Peregrine ji, though you might have asked in jest (or foreseeing a developing situation which looks more or less a certainty), I would recall another post of mine on the border issue:
The entire boundary is divided into three sectors, Eastern, Middle and Western.
The Eastern sector encompasses Arunachal Pradesh (with China claiming 90000 Sq. Km), the Middle Sector encompasses Uttarakhanad and Himachal Pradesh (under dispute 1820 Sq. Kms) and the Western Sector encompasses Aksai Chin, Leh & Ladakh (China possesses 38000 Sq. Kms) and Shaksgam Valley (conceded by Pakistan to China of 5180 Sq. Kms).
In recent times, China is also questioning the total length of the India-China border. While India maintains the total length of the border as ~ 3500 Kms, China claims it to be only ~2000 Kms omitting the roughly 1500 Km western sector. This border is the longest undemarcated (demarcation requires physical boundary pillars on the ground) and disputed border in the world. In the absence of a proper border, a Line of Actual Control (LAC) is used by both sides to claim the area up to which each side has effective military control.
In the Eastern Sector, the LAC roughly corresponds to the McMahon Line while in the Western Sector the two sides have failed to agree to a single LAC, and thus there are two LACs going deep into each other’s claimed territory. During his visit to China in May, 2015, Prime Minister Modi was forthright in conveying to his hosts that the process to clarify the LAC, stalled since 2005, should be resumed. Just after Modi’s return from China, the National Security Advisor and India’s Special Representative (SR) on the border talks, Ajit Doval, said while giving the Rustamji Memorial Lecture on the 50th anniversary of BSF's foundation, “China's stand on the border dispute has been in complete contravention of accepted principles. They have accepted the McMohan Line while settling the border with Myanmar and then they say that the same line is not acceptable in case of India, particularly in Tawang. The settled population in these areas has been part of the national mainstream (of India) all through. We have to settle this dispute. China is an important country for us. It is one of the world's largest economies. It has got a long border with us. It has a special relationship with Pakistan. Both these countries are nuclear and not the kind of democracies that we are”
Reacting to Doval, the Chinese FO spokesperson said, "The Chinese government does not recognize 'the McMahon Line', which is illegal”. A few weeks later, the Chinese deputy director general of the Asian Affairs at the foreign ministry Huang Xilian rejected the “LAC clarification” approach saying, that was tried “some years ago but it encountered some difficulties, which led to even complex situation. That is why whatever we do we should make it more conducive to peace and tranquility for making things easier and not to make them complicated”. He suggested instead a “Code of Conduct” pact to maintain peace along the border. The Indian side later countered the CoC proposal saying that the Confidence Building Measures (CBM) protocol signed on April 11, 2005 “covers all the conceivable contingencies that may arise and ways to address them” and nothing more needs to be done. They also said that the Chinese side was committed to LAC clarification in the documents signed between September 1993 to November 2006, but for some “explicable’ reason have not endorsed the process on paper since 2008.
During Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit to India in c. 2005, broad principles on resolving the border issue were agreed upon. Two of those principles were ‘not disturbing’ any settled population along the border and that the boundary would be more or less along the ‘as is where is’ basis with only appropriate adjustments wherever necessary taking into account geographical features.
It is only since c. 2008 that the Chinese went back on their promises on boundary settlement. The LAC clarification process had fully commenced following the 1996 CBM accord where there was an agreement to exchange maps indicating the “respective perceptions” of the two sides regarding “the entire alignment of the LAC as soon as possible”.
Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Of course, Pakistan is rapidly becoming Sinic and we know that. A Paki proudly confirms that too. How Pakistan is becoming China's land of opportunityPeregrine wrote:SSridhar Ji :SSridhar wrote:China-India border tension remains despite growing economic ties: U.S. - PTI, The Hindu
Sir Ji, why is Indo-Pak border in Jammu and Kashmir is 1,597 km, included in the India-China Border is that the reason is "Clapistan is already Clapziang"?
Cheers
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
US says Chinese plan to have a full fledged and an extensive military base in Pakistan, in the near future.
Another defeat for India.
India should provide a long term military base to the US, in POK, in exchange for US political, military, diplomatic, intelligence and logistical support in taking back POK and Northern Areas. This should give both US and India land access to Afghanistan (of course there would be massive tunnelling required to build roads across the mountains from POK to Afghanistan, but we can rely on US ingenuity and money to do that. This will also put the US dangerously(for China) close to China.
We should do to Paki in POK and Nothern Areas, with American support, what the Israelis did to Egypt in 1956, with French and British support.
Another defeat for India.
India should provide a long term military base to the US, in POK, in exchange for US political, military, diplomatic, intelligence and logistical support in taking back POK and Northern Areas. This should give both US and India land access to Afghanistan (of course there would be massive tunnelling required to build roads across the mountains from POK to Afghanistan, but we can rely on US ingenuity and money to do that. This will also put the US dangerously(for China) close to China.
We should do to Paki in POK and Nothern Areas, with American support, what the Israelis did to Egypt in 1956, with French and British support.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Chinese military base likely in Pakistan: Beijing hits out at Pentagon report, says remarks 'irresponsible' - AP
Beijing says it is "firmly opposed" to a Pentagon report that highlighted China's construction of military facilities on man-made islands in the disputed South China Sea and speculated that Beijing would likely build more bases overseas.
The annual report made "irresponsible remarks on China's national defence development and reasonable actions in defending our territorial sovereignty and security interests in disregard of the facts," foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying told reporters on Wednesday.
"China is firmly opposed to that," Hua said, adding that her government was a force for safeguarding peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region and the world.
While Hua declined to comment on possible overseas bases, she said China and Pakistan - one of the countries considered most likely to host a Chinese military presence+ - were close friends that conduct mutually beneficial cooperation in a variety of fields. {including vertical & horizontal proliferation of WMDs and their delivery systems and by using fraudulent means such as the ruse of 'grandfathering' et al}
While China objects vocally to US naval operations+ in the South China Sea, it is eager not to be seen as a threat, and its criticism of the annual Pentagon assessment is part of a drive to avoid being perceived as attempting to seize the mantle as the region's dominant military force. It has also engaged in a series of dialogues and exchanges with the US military, although the two continue to view each other warily. "We hope the US side will put aside the Cold War mentality, view China's military development in an objective and rational manner, and take concrete actions to maintain steady growth of the military relationship between the two countries," Hua said.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Indian Army prepared for a two and a half front war: Army Chief Bipin Rawat - Economic Times
Chief of Army Staff General Bipin Rawat, in an interaction with ANI, said that the Indian Army is well prepared to face external, as well as internal threats to the country. Speaking to ANI General Bipin Rawat said, "Indian Army is fully ready for a two and a half front war".
The Army Chief added that even though India is ready for a multi front war there are effective mechanisms available to defuse an adverse situation. "Even the PM has stated that for the last forty years not even a single bullet has been fired on the Indo-China border," said General Rawat.
In a freewheeling conversation with ANI, General Rawat also informed that a new strike corps, 17 Strike Corps, is being raised specifically for mountain warfare. On asking about the delay in its raising Army Chief said a process as complex as this takes time. He said, "It is being raised from scratch. The recruitments are on. As it is, to prepare an army soldier it takes about three years from recruitment process to training and then orienting and finally their deployment."
General Rawat went on to discuss modernisation plans of the Army, saying that the government is aware of our all needs and is supporting us in every manner. "Make in India is a good initiative, it will give results in two to three years," said General Rawat.
General Rawat added that all armies across the world maintain an inventory in the ratio of the 30:40:30. Here 30 percent equipment is state of the art technology, 40 percent is undergoing modernization and the rest 30 percent is obsolete, which requires an upgrade.
General Bipin Rawat concluded by saying that the Indian Army's preparations are not against any specific country.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
rsangram wrote:US says Chinese plan to have a full fledged and an extensive military base in Pakistan, in the near future.
Another defeat for India.
US says that Chinese plan to do XYZ in Pakistan, in the "near future"???
Of course this amounts to a "defeat" for India. Done and dusted. Unavoidable and incontrovertible. What else could it be?
Now we must await the inevitable recommendation from our resident uber-patriot. Since we have already been defeated, let's immediately have another partition of India and give 15% of our territory to the Chinese. That will solve everything
This is what happens when "passionately patriotic" geniuses rely on soundbites, rather than on literacy, for their impressions of historical events.rsangram wrote: We should do to Paki in POK and Nothern Areas, with American support, what the Israelis did to Egypt in 1956, with French and British support.
The Israelis failed to secure war aims in 1956. After fighting and losing blood and treasure, Israel had to relinquish its occupation of the Sinai within 5 months of the war... suffering a net loss in lives, money, and materiel not to mention diplomatic capital. Meanwhile the political careers of both Anthony Eden in the UK and Guy Mollet in France were effectively ended by their extension of support to this lame-brained failure of an operation. The US was not stupid enough to support the adventure in Sinai for Israel's sake; is it going to support an adventure against Pakistan + China for India's sake?
Of course, said geniuses only have to hear the name "Israel" and they immediately assume that everything must have turned out as a bold, daring, brilliant, TFTA military victory for Tel-Aviv. Just as anything involving SDRE "India" is assumed to be a cowardly, foolhardy, hopeless defeat (that can only be avoided by wisely and pre-emptively gifting land to the enemy).
Some "thinking" needs to be put back in the box before its stench makes the air unbreathable.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
This is a surprising turnaround from AK Antony era when VK Singh had to write letters lamenting not being prepared. A very good result in 3 years, if accurateSSridhar wrote:Indian Army prepared for a two and a half front war: Army Chief Bipin Rawat - Economic TimesChief of Army Staff General Bipin Rawat, in an interaction with ANI, said that the Indian Army is well prepared to face external, as well as internal threats to the country. Speaking to ANI General Bipin Rawat said, "Indian Army is fully ready for a two and a half front war".
The Army Chief added that even though India is ready for a multi front war there are effective mechanisms available to defuse an adverse situation. "Even the PM has stated that for the last forty years not even a single bullet has been fired on the Indo-China border," said General Rawat.
In a freewheeling conversation with ANI, General Rawat also informed that a new strike corps, 17 Strike Corps, is being raised specifically for mountain warfare. On asking about the delay in its raising Army Chief said a process as complex as this takes time. He said, "It is being raised from scratch. The recruitments are on. As it is, to prepare an army soldier it takes about three years from recruitment process to training and then orienting and finally their deployment."
General Rawat went on to discuss modernisation plans of the Army, saying that the government is aware of our all needs and is supporting us in every manner. "Make in India is a good initiative, it will give results in two to three years," said General Rawat.
General Rawat added that all armies across the world maintain an inventory in the ratio of the 30:40:30. Here 30 percent equipment is state of the art technology, 40 percent is undergoing modernization and the rest 30 percent is obsolete, which requires an upgrade.
General Bipin Rawat concluded by saying that the Indian Army's preparations are not against any specific country.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Prepped for a two and a half war !
Music to a jingos ears. There was huge controversy over appointment of COAS about ignoring senior candidates for the top job.
The govt selected the right man for the job.
Music to a jingos ears. There was huge controversy over appointment of COAS about ignoring senior candidates for the top job.
The govt selected the right man for the job.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/did ... snub-21048
Did India Miscalculate China’s Red Lines in Australia Snub?
"Chinese analysts have become less concerned about the prospects of an “Asian NATO” and more tolerant of regional multilateral-security activities."
Did India Miscalculate China’s Red Lines in Australia Snub?
"Chinese analysts have become less concerned about the prospects of an “Asian NATO” and more tolerant of regional multilateral-security activities."
India has denied Australia’s request to send a flotilla to the annual U.S.-Japan-India trilateral Malabar exercise, to be held in the Bay of Bengal in July. Citing Indian diplomats and military officials, Reuters reported in late May that New Delhi’s decision to deny the request was intended to assuage Chinese concerns about encirclement and avoid a stronger Chinese military presence in the Indian Ocean. If true, then this would represent a misreading of Chinese perceptions: China likely would not have interpreted Australia’s participation in the exercise as a major security challenge, nor would it have overreacted. Given the potential benefits, India should consider including Australia in this exercise or in a future iteration of the exercise.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Too much is being made of the Indian snub to Aussies.
I'm glad we demonstrated to the Aussies that they cannot take India for granted. And that they need military involvement with India way more than we need them.
The Malabar series while helping in inter operability and joint tactics to prep for a potential world(multi country) war is of not much immediate gain imvho.
In case of a full blown Indo China war which involves both our navies on the high seas, none of the Malabar participants are going to come to the fight alongside IN.
The Oz will be the first to RTB in a hurry.
Except that all of it is just posturing in Indo China sea. A large multinational flotilla for show of strength for freedom of navigation. But if the Chinese fight with US or Japan, would we enter that fight ?
It's not our panga to take.
I'm glad we demonstrated to the Aussies that they cannot take India for granted. And that they need military involvement with India way more than we need them.
The Malabar series while helping in inter operability and joint tactics to prep for a potential world(multi country) war is of not much immediate gain imvho.
In case of a full blown Indo China war which involves both our navies on the high seas, none of the Malabar participants are going to come to the fight alongside IN.
The Oz will be the first to RTB in a hurry.
Except that all of it is just posturing in Indo China sea. A large multinational flotilla for show of strength for freedom of navigation. But if the Chinese fight with US or Japan, would we enter that fight ?
It's not our panga to take.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Enhance connectivity without infringing sovereignty: PM Modi at SCO - PTI, ToI
ASTANA: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday strongly pitched for coordinated efforts among SCO+ members to combat the menace of terrorism and enhance connectivity without impinging on sovereignty and territorial integrity.
In his address at the annual summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in the Kazakh capital, Modi hoped that India's entry into the SCO family will give a new momentum to the grouping in dealing with terrorism.
"Terrorism is a major threat to humanity," Modi said, adding that there was a need for coordinated efforts to defeat terrorism and radicalisation.
The Prime Minister also spoke on the need for enhancing connectivity in the region and said it was the key for boosting trade and investment.
"We have extensive cooperation with SCO nations. We want to deepen the focus on connectivity," he said.
However, the Prime Minister, speaking in the presence of Chinese President Xi Jinping and Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif among others, asserted that sovereignty and territorial integrity should be the key factors in such a cooperation.
His remarks assume significance as they come weeks after India boycotted the high-profile Belt and Road Forum+ held in Beijing in which 29 world leaders took part.
India abstained from the Summit to highlight its concerns over the $50 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor+ (CPEC) which is part of the "Belt and Road Initiative" (BRI), the pet project of Xi Jinping, and passes through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK).
Modi said that the SCO will help in bringing peace in war-torn Afghanistan.
The Prime Minister also called for efforts by the SCO to tackle climate change.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi today underscored the need to respect each other's core concerns and appropriately handle the disputes as he met Chinese President+ Xi Jinping amid tensions in the bilateral ties over a host of issues including the CPEC and India's NSG membership bid.
The two leaders met in the Kazakh capital, Astana, on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Summit.
It is the first meeting between the two leaders after India boycotted the high-profile Belt and Road Forum held in Beijing last month in which 29 world leaders took part.
During his meeting with Xi, Modi said the two sides should tap their potential in cooperation, strengthen communication and coordination in international affairs, respect each other's core concerns and appropriately handle their disputes.
The Indian side is grateful for China's support for India's accession to the SCO and will work closely with China in the organisation, Modi said.
On his part, Xi told Modi that the two sides should increase communication and coordination in multilateral affairs and appropriately control and handle disputes and sensitive problems, China's official Xinhua news agency said.
In Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told a media briefing that both the countries "should also address sensitive and major issues" as she highlighted the issues figured in the meeting.
"India should focus more cooperation and work alongside to provide assistance to each other's developmental goals," Hua said.
"The two sides should strengthen the complementarities of the development strategies and press ahead with the major cooperation projects such as energy and railways," Hua said.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
‘India-China ties are improving’ - Atul Aneja, The Hindu
India’s decision to skip the China-led Belt and Road Forum (BRF) is an isolated event, which will not have a major impact on the “steadily improving” India-China ties over the past three years, says a senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader.
In an interview with The Hindu on the sidelines of a forum of political parties and think tanks of the Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa (BRICS) grouping, organised by the Communist Party of China (CPC), BJP National General Secretary Ram Madhav said: “There is no reason to think that our non-participation in the Belt and Road Forum is going to be a major setback in the relationship [with China]. Our non-participation in the BRF was essentially because of certain sovereignty related questions. The Chinese side is well aware of our concerns or objections to that. But you should also know that before the BRF and after, we have been together in many forums. We have now become full members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). The BRF was an exception.”
A unique case
Asked to comment on Japan and Vietnam’s participation in BRF, despite serious differences on sovereignty issues with China, Mr. Madhav said that India’s case was unique as it also involved a “third country” — a veiled reference to Pakistan.
“This argument does not apply to India. Countries you have been talking about have certain issues with China. In our case we have issues with a third country. Here, we cannot make a statement to the third country that we are foregoing our claim over our sovereign territory. So there is no comparison between the two issues.”
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
X-posted from STFU-P thread . . .
I am posting it here to illustrate how China wants to assume a dominant role on behalf of Pakistan because Afghan is such a helpless country while Pakistan is Chinese land anyway.
In a first, China seeks to mediate between Pakistan, Afghanistan - DAWN
I am posting it here to illustrate how China wants to assume a dominant role on behalf of Pakistan because Afghan is such a helpless country while Pakistan is Chinese land anyway.
In a first, China seeks to mediate between Pakistan, Afghanistan - DAWN
The Chinese are getting rattled that the Af-Pak situation is a big block for a successful CPEC among many other blocks in Pakistan. But, how can China be ever an honest broker when Pakistan is already a province of PRC?China has expressed a desire to take on a role as mediator between Pakistan and Afghanistan, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani's office said in statement on Monday, Tolo News reported.
"China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi is scheduled to visit Kabul soon where he will meet Afghan officials to discuss ways to improve Afghanistan-Pakistan relations," the statement said.
It added that the Chinese foreign minister would work to discuss the possibility of setting up a meeting between the four members of the Quadrilateral Coordination Committee ─ Afghanistan, Pakistan, the United States and China.
The four-nation group was formed in January 2016 for reconciliation in Afghanistan through the direct peace talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Panama ditches Taiwan, established diplomatic ties with China - PTI, New Indian Express
So, one more chokepoint is being taken care of by China.In a diplomatic coup for China, Panama today cut long-standing diplomatic ties with Taiwan and established relations with Beijing as the cash-rich Communist giant exerted its economic clout to wean away handful of allies of the self-ruled island.
Regarded as big blow for Taiwan, China and Panama signed a joint communique here formally establishing full-fledged diplomatic relations.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with Isabel Saint Malo de Alvarado, Panama's vice president and foreign minister, state-run Xinhua news agency reported.
They signed the joint communique in which Panama has recognised One China, meaning that Taiwan is part of the Chinese mainland.
Panamanian President Juan Carlos Varela said on Monday that Panama was upgrading its commercial ties with China.
"I'm convinced that this is the correct path for our country," Varela said.
Taiwan expressed "anger and regret" over the "very unfriendly" diplomatic turn by Panama that "yielded to economic interests by the Beijing authorities".
It accused Panama of "bullying" Taiwan while "ignoring the many years of friendship" between the two countries, and added it would "not compete with the Beijing authorities for money diplomacy".
Last June Taiwan's leader Tsai Ing-wen, a strong advocate of Taiwan's independence from China visited Panama, on her first overseas trip as President.
Taiwan's foreign ministry condemned the move, alleging the island nation had demanded a huge amount of financial support.
The move by Panama comes as China began construction of a container port with natural gas facilities in northern province of Colon last week.
For long, Panama has maintained that it has commercial ties with China and diplomatic ties with Taiwan.
In December last year, the African island nation of Sao Tome and Principe made a similar move. Now only 20 countries have diplomatic relations with Taiwan.
Taiwan has left with few allies, mostly small countries.
They include Belize, El Salvador, Haiti, Nicaragua, St Kitts and Nevis, St Vincent & the Grenadines, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Paraguay, Honduras and Saint Lucia In Africa: Burkina Faso and Swaziland, The Holy See, Kiribati, Nauru, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, the Marshall Islands and Palau.
Panama did not give any reason for changing its diplomatic allegiance but there has been growing economic cooperation with China in recent years.
China's foreign ministry also released a statement saying that "the Chinese government and its people highly appreciate and warmly welcome" the move by Panama.
Chinese companies are developing ports in Panama, and Chinese state firms are said to have expressed interest in developing the land around the Panama Canal once the country opens a tender for it later this year, media reports said.
The Panama Canal is a vital shipping route. As China expands its global trade ambitions with its One Belt One Road infrastructure-building initiative, access to the eastern coasts of both South America and the US is expected to be of growing importance for Beijing, the report said.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
SSridhar ji, I am confused.SSridhar wrote:X-posted from STFU-P thread . . .
I am posting it here to illustrate how China wants to assume a dominant role on behalf of Pakistan because Afghan is such a helpless country while Pakistan is Chinese land anyway.
In a first, China seeks to mediate between Pakistan, Afghanistan - DAWN
]
The Chinese are getting rattled that the Af-Pak situation is a big block for a successful CPEC among many other blocks in Pakistan. But, how can China be ever an honest broker when Pakistan is already a province of PRC?
Hasn't PRC been part of several multilateral working groups on AfPak for several years now (including US-Pak-PRC-Afghanistan, Rus-Pak-PRC-Afghanistan, etc?)
If so then what is the significance of this "mediation" news (article refers to it as "in a first")? Hasn't PRC always been Pakistan's godfather in any international talks involving Afghanistan? Or is the significance that US, Russia, and other players like India and Iran have now basically abdicated their places at the table, leaving China as the sole "mediator" in the field?
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/world-c ... sea-386104
In a pleasant surprise, China has backed India’s plans to set up a tsunami warning system in the disputed South China Sea.
China has supported the Indian proposal despite the fact that Beijing is very “touchy” about its “territorial sovereignty” over the South China Sea.
Extending supported to Indian proposal, China said that an efficient tsunami alert mechanism would be good for littoral states.
-
ArjunPandit
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4056
- Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
I suspect they would use this to set tracking devices in IOR right under our and claim this as the precedent
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
RD, yes, of course PRC has been a prominent player in 'peace talks'. But, the QCG (Quadrilateral Coordination Group) fell by the wayside after the Taliban Emir Mansour Akhtar was killed in a drone attack more than a year back. The frequent contacts at Beijing between the Taliban & PRC also stopped. China even announced that QCG was now defunct after the Taliban refused to attend the meeting in spite of their closeness to China. Sartaj Aziz said that if the Taliban did not cooperate they would be evicted from Quetta and no medical facility would be extended to them anymore, but nothing worked. Sometimes, the Taliban have a mind of their own too. For over a year now, therefore, everybody has forgotten the QCG mechanism. There has been no new initiative by anyone at all. It is that which PRC is trying to revive taking the lead and that is what is referred to perhaps as a 'first' for China because the QCG was an American initiative and the US is uninterested in that (has been so since Obama's last year in office).Rudradev wrote:Hasn't PRC been part of several multilateral working groups on AfPak for several years now (including US-Pak-PRC-Afghanistan, Rus-Pak-PRC-Afghanistan, etc?)
If so then what is the significance of this "mediation" news (article refers to it as "in a first")? Hasn't PRC always been Pakistan's godfather in any international talks involving Afghanistan? Or is the significance that US, Russia, and other players like India and Iran have now basically abdicated their places at the table, leaving China as the sole "mediator" in the field?
In the last one year several high-profile attacks on Kabul have taken place and China kept a studied silence not willing to offend Pakistan or the Haqqanis. The Haqqanis, under ISI instructions, have always refused to accommodate the ETIM members as part of the evil conglomerate and thus have the gratitude, if not the patronage, of PRC. Can Ghani trust a China that has been so blatantly sided with Pakistan? Of course, he cannot, but then, there is nobody else who is offering any peace to that helpless nation and Ghani's control is shrinking alarmingly. He is forced to clutch at straws now. The Trump administration has no Afghanistan policy yet; Russia has no clout over the warring parties regardless of whatever Lavarov may say about his contacts with the Taliban etc; India is a peripheral player; Iran may have more influence than India because of its contiguity with Afghanistan but is nowhere near the US or China or Pakistan or even Russia in determining the course of events in Afghanistan and moreover its cup of woes is complete with Syria, Muslim NATO etc., leaving China the only viable option now.
IMO, this 'mediation' effort must be read also in the context of Chinese news reports that appear now and then citing that CPEC would resolve the India-Pakistan problem or that SCO would settle the Kashmir & terrorism issues between India-Pakistan. Behind the offer of Afghan mediation must be the ultimate goal of India in the PRC thinking, after all. The Americans created this myth that the Islamist jihadi terrorism in Af-Pak as well as the Afghan-Pakistan issues are related to the 'Kashmir issue'.
I see two strands of Chinese reasoning here. One is that China is desperate to make CPEC, the pioneer project of OBOR, a success but that is becoming increasingly worrisome with each passing day because of the internal situation in Pakistan. This takes precedence over the other strand (explained below) because it is the Chinese economy that is of greatest concern to Xi and his ruling clique of the 25-member Politburo. Xi has earned many enemies with his massive crackdown on corruption and downsizing and reorganization of the PLA and if he doesn't deliver on the faltering economic front, the knives will be out easily. In communist countries, the facade of a strong leader is a mere sand castle. Xi also seems to have ambitions of becoming the first leader after Mao to have more than two terms. At this rate in China, he may have no chance at all.
The other strand is that China wants to extend its economic and military dominance to the diplomatic sphere as well. They were given an opportunity when Clinton asked them to draft the declaration condemning India after the May 1998 events. They did grab that opportunity, but they have remained dormant since then. Even in the climate talks, it was India that took the lead and ensured the success of the Paris talks. On its own, it might have launched projects such as AIIB, OBOR etc or even got involved in high-profile bilateral issues involving itself & ASEAN or Philippines (UNCLOS), but in multilateral fora it has been quite reticent (NSG is an exception. In UNSC, it operates surreptitiously against India). As we know that Xi had determined now that the 'peaceful rise' is over and it has to assert itself, the Chinese may want to be involved more aggressively in the Pakistan-Afghanistan issue as a prelude to settling the India-Pakistan issue. The Chinese may be under the impression that the admission of India into SCO, the backing of a servile Russia to China's mediatory role, the chaos that governs the US these days, the developments in West Asia et. al offer China a golden opportunity to launch forth its diplomatic efforts to be on par (eventually) with its economic & military strengths.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Coping with the China factor in Myanmar - G.Parthasarathy, Business Line
When Aung San Suu Kyi emerged victorious in national elections in Myanmar, there were widespread expectations that given her iconic image in the west, her Government would receive substantial economic assistance from the US and the European Union. Suu Kyi had two priorities on assuming office.
The first was to establish ethnic peace in Myanmar, where minority groups have resorted to armed insurrection. President Thein Sein, who headed the Government earlier, had negotiated cease-fire agreements with a number of these groups. But, a number of influential and powerful groups continued with their revolts.
Suu Kyi’s second priority was to create conditions for accelerated economic growth. Illusions that she may have entertained about receiving substantial western aid were not fulfilled. Myanmar has, however, done well on her second priority, by diversification of agricultural production, while achieving a growth rate of around 8 per cent.
Rather than appreciating Suu Kyi’s efforts to seek ethnic peace, western powers and Islamic busybodies such as Turkey and Malaysia chose to pressurise Myanmar for alleged violation of the human rights of its Rohingya Muslim population. Japan and India have shown understanding of Myanmar’s internal problems. China embarrassed its Southern neighbour by offering to “mediate” in the Rohingya issue. It is, however, China’s approach to Myanmar’s ethnic problems which is forcing Myanmar into a tight Chinese bear hug.
How China prevails
The long-running ethnic insurgencies in Myanmar now involve the dominant majority Bamars facing 22 armed groups, comprising ethnic minorities. Amongst the strongest of these groups are the United WA State Army (UWSA) with 25,000 well-armed cadres and the 5,000-strong Kachin Independence Army (KIA), which operate across the India-China-Myanmar tri-junction. These groups receive weapons and logistical support from China.
The KIA has backed India’s north-eastern separatist groups such as ULFA and the NSCN (Khaplang), in consultation with government officials in China’s neighbouring Yunnan province. The Chinese have equipped the UWSA with sophisticated weapons, used in Myanmar’s insurgency-ridden Shan State. Cross-border attacks by the UWSA are a major instrument of China to pressurise Myanmar.
China also regards Myanmar as a land bridge to the Indian Ocean. It was initially concerned about the reportedly pro-western Suu Kyi’s election victory. However, Beijing skillfully used its security and economic leverage to ‘persuade’ Suu Kyi to give it a significant say in her quest for peace agreements with armed separatist groups. China shielded Myanmar from western criticism in the UN, on the issue of Rohingya Muslims.
It also used short-sighted western aid policies to acquire considerable leverage within Myanmar. It reportedly persuaded the UWSA recently to accept a ceasefire. It is acting similarly with the Kachin Independence Organisation (KIO). China’s envoy to Myanmar has “facilitated” talks with the KIO – a development India should closely monitor. China now has an ability to significantly influence Myanmar insurgent groups.{This is exactly what it is trying to do in Af-Pak. It is with this in mind that India has been accepted in the SCO}
Large Chinese infrastructure and mining projects in Myanmar have come up since the early 1990s, with scant regard for environmental degradation and displacement. Myanmar’s first Constitutional President, Thein Sein, was compelled to suspend a $3.6-billion hydroelectric project called the Myitsone dam because of public protests.
Apart from displacement of thousands, this project involved the transmission of 90 per cent of the power generated to China. Suu Kyi, however, personally and controversially approved, amidst widespread local protests, a Chinese-backed copper mine project, giving the Chinese partner a 30 per cent share of profits.
Another controversial Chinese project is the development of the Bay of Bengal port of Kyauk Pyu, involving an estimated Chinese investment of $7.3 billion. Beijing is looking at a 70-85 per cent equity stake in this project. Alongside the port is a proposed 4,289-acre Kyauk Pyu Economic Zone, where China has sought a 51 per cent stake, with an investment of $2.1 billion. China is reportedly agreeing to not press its demands for the Myitsone hydroelectric project if Myanmar agrees to its terms for projects in Kyauk Pyu. China could, thereafter, assume control of the Kyauk Pyu port and use it for berthing its naval vessels, as it has done in Gwadar. Its navy recently held joint exercises along Myanmar’s shores.
India has continued its engagement with Myanmar, with both Army Chief General B. P. Rawat and Foreign Secretary Jaishankar visiting Myanmar recently. The Indian Armed Forces have traditionally had friendly relations with their Myanmar counterparts. Both countries face problems of armed separatist groups using each other’s soil. Problems for India have now increased, because of covert Chinese support for India’s north-eastern separatist groups.
India at a disadvantage
India has to recognise the reality that it cannot match China in weapons supply, or in a range of infrastructure and industrial projects. India, for example, cannot match Chinese supply of JF 17 fighters manufactured in Pakistan, as our much-touted Light Combat Aircraft has not yet been operationalised.
Likewise, our public sector infrastructure projects such as the Sittwe Port, the Kaladan Corridor linking our landlocked north-eastern States to the Bay of Bengal at Sittwe, or the proposed 1800 MW hydro-electric project, have either been delayed or abandoned.
While diplomatic efforts enabled us to get a stake in successful offshore gas exploration, we lost access to the gas because of our inability – and indeed inefficiency – in devising measures to transport/transfer and utilise the gas, which is now transshipped to China by a pipeline. Private sector projects to use Myanmar’s vast bamboo resources for the paper industry, or investment in the agricultural sector have similarly been delayed, or failed. The main area which has won us gratitude is vocational training and education facilities for Myanmar personnel. {We are big talkers, but our execution is worse than pathetic}
We need to review and restructure our economic cooperation with Myanmar, with an increasing focus on assisting the populations living close to our borders through imaginative schemes for education, health, communications and small/village industries.
The rupee could be made legal tender for such cross-border projects. This could be undertaken in close cooperation with Japan and the Asian Development Bank and duly integrated with new measures now being considered for giving momentum to Regional Cooperation through BIMSTEC. Larger industrial and agricultural projects in Myanmar are best left to market competition, and not undertaken through monopolistic public sector involvement.
The writer is a former High Commissioner to Pakistan
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
China is Nepal’s new best friend - Sanjay Kapoor, Business Line
Sher Bahadur Deuba has become the 11th Prime Minister of Nepal after Prachanda resigned on May 24 — respecting a power-sharing agreement that India had quietly brokered between the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre) last year. Burmese State Counselor Aung San Suu Ki seemed to be as bewildered as many in the subcontinent when she observed some time ago that she had never come across a country with so many ex-PMs as in Nepal.
These rapid changes were a manifestation of not just the social and political churn that the tiny Himalayan nation has been experiencing after the end of Rajshahi, but also due to the aggressive jostling for influence by India and China.
What is intensifying this contestation is China’s attempts to call the shots in Nepal’s politics and India’s attempts to use its shared religion and ethnicity to counter that.
For the past three years, ever since the BJP came to power in Delhi, there has been a renewed attempt by the RSS and its affiliates to spread Hindu consciousness in the turbulent plains of Nepal and the hills.
Cometh Yogi
What has really given impetus to these moves has been the elevation of Yogi Adityanath, head priest of Gorakhnath temple as the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh. The Gorakhnath temple is highly revered in Nepal and during the days of monarchy, the head priest would be placed on a higher pedestal than the King himself.
The coins of that period would also have images of Gorakhnath temple on them. The Yogi had been visiting Nepal periodically and his speech last year at the World Hindu Conference in Kathmandu was particularly illustrative of what the young monk thought of the country’s decision to go secular. He had said that Nepal was losing its identity, which had evolved over the years due to Nepal’s Hindu Kings and their respect for the Gorakhnath temple. He had asserted that Nepal would prosper under this unified identity.
It was apparent that the decision of the Nepalese government to declare itself as a secular nation in their constitution left Yogi and many in the Sangh Parivar deeply distressed.
The Indian government had dispatched Foreign Secretary Jaishankar to convince the Nepalese government against adopting secularism as its guiding principle before the constitution was promulgated.
No to Modi
Pro-Indian PM, Sushi Koirala, sensing the mood in the constituent assembly and outside, had refused to oblige.
His government also denied permission for PM Modi to address a public meeting at Janakpur from where he was to formally announce a four-lane highway to connect it with the Lord Rama’s birthplace, Ayodhya.
“Modi was treated shabbily by Nepalese leaders. If they had been as large hearted as Modi was during his first two visits to Kathmandu then the ties between the two countries would have been in a different orbit,” claimed a Nepalese businessman who has business interests in both the countries.
These two episodes in some ways represented a rupture of ties between the two countries which was further aggravated by the botched up assistance provided during the monster earthquake and later by a long blockade by the people of the plains or Madheshis of the road route that ferried fuel and other goods from India to land locked Nepal.
The resentment of ordinary Nepalese reached feverish levels due to this blockade by the Madheshis that were demanding inclusion and further deepening of constitution’s federal character. The antagonism between the Madheshis and people of the hills was helped by Nepali PM and leader of Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxists and Leninists) KP Sharma Oli.
He sensed the mood against New Delhi post-earthquake and blockade, and created spaces for China to interfere more in its politics and economy. During the blockade, Chinese ended the Indian monopoly to supply fuel to Nepal when they sent their tankers through Tibet.
They also tried to work towards forging left unity by trying to get Oli and his successor, Pushpa Kamal Dahal or Prachanda to work together. This effort did not succeed as India still enjoys great influence in Nepalese politics and it managed to cobble together an alliance of Prachanda-led CPN (Maoist centre) and the Nepali Congress to pull down Oli.
New chinks
On May 24, Prachanda, as part of the power-sharing agreement resigned and paved the way for the new PM who will oversee the next round of local elections on June 14. Prachanda, who displayed greater maturity than in his earlier stint, brought in economic stability to his country that saw the growth rate rise to 6.9 per cent.
He also aligned Nepal closer to China by joining the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). He also gave permission to China to pick the 16 districts that it wanted to develop as part of its poverty alleviation programme.
This freedom was earlier reserved for India, but now politicians in Kathmandu talk openly about maintaining equidistance from the two big neighbours on such matters.
This does not mean that India and China are comfortable with Nepal playing both sides and maximising its self-interest. Though Prachanda, after he demitted office, is trying to show that he is no stooge of New Delhi, Indian government is drawing comfort from the fact that the alliance that it supports has gained in strength.
The Nepali Congress has done well in the first round and could pip Oli’s CPN ( UML) after the second round too.
The parliament elections that take place early next year will test how much of sway Adityanath and the Sangh Parivar have in this deeply religious country to counter the fast-growing Chinese influence.
The writer is the editor of Hardnews
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Chinese videos slam India-Singapore exercise - Indrani Bagchi, ToI
When India and Singapore held advanced naval warfare drills together in the South China Sea in May, an annual engagement, propaganda videos were circulated among Singapore's Chinese-origin citizens criticising the country's decision to hold such an exercise.
One of the videos, which TOI has accessed, laments Singapore as a "small country with people having yellow skin and black heart" for choosing to have stronger ties with the US and India instead of China.
The video, in Chinese, says Singapore's forces are not strong enough by themselves, but with the US and India, could inflict damage on China in the South China Sea.
The alliance, it said, could impact Chinese export and import, most of which take place through the South China Sea. It excoriated Singapore for going with India and the US, even though Singapore had the closest of relations with China.
The exercise was not only military in nature, but part of the celebrations of the 50 years of diplomatic ties between India and Singapore, which is India's closest partner in the ASEAN region and has been its primary supporter in this region as well.
The video makes much of a strategic partnership agreement between Singapore and India (signed in November 2015), and comments on India growing its Navy to be able to control the Indian Ocean.
The video ends with a strange reference to India-Pakistan relations and a map showing CPEC, indicating that if India and Singapore cut off China in the Malacca Straits, they would still have Gwadar port.
Singapore's Chinese-language newspaper too has published opinion pieces with similar views.
Jayadeva Ranade, a China analyst, said the video could be part of unofficial propaganda spread by the local group, United Front, in Singapore.{The Singapore government must take action against this group for sowing differences and damaging Singapore's foreign policy and security. A lot of Singaporean Chinese have business deals in mainland China; but, they also have similar deals with the US, India & Taiwan.}
Officially, though, the Chinese foreign ministry was more non-committal about the bilateral exercises. "If such exercises and cooperation are for the benefit of regional peace and stability, then we have no opposition," foreign ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told a regular news briefing at that time.
"We hold a very open attitude to normal exchanges between countries," she said when asked to comment on the exercise in the South China Sea. "We just hope when relevant countries conduct such exchange and cooperation, they should bear in mind such activities (do) not hurt the interests of other countries or have a negative impact on regional peace and stability," she said.
China has put Singapore under tremendous pressure in the last year, from berating them on a NAM summit statement to refusing to invite Lee Hsien Loong, its prime minister, to the OBOR summit {as well as the incident late last year when Singaporean Army's armoured carriers which were returning from a military exercise in Taiwan were impounded at the HongKong port for false declaration in the manifold. The case is still going on in a HongKong court.}.
Sources say China is now increasing its interactions with Chinese-origin Singaporeans to put pressure on the Singapore government.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Bramha Chellaney
WORLD AFFAIRS
BRAHMA CHELLANEY
JUN 15, 2017 0
Countering China’s High-Altitude Land Grab
NEW DELHI — Bite by kilometer-size bite, China is eating away at India’s Himalayan borderlands. For decades, Asia’s two giants have fought a bulletless war for territory along their high-altitude border. Recently, though, China has become more assertive, underscoring the need for a new Indian containment strategy.
On average, China launches one stealth incursion into India every 24 hours. Kiren Rijiju, India’s Minister of State for Home Affairs, says the People’s Liberation Army is actively intruding into vacant border space with the objective of occupying it. And according to a former top official with India’s Intelligence Bureau, India has lost nearly 2,000 square kilometers to PLA encroachments over the last decade.
DONATE NOW
The strategy underlying China’s actions is more remarkable than their scope. On land, like at sea, China uses civilian resources – herders, farmers, and grazers – as the tip of the spear. Once civilians settle on contested land, army troops gain control of the disputed area, paving the way for the establishment of more permanent encampments or observation posts. Similarly, in the South China Sea, China’s naval forces follow fishermen to carve out space for the reclamation of rocks or reefs. In both theaters, China has deployed no missiles, drones, or bullets to advance its objectives.
China’s non-violent terrestrial aggression has garnered less opposition than its blue-water ambition, which has been challenged by the United States and under international law (albeit with little effect). Indian leaders have at times even seemed to condone China’s actions. During a recent panel discussion in Russia, for example, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that although China and India are at odds over borders, it was remarkable that “in the last 40 years, not a single bullet has been fired because of [it].” The Chinese foreign ministry responded by praising Modi’s “positive remarks.”
Moreover, Modi’s predecessor, Manmohan Singh, used to claim that, in their 5,000-year history, India and China fought only one war, in 1962. What this rose-tinted history failed to acknowledge was that China and India became neighbors only after China annexed the buffer Tibet in 1951.
Given India’s accommodating rhetoric, it is easy to view the country as a paper tiger. While Modi has used the phrase “inch toward miles” as the motto of India-China cooperation, the PLA has continued its cynical territorial aggrandizement by translating that slogan into incremental advance. After spending so many years on the defensive, India must retake the narrative.
The first order of business is to abandon the platitudes. Modi’s calls for border peace and tranquility might be sincere, but his tone has made India look like a meek enabler.
China’s fast-growing trade surplus with India, which has doubled to almost $60 billion on Modi’s watch, has increased Chinese President Xi Jinping’s territorial assertiveness. The absence of clarity about the frontier – China reneged on a 2001 promise to exchange maps with India – serves as cover for the PLA’s aggression, with China denying all incursions and claiming that its troops are operating on “Chinese land.” But, by acquiescing on bilateral trade – the dumping of Chinese-made steel on the Indian market is just one of many examples – India has inadvertently helped foot the bill for the PLA’s encirclement strategy.
China’s financial regional leverage has grown dramatically in the past decade, as it has become almost all Asian economies’ largest trade and investment partner. In turn, many of the region’s developing countries have moved toward China on matters of regional security and transport connectivity. But, as Modi himself has stressed, there remains plenty of room for India to engage in Asia’s economic development. A more regionally integrated Indian economy would, by default, serve as a counterweight to China’s territorial expansion.
India should also beef up its border security forces to become a more formidable barrier to the PLA. India’s under-resourced Indo-Tibetan Border Police, under the command of the home ministry, is little more than a doorman. Training and equipping these units properly, and placing them under the command of the army, would signal to China that the days of an open door are over.
If the tables were turned, and Indian forces were attempting to chip away at Chinese territory, the PLA would surely respond with more than words. But in many cases, Indian border police patrolling the area don’t even carry weapons. With such a docile response, China has been able to do as it pleases along India’s northern frontier. China’s support of the Pakistani military, whose forces often fire at Indian troops along the disputed Kashmir frontier, should be viewed in this light.
The Year Ahead 2017 Cover Image
The PLA began honing its “salami tactics” in the Himalayas in the 1950s, when it sliced off the Switzerland-size Aksai Chin plateau. Later, China inflicted a humiliating defeat on India in the 1962 border war, securing peace, as a state mouthpiece crowed in 2012, on its own terms. Today, China pursues a “cabbage” approach to borders, cutting off access to an adversary’s previously controlled territory and gradually surrounding it with multiple civilian and security layers.
Against this backdrop, the true sign of Himalayan peace will not be the holstering of guns, but rather the end of border incursions. India’s accommodating approach has failed to deter China. To halt further encroachments, India will need to bare its own teeth
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Chinese loans may put Bangladesh in debt trap - ToI
Besides Djibouti, China is developing the following foreign bases: Chongin Port (North Korea), Moresby port (Papua & New Guinea, PNG), Sihanoukville Port (Cambodia), Koh Lanta Port(Thailand), Chittagong Port(Bangladesh), Gwadar Port(Pakistan),Hambanatota Port(Sri Lanka), Male(Maldives), Seychelles, Lagos port(Nigeria), Mombasa Port(Kenya), Dar es Salaam Port(Tanzania), Luanda Port(Angola) and Walvis Bay Port(Namibia). China believes that these ports will take care of the three crucial chokepoints for marine trade namely, Bab-el-Mandeb (oil transport from South Sudan on the Red Sea), Hormuz Strait (almost 40% of China’s total crude oil) and the Malacca Straits (37% of Chinese LNG imports, 46% of gas imports and 59% of oil imports).
The Chinese approach is to own the lands and ports at all the above places. It has succeeded in a few such as Cambodia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Seychelles & Djibouti. The status in North Korea is unknown. It is working on others such as Bangladesh & Thailand.
This behaviour by the Chinese is not a surprise.Lanka's estimated national debt is $64.9 billion, of which $8 billion is owed to China.
China is arm-twisting Bangladesh to convert soft loans it offered -during President Xi Jinping's visit to Dhaka last year -to commercial credit (incurring higher interest rates) with apparently no headway into projects for which the amount was earmarked.
Bangladesh, however, has resisted the move to change pattern of loans for the projects which are part of grandiose OBOR project connecting China with rest of Asia, Africa and Europe. Higher interest on Chinese loans could push Bangladesh into a debt trap like Sri Lanka.
It has been learnt that the Chinese proposal was made by Li Guangjun, economic and commercial counsellor at the Chinese Embassy in Dhaka, during a recent meeting of the Sino-Bangladesh Joint Economic Council. However, China later showed signs of softening its stance in the face of Opposition from Bangladesh, according to Dhaka-based persons familiar with the issue. Converting soft loans into commercial credit means Bangladesh will have to pay higher interest for the loan amount, Bangladesh officials told ET from Dhaka over phone.
Bangladesh signed $25 billion deals with China for nearly two and a half dozen projects during President Xi Jinping's visit to Dhaka in October last year. Chinese officials have claimed that Beijing had not promised that all the projects signed between the two sides during the president's visit would be implemented on the G2G (government to government) basis. The Chinese officials believe that Bangladesh could jointly fund the projects.
But Bangladesh government officials argue, when the agreements are signed at the level of leaders, especially in the presence of two heads of government, the loans are treated as soft loans.
Compared to the Chinese approach India's support of $ 7.5 billion Line of Credit for slew of development projects are offered at a concessional rates. Interest rates of India's Line of Credit to the neighbouring countries are as low as one per cent or even less in some cases. China told Bangladesh that it a detailed list outlining how much of the $25 billion for 34 projects would be treated as soft loans, how much as commercial credit and how much to be contributed by the Bangladesh government.
Besides Djibouti, China is developing the following foreign bases: Chongin Port (North Korea), Moresby port (Papua & New Guinea, PNG), Sihanoukville Port (Cambodia), Koh Lanta Port(Thailand), Chittagong Port(Bangladesh), Gwadar Port(Pakistan),Hambanatota Port(Sri Lanka), Male(Maldives), Seychelles, Lagos port(Nigeria), Mombasa Port(Kenya), Dar es Salaam Port(Tanzania), Luanda Port(Angola) and Walvis Bay Port(Namibia). China believes that these ports will take care of the three crucial chokepoints for marine trade namely, Bab-el-Mandeb (oil transport from South Sudan on the Red Sea), Hormuz Strait (almost 40% of China’s total crude oil) and the Malacca Straits (37% of Chinese LNG imports, 46% of gas imports and 59% of oil imports).
The Chinese approach is to own the lands and ports at all the above places. It has succeeded in a few such as Cambodia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Seychelles & Djibouti. The status in North Korea is unknown. It is working on others such as Bangladesh & Thailand.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Pak’s action against terror funding only on paper, India to tell watchdog - Neeraj Chauhan, ToI
As the UN Sanctions Committee met in June 2015 at India’s request demanding action against the release of the 26/11 Mumbai attack mastermind Lakhvi, by the Pakistani courts, China blocked the move by citing insufficient information. The Indian Prime Minister seemed to have spoken to his Chinese counterpart after that and the Indian Foreign Minister, Ms. Sushma Swaraj also took up the matter with her Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, in the sidelines of the donor conference in Kathmandu where she emphasized that the Chinese action was ‘at variance’ with progress in bilateral ties. Within a few days, China again stood by Pakistan at the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) meet at Brisbane where New Delhi had strongly raised non-compliance by Islamabad on freezing assets of Lashkar-e-Taiba and its affiliates. China, however, felt that Pakistan was doing all it could and had been submitting reports to the Asia Pacific Group (APG) on Money Laundering that collaborates closely with the FATF. China also objected to India raising the issue at the FATF on the grounds that Pakistan was not member of the grouping. In Ufa (Russia) where Prime Minister Modi met the Chinese President Xi Jinping on July 8, 2015, he raised the Lakhvi issue and spoke very candidly about India’s concern. Later, the Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson in Beijing said that “As a permanent member of the UN security council China always deals with the 1267 committee matters based on facts and in the spirit of objectiveness and fairness”, thus defending its own position.
As China supports Pakistani terrorism in general (so long as it is not directed against Xinjiang or Chinese nationals in Pakistan) and LeT, JuD & JeM groups against India in particular, China would certainly argue along the same lines as it did two years back at Brisbane.
It is time we provide moral & diplomatic support to insurgencies in China and be open about that.
Why am I posting a Pakistan-related stuff in this thread?On Sunday, India will take on Pakistan in the final of the ICC Champions Trophy in London. The same day, in Valencia in Spain, it will be a contest of a different sort as the government sets about exposing Pakistan for "hoodwinking" the international community on "terror funding" and not taking any action against Jamaat-ud-Dawa and its arms when the plenary meet of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the international terror financing watchdog, begins.
An Indian delegation headed by Enforcement Directorate chief Karnal Singh will brief the forum, where 198 member countries and the UN, IMF and World Bank will discuss ways to counter terror financing.
India, according to top government sources, has prepared a detailed report on Pakistan which names the country for supporting the funding activities of banned outfits like JuD, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad and others, operating freely from Pakistani soil.
Not just that, India will also inform the international community in the FATF plenary, to be held from June 18 to 23, that JuD has not just increased its activities in Pakistan but also spread its tentacles to Yemen, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and other countries.
Sources said FATF will be informed that Pakistan's action against terror outfits like JuD/LeT and its chief Hafiz Saeed was nothing but "paper activity" which was devoid of any ground work and was meant to "hoodwink the international community".
Based on intelligence collected by Indian agencies, it will be informed that Pakistan had seized only 69 accounts of JuD and its front Falah-i-Insaniyat Foundation (FIF) in 15 years, which was "nothing" and showed Pakistan's true intent about taking action against terror outfits.
India is also armed with more details about the current activities of Saeed, his organisations in Pakistan and beyond.
"JuD, FIF and its student wing Al-Muhammadiya Students (AMS) have indulged in organising lectures, rallies, meetings, fund raising activities and recruiting youngsters to take up jihad against India.
Global terrorists Hafiz Saeed, Abdul Rehman Makki and others of JuD are openly engaged in these activities apart from funeral prayers for terrorists who are sent to India to attack security forces and are killed, but Pakistan has allowed them to continue their activities," a senior home ministry official said.
On the basis of inputs shared by the NIA and other agencies, India will inform international delegates that Pakistan has not taken any action against the perpetrators of 26/11 Mumbai attacks and the January 2016 attack on an IAF base in Pathankot despite sharing all evidence with it.
During its last meeting, the FATF had slammed Pakistan for not blocking the financial routes of JuD and its affiliates.
"Pakistan, if it doesn't take any action, faces the risk of being named a major defaulter of counter-terrorism measures," a government official said. {No, it won't be. It has a powerful ally in the form of China}
Islamabad had taken several measures, including taking over management of UNSCR 1267 designated organisations LeT and its charitable arms — FIF and JuD — and appointing an administrator from Punjab (Pakistan) government to oversee their operations apart from freezing some bank accounts related to individuals and entities associated with LeT, JuD and FIF, banning advertisements seeking funds in the name of charity and holding public rallies.
It had also blocked websites and telephone services for raising funds. However, India maintains that all this was mere "eyewash".
As the UN Sanctions Committee met in June 2015 at India’s request demanding action against the release of the 26/11 Mumbai attack mastermind Lakhvi, by the Pakistani courts, China blocked the move by citing insufficient information. The Indian Prime Minister seemed to have spoken to his Chinese counterpart after that and the Indian Foreign Minister, Ms. Sushma Swaraj also took up the matter with her Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, in the sidelines of the donor conference in Kathmandu where she emphasized that the Chinese action was ‘at variance’ with progress in bilateral ties. Within a few days, China again stood by Pakistan at the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) meet at Brisbane where New Delhi had strongly raised non-compliance by Islamabad on freezing assets of Lashkar-e-Taiba and its affiliates. China, however, felt that Pakistan was doing all it could and had been submitting reports to the Asia Pacific Group (APG) on Money Laundering that collaborates closely with the FATF. China also objected to India raising the issue at the FATF on the grounds that Pakistan was not member of the grouping. In Ufa (Russia) where Prime Minister Modi met the Chinese President Xi Jinping on July 8, 2015, he raised the Lakhvi issue and spoke very candidly about India’s concern. Later, the Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson in Beijing said that “As a permanent member of the UN security council China always deals with the 1267 committee matters based on facts and in the spirit of objectiveness and fairness”, thus defending its own position.
As China supports Pakistani terrorism in general (so long as it is not directed against Xinjiang or Chinese nationals in Pakistan) and LeT, JuD & JeM groups against India in particular, China would certainly argue along the same lines as it did two years back at Brisbane.
It is time we provide moral & diplomatic support to insurgencies in China and be open about that.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
SS sir, the insurgency in China is impossible as there is a big vassal nation of Tibet between China and India. That's the advantage of middle Kingdom with vassal states all around. Even if we encourage any insurgency in Tibet, it's not China proper, they can do any atrocities on Tibetans to suppress such insurgency. The disadvantage for India is that any land grab of Indian territory is loss for India as India doesn't have vassal states around it.SSridhar wrote: As China supports Pakistani terrorism in general (so long as it is not directed against Xinjiang or Chinese nationals in Pakistan) and LeT, JuD & JeM groups against India in particular, China would certainly argue along the same lines as it did two years back at Brisbane.
It is time we provide moral & diplomatic support to insurgencies in China and be open about that.
It's also an opportunity for India to make Tibet as it's vassal state, when (not if) China attacks India sensing some weakness.
So the strategy for India has to be give an illusion to China and drag it for a conflict, and do not stop till we capture Lhasa whatever may be the price in terms of men, material and political and diplomatic costs.
China's security is in Tibet. Cut that off.
Lhasa is not difficult to capture, as we have natural advantage. And that's the fear China has. That's the reason for CPEC and any number of initiatives China is seeking.
We can install Dalai Lama's government and keep our armed forces to protect the government there a'la what US is doing in Afghanistan.
Low level insurgencies only destabilize but are not strategic in nature. Let them get delusional that they are winning and everything going their way, but surprise them with military attack, we can get back Tibet.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Chinese CPEC is like "Ashwamedha yaaga". OBOR conference is like "Rajasuya yaaga".
India should stop CPEC, even if it has to directly confront PLA of China in Tibet.
India should stop CPEC, even if it has to directly confront PLA of China in Tibet.
Re: Various Chinese Minorities
** Long Post **TKiran wrote: . . the insurgency in China is impossible as there is a big vassal nation of Tibet between China and India. That's the advantage of middle Kingdom with vassal states all around. Even if we encourage any insurgency in Tibet, it's not China proper, they can do any atrocities on Tibetans to suppress such insurgency. The disadvantage for India is that any land grab of Indian territory is loss for India as India doesn't have vassal states around it.
TKiran, we can do many things including what you have suggested.
But, we have to also understand the multi-nationalities that comprise China. We may have opportunities.
Here is what I have understood of China's peripheries especially closer to the Indian east. This is a summary from two books on this topic that I have read.
Let me put the context first. By c. 2008, the problems of China were becoming obvious: rampant corruption, the yawning gap between the rich and the poor, the migration of people leading to the coast vs. the interior divide, over dependence on an export economy, and the east-to-west slide in income levels. The Chinese planners concluded that the biggest reason for the gap in GDP between easternn cities such as Hongkong (USD 50K), Beijing, Shanghai (USD 25K each) and Yunnan (USD 3500) in the west was the latter's lack of access to seaports and consequently the export market. It was decided to make China bi-coastal and the project was officially launched in c. 1999 to have the western gateway through Burma to the Indian Ocean, what is known as the 'Go West' policy.
This required integration of the 7% Chinese minority who live mostly in an arc north-west to south-west from Xinjiang (Uyghurs), Tibet(Tibetans), through Yunnan, Guanxi & Guangdong. China officially recognizes 56 'nationalities' as minorities. The borders of modern China were fixed only in the 20th century and do not correspond to the borders of older dynasties. The idea of China has not been a fixed geographical entity over times. So much for the Communist China sympathizers in India who claim Bharat was never a unified territory.
Though Sichuan had been incorporated into China by medieval times, the regions of southwestern & eastern China were annexed only in the 20th century.
The Chinese refer to non-Han minorities as either 'cooked' or as 'non-cooked' depending on whether they are more integrated with the Han or not. The Uyghurs are non-cooked while the accommodating and pleasant Dai of Xsihuangbanna are 'cooked' and the Wa are 'less cooked barbarians'.
The biggest concentration of minorities live in Yunnan (40% non-Han population) and that's why Myanmar has been important to the Chinese calculus. Yunnan means "South of the clouds" and for long has been the wild area southwest of China. The Irrawady, Mekong, Yangtze & the Pearl river all flow through Yunnan as they descend from Tibet.
There are many native people of Yunnan. Chief among them being the Yao. They often fought with the expanding rulers of Han Chinese until they were defeated in the latter half of the 15th century. Another native people are the Miao who were conquered in the 18th century. Then, there are the Buyu people who were defeated in the late 19th century. The Buyu continued to revolt well into the 20th century. As late as 1950s, China still recognized tusi (Chinese for 'local tribal chieftains') in these areas signalling a non-existent Chinese rule. PLA units were fighting fierce resistance in the mountains. With Great Leap Forward, many tusi fled to Myanmar. When Cultural Revolution came in the mid-60s, Yunnan was terribly affected. Ethnic dresses and traditional festivals were banned. 'Enforced suicide' led to sevaral thousands dead. As 'anything different from mainstream Han pratices' was attacked, the Muslims of Yunnan were terribly affected. The Muslims of Shadian, just outside Kunming, revolted in 1975 and PLA had to destroy that town.
North-west of Kunming is Dali which belongs to the Bai people and the Bai Autonomous Prefecture. There are 2 million Bai people. When Yunnan was an independent kingdom, Dali was its capital. The Chinese called their ruler Nanzhao or Lord of the South. By the turn of the first millennium (1000 AD), the Yunnan kingdom became Buddhist and called themselves Gandhara. The old Myanmarese name for Yunnan is Gandhara. They joined hands with the then powerful Tibetans. The Chinese wanted a grand encirclement of the Tibetans through an alliance with Nanzhao, India & the Arabs and the Turks in the west. Wanting an Indian pedigree, the Gandhra kings of Dali claimed themselves to be descendants of 3rd century BC King Asoka. Yunnan has since then been a bridge between India & China.
In the 14th century, the Mongols defeated the Nanzho and brought in Turkish Muslim influence as the commanders were of Turkish origin. A century later, the Ming emperor defeated the Mongols in Yunnan and in the most sustained state-supported Han migration in Chinese history, a million Han chinese settled in Yunnan. Thus, Yunnan became a home to three different communities, the Han, the Turkish-descent Muslims and the various native peoples.
The war between the Han Chinese and the Muslims in Yunnan reached its peak in c. 1856 when the Han launched a sytematic genocidal extermination pogrom against the Muslims killing thousands of them. The Muslims also fought back. Under 'Sultan Suleiman', the Muslims captured Dali and declared an independent kingdom. In 1872, the Manchu emperor decisively defeated the Sultan and massacred the entire Muslim community of Dali. Those who escaped moved to the Shan Hills in Myanmar.
From Dali, the old caravan routes to Tibet headed due north and an important stop on the way was Lijiang. The dominant people of the Lijiang valley are Naxi whose population today is about 300,000. The Naxi had been traditionally trading with Lhasa and through Lhasa with India. The Naxi kingdom has been ruled by the same Mu clan since medieval times. A description of the Naxi kingdom by a self-styled American botanist, Joseph Rock in the National Geographic of 1933 led to the description of Shangri La by the novelist James Hilton for his novel Lost Horizon. Thus, the legend of Shangri La was born. The Yi tribal people inhabit further north of Naxi in the Lingshuan mountain ranges that divide Yunnan from Sichuan. This area, north of Lijiang is further shared by the Mosuo people who practice gender equality and where women warrior are common. This is a matrilineal society with sexual promiscuity. China is even promoting tourism here by even advertising the reputation of promiscuity.
The intention of the Chinese government is to commercially integrate Yunnan with Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar, Bangladesh & India. This will solve its locational disadvantage while improving the living standards for everyone thereby making the minorities feeling involved as part of the Chinese economic growth. In the past Yunnan was the crossroads connecting the northern Han empire with Tibet, Myanmar & India. The Chinese are taking a modern leaf out of history.
Yunnan still has 10 million Miao, 4 million Yao & over a million of Dai people. All the minorities of Yunnan are Therevada Buddhists.
Then there is Tibet. Up until medieval times, Tibet was either an independent country or a collection of independent kingdoms, entirely Buddhist. During the period of Mongol domination of Eurasia, Tibet came under their indirect suzerainty. It was thus Mongolia converted to Tibetan Buddhism. Only later, under the Manchu and Qing dynasty that Tibet came under Chinese suzerainty mainly to keep the British in the western boeders at bay. The Manchus also followed Tibetan Buddhism and held Tibet in high regard. In the early twentieth century, with China itself under great turmoil, the eastern parts of Tibet like Kham & Amdo came under warlord control and proper Tibet under Lhasa's Control declared independence which lasted until October 1950 when PLA marched into Tibet. Initially, the Chinese treated the Dalai Lama reverentially leading the Tibet to sign a 17-point accord with China in 1951. The accord covered only what was known as 'Tibet proper' and discontent in faraway eastern Tibet areas of Kham & Abdo was brutally repressed by the PLA. These fighters sought CIA assistance which was offered to them. The CIA was already active along the Burma-China border arming the remnants of the Chiang-kai-Shek regime. The eastern-Tibet unrest finally spread to Lhasa where tens of thousands of Tibetans were killed by the PLA in 1959. The Dalai Lama escaped to India. Thus, for the first time in history, Tibet was brought under direct Han-Chinese control. The Cultural Revolution of the 60s destroyed monasteries and their rich antique and priceless Buddhist collections. The March 2008 uprising by Buddhist monks in Lhasa spread quickly beyond Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) to other Tibetan-speaking areas such as the Gansu province in the old Silk Road and Sichuan.
The Uighurs, in Xinjiang, are racially Turkish and were once devout Buddhists but during medieval times converted to Islam. Like the Tibetans, the Uyghurs also came under Chinese suzerainty during the Manchu period. In 1933, when the Manchus weakened, the Uyghurs announced their independent Easter Turkestan state out of Kashgar. In July 2009, the Uyghur violence started from near Hong Kong and spread to Urumqi.
Then, there is the rain-forest Xishuangbanna region in south Yunnan bordered by Myanmar & Laos and irrigated by the Mekong. These are the Dai people and Xishuangbanna is the Dai Autonomous Prefectuee. Apart from Xishuangbanna, the Dai people are spread far and wide in the notorious Golden Triangle of the borders of Myanmar (the far-eastern Shan state), Thailand & Laos. In fact, Greater Dailand beyond the Golden Triangle and has always been the place of refuge forvthose who rejected the Chinese rule. While in Yunnan, the Dai are influenced by the Chinese culture and profess Chinese ways, closer to the Burmese border or in the Shan state of eastern Myanmar, they identify more closely with the Burmese and in northern Thailand, they are more Thais. A Dai family may have relatives at all these places.
Han Chinese are attracted to the capital of Xishuangbanna, Jinghong, by its tropical climate and exotic nature, especially their presumed sexual promiscuity. The Dais celebrate their new year, called Songkron just like the Thais (or Sankranti in India) in mid-April. Water is splashed everywhere. It was only in c 1953, when the Dai ruler of Xishungbanna was stripped of his Kingdom, that China began registering officially its minorities. In the end, it lumped them all (over 260) under 55 names. More than half of all Chinese minorities hail from Yunnan. In order to prevent such violences as in Tibet & Xinjiang, the Chinese authorities are trying to keep the minorities of Yunnan happy. Besides, the minorities of Yunnan are not homogenous like in Tibet or in Xinjiang. China allows far more cultural freedom to these minorities even excepting them from the rogorous one-child policy. Buddhist monks are ubiquitous in Banna. The long borders of Yunnan with neighbouring countries are also porous because China does not consider these minorities as a threat. Because of this reason, the borders are also most lawless especially with drug & human trafficking. The numerous minorities of Banna (as Xishuangbanna is referred to locally) is difficult to be unified by a single leader unlike in Tibet ir in Xinjiang because there are not only Dais (known as Tai Lue outide of China) but also twelve other ethnic groups such as Wa, Bulang, Akha, Lahu, Miao et al.
China's stability is largely based on its phenomenal economic strength and the promise of more to come.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
^^^wow, great post.
But do we still have the sufficient population who are still willing to fight like the Tibetan or Uyghurs, without getting decimated by PLA?
But do we still have the sufficient population who are still willing to fight like the Tibetan or Uyghurs, without getting decimated by PLA?
Why we still finance the PLA with our trade deficit?China's stability is largely based on its phenomenal economic strength and the promise of more to come.
Brahma Chellaney @Chellaney
·
Jun 16
By allowing China to double its trade surplus in 3 years, India foots the bill for the PLA’s encirclement strategy:
-
ArjunPandit
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4056
- Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
because traiters in ndtv say that govt should block it rather than citizens and traders of our country buycotting it..we are funding **** for those that rape us..
-
sanjaykumar
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6118
- Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
the insurgency in China is impossible as there is a big vassal nation of Tibet between China and India. That's the advantage of middle Kingdom with vassal states all around. Even if we encourage any insurgency in Tibet, it's not China proper, they can do any atrocities on Tibetans to suppress such insurgency. The disadvantage for India is that any land grab of Indian territory is loss for India as India doesn't have vassal states around it
In fact this is source of great concern for the Han, relatively small number of minorities occupy very large areas of what the Han call China.
An insurgency in China proper is going to have a short half-life as the Han smother it with sheer numbers.
It is like a Muslim insurgency in Kashmir versus Andhra.5
Very informative post SSridhar, good to have access to R&AW briefing notes
In fact this is source of great concern for the Han, relatively small number of minorities occupy very large areas of what the Han call China.
An insurgency in China proper is going to have a short half-life as the Han smother it with sheer numbers.
It is like a Muslim insurgency in Kashmir versus Andhra.5
Very informative post SSridhar, good to have access to R&AW briefing notes
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
WRT Trade, things are never that simple. Lets look at an example and this is only an example.
We import a lot of solar equipment (panels, accessories, etc) from China. China has a lot of spare capacity and is willing to supply below cost. So, the impact is as follows
1. We get to build our solar program cheaper that it would be possible. Competition brings down the prices in the market. Indian supplies would be expensive because they lack scale. (+)
2. China subsidizes our build by supplying at below cost given their over production. (+)
3. Faster ramp-up in capacities than if Chinese were banned from the Indian market. (+)
4. Loss to local manufacturing base / wealth creating. (-)
5. Money outflow to China (-)
6. Jobs outflow at least the factory jobs that would have been created by local suppliers. (-)
There are some positives and some negatives in *most* such situation. It depends on ones POV and the industry/situation under consideration.
We import a lot of solar equipment (panels, accessories, etc) from China. China has a lot of spare capacity and is willing to supply below cost. So, the impact is as follows
1. We get to build our solar program cheaper that it would be possible. Competition brings down the prices in the market. Indian supplies would be expensive because they lack scale. (+)
2. China subsidizes our build by supplying at below cost given their over production. (+)
3. Faster ramp-up in capacities than if Chinese were banned from the Indian market. (+)
4. Loss to local manufacturing base / wealth creating. (-)
5. Money outflow to China (-)
6. Jobs outflow at least the factory jobs that would have been created by local suppliers. (-)
There are some positives and some negatives in *most* such situation. It depends on ones POV and the industry/situation under consideration.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
With bania thinking you can conjure up profits in any transaction, does not mean its good for the country.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Ban Chinese solar suppliers and you will see the cost of projects escalate and the price per unit of electricity too. The benefit to the local industry will be minuscule 'cos they don't have the capacity to ramp up while the cost to the mangos will be significant. Even then IIRC, the *core* PV Ingots/Wafers/cells will be imported and the local *banias* will tack their own margins to the price.
The net effect will be to shift orders to the West instead of China and at a higher per unit cost. OR, slow the growth of the Solar power industry to a snails pace while trying to help the local *banias* build capacity BUT who will anyway import the core components from China.
Your choice. BTW, there is no escaping the *bania*.
The net effect will be to shift orders to the West instead of China and at a higher per unit cost. OR, slow the growth of the Solar power industry to a snails pace while trying to help the local *banias* build capacity BUT who will anyway import the core components from China.
Your choice. BTW, there is no escaping the *bania*.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
We banias will look at the fastest way to add solar electric generation capacity, while the Chinese will look at the fastest way to produce solar electric generation equipment. That's the difference, at the end of the day they will have the capability to manufacture and we will have to console ourselves with the few bucks we saved.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Great Post, SSridhar garu.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
China unveils Maritime Silk Road plans - PTI, Economic Times
Total humbug when China promises the following:China today unveiled plans for three ocean-based "blue economic passages" which will connect Asia with Africa, Oceania and Europe under the Maritime Silk Road venture viewed with concern by India over its impact on the Indian Ocean region.
The proposal was included in "Vision for Maritime Cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative," which was released by the National Development and Reform Commission and the State Oceanic Administration.
China is willing to engage in all-dimensional and broad- scoped maritime cooperation and build open, inclusive cooperation platforms with countries along the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road, promoting mutually beneficial "blue partnerships" and forging a "blue engine" for sustainable development, according to the document.
China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) includes a maze of roads like the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) , Bangladesh, China, India, Myanmar (BCIM) corridor, and the Maritime Silk Road.
While India backs the BCIM, it is opposed to the USD 50 billion CPEC and remains silent on the Maritime Silk Road due to security concerns over its impact in India's backyard.
India skipped China's Belt and Road Forum that was held in Beijing to highlight the BRI last month in which leaders of 29 countries took part.
The three blue economic passages will be priority maritime cooperation tasks.
The China-Indian Ocean-Africa-Mediterranean Sea blue economic passage, will run westward via the South China Sea to the Indian Ocean, and link with the China-Indochina Peninsula Economic Corridor, and connect with the China-Pakistan, and Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar economic corridors, the document said.
The China-Oceania-South Pacific passage will run southward via the South China Sea into the Pacific Ocean, while another economic passage is also envisioned linking Europe via the Arctic Ocean.
The document called on countries along the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road to focus on "sharing blue space and developing the blue economy," which will target issues such as marine environment protection, marine interconnectivity, maritime security and common oceanic governance.
China has promised to abide by market rules and international norms, giving play to the primary role of enterprises, the document said.
The document stressed joint development and benefits sharing among participating countries. "We will plan together, develop together and share the fruits of cooperation," it said.
- MSR will be "sharing blue space and developing the blue economy" - China never shares anything with anyone else without a hefty and debilitating RoI and the development it talks about are its own developments alone. Examples abound including the latest, Bangladesh.
- MSR will target issues such as marine environment protection, marine interconnectivity, maritime security and common oceanic governance - China is the farthest removed from concerns for 'environment protection' especially in its indentured countries that will be part of MSR. Examples abound again from Myitsone (Burma), Northern Cascades (POK), Copper project (Afghanistan), various projects in Latin American countries. As for 'security', the less said the better because it is China which is the biggest security threat. "Common oceanic governance", are you kidding us all, China? What the frig are you talking about, China, after your reaction to the UNCLOS in the Philippines case and your procrastination for 15 long years in signing a Conduct of Parties (CoP) with the ASEAN members? You have the temerity to say "Common oceanic governance" with a straight face?
- "abide by market rules and international norms" - China has been one of the biggest violators of these.
- "We will plan together, develop together and share the fruits of cooperation," - After the unfortunate debt death trap of several countries, nobody can believe this without a bucketful of salt.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
China is trying to take the initiative in Afghanistan.
Chinese FM due [in Islamabad] on 24th to discuss Afghan reconciliation - DT
Chinese FM due [in Islamabad] on 24th to discuss Afghan reconciliation - DT
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi is scheduled to arrive in Islamabad on June 24 on a two-day visit for talks to push for peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan, officials said on Wednesday.
Both sides will discuss how to revive the Quadrilateral Coordination Group (QCG) of Afghanistan, China, Pakistan and the US for peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan.
The QCG has been almost dysfunctional since the American drone killed Afghan Taliban chief Mullah Akhtar Mansour in May last year. Mansour was killed just three days after the last meeting of the QCG was held in Islamabad on May 18.
Wang will arrive in Islamabad after his visit to Kabul where he will discuss the same issues with the Afghan leaders. Afghan sources say the Chinese foreign minister would hold official talks with his Afghan counterpart Salahuddin Rabbani and was likely to call on President Ashraf Ghani and Chief Executive Dr Abdullah Abdullah.
The Chinese FM will hold meetings in Islamabad on June 25, a source told Daily Times.
Wang will visit Kabul and Islamabad nearly two weeks after Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif met on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, on June 9.
Some sources say that China had helped in the Sharif-Ghani meeting at a time relations between the two countries are at the lowest ebb. Beijing is also planning to host a trilateral summit of Afghanistan, Pakistan and China.
In Astana, the prime minister and the Afghan leader agreed to use the QCG to promote peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan that could be seen an important development in view of the key role the grouping can play in the peace process.
Pakistan, which believes the QCG is an effective forum, had been effectively involved in the process since it was launched in Islamabad in December 2015 on the sideline of the Heart of Asia – Istanbul Process.
China and Pakistan had been working closely under the QCG; however, it is now up to the US and Afghanistan how to use this forum to negotiate the settlement. Another regional peace initiative led by Russian was also an important forum to find out ways to promote political process; however, the US seemed to be perturbed over Moscow’s active diplomacy and refused to take part in the April meeting. All key regional players had taken part in the meeting.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
China asks India, US not to disturb peace in South China Sea - PTI
China on Friday asked India and the US not to disturb peace in the strategic South China Sea and play a "constructive role" in the disputes there, as the issue was likely to be discussed during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's meeting with President Donald Trump.
Modi will meet Trump on June 26. He will hold talks with Trump on a range of bilateral, regional and international issues of common concern.
Asked about the cooperation between India and the US on Indo-Pacific region which includes the South China Sea, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang said the situation in the disputed region was "cooling down".
"With concerted efforts of China and ASEAN countries the situation there is cooling down. We hope other countries especially non-regional countries can respect the efforts by the regional countries to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea and can play a constructive role in this regard," Geng said.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
https://twitter.com/Leopard212/status/8 ... 3679721472
Wandering Baba @Leopard212
A skirmish has been reported on Indian side of Sikkim-Bhutan-Tibet Tri junction (East of Chumbi Valley)
Chinese troops hit Indian bunkers.
This action by Chinese troops have led to Kailash Mansarovar Yatra via Nathu La being suspended.
Chinese destroyed recently repaired Indian bunkers, at Dokala, 14 days ago.
This was an innocuous statement from the Foreign Office, on the troubling situation as it exists in Sikkim.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
This is a clear escalation by PRC in response to our campaign of pulverizing Paki bunkers on the LOC/IB.