Managing Chinese Threat

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 30 Apr 2013 17:52

There is a new issue of "Frontline" scheduled to be out today. My feeling is that A.Noorani or some other writer will pen a silly piece that blames India more than China for the recent spat. But it will carry a balancing remark that China is not entirely blameless. Save us from these jackass commentators.

Virendra · Post by **Virendra** » 30 Apr 2013 18:09

Please use only the following url/thread to discuss anything related to this recent incursion - http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... f=1&t=6580

The current thread is more generic in nature and so the discussion has moved on that new thread.
Thanks for co-operation.

Regards,
Virendra

Rajiv Lather · Post by **Rajiv Lather** » 30 Apr 2013 18:29

I have a different take on this. The Chinese are no fools, to get into firefights with South Korea, Japan, India, Vietnam and Philippines, and that too simultaneously. And in the media it sure is being played out like this, but look at the economy of effort.

Thirty soldiers pitching tents in Ladakh, couple of patrol boats to circle disputed islands near Japan, tourist boats to islands in dispute with Philippines, Ding Dong in North Korea moving ballistic missiles from one place to another. What is the cost of all these antics for the Chinese, where they seem to be ready to take on half the world ?

So while I do want the Chinese soldiers to be pushed out and for India to keep on improving its capabilities - I see all such Chinese moves as feints.

The Chinese are moving and preparing to take over Taiwan, before the Americans get out of their numerous wars and before they complete their so-called Asia-Pacific pivot. This will, in all probability start from within Taiwan, there being lots of Beijing sympathizers, and then the Chinese military will make their move.

Even otherwise, let us be practical, Chinese are not in a position to fight a full-fledged war with India, with their supply lines stretched all over Tibet, and nor can they take on the Japanese Navy at least in the next five years or so. To imagine Chinese being ready to fight with all these countries simultaneously is laughable.

If I was a Chinese planner, the game-plan would be to block all other fronts and go for Taiwan and once that is complete, to deal with South Korea.

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 30 Apr 2013 18:52

Even with their current hardware they cannot take on even Vietnam. Surely the others will gang up on China, scenting the best time to take on the dragon, even "holding" these countries will be impossible.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 30 Apr 2013 19:35

Please can we get back to the breast beating and the breathless 'sky is falling' reactions.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 30 Apr 2013 19:48

Ticker on tv was saying cheen is now claiming dbo. Not sure whats the source...

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 Apr 2013 21:23

@nitingokhale: China offers to disengage from current face off site. India says will consider if China agrees to withdrew fully. This during 3rd flag meet

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 30 Apr 2013 21:24

"If I was a Chinese planner, the game-plan would be to block all other fronts and go for Taiwan and once that is complete, to deal with South Korea."

I loath to even think along the lines of "If I was Chinese...". Simply because there is nothing elevating, progressive, just or ethical about what the Chinese are doing. It's almost like speculating "If I was a Nazi" or "If I was a Spanish Conquistador". After my stomach turns, I get off that line of thinking! Empire, domination, control, territory and subjugation is all one can really see here.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 01 May 2013 07:14

We have claims on parts of Tibet, and if it is a matter of deciding between who has greater claims over all of Tibet - we have much more than plains China. To h*** with legitimacy or precedence.

The reason that the Sinophiles [just as the Pakiphiles, Islamophiles, etc] have been so successful within the Indian establishment is the apparent fear that China will recognize "indep" J&K. This happens because India does not raise the stakes high right from the beginning - by claiming much more than that which is even preposterous otherwise.

We should claim large chunks of Chinese occupied territory and make them "disputed". Every "dispute" China recognizes in favour of enemies of India, should be countered by expanding the "dispute" list from Indian side.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 01 May 2013 12:54

Forgot to mention the US had attacked the Chinese PLA 3rd division (cyber). The Chinese are pretty embarrassed about it. Apparently their comms were shut down for some time. Happened 2 weeks ago

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 01 May 2013 13:16

I am wondering whether the Chinese are so belligerent because they have elite by the balls due to deposits in Macau and the elite feel giving up Indian land fopr safety of deposit is more important?

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 01 May 2013 14:08

Not to say much , though in recent times Pakis did Kargil to us by occupying posts and heights on J&K LOC and the Govt of the day was quite successful in many respects and evicted them. Now China does a Chargil on DBO sector ( and God knows where else) and see the response of present day Govt. Two Singhs met to decide ~~to offer GUBO to Chinese~~ on various options to be considered by China Study Group in consultation with PeeamOh when they are not busy with handling coalgate for brighter smile.
http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/in ... 45803.html

Amid indications that China may not retreat from Ladakh, Indian Army Chief General Bikram Singh met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Wednesday.

Gen Singh met the PM at his official residence 7 Race Course Road in the national capital. The Army Chief also brifed the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) on the issue.

All the options suggested to the China Study Group are being looked at carefully and other stakeholders in the situation have also given their inputs.

The China Study Group is handling the whole issue in consultation with the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) and the Defence Ministry.

The Army had rushed its troops from the 5 Ladakh Scouts battalion to the DBO area and they are camping there. The force is also considering the option of dispatching additional troops if the need arises. ( what happened to border surveillance every time they get caught with pants down)

My CT is that two or three days before Karnataka polling Chinese might withdraw their 50 soldiers picnicking on Indian side under pressure of roar of Mickey Mouse and hapless Indians be presented with massive diplomatic victory and a swing in sentiments at least in Karnataka.

member_19648 · Post by **member_19648** » 01 May 2013 15:02

C,

I don't think its the army's fault. The particular area under question is manned by ITBP and Army was quite upset about the failure. Having said that, there was a news report that the incursion was restricted through the quick response from ITBP/Army. Now, the other side of the LAC is not heavily manned too, because China is quite over confident and they have the infra to rush in troops. So, the same monkey business can be done by India too on the other side, but India lacks the intention which is fair enough. As for the response, it should have come in the early days hen diplomacy was not involved, there could have been a quick response to evict the aliens and then diplomacy could have taken care of the rest. Now it has turned totally diplomatic and the Indian diplomats would get 0 in handling the situation. Getting the Chinese out without conceding to their demands seems very improbable now unless IA has a plan.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 01 May 2013 15:34

I know that the whole sector is manned by ITBP in peacetime. I remarked about surveillance. However preparedness of ITBP as well as Army is in question itself. if I am not mistaken few months back Jawans and Officers fought with each other in Ladakh Sector and certainly Chinese would have noticed.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 01 May 2013 16:40

Bji, i have said this before. Our GoI and functionaries are selected for aptitude that enhances the status quo. These make the myriad bureacracy in India including in FP circles. That has translated into a thinking that translates dispute==war. Thus we have to reduce 'dispute'. Whereas after witnessing Chinese obduracy in TIbet for over 60 years we should have realized that something is fundamentally wrong with that status quo'ist assumptions we have played all along with. Reducing 'Disputed territory' is not happening. More claims are being put forward.

The mindset has to be increase our claims. What licenses we granted to China before, revoke them. Openly declare HH DL Govt in exile as the considered legitimate govt of Tibet. Claim KM. Claim Aksai Chin to parts of Xinjang to KM as our own. Get into agreements with HH DL in exchange for a more aggressive diplomatic posture on Tibetan independence. Tibet will be more than happy to trade KM region for our stance on TIbetan independence. This will rattle China more than a dozen thermonuclear warheads will. Assert LAC boundaries with firmness and military hardware. Extend and push Chinese a km here and there across anywhere. If it gets too hot withdraw to previous LAC. Meanwhile a month later where Chinese troops prescence is low, get 5 km inside and park some tents. When that area gets hot, get into border talks and management mechanisms. Yet never dilute one's claims. When the Chinese transgress we talk about these 10-19 kms. Chinese pull out maps. We start negotiations, talks etc on where the Chinese transgress..this is not difficult at all. It's only hard for the defeated mindset.

member_23629 · Post by **member_23629** » 01 May 2013 16:48

chaanakya wrote:I know that the whole sector is manned by ITBP in peacetime. I remarked about surveillance. However preparedness of ITBP as well as Army is in question itself. if I am not mistaken few months back Jawans and Officers fought with each other in Ladakh Sector and certainly Chinese would have noticed.

It is fool hardy to position ITBP (which is under home ministry, not defence ministry) against the Chinese army - this is Nehru's idiotic policy of "The police is enough to man our borders as we have no ill intention towards anybody." The Chinese don't have any police to man their borders and neither should India.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 01 May 2013 20:12

Yeah - The whole world is Chinese, so they do not need to man their borders. They simply need to be present across the borderless world.

No, the Chinese must have had something from the even the late 40's on the Indian leadership. I have suggested the possibility in other threads. Otherwise some of the concessions given to China right from the days of the Korean war would not have simply happened. No use trying to hide behind the claim that India "did not know" the Chinese would be "so bad" and betray the "trust". For the very leader who gave away those stuff - had made comments that show that he himself was not that convinced of Chinese communist intentions - before the 49 start of appeasement.

There is a lot of posturing on GOI part - but no concrete action - where China is concerned. Something has been fishy for a very long time.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 01 May 2013 20:16

Peace at any cost brothers. Peace at any cost.

Going to a China controlled Kailash Mountain / Manasa Sarovar is only a visa-away; the transport and other costs being the same. It will not be a much issue if we have to get a visa to go to Varanasi as well.

Be open minded. We are in a border-less global village. All you need in this village is a visa to visit the next house.

Be Peaceful. Be secular. Be constipational. Do not criticize Moorkh Minority Slaves.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 May 2013 20:18

Aditya_V wrote:I am wondering whether the Chinese are so belligerent because they have elite by the balls due to deposits in Macau and the elite feel giving up Indian land fopr safety of deposit is more important?

Isn't this an oxymoron? How can euunuchs have balls?

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 01 May 2013 20:31

Going to a China controlled Kailash Mountain / Manasa Sarovar is only a visa-away;

Yes a Visa and sometimes just a Route permit away:

Kathmandu, Jun 7: Hundreds of Indian pilgrims have been stranded in Nepal on their way to Kailash-Mansarovar in Tibet as Chinese authorities stopped them at the border entry point saying that their vehicles did not have route permit.
Around 700-800 Indian pilgrims, who were on their way to Tibet to pay a visit to Kailash-Mansarovar, a famous Hindu and Buddhist pilgrimage site, have been stranded at Tatopani area around 125 km east of Kathmandu after Chinese officials stopped them at the border, Nepalese officials said.

The Indian pilgrims have visa, but the Chinese authorities stopped them an the border entry point saying that they don’t have route permit for their vehicles.

Chinese stops Indian Pilgrims from going to Kailash Mansarover

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 01 May 2013 20:36

given the low rates of return on money these days, it is less likely to be languishing in phorin vaults and more likely to be burnt (like gasfield flares) in highly liquid form in hi-fi-5-star locations. so not sure that the netas are being held on that score

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 01 May 2013 21:44

Nehru followed Forward Policy on India China Border without adequate preparation for eventual escalation. Rest is history. And History repeats itself as we have failed to learn the lessons. Vivek scenario might come to pass sooner or later.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 01 May 2013 22:10

Will China extend its influence in the Indian Ocean by building a naval base in Gwadar, Pakistan?
http://www.cfr.org/south-asia/china-ext ... tan/p30603

t is possible that China will eventually build a naval base in Pakistan, but it will not be for some time. Chinese influence in the Balochistan province of Pakistan and adjacent waters will certainly increase, if China's Overseas Port Holding Company's recent acquisition of management of the commercial port in Gwadar is followed by the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy's use of the facility. Gwadar would join several important locations along China's sea lines, the so-called "string of pearls," that extend from the Chinese mainland to Port Sudan and include facilities in Myanmar, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
Ethnic tensions in Balochistan add an extra dimension to this puzzle. There is a strong Baluch feeling that developing the port for Chinese and Pakistani use is just another effort by the "Punjabis" to undermine Balochistan's call for independence from Islamabad. As one Baluch tribal leader put it in reference to the Chinese, "we have not invited them." Such sentiment cannot be discounted out of hand. Another dimension is the current lack of infrastructure necessary to support PLA Navy use beyond simple refueling. Roads for resupply do not exist from Gwadar to Xinjiang, the autonomous region in northwest China.China has already invested over $200 million in developing the port and understandably views it as a partial solution to its reliance on the Malacca Strait— its "Malacca dilemma"—for petroleum imports. To date, Chinese officials have asserted that their interest in Gwadar is strictly a commercial effort to provide another energy corridor for Middle East oil, and Pakistani government officials stridently affirm this position. New Delhi, on the other hand, has expressed "concern" about the true motivations in developing Gwadar, suspecting that it is a Sino-Pak effort at encirclement.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 01 May 2013 22:23

brihaspati wrote:There is a lot of posturing on GOI part - but no concrete action - where China is concerned. Something has been fishy for a very long time.

B-ji: you are seeing a CT where there is none. Cowardice, incompetence, lack of a vision for the nation and a naive understanding of how the world works - these have been hallmarks of our leaders from Nehru till now. And a population which cannot think beyond its next meal keeps electing these leaders.

Sushupti · Post by **Sushupti** » 02 May 2013 00:01

All voices arguing for a more robust response were successfully hushed. At every stage, it was more important that the new Chinese premier Li Keqiang's visit, beginning May 20, be insulated from this. When the media noise became too loud, the government "inspired" certain strategic experts to write dismissive articles on the incident, saying it happens "all the time". Even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was advised to say the incident was "localized".

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... w/19823876.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 02 May 2013 03:44

Army Chief meets PM with options for handling China incursion

The army chief reportedly suggested to the government that India's counter-measure can be cutting off routes to the five-tent remote camp set up by China which will effectively restrict their supplies.

The General suggested that Indian troops could cross the Chinese camp to patrol along the border, which would bring Indian soldiers very close to a bigger Chinese camp set up in Aksai Chin.

After China set up its five tents 19 kilometres deep into Indian territory, India set up its own camp just 500 meters away.

General Singh said that India, as another counter-measure, could add another temporary post in another area claimed by both sides.

The government has been counting on diplomatic negotiations to find a compromise, prompting severe criticism from the opposition and even key allies like Samajwadi Party chief and former Defence Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 May 2013 04:10

Sushupti wrote:
All voices arguing for a more robust response were successfully hushed. At every stage, it was more important that the new Chinese premier Li Keqiang's visit, beginning May 20, be insulated from this. When the media noise became too loud, the government "inspired" certain strategic experts to write dismissive articles on the incident, saying it happens "all the time". Even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was advised to say the incident was "localized".

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... w/19823876.

So that explains the KP Nayar type of sarkari lifafa article!

Now that guy has reduced credibility.

Now who advised MMS to say incident is localized? I thought he was head of govt? is there a kitchen cabinet which can advise the PM to hush up?

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 02 May 2013 04:32

Army Chief briefs CCS on border standoff with China

A day after the third flag meeting between Indian and Chinese military commanders failed to resolve the border standoff in Ladakh's Depsang plains, Army Chief General Bikram Singh briefed the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) on the matter and shared details of China's demands.

Sources said the Army Chief did not discuss military options at the meeting with the CCS, which took stock of the security situation in the wake of the border faceoff.

What a joke ...

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 02 May 2013 04:37

Can China's Top Guns Fly?

The Chinese Air Force plane drifted past a city and seemed to float, like a leaf, before exploding onto a mudflat where the Shandong peninsula juts out into the Yellow Sea.

"It was floating, floating, floating then BANG, suddenly hit the ground," says a witness, according to video footage of the smoking wreckage on March 31 that was anonymously uploaded on the Chinese version of YouTube.

...

Crashes happen, even to the United States. But for professional military watchers, the more they see inside one of the world's most secretive air forces, it seems, the less they are impressed with the Chinese military's aerial wing.

Pilots are neither trusted nor properly trained. Drills are regimented, centrally controlled, and divorced from realistic combat conditions. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) has nearly 2,000 thousand planes, compared with a little over 3,000 for the U.S. Armed Forces, but only a fraction of the peace-time accident rate, suggesting pilots are not spending sufficient time in the air or training under pressure.

While Chinese military enthusiasts saw the Shandong crash as an embarrassing setback, professionals saw it as a small sign that the PLA Air Force might be beginning to take the risks required to develop human "software" to match its expensive hardware and compete with their American, Taiwanese, or Japanese counterparts.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 May 2013 04:52

TOI

19km incrusion but 750sq km at stake.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 02 May 2013 07:10

varunkumar wrote:
chaanakya wrote:I know that the whole sector is manned by ITBP in peacetime. I remarked about surveillance. However preparedness of ITBP as well as Army is in question itself. if I am not mistaken few months back Jawans and Officers fought with each other in Ladakh Sector and certainly Chinese would have noticed.
It is fool hardy to position ITBP (which is under home ministry, not defence ministry) against the Chinese army - this is Nehru's idiotic policy of "The police is enough to man our borders as we have no ill intention towards anybody." The Chinese don't have any police to man their borders and neither should India.

varunkumar, the border management agreement between the two countries does not allow armies (of both countries) to be deployed within a certain distance from the LAC. However, the Chinese violated that and as usual we stuck to that. There is no court where we can file the case.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 02 May 2013 07:14

Prem Kumar wrote:Cowardice, incompetence, lack of a vision for the nation and a naive understanding of how the world works - these have been hallmarks of our leaders from Nehru till now.

Prem Kumar, right on dot. I will also add a 'frog-in-the-pond' attitude to that.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 02 May 2013 07:25

From a ToI report posted earlier,

Sources said patrols can be sent from rear and they can reach behind the Chinese camp undetected to interfere in the Chinese supply line, which is being maintained by them using high-mobility trucks and light vehicles.

There is no point in discussing options. There will never be unanimity on anything. Over analysis leads to action paralysis because everything would look scary. Just do it.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 02 May 2013 08:41

Prem Kumar wrote:
brihaspati wrote:There is a lot of posturing on GOI part - but no concrete action - where China is concerned. Something has been fishy for a very long time.
B-ji: you are seeing a CT where there is none. Cowardice, incompetence, lack of a vision for the nation and a naive understanding of how the world works - these have been hallmarks of our leaders from Nehru till now. And a population which cannot think beyond its next meal keeps electing these leaders.

Unlikely. This same cowardice, incompetence, lack of vision - did not hamper springing to much faster action on the J&K or Hyderabad fronts. GOI's have been surprisingly active or reactive on the western front compared to the eastern front.

There were consistent giveaways -whose future consequences could not have escaped the strategic foresight of the brilliant order that supposedly got Asia rid of colonialism at one stroke at Bandung. Moreover those giveaways happened after the leadership openly acknowledged the perfidy and unreliability of the Chinese communists.

No - one can see a consistent soft pedaling where China is concerned. Its not merely cowardice. It could be mediated by third parties - of course.

Anyway - my hunch was correct - the Chinese would not be moving, and GOI will be trying to find its best excuse to justify the Chinese.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 02 May 2013 08:50

" India set up its own camp just 500 meters away."
Why is this being repeated again and again? To show that the government is taking strong action or, is trying to intimidate the Chinese? By setting up a camp 19 km within its own territory?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 02 May 2013 09:03

pandyan wrote:How come netas and babus who are exceptionally efficient in grabbing others land and properties fail miserably at the border? Should there be a financial incentive.

Not even grass grows there. Only that land is important that is/was the identity-homeland of the supreme ruler - say "Kashmir", even if not much grows there - or UP doab, current domicile or power base (although a lot of grass grows there), or if plenty of grass grows there.

Importance of land is a matter of perception and its position as an issue in the priority list of what must be the nations chief concern. Hindu fanaticism, 50000 years of repression and deprivation of minorities, Namo's speeches, are the greatest threat to the nation - and the Chinese cannot be so bad after all. They are the birthplace of Maoism. It is crucial for the Indian economy - or rather the political economy of India that scams which generate developmental resources are kept a top priority. Compared to that a piece of land where not even grass grows - cannot be that important, since it can only mean more investment expenditure and not generation of new "resources".

If by resisting Chinese claims, there is war - development will crash. Even if there is mere talk of possibility of war, FDI will fall, leading to deprivation of billions of Indians from gazillions of as yet unseen prosperity. On the other hand, a little appeasement towards countries flush with lot of money like Saudi Arabia/Gulf and China - can go a long way towards self-fulfillment. Trade can flourish and traders know how to make people happy - the important ones at least. After all fulfillment of the self is also fulfillment of India since the neta's self also belongs to India.

Sarabjit's killing and Chinese incursion - coincided. AFG changing hands into Taleb next year more overtly. So the final countdown has started. The existing rashtryia beneficiaries need a breathing time of peace within which they can put away their capital and loved ones in safe houses in the west. That is why the desperate wriggling at avoiding "war".

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 May 2013 18:50

Bji, What development? MMS has brought the economic growth rate back to Nehruvian lows. Its hoverinj a couple of points above that from the halcyon rates in the early 2000 decade.

Meanwhile TOI reports:

ramana wrote:Cabinet okays paramilitary modernization:

Cabinet Okays rs 11000 crore plan to modernize paramilitary

NEW DELHI: The Cabinet on Wednesday approved a Rs 11,000 crore plan to modernize central armed police forces (CAPF) including the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) which is deployed along the Indo-China border.

Though the plan was conceived long ago, the timing of the approval assumes significance in view of the current standoff along the Indo-China border.

The decision will also give a boost to ongoing efforts to strengthen ITBP when the government is learnt to have made it clear to the Army that it will not hand over command of the border force to the Army, notwithstanding its demand for operational control of the paramilitary force which guards the Indo-China border.

Sources in the home ministry said the Centre would rather modernize the paramilitary force by providing it more sophisticated arms, ammunition, night vision devices, patrolling equipment and vehicles so that ITBP can do more intensive patrolling in inhospitable terrain along the border.

The plan - which is meant for all paramilitary forces including BSF, CRPF, SSB, CISF, NSG and Assam Rifles - was approved by the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The entire Rs 11,000 crore will be spent to modernize these seven paramilitary forces in the next five years, beginning this financial year.

Besides ITBP, three other paramilitary forces - BSF, SSB and Assam Rifles - are the country's border guarding forces. While the BSF is deployed along India-Pakistan and India-Bangladesh borders, SSB is stationed along India-Nepal border and Assam Rifles guards the India-Myanmar border.

Though the Army is pushing hard for "operational control" over ITBP for "cohesion, coordination and synergy" to counter the Chinese army's "offensive" acts in the wake of renewed tension along the border, there is no move to change the current arrangement.

"There are glaring deficiencies in the ITBP deployment posture along the Line of Actual Control, along with a sub-optimal weapons profile and limitations in reacting to operational contingencies. Army's peacetime control over ITBP will assist in a coordinated response, better training, operational preparedness and transition to hot war when required," a senior Army officer said.

Countering this, a home ministry official, however, said there was no delay on the part of ITBP in informing all concerned about the incursion by Chinese troops in Ladakh. He said ITBP informed the Army authorities apart from all concerned in New Delhi about it within minutes on April 15 and the armed forces personnel reached the spot within four hours.

The ghosts of Curzon and Kitchner are still fighting in New Delhi.....

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 02 May 2013 19:03

ramana ji,
and many people think I indulge in CT's about the soft-pedal towards China. The paranoia about allowing the army near the border - especially where they have better day to day boots on the ground - started off right from the days of JLN's appeasement policy.

It almost appears that it was in mutual interest of the then GOI [and subsequent ones] that Tibet was occupied and "sterilized" of the Tibetan Buddhist infrastructure, by removal of its leadership to India for safe keeping and restriction/control, while China took over the Tibetan Buddhist links that connected the southern Siberian region around Baikal to India.

The army had somehow to be kept out of patrolling and surveillance - that control ha dto be under civilian/non-army command and more directly answerable to GOI's bureuacracy.

Nothing has changed from that attitude. There has to be concrete and deeper reasons than mere "lack of vision". There are possibly things that the deeper core of GOI establishment is scared of the army actually starts looking at the day to day aspect of the "border" and "Tibet". The emphasis and feet dragging on "patrol" and "surveillance" points to some deep fear and concerns about cross border movement of humans. The movement somehow has to be kept out of the army's eyes - or that the army is not the first one to filter the movement. GOI is very keen on first knowing and dealing with who is "coming in" rather than the army.

Just a pointer - Naxalites had no great difficulty in crossing the border and going to meet Chinese counterparts.

Kati · Post by **Kati** » 02 May 2013 19:28

What is preventing us from setting up a platoon-strength camp 10 km inside Tibet?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 May 2013 19:30

brihaspati wrote:ramana ji,
and many people think I indulge in CT's about the soft-pedal towards China. The paranoia about allowing the army near the border - especially where they have better day to day boots on the ground - started off right from the days of JLN's appeasement policy.

It almost appears that it was in mutual interest of the then GOI [and subsequent ones] that Tibet was occupied and "sterilized" of the Tibetan Buddhist infrastructure, by removal of its leadership to India for safe keeping and restriction/control, while China took over the Tibetan Buddhist links that connected the southern Siberian region around Baikal to India.

The army had somehow to be kept out of patrolling and surveillance - that control ha dto be under civilian/non-army command and more directly answerable to GOI's bureuacracy.

The emphasis and feet dragging on "patrol" and "surveillance" points to some deep fear and concerns about cross border movement of humans. The movement somehow has to be kept out of the army's eyes - or that the army is not the first one to filter the movement. GOI is very keen on first knowing and dealing with who is "coming in" rather than the army.

There is defentltly a soft peddling of the Chinese border and chinese sensibilities.
One is the Chinese attitude towards other countries and thier views about the border military of other countries. Already PLA has shown aggressiveness against Indian army in the NE section. PLA has focus on its target against India.

It almost appears that it was in mutual interest of the then GOI [and subsequent ones] that Tibet was occupied and "sterilized" of the Tibetan Buddhist infrastructure, by removal of its leadership to India for safe keeping and restriction/control, while China took over the Tibetan Buddhist links that connected the southern Siberian region around Baikal to India.

THere is a deeper forces which are controlling the Tibetian Buddhism and it is under safe keeping now. There is a future plan to bring it out when the time is right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitreya

What is the future of China and the religion of Chinese is still fuzzy