g.sarkar wrote:A few points I would like to make:
1. Let us not assume that China will not start a war at this time. This would be repeating the mistakes of 1962, when Pandit Nehru and Krishna Menon had falsely concluded that China was not going to start a war. They did. The timing of 1962 was well planned. Both Mao and Chou were involved. The international situations were a factor and the weather was another. Once again October is the month; I hope we are reinforcing our troops relentlessly in both East and the West. If we are ready, they will not attack.
2. If China cannot sort out India, a relatively soft power, they can forget becoming number one. Along with this, they can forget about coercing smaller nations in Asia and Africa to follow, whose cooperation is inevitable for China to become the top dog . No one will follow a loser, the end of China’s dream.
3. The US and Europe are now so dependent on cheap imports from China, I do not believe they will stop imports from China if India is attacked. The imports will be stopped only China attacks them or their allies directly. They will willingly send arms and ammunition to India at a price and take a wait and watch attitude over the conflict. So if the conflict widens, we should not think that any other power will come to our aid on the short run. Israel being an exception.
4. A great deal of effort is made at BRF to find a motive to China‘s actions. Why are they are doing so and so, they would be better off if they did something else. It is not possible to find out why a group of insulated people with very little outside world experience leading a closed dictatorship, are acting the way they are. Using the same logic, you may say a peaceful resolution of 1962 may have brought China more benefits. Unfortunately, that is not how they think. Their society and system of government allows them to take sudden and apparently irrational actions. For example, during WWII Germany, Japan and the USSR made unexpected moves that the West could not match.
1) You don't get to be the largest trading nation on the globe by being an irrational psycho nation, global economics punish those without fail,
2) Because they are an economic power and a weak military nation in terms of culture (not hardware), war weakens their intrinsic strength.
Cheen of Mao WAS a psycho state and global economics punished it as such. The Cheen of today, if it wants to continue advancing, cannot be.
The fact they haven't fought in 4 decades even as their military had grown exponentially shows me they are a rational trading state intent on growing power through intimidation, not fighting.
I would be happy if Cheen were psycho and did start a war that I know we can win easily. But I fear they are not and they won't fight.
But is it to our advantage if they don't fight? I don't think it is. Letting them off the hook without bloodying them means we are still waiting for their hammer to drop. Their hammer is their infrastructure (Gwadar, Djibouti), their schemes (CPEC,OBOR) and their military/industrial production (endless mass of ships and aircraft.) The weight of those will only get heavier with time.
We need to go war, regardless of Cheen does because right now, we own all advantages along the border and in the IOR where we can cut off trade to a trading power in a way that can stunt their strategy of grow and intimidate.