People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

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.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19748
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Philip » 25 Jan 2012 00:27

From Chairman Mao's Red Book to........."Thoughts of Prof. Kong"! ...who claims to be a descendant of Confucius!

One of the Middle Kingdom's top intellectuals.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/ja ... -kong-dogs

A professor at one of China's most prestigious universities has stirred up a hornets' nest in Hong Kong after publicly calling residents of the territory "********", "thieves" and "dogs of British imperialists".

Kong Qingdong of Peking University launched the tirade during a webcast interview at the weekend that has tarnished the reputation of his employer and intensified an already fierce debate about relations between Hong Kong and the mainland.

For Kong – an ultra-nationalist who claims to be a descendant of the sage Confucius – such cases are unforgivable.

"To the best of my knowledge, many people in Hong Kong don't consider themselves to be Chinese. Those types of people are used to being the dogs of British imperialists – they are dogs, not humans," the professor of Chinese studies told the host of the news website v1.cn.

He went on to accuse Hong Kong tour guides of cheating visitors and to insist that all Chinese people should speak Mandarin rather than local dialects such as Cantonese. The video has since circulated widely on the internet.

Coming from a professor at a university that educates many of China's top officials, these vitriolic comment stirred up a passionate response. On Sunday, several hundred demonstrators – many with their dogs – gathered outside the China Liaison Office in Hong Kong to express their anger. Some chanted that it was better to be a dog in Hong Kong than a human on the mainland, according to local media reports.

Peking University has yet to comment on the case. Kong, however, has since tried to distance himself from his comments by saying they have been taken out of context – though the video was apparently uncut and his vitriol unrelenting.

In a blogpost on Monday, Kong denied insulting all Hong Kongers.

"I know there are many nice people in Hong Kong, but many Hong Kong people are still dogs" he wrote.

It is not the first time that Kong has provoked controversy. He participated in the "Confucian peace prize" – set up as a rival to the Nobel – which gave its latest award to Vladimir Putin.

He has also denied North Korea had ever faced famine and said he would not be sad if journalists were lined up and shot.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/ja ... protesters
Chinese security forces 'shoot Tibetan protester dead'

One man is said to have been killed and 31 injured when hundreds of demonstrators gathered in Sichuan province




http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/ja ... emy-paxman

Boom time in Beijing

China riots over new iPhones and snaps up Rolls-Royces. On his first visit to the country, Jeremy Paxman is shocked by the flaunting of wealth
Jeremy Paxman
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 22 January 2012

There was a minor riot in Beijing last week. The Apple store was attacked. Its offence? Not being willing to sell sufficient numbers of the iPhone 4S. Buyers had queued all night and things turned ugly when it became clear that many of those in line had not the faintest idea what an iPhone was. They belonged to teams hired by middlemen who knew that every handset bought was resaleable for an additional £100. The teams of tech-unsavvy people were identifiable to each other by homemade armbands, and when the store staff realised what was happening, they suspended sales. That was when the eggs started flying. In London they riot to steal things. In Beijing, they riot because they cannot buy them.

China proclaims itself a secular country. But that is not what it looks like. For a first-time visitor to China, the most astonishing aspect of the country is the worship of wealth. The mayor of London may like to be seen riding around on a bicycle. That is not the style of the mayor of Beijing.

Even China Daily, a sort of hymn-sheet to the Communist party, reads like the FT much of the time. It reported this month that there were more Rolls-Royces bought in China last year than anywhere else on earth, that Audi now sells more of its brand there than in Germany, and that the company confidently expects to exceed its target of 1m sales between 2011 and 2013, "as long as we can grow annually at 8%", as a senior executive blithely asserted. The target was set less than a year and a half ago.

It is all surface froth, of course: there will still be 1,299,000,000 Chinese who do not buy an Audi. But it is the flaunting of wealth that is so shocking, because the entire economy floats on a sea of migrant workers willing to go anywhere for a day's pay. You can hear them hammering on the construction sites and see them clambering across the half-built highway towers from dawn until long after dusk. Victorian Britain was perhaps similar, and the smog of Charles Dickens's London finds its counterpart in the murk that envelopes Beijing on windless days and tears at your throat like sandpaper. Beijing – once, apparently, a charming ancient city – has been torn down and replaced with a traffic-jammed assortment of functional concrete blocks, interspersed with the occasional stunning pieces of modern architecture.

The ageing men in the politburo must look out on it all from the backs of their limousines and smile. Chairman Mao's Cultural Revolution sent intellectuals to live as peasants. Embracing capitalism has created a class of urban plutocrats. China is the great emerging force in the world, and the feeling of apprehension everywhere else must be good.

It is customary to attribute China's new wealth solely to its abundance of cheap labour. But it would have been impossible if the country's entrepreneurs had not possessed the sort of work ethic that drove the captains of Victorian industry. People seriously want to get rich. It may not be attractive. But it is more than enough to see off soft, western welfare states that have sold their future for the sake of cheaper televisions and trainers.

Dozy western governments seem to believe that it does not matter much, because somehow their comfortable democracies will coast along on the fruits of intellectual invention. These governments bask in the belief that we can outsource metal-bashing and shirt-stitching because the brains that devise the products nestle inside western heads.

How much longer can this complacent illusion last? In the 1960s there was a common belief among the English middle class that things made in Japan were "Japanese junk". The Sony Walkman and infinitely more reliable televisions than any manufactured in the country that invented the damn things soon ended that complacency. The main television station in Chengdu, capital of Sichuan province, has a spanking new news studio infinitely superior to any the BBC can boast. Chinese airlines (many of which know a great deal more about service than their western counterparts) fly Airbus and Boeing but soon the country will be making its own passenger aircraft. What reason is there to assume that banking or any of the creative industries are beyond their ability? Computer graphics for the London Olympics have been designed and made in Beijing.

Predicting the future is a job for clairvoyants, not journalists. But I can't see any easy way for the trade imbalance to be equalised. Rather the reverse.

There is, though, one worry the so-called communists in the Chinese government might want to trouble themselves with. One night, while eating in a smart Beijing restaurant, I teased my host by asking whether the other diners were party officials. His instant – and serious – reply caught me out. "Oh no," he said, "they always eat in the private rooms at places like this."

All the best restaurants have these private rooms, so the rich and powerful do not have their meal spoiled by the offensive sight of their fellow citizens. Many of these private rooms serve delicacies the Chinese people can only dream of. Come to think of it, they probably do dream of them. I'm talking abalone, sea slug and pufferfish. I don't know enough about China to assert that this sort of behaviour cannot last. But I do know that it would not be tolerated in western Europe: revolutions have been sparked by less.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19748
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Philip » 25 Jan 2012 15:15

More Tibetans killed by barbariian "Beijiing Butchers"!

Two more Tibetans 'shot dead' in clashes with Chinese forces
Two more Tibetan protesters have been shot by Chinese security forces, bringing this week's death toll to five, the Tibetan government-in-exile has said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... orces.html

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Suppiah » 26 Jan 2012 07:09

^^^ we should not accept such Al-guardian articles simply because they are targeting China - typical condescending western trash with no regard for truth and dripping wet with hypocrisy. Dont they have clubs in Britain where the rich and socially high class wine and dine in private? Where they blackball new members who do not 'fit in'? Perhaps the loony leftist mayor rides the tricycle, but what about the royal family? Do they go around in the tube? All those crazy hats and designer clothes they wear on racing day, is that not flaunting wealth?

And why do poorer british patients end up coming to third world countries like India for medical treatment because their NHS will treat them long after they have gone to their graves?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby shiv » 27 Jan 2012 10:08

Xinjiang gets much safer as 72 Pakistanis get their 72s by Chinese covert action :D

as many as 72 cardiac patients had died by using ‘contaminated drugs’
<snip
the ‘raw material’ used in the said medicine was imported from China and Dubai



Long Live Pakistan China Friendship!

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10512
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby pankajs » 30 Jan 2012 19:02

China boosts police presence in Xinjiang region amid concern over religious extremism
BEIJING — Thousands of additional police officers are being dispatched to combat religious extremism and other security concerns in China’s volatile, heavily Muslim northwestern region of Xinjiang, state media reported Monday.

Officials plan to recruit 8,000 officers to ensure every village in Xinjiang has at least one on patrol, the Xinhua News Agency said.


Their primary tasks will be “security patrols, management of the migrant population and cracking down on illegal religious activities,” it said. The officers will be joined in their tasks by security guards and local militia, who are typically unarmed, Xinhua said.

The beefing up of the police force is a sign of Beijing’s concern over unrest in Xinjiang, where long-simmering resentment against Chinese rule boiled over in 2009, when nearly 200 people were killed in fighting between native Uighurs and Han Chinese in the regional capital, Urumqi, according to the government.

Dozens have been killed or wounded in recent months, and authorities have increasingly relied on overwhelming force and heavy-handed policing to control the situation. China has blamed overseas activists for what it described as organized terrorist attacks, specifically Pakistan-based militants affiliated with al-Qaida.

Violence has also worsened in Tibetan areas to the south, following the self-immolations of Buddhist monks, nuns and former clergy. Police have fired into crowds of protesters, killing and wounding dozens, while barring outsiders from traveling to the area.

Xinjiang regional spokeswoman Hou Hanmin confirmed to The Associated Press that the 8,000 officers were being recruited under a “one village, one officer” campaign. She said their main job would be to improve public services.

The deployment also appears aimed at avoiding a Xinjiang crisis during a year that will see the start of a generational leadership transition in Beijing.

Leading Xinjiang security official Xiong Xuanguo pledged earlier this month to strictly guard against “violent terrorism” and create a “harmonious social environment” ahead of the ruling Communist Party’s national congress due this fall, an event held once every five years.

“Local authorities must further improve their capabilities for maintaining social stability and amplify the crackdown on religious extremist activities,” Xiong said.

As with Tibetans, Xinjiang’s Uighurs have been angered by restrictions on cultural and religious life, as well as an influx of Han migrants they feel has left them economically marginalized in their own homelands.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23251
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby SSridhar » 01 Feb 2012 13:00

India, US win WTO case against China over export of raw materials - BusinessLine
Led by the US, several countries, including India, Mexico and Brazil, have won their battle against China at the World Trade Organisation on export of raw material.

In a ruling, the WTO Appellate Body found China’s export restraints on several industrial raw materials used as key components in the steel, aluminium, and chemicals industries to be inconsistent with China’s WTO obligations.

The Appellate Body affirmed a WTO dispute settlement panel’s July 2011 finding, therefore agreeing with the US and rejecting China’s attempts to portray its export restraints as conservation or environmental protection measures or measures taken to manage critical shortages of supply.

The export restraints challenged in this dispute include export quotas and export duties, as well as related minimum export price, export licensing, and export quota administration requirements.

The raw materials at issue include various forms of bauxite, coke, fluorspar, magnesium, manganese, silicon carbide, silicon metal, yellow phosphorus and zinc.

Export restraints on these types of industrial products can skew the playing field against the US and other countries in the production and export of numerous steel, aluminium and chemical, and a wide range of other products, the USTR said.

They can artificially increase world prices for these raw materials while artificially lowering the prices for Chinese producers.

Lower-priced products

This enables China’s domestic producers to produce lower-priced products from the raw materials and thereby creates significant advantages for China’s producers when competing against US and other producers, both in China’s market and other countries’ markets.

Such export restraints can also create substantial pressure on foreign producers to move their operations and, as a result, their technologies to China.

The European Union and Mexico joined the US as co-complainants in the dispute. Upon a US request, the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) will adopt the panel and Appellate Body reports within 30 days and call for China to bring its measures into compliance with its WTO obligations.

Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, India, Japan, Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Chinese Taipei, and Turkey joined as third parties in the dispute.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23251
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby SSridhar » 01 Feb 2012 13:08

The Sino-Indian Exchange- The Hindu
In Nagapattinam to Suvarnadwipa — Reflections on the Chola naval expeditions to Southeast Asia , I found further confirmation of something I had mentioned in these columns before: a Hindu, probably Tamil settlement in Quanzhou (once Canton). Risha Lee categorically states that in the late 13th Century, a Tamil-speaking community in southern China's coastal city of Quanzhou built a temple devoted to Lord Siva. The temple no longer survives, but over 300 fragments of it are in museums in and around the city and built into the Kaiyuan Temple, Quanzhou's main Buddhist shrine. The granite carvings reflect the workmanship and style of temples built in the heyday of the Cholas, the 11th to the 13th Centuries.

The second Chola era coincides with China's Song (960-1279) and Yuan (1279-1368) dynasties, the latter springing from Genghis Khan's conquest of the Songs by capturing Quanzhou in 1279.

In its capture of the great southern emporium, Lee posits that it had the help of the many foreign trading communities, including ones from Tamizhagam and West Asia, who had settled in the Quanzhou area.

Whether connected with this aid or with the previously mentioned temple finds is a stone block in the Xiamen University Museum with a bilingual inscription — in Tamil and Chinese. The inscription records the consecration of a Hindu temple in Quanzhou in 1281. The temple in praise of Lord Siva was, according to the inscription, raised by Sambandhaperumal to ensure the welfare of the Mongol ruler Chekachai Khan.

Not clear is whether the remains now preserved in Quanzhou are from this temple or another, but Lee believes most of them were found in 1947 near the Tanghwai Gate when the old city wall was being demolished.

The wall and the gate, in the southern part of the city, were raised during the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644), and it could well be presumed that the Mings put an end to the Hindu settlement that once thrived in Quanzhou.

Researchers also point to remains of ancient Chinese settlement being found in the Nagapattinam area. And that needs investigation too.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10512
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby pankajs » 01 Feb 2012 14:10

cross post
"The Indian Army believes a major Sino-Indian conflict is not imminent, but the Indian military is strengthening its forces in preparation to fight a limited conflict along the disputed border, and is working to balance Chinese power projection in the Indian Ocean," he said.

India, Clapper said, has expressed support for a strong US military posture in East Asia and US engagement in Asia. He said China in 2011 appeared to temper the assertive behavior that characterised its foreign policy the year before, but the internal and external drivers of that behavior persist.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10512
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby pankajs » 01 Feb 2012 14:20

India’s big push for Africa, Indian Ocean strategy
NEW DELHI: India is giving a big push to its Africa and Indian Ocean strategy even as there appear to be signs of a Chinese reassessment of its approach to Africa.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10512
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby pankajs » 01 Feb 2012 14:55

About That Hong Kong ‘Locust’ Ad…
Image
A Hong Kong newspaper ad decried Chinese visitors as ‘locusts.’ The text asks, ‘Are you willing for Hong Kong to spend one million Hong Kong dollars every 18 minutes to raise the children born to mainland parents?
Hong Kong’s latest fissure with China deepened Wednesday after a popular local newspaper published an advertisement slamming mainland Chinese as “locusts” who swarm the city and drain its resources.

“Hong Kong people, we have endured enough in silence,” said the ad, which ran in the Apple Daily, a Chinese-language paper with an average daily circulation of about 288,000 in the first half of 2011, according to Hong Kong’s Audit Bureau of Circulations.

The full-page ad, which shows a locust looking at the Hong Kong skyline, was paid for by an online fund-raising campaign on Facebook and local site Hong Kong Golden Forum, which received more than 100,000 Hong Kong dollars (US$12,900) from 800 donors in a week.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10512
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby pankajs » 01 Feb 2012 15:04

Cadmium spill threatens water supplies of major Chinese city
Chinese emergency personnel are erecting barrages and pouring hundreds of tonnes of chloride into a river in southern China in a desperate effort to prevent a toxic spill from contaminating the supplies of a major city.

The flow of cadmium - discharged into the Liu River earlier this month - has continued despite three previous containment operations, and now threatens the 3.2 million residents of Liuzhou city in Guangxi province.

Thousands of police, soldiers and fire brigade officers have been mobilised to halt the spill, which has sparked panic buying of bottled water and underscored the environmental cost that China is paying for its rapid economic growth.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10512
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby pankajs » 01 Feb 2012 15:12

China's largest freshwater lake dries up
For visitors expecting to see China's largest freshwater lake, Poyang is a desolate spectacle. Under normal circumstances it covers 3,500 sq km, but last month only 200 sq km were underwater. A dried-out plain stretches as far as the eye can see, leaving a pagoda perched on top of a hillock that is usually a little island. Wrapped in the mist characteristic of the lower reaches of the Yangtze river, the barges are moored close to the quayside beside a pitiful trickle of water. There is no work for the fisheries.

According to the state news agency Xinhua, the drought – the worst for 60 years – is due to the lack of rainfall in the area round Poyang and its tributaries. Poor weather conditions this year are partly responsible. But putting the blame on them overlooks the role played by the colossal Three Gorges reservoir, 500km upstream. The cause and effect is still not officially recognised, even if the government did admit last May that the planet's biggest dam had given rise to "problems that need to be solved very urgently".

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10512
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby pankajs » 01 Feb 2012 15:26

China's Workers Are Targeted as Its Overseas Reach Grows
Assailants in Egypt released 25 Chinese workers kidnapped on Tuesday, even as tensions appeared to rise between China and Sudan over Chinese held by rebels there.

The abductions underscored a hard truth for Beijing: As China has extended its investment and presence into the world's trouble spots, its people have become targets.
China's surge to become the world's No. 2 economy in recent years has sharpened its appetite for oil, iron ore and other raw materials. That has put China in a number of places other investors might fear to tread, from Pakistan and Libya to Egypt and Sudan.

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

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Agnimitra » 01 Feb 2012 21:35

MKB beats the dindora for his leader:
A dragon dance in the Negev
MKB seems to be bitten by the 2012 bug, which is evident from the drumroll with which he starts each one of his magnum opus installments lately:
There is no record of dragons in the nomadic life of the Negev desert, which dates back at least 4, 000 years (some say 7,000). That may be about to change in the Year of the Dragon. { :shock: scream, hoot hoot}

The Bedouins of the Negev will soon witness the sight of a Chinese-built railway line snaking its way through the melange of brown, rocky, dusty mountains and the wadis and deep craters, leading north from the resort city of Eilat in the Gulf of Aqaba toward the eastern Mediterranean. {masha'Allah!}

The "Med-Red" plan is symbolic of China's bold Middle East advance on three tracks: Iran, Gulf states and Israel. The geopolitical implications are profound and pose unsolvable riddles for other outside powers.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23251
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby SSridhar » 03 Feb 2012 07:44

Ahead of Hu Jintao's visit, SM Krishna to tour China
A month before Chinese President Hu Jintao arrives here to take part in the BRICS (Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa) summit, External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna will be in China as part of the move by both countries to frequently exchange high-level visits in order to resolve pinpricks that bedevil relations.

During a luncheon meeting between Mr. Krishna and his Chinese counterpart Yang Jiechi next Wednesday, the two leaders will also touch upon substantive issues including climate change, the situation in Afghanistan and the role of neighbours in stabilising the country and, above all, the western squeeze on Iran, which is a substantial supplier of crude to both India and China.

Meeting with Hu's successor?

Diplomats were trying to arrange a meeting for Mr. Krishna with Vice-Premier and Chinese Communist Party Polit Bureau member Xi Jinpeng, who is slated to succeed President Hu Jintao. Mr. Krishna will inaugurate the expanded Chancery at the Indian Embassy in Beijing to cater for the increased two-way traffic in recent years.

Mr. Krishna's three-day visit, beginning Tuesday, comes less than a month after high-ranking Chinese official Dai Bingguo came to India to hold the fifth meeting of the Special Representatives on the China-India boundary question.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby chackojoseph » 03 Feb 2012 09:55


Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Virupaksha » 03 Feb 2012 12:17

chackojoseph wrote:WTO confirms China’s export restraints on raw materials

The rare earth issue challenged.

This is actually a major major blow to all the under-developed countries of the world.

Does this rule apply for food, oil, gold, diamonds, coal, iron and so on.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9974
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Aditya_V » 03 Feb 2012 12:40

Virupaksha wrote:
chackojoseph wrote:WTO confirms China’s export restraints on raw materials

The rare earth issue challenged.

This is actually a major major blow to all the under-developed countries of the world.

Does this rule apply for food, oil, gold, diamonds, coal, iron and so on.


Can this apply to Uranium exporters in the world also?

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby chackojoseph » 03 Feb 2012 14:38

Virupaksha wrote:
chackojoseph wrote:WTO confirms China’s export restraints on raw materials

The rare earth issue challenged.

This is actually a major major blow to all the under-developed countries of the world.

Does this rule apply for food, oil, gold, diamonds, coal, iron and so on.


Raw materials. But, no one restricts the minerals you listed. This is a result of Chinese rare earth export control. Now, they have to open other minerals too. Its a tit for tat.

Aditya_V wrote:Can this apply to Uranium exporters in the world also?


Its an exception and other laws also govern it.

shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6722
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby shyamd » 04 Feb 2012 06:22

Desperate attempts made to contaain and limit protests and stop them from spreading. This is the same tactics Asaad used pre crackdown.

China cut off internet in area of Tibetan unrest

Internet connections and mobile phone signals were cut for 30 miles around scene of clashes in Sichuan, state media reports
Chinese officials cut off mobile phone and internet connections to areas where Tibetans were shot dead amid unrest last month, state media has reported.

Officials say security forces fired in self-defence after mobs of rioters attacked police and official buildings in the south-western province of Sichuan, resulting in two deaths.

Tibetan exiles and campaign groups say police fired at peaceful protesters and killed at least three people.

It has been impossible to verify accounts of the unrest. Foreign reporters attempting to visit the region have been turned back, with officials blaming bad weather and the state of the roads.

Friday's English-language edition of the Global Times newspaper published a report from the region titled Monks Run Amok. The police chief of Luhuo in Ganzi – a county known to Tibetans as Drango – said police first tried to disperse rioters with high-power water guns and rubber bullets, but failed.

"Rioters continued to attack and tried to grab the guns from the police," he told the paper. "[Officers] first shot in the air as a warning, but it was completely ignored, so we had no other choice but to open fire."

The newspaper said the incident began with a protest that became violent. It said other Tibetan-populated counties had quickly tightened security, allowing police to quickly control the next day's unrest in Seda, known to Tibetans as Serthar, where another Tibetan was shot dead.

"After the riots, internet connections and mobile phone signals were cut off for over 50km [30 miles] around the riot areas. Police believe external forces played a part in the riots," the newspaper said.


In 2009, China cut off internet and text messaging services across the north-western region of Xinjiang after ethnic riots in the capital, Urumqi, left almost 200 dead.

Officials blamed "trained separatists" for instigating the events in Ganzi. They have also sought to blame outsiders for a string of self-immolations by Tibetan clergy and laypeople over the last year, mostly in Sichuan.

China appears to have stepped up security across other Tibetan areas, with the top party official in Lhasa urging security forces to increase surveillance of monasteries and main roads in the Tibet Autonomous Region.

Qi Zhala ordered all people entering Tibet to carry identification cards from March, the state news agency Xinhua reported. He urged officials to strive for "no big incidents, no medium incidents and not even a small incident".

gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4438
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby gakakkad » 04 Feb 2012 07:55

Well , well . separatist movements appearing in HK too. They wanted to split Yindia into 22 parts. How many parts will the Chinese be split ?

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10512
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby pankajs » 05 Feb 2012 00:28

US Senator: China Cannot Avoid ‘Arab Spring’
A leading U.S. senator and one-time presidential candidate is warning China, “the Arab Spring is coming.”

Republican Senator John McCain made the comment to Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Zhijun Saturday during a high level security conference in Munich.

McCain, in his Arab Spring warning, referenced the recent self-immolations by Tibetan monks to protest Chinese rule in Tibet. He said, ” there is not a way that you will be able to stifle it completely because of these devices,” while pointing to a mobile phone.


McCain also raised concern about China's activities in the tense South China Sea. Several East Asian countries claim part of the sea, which holds abundant natural resources, but China claims the entire area as its own.

Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zhang told the conference that as his country continues to develop it has a bigger stake in peace and stability. He said, “There is no reason for us to upset the situation.”

China seized control of Tibet more than 50 years ago, forcing the Dalai Lama and other Tibetan leaders to flee to northern India. Beijing accuses the Dalai Lama of wanting to separate Tibet from the rest of China, a charge that he denies.

Regional tensions intensified almost a year ago, when a young Buddhist monk demanding the return of the exiled Dalai Lama set himself on fire and died at a monastery in Sichuan. Since then, at least 15 other monks, former monks and nuns have died in similar protests against Chinese rule.

Many Tibetans accuse the Chinese government of attempting to erode their culture and faith, and resent the large-scale migration of China's ethnic Han majority into Tibetan areas.

heech
BRFite
Posts: 157
Joined: 21 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: California, USA

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby heech » 07 Feb 2012 04:43

Rahul M wrote:heech, the only time a pre-modern administration unified china to anything close to its modern geography was the yuan mongol empire under kublai khan. correct me if I am wrong but weren't han chinese relegated to a 2nd class citizen status in that era ?

I'm just responding to Rahul's post out of convenience, although there were quite a few higher up on the page discussing the same issue.

I'm a little surprised by the reaction from many Indians. I didn't make my comment as some sort of criticism aimed at India's history, and didn't know it would be taken as controversial. I am the first to admit that I'm not very well informed about Indian history... and perhaps, some of the other more humble posters here will be nice enough to say they know as little of Chinese history as I know of Indian history. So, if I may say something from a constructive point of view: let's learn from each other.

*My* understanding (from reading of casual newspaper article + skimming of Wikipedia in the past) is that India has rarely had an "united" presence in history. I know a little of the Mughal empire, as well as other Indian empires within history... but my understanding is that this is the exception. And this is why, even today, India has very obvious religious + cultural + language differences throughout the sub-continent. Let me pose this as a question to the Indians here: what % of the past 2000 years, has the vast majority of India been united under a single government or institution?

Now, as far as Chinese history... someone above actually made the comment that China was made "homogeneous" due to the Cultural Revolution. Now, the Cultural Revolution was absolutely evil in a lot of ways... but that comment is really a huge misreading of Chinese history. We Chinese trace our united history to the Qin dynasty in 200 BC. The initial Qin emperor was an absolute despot (and also admired by Mao Zedong) who conquered all of his enemies, burnt textbooks from all competing philosophies, and killed intellectuals who opposed his view. He's the one that first homogenized China, and the *great* majority of the people (> 90%?) who have lived in geographic China for the past 2200 years would probably trace their history/civilization directly to him.

Every empire that has followed has essentially traced their histories starting from the Qin. Many of you are probably unaware of the "24 histories", for example... this is a *collection* of official history books which have been continuously updated over time, with each new empire/dynasty officially commissioning a history of the previous dynasty as they replace them.

Rahul above asked about the Mongol Yuan dynasty, for example... well, they did exactly the same thing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Song

And the Manchu Qing dynasty, which some still insist are "non-Chinese"... the first thing they did upon crossing the border and conquering Beijing (even before fully eliminating the Ming) was to commission the writing of the History of the Ming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ming

And of course, both the Mongol and Manchu commissioned histories are also written in the same "imperial Chinese" language that preceded them. And the Republic of China, in 1913, commissioned the "official" history of the Qing dynasty that they replaced. Let me repeat the significance of this... China as a continuous entity is not revisionist history forced upon the Chinese over the past 40, 60, or 100 years. For 2000 years, new dynastic government have consistently officially commissioned a historical work that places the new dynasty within the longer tradition. Every dynasty characterizes itself as replacing the previous dynasty within the scope of this continent-sized civilization... whether we call that civilization "China" or not.

Now, we can argue what it means for China to really be "united" over those 2000 years... our ancestors didn't have helicopters and SUVs and GPS, so it's not like we had well defined borders the way we do today. In fact, much of the border regions were simply unpopulated. An emperor thousands of miles away can't possibly compete with local warlords + foreign kingdoms right on the border. I would personally define a "united" China as any central government which controlled more than... say, 90%... of the population living, at the time, in what is modern day China.

And if we use that definition of a "united" China, I would estimate China has been united for more than 1500 of the past 2000 years. Regardless of the actual number (maybe its 'only' 1100 years out of the past 2000?), my original point was just that this differs very much from Indian tradition. It is Chinese tradition that we are united by a single, strong central government. This is the way it has always been, at least ever since Qin Shihuang butchered his opposition. For over 2200 years... whenever a dynasty has collapsed or imploded, successors have been vying for the right to establish themselves as the new *central* government inheriting from the old, rather than some new entity started from scratch.

PS. One quick comment about the Great Wall... it hardly runs through the "middle" of China. It runs north of Beijing, at the edge of what used to be arable territory. Although a significant % of the Chinese population now live north of the Wall (especially in the Northeast)... you have to understand almost ALL of that migration happened in the last 150 years, as the Qing dynasty was nearing collapse. For most of the past 2000 years, the area north of the Great Wall had a very small population.

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

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby svinayak » 07 Feb 2012 05:11

heech wrote:
*My* understanding (from reading of casual newspaper article + skimming of Wikipedia in the past) is that India has rarely had an "united" presence in history. I know a little of the Mughal empire, as well as other Indian empires within history... but my understanding is that this is the exception. And this is why, even today, India has very obvious religious + cultural + language differences throughout the sub-continent. Let me pose this as a question to the Indians here: what % of the past 2000 years, has the vast majority of India been united under a single government or institution?

Most of the information floating out there in the world about India is from the source connected with the British and British govt. The perception about India and its religions have been described by the Britih missionaries for the last 250 years. If you need to understand India start with Tao, Confucius, Buddhism ( King Ashoka was the largest empire), Tibet and then understand the unity of India. Indian govt always had a distributed govt and local govt for many centuries. The population and history of India ties to each area and region in the country.

Having a single instituion is not a requirement for a single country such as India.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2239
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Rony » 07 Feb 2012 05:37

Heech, you are using a very loose limited defination for "being united" and from that limited defination you are trying to prove that China is a continously united nation. The fact remains that many foreign people since antiquity imposed their will over China (which itself is loosely associated with 'Han' since there is no "China" in anceint times and people associated themsleves with the dynasty and not the country). When the Mongols invaded china and colonised the Hans and relegated them to the bottom of the social lader, neither the Mongols nor the Hans had no doubt in their mind that this is a colonisation of Hans. Manchu's trying to sinicize themselves and trying to position themselves as another "chinese dynasty" did not stop Sun Yat sen from launching a 'independence struggle to liberate the Hans from foreign Manchu rule". None of the dynasties of china (bar the foreign Mongol and Manchu dynasties) resemble the geographic extent of modern day china. Modern day chinese frontiers are largely a result of Manchu colonial expansion. The funny thing is that the Han chinese (including the commies) resented Mongol and Manchu colonisation of Hans but it did not stop them from using Mongol and Manchu legacy to stake claim over Mongolia/Tibet/Xinjiang/Taiwan.
Last edited by Rony on 07 Feb 2012 05:42, edited 1 time in total.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16498
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Rahul M » 07 Feb 2012 05:41

unfortunately, if you look at the maps of china from history it shows the opposite of what heech says, china has never been unified under one admin other than under the mongol yuans.

Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2239
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Rony » 07 Feb 2012 05:46

Rahul,foreign Manchu Qing also unified China but they like Mongols before them were also considered as foreign and 'barbarian' by the Hans. 'Independence from foreign Manchu rule' was the rallying cry for Sun Yat Sen in the beginning of early 20th century.Of course, in later years the Manchus got assimilated in larger chinese identity.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 12077
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Suraj » 07 Feb 2012 05:51

Heech: the fact remains that India had the first of multiple significant empires that encompassed the vast majority of its current territorial area before China's first significant dynasty even came into being, at which time it encompassed just a fraction of its modern day territory.

For how much of the past 2000 years has China - at largely its current territorial extent - been a unified entity under Han rule, as opposed to being overrun and subjugated by others ? The Han, Song, Tang, Ming ... none of them fit. It has been the the case only since 1912, or more accurately, since 1949, since 1912-1949 was a lawless civil war interregnum. The Yuan Dynasty was Mongol. The Qing was Manchu. If anything, pop cultural references to the latter (e.g. Bruce Lee movies) view the Qing as hated overlords that among other things, led to the triads.

The claim that all Chinese willingly submitted to each successive dynasty is just modern airbrushing, particularly since the CPC has every reason to assert a history of strong central rule and the willing submission of citizens to it. Continued rebellion by the loyalists of the prior dynasty were a regular event, particularly once the Europeans began to eat their way in from the 1600s.

What you call the continuous politically unified entity of China is in fact a sequence of potentates who primarily controlled the region surrounding the Yellow River, a.k.a the cradle of Chinese civilization. Following exactly the same criteria, not only did most of India's major empires grow out of the Gangetic plain too, but they encompassed larger parts of modern day greater India.

heech
BRFite
Posts: 157
Joined: 21 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: California, USA

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby heech » 07 Feb 2012 06:14

Acharya wrote:Indian govt always had a distributed govt and local govt for many centuries. The population and history of India ties to each area and region in the country.

Having a single instituion is not a requirement for a single country such as India.

It sounds to me like we're in agreement. I don't think there are any "requirements" for any country... I'm just stating that "India" doesn't have a tradition (for the lack of a better word) of a single, united central government.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16498
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: woh log gawad hai, unpad hai !
Contact:

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Rahul M » 07 Feb 2012 06:15

rony, the emphasis being on 'modern geography' (from my post which heech quotes). rest of the time even the largest of chinese 'empires' covered at most 30-40% of PRC's landmass.

Image

if those standards are applied India always has had at least one kingdom/empire 'unifying' it throughout history.

NOTE : there are some obvious exaggerations in the above map.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 12077
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Suraj » 07 Feb 2012 06:21

heech wrote:I'm just stating that "India" doesn't have a tradition (for the lack of a better word) of a single, united central government.

A more accurate statement would be that China has a history of a unitary, as opposed to united, central government, while India has historically had a federal one, something that's the case in the modern Federal Republic of India as well.

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

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby svinayak » 07 Feb 2012 06:29

Suraj wrote:
heech wrote:I'm just stating that "India" doesn't have a tradition (for the lack of a better word) of a single, united central government.

A more accurate statement would be that China has a history of a unitary, as opposed to united, central government, while India has historically had a federal one, something that's the case in the modern Federal Republic of India as well.

Also China never had the current boundaries as its real government in its entire history till date.

heech
BRFite
Posts: 157
Joined: 21 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: California, USA

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby heech » 07 Feb 2012 06:30

I'd really like to leave the political/legal question about the border out of the discussion for the moment. It's distracting, and has nothing to do with my original point: that the plains area of what we today call China has a long, established tradition of united central governments, with one dynasty seeing itself as the successor to another. What we today call "Tibetans" and "Uighurs" represent less than 1% of the Chinese population; I'm talking about the tradition that defines modern China as an entity, without suggesting it applies to all 1.3 billion Chinese citizens equally.

Rony wrote:Heech, you are using a very loose limited defination for "being united" and from that limited defination you are trying to prove that China is a continously united nation. The fact remains that many foreign people since antiquity imposed their will over China (which itself is loosely associated with 'Han' since there is no "China" in anceint times and people associated themsleves with the dynasty and not the country). When the Mongols invaded china and colonised the Hans and relegated them to the bottom of the social lader, neither the Mongols nor the Hans had no doubt in their mind that this is a colonisation of Hans. Manchu's trying to sinicize themselves and trying to position themselves as another "chinese dynasty" did not stop Sun Yat sen from launching a 'independence struggle to liberate the Hans from foreign Manchu rule".

It sounds to me like you're using a very specific definition in trying to define China is, and I don't see why that's fair or accurate. If I were to study Indian history + tradition, should I only be looking at Hindu political/cultural/religious history?

You just flat out assert "China = Han", and then talk about the Manchu trying to "sinicize"... what does that mean, exactly? Were the Manchu trying to become Han...? Hardly, since they still drew obvious distinctions between the farmers of central China and the Manchu nomads who came out of the northeast. So, what were they trying to become, when you say they were trying to "sinicize"?

Whatever your answer to my question is, that happens to be my definition of what China is. Whatever the Manchu and Mongols were trying to achieve in adopting the Chinese language, in worshipping previous Chinese emperors, in adopting Chinese court/bureaucracy, in writing histories about the previous dynasties... that is my definition of what China is. That civilization + cultural tradition exactly what has been continuous for over 2000 years, nothing else. "Han rule" has not been continuous for over 2000 years, and I couldn't care less.

By the way... Sun Yatsen did, for a part of his life, call for a racially pure China based on the definition of "Han". So what? Not only does he not speak for all Chinese, he doesn't even speak for *himself*... since even his position was very different by the time he finally overthrew the Qing.
Last edited by heech on 07 Feb 2012 06:41, edited 2 times in total.

heech
BRFite
Posts: 157
Joined: 21 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: California, USA

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby heech » 07 Feb 2012 06:39

Suraj wrote:
heech wrote:I'm just stating that "India" doesn't have a tradition (for the lack of a better word) of a single, united central government.

A more accurate statement would be that China has a history of a unitary, as opposed to united, central government, while India has historically had a federal one, something that's the case in the modern Federal Republic of India as well.

I'd be interested in you explaining the distinction between "unitary" versus "united" central government. I'm not sure whether I agree or disagree, since I don't know how the terms are to be defined.

A "federal government" would suggest to me that there historically remained a layer of government, above all local governments, which had the legal and moral authority to make policies and laws that affected all. Was that indeed the case in India? (And not a rhetorical question, but a serious one.)

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 12077
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Suraj » 07 Feb 2012 06:54

Unitary state
Federal state
Neither implies unity as such - they're just different forms of government. China's history is characterized by a sequence of unitary states centered around the Yellow River, with badlands and warring factions beyond the central core. India on the other hand is characterized by various phases of federal and unitary rule between most of the current territorial extent, involving significant trade and cultural ties. Hindus for example, consider holy a series of temples located all around India, and have been performing pilgrimage to them since well over 2000 years ago.

When you speak for 2000 years of Chinese united rule you're effectively appropriating those limited states as applying to all of historical Chinese territory and population. A significant part of that history was not even a single dynasty calling the shots - you have such elegantly named phases as 'Warring States Dynasty', 'Three Kingdoms' and 'Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms'. It's like the local Chinese restaurant calling a pig offal and pork blood concoction as 'Gentle Blossom Smiling Soup' or something :)

VikramS
BRFite
Posts: 1755
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby VikramS » 07 Feb 2012 07:42

heech:

Regarding the Great Wall of China comment, the point I was trying to make is that there is a vast amount of land-area in modern PRC which historically consisted of areas whose people were better kept out. For most of history it was those people who would try to "rob" the riches of the fertile delta/plains on the other side of the wall, what forms the core cultural heart of modern China.

As you correctly observed the history of China (whatever that notion is supposed to imply historically) got rewritten when a new dynasty takes over. While you agree that different dynasties had differences, you feel that they all wanted to be what you now call "Chinese". While I do not deny that there are elements of one-ness and continuity among various Chinese factions and dynasties, they obviously had their differences. If they did not, they would not be fighting, and then rewriting each history. In fact it would be wonderful if you could articulate what this notion of China was to help people here better understand it.

While I am not an expert on China in any means, common sense also dictates, that the great purges of the first thirty years of CPC rule would also rewrite history to suite its goals.

As you correctly mentioned, when information traveled as fast as the horse, the concept of rule, administration and control were a bit different. What would define a nation would be cultural, religious, ethno continuity. If you look at the Indian sub-continent the continuity is obvious, and obvious for thousands of years.

One way to study the history would be to study the extent of the Buddhist influence. The Gaandhara Kingdom, and the city of Taxila in modern Afghanistan/Pakistan were great centers of Buddhist learning. In Mahabharata, the ancient Indian epic containing the Bhagwad Gita, one of the main protagonist was Gandhari (from Gandhar). You can read about the Mahajanapadas which existed in India around that period http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahajanapada

Tibetan language has exactly the same sounds as the Northern Indian scripts. In fact the Tibetan alphabet has the same sounds as devanagri, the main script used to write modern Hindi, and the ancient Sanskrit.
Devanagri Script
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari
Tibetan Alphabet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibetan_alphabet
Image

All this canard about no India till 100 years ago, etc. are modern Western constructs, specifically Anglo inspired constructs. Prior to the emergence of modern Indian nation state, they too used to call the region the Indian sub-continent; this whole notion of South Asia too is a modern construct created precisely to spread the canard.

heech
BRFite
Posts: 157
Joined: 21 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: California, USA

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby heech » 07 Feb 2012 10:20

Suraj wrote:When you speak for 2000 years of Chinese united rule you're effectively appropriating those limited states as applying to all of historical Chinese territory and population. A significant part of that history was not even a single dynasty calling the shots - you have such elegantly named phases as 'Warring States Dynasty', 'Three Kingdoms' and 'Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms'. It's like the local Chinese restaurant calling a pig offal and pork blood concoction as 'Gentle Blossom Smiling Soup' or something :)

Perhaps these "exceptional" periods are more useful for proving my point.

Warring States pre-dates the initial unification under the Qin in 200 BC. Three Kingdoms themselves officially lasted all of 60 years after the collapse of the Han... although some degree of fragmentation didn't end for about 300 years, ending finally with reunification by the Sui. "Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms" lasted only about 50 years, before the Song followed them.

In other words, for the past 2200 years... we're looking at about 350 years of fragmentation. You can probably easily add in another 100-200 years in there as rounding error.. but you get the idea. As I said, 1500+ years of unified central government over the past 2200 years.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 12077
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby Suraj » 07 Feb 2012 11:06

heech wrote:In other words, for the past 2200 years... we're looking at about 350 years of fragmentation. You can probably easily add in another 100-200 years in there as rounding error.. but you get the idea. As I said, 1500+ years of unified central government over the past 2200 years.

Since you chose to characterize China as such, I think we can all agree now that China really amounts to just the region between Yellow and Yangtze river basins, since that's the only region that's consistently been part of the centrally ruled territory over the course of all the dynasties.

All the outlier portions - Heilongjiang, Jilin, Liaoning, Inner Mongolia, Qinghai, Turkestan, Tibet and even Yunnan, are annexed territories upon which Chinese territorial claim is at best nebulous, depending on whose argument you choose to accept.

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

Re: People's Republic of China, Dec. 27 2011

Postby svinayak » 07 Feb 2012 11:25

Even now most of the central leadership of China comes from the Wuxi province near Beijing. Other regions dont have a claim on the leadership at all. It shows the evolution of the nation.

Dhiman
BRFite
Posts: 527
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 13:56

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Dhiman » 07 Feb 2012 11:47

Heech,

To me the issue is not whether China has a unified polity for 2000 years and India does not, but about the "standard" or "logic" that you are applying to conclude that China has a unified polity of 2000 years; while as, India barely 100 years.

I know a little of the Mughal empire, as well as other Indian empires within history... but my understanding is that this is the exception.


Mauryas, Gupta (with some exception), Mughals, British, and current Indian Republic. In each case, a strong central authority worked/works in concert with smaller authorities.

And this is why, even today, India has very obvious religious + cultural + language differences throughout the sub-continent.


I have often felt that non-indians often assume one or both of the following: 1) homogeneity is a universally desired goal and/or 2) a diverse group will spontaneously morph into a homogenous group over time.

Indian history and its current composition shows that this is not true. Traditionally homogeneity has not been a desired end goal in the Indian context, that is the reason why you see so much diversity in India. You can probably blame the cast system for this. Everyone got a cast assigned to them and they married within that cast for thousands of years.

Unlike many/most other regions of the world which have waged wars to eliminate diversity, there are hardly any such wars in India. Also, whenever a strong central government attempted homogeneity either by forcing the population or through wars, the experiment always led to the end of that strong central government because no strong central government has been able to establish itself in India without the cooperation of smaller authorities (federal structure). Attempting homogenization meant loss of cooperation of smaller authorities and hence sure-shot end of the central authority. As I stated earlier this is what led to end of Mughal and East India Company.

Let me pose this as a question to the Indians here: what % of the past 2000 years, has the vast majority of India been united under a single government or institution?


Cast System and Hinduism.

Every empire that has followed has essentially traced their histories starting from the Qin.


Seems like a pretty weak argument for establishing "unified polity of 2000 years", but its your standard. However even stronger than that: almost every king in India before the advent of Mughal Empire traced his lineage to either "Sun clan" or "Moon clan".

Keep in mind that we are still comparing just "Eastern China" with all of India right now. I am very interested in seeing as to what logic and standard you would apply to extend this to rest of current day China.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Karan M, s_gopal and 36 guests