global property”. That was why, Hillary Clinton referred to South China Sea as West Philippines Sea. We should expect that China sets up a similar ADZ over South China Sea very soon. While ADZ, per se, is legitimate, it is the rules of engagement that China announced that cause a problem.

The Chinese would like to win concessions all the time through threats and by upping the ante relentlessly. I believe that they may not deliberately go for a war against any country. They sense a grand informal alliance forming in the region and beyond against them. But, their game of escalatory upmanship is dangerous and can accidentally lead to an ugly spat.

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

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby paramu » 03 Dec 2013 07:54

Someone needs to tell PRC that before arbitrarily claiming ADZ of other's territories, like Senkaku islands, it should take physical possession of those area and then make the claim. Other countries will be be happy to oblige.

If they make arbitrary claims, and if they shoot down any aircraft for not following their claims will amount to declaration of war.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19329
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby chetak » 03 Dec 2013 11:11

Surrender in Beijing




Brahma Chellaney

Diplomacy, to be effective, must be backed by leverage and cross-linkages to minimise the weaker side's disadvantages and help maintain a degree of equilibrium in a bilateral relationship. The Indian leadership, however, has ignored that imperative, embracing diplomatic showmanship. Its engagement with China is bereft of even the first principle of diplomacy-reciprocity-thus allowing Beijing to reap a soaring trade surplus even as it undermines Indian interests. Showcasing the "success" of a bilateral summit takes precedence over safeguarding national interest-a "hug first, repent at leisure" approach.

Nothing can illustrate this better than the recent Beijing visit of Manmohan Singh, India's most-travelled prime minister ever. He returned with a completely hollow river-waters accord that effectively hands China a propaganda tool to blunt any Indian criticism of its dam-building spree in Tibet. Rarely before have two major countries signed an accord so steeped in empty rhetoric as this memorandum of understanding unveiled during Singh's visit. The accord, incorporating not a single Chinese commitment or anything tangible, seeks to pull the wool over the Indian public's eyes.

It is just a public relations text with only platitudes-that the "two sides recognised that trans-border rivers and related natural resources and the environment are assets of immense value"; that they "agreed that cooperation on trans-border rivers will further enhance mutual strategic trust and communication"; and that they also "agreed to further strengthen cooperation on trans-border rivers" and "exchange views on other issues of mutual interest". As if to add insult to injury, the accord even extracts India's "appreciation to China" for selling "flood-season hydrological data", although India provides such data free to downstream Pakistan and Bangladesh year-round.

Another much-trumpeted accord signed during the visit-the Chinese-dictated Border Defence Cooperation Agreement (BDCA)-contains nothing to halt the increasingly frequent Chinese border incursions or prevent a Depsang-style deep encroachment again. Defence Minister A.K. Antony has admitted this, saying the accord "does not mean nothing will happen" on the frontier. Beijing wanted a new accord to wipe the slate clean over its breaches of the border-peace agreements signed in 1993, 1996 and 2005. But why did India accede to the violator's demand for new border rules?

BDCA's provisions are so vaguely worded as to allow China-a master at reinterpreting texts-to cast the burden of compliance mainly on India. For example, Article II, without elaboration, calls for exchange of "information about military exercises, aircraft, demolition operations and unmarked mines". Does this mean that India must inform China about its military cargo flights to forward landing strips such as Daulat Beg Oldi and its demolition work to build Himalayan road tunnels?

Or take Article VI, which says minimally: "The two sides agree that they shall not follow or tail patrols of the other side in areas where there is no common understanding of the line of actual control (LAC)". The home ministry-administered Assam Rifles and Indo-Tibetan Border Police (not regular Army troops) that India timorously deploys to fend off the aggressive People's Liberation Army (PLA) have a defensive mindset and are in no position to tail the Chinese. But if PLA troops intrude and pitch tents, claiming they are on Chinese land, Beijing is likely to interpret this provision as barring Indian patrols from encircling them or setting up their own Depsang-style camp to keep an eye on the raiders.

Given China's claims on Indian territories and its refusal to even clarify the LAC, Article VI, in effect, ties only India's hands. No less suspect is Article VII, which gives either side the right to seek "clarification" from the other if "any activity" occurs in "areas where there is no common understanding" of the LAC. If India were to seek clarification over a Chinese penetration, it would likely get the stock reply that the "Chinese troops are on Chinese soil". Contrary to the pre-visit claim, BDCA contains no commitment to set up a hotline between the Indian and Chinese military headquarters; it only says the two sides "may consider" doing that.

Any Chinese leader combines an India stopover with a visit to his country's "all-weather ally", Pakistan, but a meek Singh declined to club his China visit with a trip to Japan or Vietnam. Singh, in fact, was in Beijing at the same time as the Russian and Mongolian premiers, with Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev beginning his Beijing trip while Singh was cooling his heels in Moscow on an official visit.

Yet, with the help of the planeload of journalists he takes with him on any overseas visit, Singh marketed his China trip as a major success. In truth, as the two accords attest, he willfully played into China's hands.


Brahma Chellaney is a geostrategist and author.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 03 Dec 2013 15:52

Biden to raise ADZ issue wiyh China: White House
U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden would convey the concerns of the America and its allies to China about its newly-declared air defense Zone in East China Sea, the White House has said.

“While a number of issues will be raised in the discussions he’ll have, given the increase in regional tensions, the Air Defence Identification Zone that China announced will be an issue the Vice-President will raise,” the White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on Monday said.

Mr. Biden is currently on a three-nation Asia trip taking him to Japan, South Korea and China.

“He has an excellent relationship with the leaders of all three countries, and he will underscore how important it is to avoid actions that raise tensions and to prevent miscalculations that could undermine peace, security and prosperity in the region,” Mr. Carney said.

The visit by the Vice-President is an opportunity for him to raise U.S. concerns directly with policymakers in Beijing and to seek clarity regarding the Chinese intentions in making this move at this time, he said.

“It is also an opportunity to confer with our allies, Japan and the Republic of Korea, both of whom are directly affected by China’s actions,” Mr. Carney said.

The US, he said, remains deeply concerned that China announced the establishment of an East China Sea Air Defence Identification Zone, that’s the ADIZ I mentioned earlier.

“This appears to be a provocative attempt to unilaterally change the status quo in the East China sea and thus raises regional tensions and increases the risk of miscalculation, confrontation, and accidents,” he said.

We are consulting and coordinating closely with Japan, the Republic of Korea, and our friends and allies in the region. China announced the ADIZ without prior consultations, even though the newly announced ADIZ overlaps with parts of the longstanding ADIZ’s of Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan, and includes territory administered by Japan,” he added.

The United States, he said, does not accept the legitimacy of China’s requirements for operating in the newly declared ADIZ.

“The fact that China’s announcement has caused confusion and increased the risk of accidents only further underscores the validity of our concerns and the need for China to rescind the procedures,” he said.

satya
BRFite
Posts: 717
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby satya » 03 Dec 2013 20:36

As per FP's daily brief : China is planning more ADIZs in its disputed border regions including one with India . Arunachal Pradesh maybe........ but what if its around Leh region .

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby member_22872 » 03 Dec 2013 20:51

There are ADIZ like zones in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh already. And we respect those "no go zones", they only need to ask us, we can move further south, doesnt matter whether it's land or air, even if it's our own land.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 12668
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Suraj » 04 Dec 2013 01:18

I find the entire thought-shaping process of reporting and discussion related to this ADIZ off eastern PRC fascinating. The bottomline is that PRC have grossly overplayed their hand here, something that receives very muted appreciation. Every single affected country - US, Japan and even SoKo, have explicitly violated it and said so in the press, as a statement of intent of what they think of it.

PRC is most welcome to dedicate multiple squadrons - ideally moved away from Lanzhou and Chengdu zones - to the eastern seaboard to scramble every time they see someone not responding to their ADIZ requirements. Both the US and JASDF, if not RoKAF as well, will be happy to constantly strain Chinese resources in this manner.

PRC cannot afford to maintain a cordon sanitaire around that area so far from shore, much less add additional ones, without draining their resources substantially. That area is in any case astride one of the most busiest commercial aviation regions. Their cost of maintaining this, or better yet, more ADIZs, is far greater than the cost of their neighbors to consistently violate it.

It provides an excellent opportunity for the IAF to constantly test them, in a manner analogous to how they do so on land on the borders. This time it is *they* who have specified a line, and in the process imposed the costs of every breach of that line, upon themselves. The constant loss of face, in addition to the cost of scrambling against each violation, will be their liability here.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 04 Dec 2013 12:44

US Backs Japan against ADIZ: Biden - Japan Times
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe received the assurance of visiting U.S. Vice President Joe Biden Tuesday that Washington stands behind Japan as it responds to China’s recent declaration of an air defense identification zone in the East China Sea that encompasses the Japan-administered Senkaku Islands.

During their 85 minutes meeting in Tokyo, Abe and Biden agreed that they won’t accept China’s recent establishment of the ADIZ and Japan and the U.S. will cooperate closely to deal with the issue.

“The U.S. is deeply concerned by the attempt to unilaterally change the status quo in the East China Sea. This action has raised regional tension and increased the risk of accident and miscalculation,” Biden said at a joint news conference held following their talks.

“The world should not forget that our alliances have been critical to the stability that has made this region’s remarkable progress possible. And I told the prime minister that we will remain steadfast in our alliance commitment,” Biden said, adding that he will discuss the issue directly with the Chinese leadership when he goes to Beijing on Wednesday.

Abe said operations by the Self-Defense Forces and the U.S. military won’t change because of China’s ADIZ.

“We further agreed that we will not condone any action that could threaten the safety of civilian aircraft,” he said.

rajrang
BRFite
Posts: 415
Joined: 24 Jul 2006 08:08

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby rajrang » 04 Dec 2013 12:47

Cosmo_R wrote:"Walking a tightrope, India has kept a studied silence over China's announcement of an Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea while stepping up engagement with regional countries that don't see Beijing's rise as benign."

Though the possibility of long-term strategic tensions are brewing with the US already sending two B-52 bombers to fly through ADIZ without notifying China, New Delhi isn't keen to take a position on the issue.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... 58437.aspx

Sigh! When the PRC declares 'Southern Tibet' an ADIZ, the Khurshi#ts of the MEA will beg others on India's POV re AP


India (loudly with trademark pontification) excluded itself from any alliance against China during then Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's visit to India in June 2012. So, India then chose to deal with China alone. (Shortly thereafter, as is customary, China returned the favor with the Deep Sang incident.) The US seems to have taken India at its word and statements or lack thereof from US leaders would appear to reflect this acceptance. This is also aligned with recent Japanese assurances (to China) that the visit of the Japanese monarchy to India is not directed at China. (If this status was corrected during PM MMS's recent visit to the US, there is no evidence in the press thus far. This is unlikely, given the present Indian government's skill sets being relatively more economics in nature and less in statecraft.)

India's position is unethical. China is bullying its neighbors in Asia including India. Being a big country India perhaps (?) has the option of standing up to China and dealing with it alone. Other countries in Asia are less fortunate because they are smaller (Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan, S. Korea). They need friends and allies to deal with China. By not helping them (albeit in collaboration with the US and Japan), India will be abdicating its moral responsibility as a big country, even in its immediate neighborhood. India has chosen to focus on its (short term) self-interest only and stay away from any leadership role.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 04 Dec 2013 12:48

Biden Urges Chinese Youth to Challenge Authority - Straits Times
US Vice President Joe Biden is opening a visit to China by urging Chinese students to challenge their government, teachers and religious leaders.

Just after arriving in Beijing, Biden paid a surprise visit to the consular section of the US Embassy in Beijing, where Chinese citizens were waiting to get visas to visit the US.

Biden says the US is able to remake itself because Americans reject orthodoxy. He says the only way you make something new is to break the mold of what's old.

Biden says American children are rewarded instead of punished for challenging the status quo. His comments seem to allude to the authoritarian rule of China's government.


SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 04 Dec 2013 14:17

NightWatch For the night of 3 December 2013
South Korea: The government in Seoul announced that it will soon confirm a new air defense zone that expands farther southward.
Comment: South Korea is no longer intimidated by China or North Korea. The Chinese and North Korean leaders continue to replay old tapes, meaning South Korea today is not the South Korea of 1953.

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby johneeG » 04 Dec 2013 14:36

SSridhar wrote:
Acharya wrote:India has to issue similar statement on all policy of Tibet and all govt action in Tibet by PRC.


The problem there is we were too quick to have recognized (and reiterated repeatedly over the decades) that Tibet was an autonomous region of PRC. We got nothing (or not much) in return for this huge concession apart from, of course, the point that we not only did an injustice to the Tibetans but also failed to preserve our own self interest. The GoI finds itself, therefore, in a big bind.


There is no bind, saar. If you move piece forward on the board, you can take it back as well. There is no reason to cling on to some mythical h&d. If the chins have not reciprocated, then the dhesh should simply reverse the stand on Tibet and go back to the original stand. What I don't understand is why there is no talk on that front? Why no one is talking of going back to the original stand on Tibet?

rajrang
BRFite
Posts: 415
Joined: 24 Jul 2006 08:08

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby rajrang » 04 Dec 2013 20:58

SSridhar wrote:NightWatch For the night of 3 December 2013
South Korea: The government in Seoul announced that it will soon confirm a new air defense zone that expands farther southward.
Comment: South Korea is no longer intimidated by China or North Korea. The Chinese and North Korean leaders continue to replay old tapes, meaning South Korea today is not the South Korea of 1953.


I love the guts that South Korea is showing. They seem to have been emboldened by strong US statements during VP Biden's visit in Japan.

Again, neither South Korea, Japan or the US have to deal with reprisals from the PLA - i.e. NOT sharing a land border with China. This is a good fortune unfortunately India (as well as Russia and Vietnam) do not have. Extending this train of thought, if hypothetically India did not share a land border with China, then with its air force and navy, India could easily tell China to " shut up get lost."

member_19686
BRFite
Posts: 1330
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby member_19686 » 05 Dec 2013 02:32

Australia investigates suspected Chinese spy at top science centre
SYDNEY Tue Dec 3, 2013 10:13pm GMT

(Reuters) - Australia is investigating a suspected espionage case at the country's top scientific organization, with a Chinese national being probed for allegedly accessing sensitive data, Fairfax Media reported on Wednesday.

The case may further test relations with China after the Australian foreign minister called in the Chinese ambassador to Canberra last week to ask for an explanation for a new air defence zone unilaterally set up by China in disputed international waters.

Australian federal police and security agencies are investigating a Chinese national, who until last week worked at the Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organization, Fairfax reported.

"CSIRO became aware of a matter involving an employee suspected of unauthorised use of CSIRO computers," the organization's spokesman Huw Morgan told Reuters in an email.

"We consider this a very serious matter and have referred it to the Australian Federal Police. It is not appropriate for us to release any further details at this time," he said.

Police said an investigation was underway but that no one had been arrested.

The Chinese man under investigation is a post-doctoral student at the highly sensitive nanotechnology laboratory in Melbourne, Fairfax reported, without naming him.

The CSIRO's nanotechnology area works closely with Australia's Defence Science and Technology Organisation.


(Reporting by Maggie Lu Yueyang; editing by Christopher Wilson)

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/12/0 ... =BRE9B218G

Canada charges man over 'bid to spy for China'

Canadian police have arrested and charged a man on suspicion of intending to pass classified information to China.

The Canadian national, named as Qing Quentin Huang, is accused of seeking to sell information about Canada's warship procurement strategy.

Mr Huang, 53, had worked for a firm involved in ship design, police said. He was thought to have acted alone.


The maximum sentence for the charges he faces is life imprisonment.

Advantage
Mr Huang, from Waterdown, Ontario, was arrested in Toronto on Saturday, two days after police were informed of suspicions about his activities.

He was working as an engineer for Lloyd's Register, a company sub-contracted by Canada's biggest shipbuilder, Irving Shipbuilding, police said.

Irving won a 2011 contract to supply military vessels for Canada's Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships (AOPS) but Lloyd's Register said he had no direct access to any classified information regarding that work.

Mr Huang faced two charges of attempting to communicate with a foreign entity, Police Superintendent Jennifer Strachan told reporters.

"In these types of cases, sharing of information may give a foreign entity a tactical, military or competitive advantage by knowing the specifications of vessels responsible for defending Canadian waters and Canadian sovereignty," she told a news conference.

She gave no details of the information Mr Huang was accused of trying to supply China with.

He is expected to appear in court on Wednesday for a bail hearing.

Last February, Canadian naval intelligence officer Jeffrey Paul Delisle was given a 20-year jail term for selling military secrets to Russia.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-25179250

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21045
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Prem » 05 Dec 2013 06:11

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/12 ... catskills/
Mysterious China-themed 'city' proposed in New York’s Catskills

U.S. immigration officials are considering a proposal from Chinese investors to create a multibillion-dollar development in New York’s Catskills called "China City" -- raising concerns among critics about the potential cost to U.S. taxpayers and, according to one analyst, the possibility it could be a "stalking horse" for the Beijing government.
A spokesman from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services told FoxNews.com that the proposal for Thompson, N.Y., has not been approved but is under consideration.The mysterious proposed development appears to be a step beyond the types of ethnic enclaves scattered throughout U.S. cities, like the Chinatown sections of New York City or San Francisco. The 600-acre "China City of America" is located far outside New York City in upstate New York's wetlands and is a meticulously planned project, calling for family housing, a college and student residences, among other structures. In addition to needing federal approval, it would likely need a host of state and local permits before ground could be broken.

If approved, every province in China would have an office there and foreign investors funding the development would receive green cards for their $500,000 checks under the EB-5 program designed to lure foreign investment, according to the Center for Immigration Studies, a conservative organization staunchly opposed to the project.A detailed report authored by David North, a fellow with the Washington-based group, claimed there is "a charge from within the Chinese community that China City is a stalking horse for the Chinese communist government in Beijing." He claimed he was told one group raised objections with the USCIS

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 05 Dec 2013 17:37

China Gives No Ground to Biden in ADIZ Dispute - Japan Times
Giving no ground, Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. Vice President Joe Biden traded strong arguments Wednesday over China’s contentious new air defense zone, with no indication of progress toward defusing a situation that is raising anxieties across Asia and beyond.

Though Biden made clear the deep concern of the U.S. and other countries during the 5½ hours of talks — themselves highly unusual for an American vice president and Chinese president — Xi vigorously made his case, too, for China’s declaration of new rules concerning a strip of airspace more than 950 km long above disputed islands in the East China Sea.

The U.S. worries that China’s demand that pilots entering the airspace file flight plans with Beijing could lead to an accident or a confrontation spiraling dangerously out of control. Now it is up to the Chinese to take steps to lower tensions, and “it’s a question of behavior and action,” said a U.S. official, who briefed reporters on the private talks.

The official was not authorized to be quoted by name and spoke only on condition of anonymity.

Though Biden expressed no disappointment in public remarks, the outcome of his visit was not what the U.S. might have hoped for.

A day earlier, the vice president had stood shoulder to shoulder in Tokyo with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, pledging to raise Washington’s concerns with Xi directly. But as he arrived in Beijing, an editorial in the state-run China Daily charged Washington with “turning a blind eye to Tokyo’s provocations,” warning that Biden would hit a dead end should he come “simply to repeat his government’s previous erroneous and one-sided remarks.”

Late Wednesday in Washington, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel called China’s announcement of the zone “destabilizing” and complained that it had come “so unilaterally and so immediately without any consultation.”

“That’s not a wise course of action to take for any country,” Hagel said at a Pentagon news conference.


Neither Biden nor Xi mentioned the dispute as they appeared briefly before reporters at the end of their first round of talks. But in private, the issue came up at length at the beginning and again near the end of the long-planned meeting, senior Obama administration officials said.

The typically upbeat Biden appeared subdued as he reflected on the complexity of the relationship between China and the U.S., two world powers seeking closer ties despite wide ideological gulfs they have as of yet been unable to bridge.

“This new model of major-country cooperation ultimately has to be based on trust, and a positive notion about the motive of one another,” Biden said, flanked by top advisers in a resplendent meeting room steps away from Tiananmen Square.

The calibrated public comments played down the deep strains permeating the relationship between the world’s two largest economies.

Earlier, however, Biden told Chinese youngsters waiting to get visitor visas processed at the U.S. Embassy that American children are rewarded rather than punished for challenging the status quo, an implicit criticism of the Chinese government’s authoritarian rule.

“I hope you learn that innovation can only occur where you can breathe free, challenge the government, challenge religious leaders.” Biden said.

Xi, for his part, stuck to the script — at least in public. The Chinese leader touted the benefits of closer U.S.-China ties as he laid out “profound and complex changes” under way in Asia and across the globe.

“The world, as a whole, is not tranquil,” Xi said.

Behind closed doors, Xi made his own case for why China’s action to establish the air zone is appropriate, said the U.S. administration officials, who weren’t authorized to comment by name and demanded anonymity. Xi listened earnestly as Biden presented his own arguments, the officials said, but it was unclear what impact there might have been.

The simmering dispute over the tiny islands and the airspace above them has trailed Biden throughout his weeklong trip to Asia. After meeting with China’s premier and speaking to business leaders Thursday, he will fly to Seoul in South Korea — another neighbor whose air defense zone now overlaps with China’s.

American officials say as far as Washington is concerned China’s newly claimed zone doesn’t exist, and the U.S. military has flown B-52 bombers through it to drive the point home. But U.S guidance to commercial pilots to abide by the airspace rules has rankled Japan and other allies, who urged the U.S. to stand firm against China as Biden headed to the region.

The Obama administration sees China’s move as part of a broader strategy to solidify its claims to territory as the country asserts its power more vigorously in the region. Wary that nationalist sentiments in China may preclude Xi from backing down now that he’s established the zone, Washington has sought to persuade Beijing to quietly refrain from enforcing it, nullifying it in practice if not in deed.

“Xi has no room on this, at least right now,” said Victor Cha, who headed Asian affairs for the White House National Security Council in the George W. Bush administration. “Maybe the space will come later in terms of enforcement of the zone, but now they are butting heads on the issue, and the Chinese see us as carrying too much of Japan’s water.”

The U.S. has also urged China not to implement new zones over other disputed territories, as China has already claimed it has the right to do. Defending such actions, Chinese officials point out that other countries including Japan and the U.S. have similar defense zones over their lands.

Japan and China both claim the islands in the East China Sea. The U.S. takes no position but recognizes that Japan administers them. China is entangled in other disputes as well, including a long-running argument with the Philippines over islands in the South China Sea.

Tensions between the U.S. and China were temporarily glossed over earlier when Biden arrived here for an elaborate welcoming ceremony in Beijing’s Great Hall of the People. Chinese Vice President Li Yuanchao greeted his American counterpart with an elaborate honor guard and a military band that played the two countries’ national anthems, as Biden and Xi stood together on a platform above the massive hall’s marble floors and crisscrossing red carpets.

rajrang
BRFite
Posts: 415
Joined: 24 Jul 2006 08:08

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby rajrang » 05 Dec 2013 20:14

SSridhar wrote:China Gives No Ground to Biden in ADIZ Dispute - Japan Times

Wary that nationalist sentiments in China may preclude Xi from backing down now that he’s established the zone, Washington has sought to persuade Beijing to quietly refrain from enforcing it, nullifying it in practice if not in deed.

“Xi has no room on this, at least right now,” said Victor Cha, who headed Asian affairs for the White House National Security Council in the George W. Bush administration.



Unlikely explanation. China is a dictatorship. Dictators do not care about public opinion. Perhaps a loss of face for themselves and their country. These are simply excuses to avoid catching the bull (China) by the horns.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19885
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Philip » 05 Dec 2013 20:16

Great new Chinese "take away","annexation of air space"!

The arrogant and outrageous behaviour of the scumbags and intestinal parasites of Zhongnanhai ,latter-day warmongerers of Asia,in their illegal and dangerous "annexation" of air space over disputed islands,has attracted worldwide alarm and criticism.If the Chinese do not withdraw,there is every likelihood of a spat with the Japanese,which the US is desperately trying to avoid.However,the Middle Kingdom which places itself above all other nations on the planet,is sabre rattling to the extreme and endangering the peace of the Asia-Pacific region which is the globe's economic powerhouse today.The PRC gambit has to be stopped in its tracks and one easy way to kick the PRC hotheads is to boycott Chinese goods by Asian nations.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/d ... a-air-zone
Joe Biden holds 'very direct' talks with Chinese leadership on disputed air zone
US vice-president warns Beijing of 'significant apprehension in region' after annexing of skies over disputed islands

Joe Biden, the US vice-president, with Premier Li Keqiang of China during talks in Beijing. Photograph: Andy Wong/AFP/Getty

China's new air defence zone over the East China Sea has caused significant unease, Joe Biden said in Beijing on Thursday, adding that he had been "very direct" in his meetings with the Chinese president.

There was little indication of progress on the issue following the US vice-president's five hours of discussions with Xi Jinping on Wednesday during the middle leg of a trip to Japan, China and South Korea that has been dominated by the row. Neither man mentioned the dispute when they appeared before reporters briefly during the talks.

"China's recent and sudden announcement of the establishment of a new air defence identification zone has, to state the obvious, caused significant apprehension in the region," Biden told US executives in Beijing.

"I was very direct about our firm position and our expectations in my conversations with President Xi."

He noted that China's stake in regional stability was growing as its economy developed, increasing its responsibility to contribute to peace and security. "That means taking steps to reduce the risk of accidental conflict and miscalculation ... and refraining from taking steps that would increase tension," Biden said.

The vice-president strongly criticised pressure on foreign media, saying the US had "profound disagreements" with China over the treatment of American journalists. The websites of Bloomberg and the New York Times have been blocked since they ran stories on the family wealth of leaders and a Bloomberg journalist travelling with David Cameron was excluded from a Beijing event this week, prompting the prime minister to complain directly to Xi.

The foreign ministry later told reporters it had sought to ensure there were sufficient spaces for Chinese and British media.

Biden said: "Innovation thrives where people breathe freely, speak freely, are able to challenge orthodoxy, where newspapers can report the truth without fear of consequences."

The vice-president later met the premier, Li Keqiang. He is due to fly to Seoul later in the day for talks with leaders there.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13271
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby Lalmohan » 05 Dec 2013 21:30

US needs to signal its intent, but sailing a CBG around Japan and Korea, and more importantly by outing some Chinese spies (ritually) and cutting some trade

member_19686
BRFite
Posts: 1330
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby member_19686 » 05 Dec 2013 22:54

THROUGH METOK, CHINA TUNNELS ITS WAY TO INDIA
Thursday, 05 December 2013 | Claude Arpi | in Edit

Beijing has been trying to set up transport connectivity to the remote Tibetan region, close to the McMahon line, for long. It has now succeeded, and with immense consequences for the defence of Arunachal Pradesh

A Chinese website affiliated with the official Xinhua news agency, China Tibet Online, recently gave what it calls ‘fast facts on controversial Arunachal Pradesh’: “The recent Indian President’s visit to the so-called Arunachal Pradesh has triggered the controversial discussion of border issue between China and India again”. Commenting on President Pranab Mukherjee’s visit to Arunachal, Xinhua said that Beijing ‘urged’ India “to refrain from moves that complicate boundary issues and work with China to create conditions for talks”. The claims and the counter-claims aside, an important aspect of the border dispute is the infrastructure development close to the McMahon Line. Here the Chinese are far in advance of India.

As Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao landed in Delhi in December 2010, Xinhua dropped a bombshell: “The tunnel of highway linking Tibet’s Metok completed”. With Metok located just north of the McMahon Line, this development heralded one of the most important strategic changes for the defence of India’s north-eastern border.

The enormity of the project was obvious; construction workers had taken some two years to complete the construction of the 3,310m Galongla tunnel, built at an altitude of 3,750m. It was the most difficult section of the highway which was to link Metok County to the mainland (and allow troops to come close to the Indian border in a much shorter time). The rain and the snow made the mountain roads impassable for nine months of the year, and the trek to cross the Galongla pass could take 10 hours or more: “The new road will dramatically shorten the time as the journey through the tunnel will take just half an hour,” announced Xinhua. At that time, some 90km of highway remained to be built. The Metok road is the symbol of China’s will to develop its border with India. With a population of just 11,000, it was not only China’s last county to have a highway, but the road is a crucial link to the area bordering the Upper Siang district of Arunachal Pradesh.

For Tibetans, it has been one of the most sacred and pristine regions of their country; they consider Pemakoe, another name for Metok County, as the home of Goddess Dorjee Pagmo, Tibet’s Protecting Deity. Xinhua admits: “There is no other place in Tibet that gets so many titles as Metok, such as the ‘secret lotus’, ‘lonely island on the plateau’, ‘world’s wildlife museum’ and ‘rare animal gene pool’.”

But the Pemakoe is not an isolated paradise anymore. On October 31, China Tibet Online reported that the 117km Metok Highway had been opened to traffic. CNTV affirmed that the people in Metok country can now reach the highway linking their remote place to the nearby Bomi County by cars or buses; if the weather conditions are good, the journey takes hardly seven to eight hours. The Chinese correspondent added: “Getting out of Metok (Medog for the Chinese) used to be very dangerous, involving climbing two snow mountains 4,000 meters above sea level.” When the Bomi-Metok road joins the National Highway No 318 near Zhamog township, it has already crossed six rivers.

Xinhua explained: “Great efforts have been made by the Government to build a highway to link Metok and Bomi counties since 1960s”. Again, an attempt was made in 1974 and it failed. In 1980, a landslide occurred 106km away from the starting point; most of the newly-built road was devastated and many trucks and road-building equipment could not be rescued. The project was again abandoned. It re-started in 1990 and though in February1994, a kutcha road had been completed and vehicles managed to enter Metok, they never came back because of disastrous landslides and mudslides. A monument has even been built to commemorate China’s ‘shortest life’ road.

The road is even connected to Xi Jinping’s ‘Chinese Dream’: “The opening of the highway to Metok is far more than a technological breakthrough… Above all, it is the Chinese dream fulfilled after several failed attempts over the past 50 years. The opening of the highway is bound to boost the socio-economic development of Metok”.

One could, however, ask why so much effort? The answer is simple: The new road can be used by the People’s Liberation Army to reinforce the border with India. China Tibet Online quotes Agence France-Presse as saying that the new road has “touched a nerve in some of the so-called critics of Beijing’s rule in Tibet”; the latter believe that “infrastructure such as railways and airports enable immigration by the ethnic Han majority, exploitation of Tibet’s resources and consolidation of political control.”

This is an indisputable fact. An article in China Military Online published on September 11 said: “PLA sends materials to Metok, Tibet, by use of motorcades”, adding: “A motorcade regiment under the Sichuan-Tibet Military Service Station Department left for Metok county in the south-eastern part of the Tibet Autonomous Region. It admitted that it was the first time that the PLA had dispatched motorcades for delivering materials to Metok county.”

Two months before the official opening of the road for civilian use, the Chinese army was already bringing supplies for the troops stationed near the Indian border in the Metok area. The PLA’s website acknowledges that earlier Metok had to “rely on horsebacks and occasional helilifts”. Director of the Sichuan-Tibet Military Service Station Department Pang Kuo told Xinhua: “It used to take the ‘hinny fleet’ more than two months to provide the yearly ration of staple and non-staple food for officers and men posted in Metok. Now it takes only one trip of the motorcade to supply enough materials the troops need for a whole winter”.

Xinhua may poetically say that “without doubt the Metok road is the road of wealth, the road of hope and the road of happiness. Local people will experience unprecedented convenience in their daily life; the culture, tourism and agriculture of Metok are bound to thrive due to this road” and that the highway “embodies the Chinese dream for the benefit of its people and reflects the mutual aspirations of all ethnic groups”. But the fact remains that the PLA will be the first beneficiary. India has to wake up.

Lately, the Chinese have become increasingly assertive (not to say aggressive). The latest example is when the Chinese Ministry of National Defense announced the establishment of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone. Beijing has taken a controversial and dangerous course, destabilising the region and upsetting its neighbours.

In India, we still remember the events in April, when the People’s Liberation Army planted their tents in the Depsang Plain of Ladakh. Better be prepared!

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/ ... india.html

member_19686
BRFite
Posts: 1330
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby member_19686 » 05 Dec 2013 23:05

Shipwrecks are China’s latest approach to claiming disputed territory
By Gwynn Guilford @sinoceros December 2, 2013

China has many ways of tackling its goal of stretching its territorial claims in the waters off its coasts. One is by air: declaring a new aerial zone. Another is by sea: using its control over shipwreck excavation, as this fascinating Wall Street Journal piece explores (paywall).

Take, for instance, the 2012 French-Filipino exploration of a 13th-century Chinese shipwreck in waters that the Philippines and China both now claim, which Chinese naval authorities drove the team from the area, saying the waters belonged to China.

This is the first time one country had invoked force to block another country’s archaeological excavation in the region, as the WSJ reports. The incident came after China announced a crackdown on illegal salvage of historical shipwrecks in its territorial waters. While international law is unclear about how countries should deal with projects in disputed waters, the United Nations recommends joint excavations. However, China has allowed almost no foreign involvement, reports the WSJ.

There’s more than potentially lucrative archaeological findings or the right to control disputed waters behind this crackdown. The submerged remains of Chinese vessels offer evidence for territorial claims.

That’s a major reason why China has ramped up investment in underwater archaeology, investing billions of yuan (link in Chinese) in salvage operations and museums. Government support of underwater cultural heritage projects are explicitly geared toward coordinating “national territorial sovereignty” (link in Chinese).

As the WSJ articles notes, part of the focus on the shipwrecks of the fleets of Zheng He, a Ming dynasty eunuch admiral and China’s most renowned maritime explorer, is due to his having visited islands in disputed waters. Already, government-sponsored projects involving the Paracel Islands, which China seized from Vietnam in 1974, explain that the shipwrecks offer archaeological proof that the Song Dynasty (960-1279 AD) claimed the islands. China also invokes archaeological evidence to boost its claims to the Spratly Islands (pdf p.2), an archipelago rich in oil and natural gas that Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam all claim as well.

Image
The patchwork of territorial claims in the South China Seas.​southchinaseastudies.org

In fact, Chinese officials make these territorial concerns explicit.

“The Philippines sent some French archaeologists to do what? To drag away this shipwreck,” Liu Shuguang, head of China’s Center of Underwater Cultural Heritage, told the WSJ. “Because this was material evidence that Chinese people first found the Scarborough Shoal [the name of the disputed area], they wanted to destroy evidence that was beneficial to China.”

China’s zeal for shipwreck excavation also helps galvanize public support for China’s muscle-flexing in disputed waters. Take, for instance, the Parcels shipwreck exhibition at the Beijing’s Capital Museum: ”China’s sovereignty over the islands of the South China Seas have been formed over a long period of historical development,” says the exhibition summary (link in Chinese). “This exhibition will open the door to public recognition and understanding of China’s southern waters, and make us reflect anew on the historical and cultural underpinnings of this piece of maritime territory.”

http://qz.com/152716/shipwrecks-are-chi ... territory/

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 07 Dec 2013 08:41

NightWatch For the night of 5 December 2013

China-US:
Comment: When world powers disagree on an issue they tend to spotlight minor points, such as treatment of journalists. While that is important, it does not threaten conflict in the same way as scrambling fighter jets in an air defense identification zone, which China has done. The Chinese made no compromises to the US Vice President about their declaration of an air defense identification zone. The Vice President said he was very direct with the Chinese, but North Korea and economic issues appear to have been more prominent in the talks, based on the press coverage.. The Chinese seldom admit mistakes, almost never issue retractions and would never compromise on a national sovereignty issue for the US or any other nation. The Biden visit was mostly for show. Nothing serious appears to have been accomplished, which should surprise no one.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 07 Dec 2013 16:20

US Senators to Chinese Ambassador: Senkakus under Japanese Control - Japan Times
A bipartisan group of senators sent a letter to the Chinese ambassador to the United States on Thursday that criticizes Beijing’s establishment of an air defense identification zone and recognizes the Senkaku Islands as being under Japanese control.

The four members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, including Chairman Robert Menendez, said in the letter to Cui Tiankai that they view the unilateral ADIZ declaration as “an ill-conceived attempt to alter the status quo.”

“China’s declaration of an ADIZ over areas of the East China Sea does not alter the U.S. acknowledgement of Japan’s administrative control over the Senkaku Islands,” the letter said.

The senators include Bob Corker, the ranking Republican on the committee.

The senators took the action because of the U.S. government’s strong reaction to the ADIZ, which overlaps similar zones previously set up by Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.

“This declaration reinforces the perception that China prefers coercion over rule of law mechanisms to address territorial, sovereignty or jurisdictional issues in the Asia-Pacific,” the letter said.

Given that China is involved in territorial disputes in the South China Sea with countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam, the senators urged Beijing not to implement the ADIZ and to “refrain from taking similar provocative actions elsewhere in the region.”

The Senate unanimously adopted a resolution in July that condemned “the use of coercion, threats or force” in the South China Sea and the East China Sea to assert disputed maritime or territorial claims or alter the status quo.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23589
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat

Postby SSridhar » 07 Dec 2013 16:23

US Requests China Hotline to Defuse ADZ Tensions - Japan Times
The United States urged China Friday to set up an emergency hotline with Japan and South Korea to avoid confusion in its newly declared airspace.

Washington does not recognize Beijing’s air defense identification zone, which extends over the East China Sea and islands in dispute with Japan and Taiwan, and has called on China to get rid of it.

“As we work through this process, they need to do a few things right now to immediately lower tensions,” deputy State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said.

“China should work with other countries, including Japan and South Korea, to establish confidence-building measures, including emergency communications channels to address the dangers that its recent announcement has created,” she added.

Harf said one of the potential dangers was that because the ADIZ overlaps airspace administered by other countries, Beijing had “created a situation in which two different authorities claim to give orders to civilian aircraft, which could potentially create confusion.”

It “creates a destabilizing dynamic, which could compel China’s neighbors to take further actions to respond,” she told reporters.

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said during a visit to Beijing Thursday that regional peace and stability were in China’s interests.

“As China’s economy grows, its stake in regional peace and stability will continue to grow as well, because it has so much more to lose,” he said.

“That’s why China will bear increasing responsibility to contribute positively to peace and security.”

Harf said while there was no treaty governing how nations set up such air zones, “there are established practices of states to ensure the safety of civil and state aircraft.”

As a regional power, Beijing must seek “to reduce the risk of accidental conflict and miscalculation, to not do things that raise tensions in the region, to act responsibly,” she added.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 63 guests