Breaking: Australia government warns that Australians travelling to China could face 'arbitrary detention', as relations between the countries continue to deteriorate.
M_Joshi wrote:China’s Superpower Dreams Are Running Out of Money
FP's take on supaa-pawaa dreams & houls...
Possibly with the current trend in defense spending ... but likely the trend will reverse.Saurav Jha @SJha1618
Obviously, China thinks it gains either way. If India doesn't spend enough on the land border then it thinks it can get away with creeping encroachment. And if India does spend enough, then Beijing thinks India's Navy will get neglected.
The offensive Mountain divisions that were put on back-burner would have to be revived and we do need conventionally armed BM based Rocket forces to hit China back.The only way to break China's expansionist game against India is to develop a land-based force posture that is geared towards serious offensive action across the Himalayas at more than one stretch. This must be backed up with a large SRBM/MRBM force armed with nuke warheads.
I think we will still need Naval expansion with hunter-killer subs, warships, SATInt, missiles, etc.This will mitigate the problem of not spending enough in the naval sphere, because this will not be a 'defensive posture'. China will know that it will lose more than face and over time these offensive formations will become a counterpressure tool on Zhongnanhai/Beijing.
Rsatchi wrote:Ashokji
Don't you think this is the right time for India to be making overtures to these countries and also France/Italy/Spain
Modiji has that personal charisma to take it to another level if need be.
The only sticking point here would be our relationship vis-à-vis Russia.
How can India keep Unkil and Dubya at an arms length from this grouping is the big question
"We’ve now reached the point where the FBI is opening a new China-related counterintelligence case approximately every ten hours."
Wray said Americans should keep three things in mind:
- China's leaders believe they are in a "generational fight" to make China the "world's only superpower by any means necessary."
- Beijing uses a diverse set of methods to achieve its goals, including economic espionage, intelligence gathering, pushing for censorship at universities, and "malign foreign influence," referring to covert and coercive attempts to make powerful people advocate for China's interests in the U.S.
- China is taking advantage of America's open system, while preserving its own closed system, such as by working through ostensibly private Chinese companies to achieve state goals.
India on Monday rejected China’s demand to grant it market economy status, amid the ongoing face-off between the two armies along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). New Delhi will continue to treat its neighbour as a non-market economy, which allows it to impose steep anti-dumping duties on imports from China.
pankajs wrote:While this was always on card it still merits an entry here ...
https://www.livemint.com/news/world/ind ... 36306.html
India rejects market economy tag for ChinaIndia on Monday rejected China’s demand to grant it market economy status, amid the ongoing face-off between the two armies along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). New Delhi will continue to treat its neighbour as a non-market economy, which allows it to impose steep anti-dumping duties on imports from China.
Suraj wrote:#CostliestWarTheyEverFought
m_saini wrote:pankajs wrote:
OT, but it's hilarious to see them refer to us as such. No "hindu nationalist BJP", "Nazi inspired RSS", "Herr Modi, the then Guj CM in 2002" buzzwords when bharat is working against someone they don't approve of. After the chinks are taken care of, and they will be given the direction and pace marching on, no prizes to guess who will be next in line.
If the chinis weren't hell bent on fingering us, I'd love for them to teach the massas a lesson. But alas.
pankajs wrote:While this was always on card it still merits an entry here ...
https://www.livemint.com/news/world/ind ... 36306.html
India rejects market economy tag for ChinaIndia on Monday rejected China’s demand to grant it market economy status, amid the ongoing face-off between the two armies along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). New Delhi will continue to treat its neighbour as a non-market economy, which allows it to impose steep anti-dumping duties on imports from China.
RaviB wrote:Suraj wrote:#CostliestWarTheyEverFought
Suraj ji, wasn't the "war on sparrows" costlier, at least in terms of lives (30-40 million)?
Gwadar itself could be vulnerable to Indian Air Force attack, however. But it adds political and military risks as it is in a third country’s territory. Attempts to blockade the port, like the Malacca Strait, could also be considered. But this would draw Indian Navy assets away from the Malacca Strait and other missions.
Additionally India’s ability to threaten goods going via Gwadar, could be complicated by the increasing Chinese naval presence in the Indian Ocean. In fact the same goes for the Malacca Strait. China has already built a strong base in Djibouti on the Horn of Africa. And it seems likely that the Chinese Navy, known as the PLAN, will establish more substantial fleet there. Chinese submarines may also become a regular threat in the area.
In the barren, high altitude Himalayan region between China and India, a clash on June 15 left twenty Indian soldiers dead. Nationalists on both sides called for demonstrations of strength, but cooler heads prevailed. As they de-escalated the conflict at the border, the battlefield shifted to other areas of competition. India, with an economy one-fifth the size of China’s, has struggled to find avenues for inflicting punishment on China. Even among India’s closest allies on the South Asian sub-continent, China has made inroads in recent years. Bangladesh and Nepal responded to June’s border conflict with silence.
In Myanmar, 4000 kilometers east of where the fighting happened, the past two weeks have provided India some much needed good news.
Beijing’s headaches there began on June 24, when a large cache of Chinese-manufactured weapons was seized in Thailand. The weapons were destined for some of the ethnic separatist armies waging war on Myanmar’s military. In the past, Myanmar has been hesitant to criticize China in such instances. It is heavily dependent on China and has little leverage in the relationship.
Last week, however, the government offered an unusually sharp response. General Min Aung Hlaing, Commander-in-Chief of Myanmar’s military, obliquely called China out for interfering in domestic politics. Speaking with Russian state media, Min asked for international help to keep “strong forces” out of Myanmar. “A country may be able to suppress terrorist organizations on its soil. But in cases when there are strong forces behind that terrorist organization, the country alone may not be able to handle it,” he said.
General Min’s statement came four days after he met with Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh. The two discussed expanding military cooperation in domains such as counter insurgency, according to a spokesperson for Myanmar’s military. In the context of his meeting with an Indian counterpart, General Min’s statement suggests that India’s support enabled Myanmar to adopt a harder line with Beijing.
For decades, the internationally isolated junta that ruled Myanmar relied on China for military and economic life support. Between 1988 and 2013, when Myanmar had lower imports per capita than North Korea, China provided 42 percent of foreign investment flow into Myanmar and 60 percent of the military’s weapons. “As Western rhetoric in favor of an immediate democratic transition became more shrill, China’s steady declarations of friendship and pledges of ‘non-interference in the internal affairs of Myanmar’ rose in value,” Thant Myint-U, a historian, wrote in his 2011 book Where China Meets India.
China’s promises of non-interference were regularly broken, of course. China backed a communist insurgency in Myanmar throughout the Cold War, and for the last two decades it has supplied weapons and support to Myanmar’s largest ethnic armies, the United Wa State Army. In 2015, the Wa State Army refused to sign a ceasefire, reportedly under orders from Beijing. Myanmar, lacking alternatives, had to accept China’s behavior.
Its options expanded when Indian policy changed. Until the 1990s, India, like most democracies, refused to do business with Myanmar’s ruling junta. It sponsored UN resolutions condemning Myanmar, and Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes even personally allowed exiled Burmese activists to stay in his home.
But as China’s influence among its neighbors grew, so too did Myanmar’s strategic importance to Indian policymakers. India dropped its former intransigence toward the regime, adopting a policy of non-interference. In 2004, India hosted Than Shwe, ruler of the military junta, for a lavish state visit.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has put Myanmar at the center of efforts to elevate India’s ties with its bordering states and with ASEAN through his Neighborhood First and Act East policies. Myanmar is the only ASEAN nation that enjoys a separate division within India’s External Affairs Ministry, a distinction which testifies to its weight in India’s foreign policy considerations.
While many Western nations put rapprochement with Myanmar on hold after the military forcibly expelled 700,000 people of the Rohingya minority between 2015 and 2017, India has continued to embrace its neighbor. In November 2017, India and Myanmar’s militaries held their first bilateral exercises. Soon after, they launched Operation Sunshine, a joint-military campaign to root out Indian separatist groups based at their shared border. In 2019, they inked a landmark defense agreement that saw Myanmar purchase its first submarine.
India has come under fire for supporting Myanmar’s government. Its most strident critics claim the partnership is ethically compromising while offering “little pay off.” Last week’s events suggest otherwise. A statement from Myanmar’s Commander in Chief lashing out at the interference of “strong forces” might not seem like much. But when compared to the military’s reticence in previous such instances, the statement indicates a notable shift against China.
In Myanmar, India has a partner waiting to be further engaged. Anti-China sentiment is widespread among Myanmar’s military brass, not to its people. General Min’s statement should be read as an invitation for India to provide Myanmar an alternative to widely loathed Chinese support.
For India, this is a rare window of opportunity to chip away at China’s regional position without needing to outspend China. India should double down on its commitment to its eastern neighbor through new economic and military initiatives. Doing so makes China’s missteps into India’s gains. Now is the time for India to act.
Suraj wrote:RaviB wrote:
Suraj ji, wasn't the "war on sparrows" costlier, at least in terms of lives (30-40 million)?
Boss, technically you're right that taking a gun and shooting oneself in the foot could qualify as 'war' , but usually that refers to dealing with other parties
Tuan wrote:In Myanmar, A Rare Glimmer of Hope for Indian Regional Policy
https://thegeopolitics.com/in-myanmar-a ... al-policy/...India has come under fire for supporting Myanmar’s government. Its most strident critics claim the partnership is ethically compromising while offering “little pay off.” Last week’s events suggest otherwise. A statement from Myanmar’s Commander in Chief lashing out at the interference of “strong forces” might not seem like much. But when compared to the military’s reticence in previous such instances, the statement indicates a notable shift against China.
In Myanmar, India has a partner waiting to be further engaged. Anti-China sentiment is widespread among Myanmar’s military brass, not to its people. General Min’s statement should be read as an invitation for India to provide Myanmar an alternative to widely loathed Chinese support...
Amid India-China Standoff, Govt To Restrict Chinese Firms From Participating In 7,500 MW Ladakh Solar Power Project
https://swarajyamag.com/news-brief/amid ... er-project
The deadly border conflict between India and China in the Ladakh region is now setting the ground for a first set of restrictions that India proposes to impose on imports from the Asian giant.
Sources said that efforts were on at the official level to explore ways of denying Chinese firms from participating in the bids for the upcoming 7,500 MW solar power project in Ladakh.
Why E-Commerce Giants Are Dragging Their Feet On Country-Of-Origin Rules
https://swarajyamag.com/business/why-e- ... igin-rules
While it is nobody’s case that genuine implementation issues should be ignored by the babus who man DPIIT, one has to separate the real reasons for the foot-dragging from the operational ones.
pankajs wrote:<snip>
When one looses contact with reality on lists all measures you have listed as "Diplomatic measures". The FACT remains, the Chinese are able to buy influence worldwide because of the economic power. Our neglect of our economy after the initial burst of reform following 1991 is coming back to bite us.
Rest is all hogwash.
‘China pumped in a lot of money for Duterte @pcoogov in the 2016 Philippines election to ensure a more compliant government because of the @PCA_CPA judgement.’ Ex-envoy @anilwad @ASHWINAHMAD3 part of our China: Serial Aggressor series
What China has done it Philippines backed by its economic clout that also translates into military clout in its region and globally.‘U.S. and Japanese aid and investment ‘could help Duterte recalibrate his position, but it is clear the economic stranglehold that Beijing has over Manila will not go away anytime soon’ @ASHWINAHMAD3 @StratNewsGlobal @USEmbassyPH @indembmanila @JaideepMazumda2 @anilwad
Ramping up the pressure
#Australia suspends extradition treaty with #HongKong
and
Announces changes in immigration rules for Hong Kongers
KL Dubey wrote:The Chinese seem to be investing in a lot of African and IOR countries, some of these are loans that lead to debt traps. I'm not saying India should throw cash around, but we should start working with these countries to squeeze the Chinese and switch over infrastructure and other projects to India.
India plans to invite Australia to join the annual Malabar naval exercise that has so far included just Japan and the U.S., in a move that could risk China’s ire. {Huh . . .?}
The decision to include Australia in the drills — the first time all members of the regional grouping known as the Quad will be engaged at a military level — comes as Beijing and New Delhi are caught up in their worst border tensions in four decades. The exercise will bring together the navies of India, Japan, Australia and the U.S. in the Bay of Bengal at the end of the year, according to senior Indian officials who asked not to be identified, citing rules.
New Delhi is expected to clear the way next week for a formal invitation to Australia following final government clearance and consultations with the U.S. and Japan, the officials said.
“The timing of India potentially letting Australia into Malabar would be especially significant at this juncture,” said Derek Grossman, researcher at the Washington-based RAND Corporation who worked in the U.S. intelligence community for more than a decade. “It would send a significant message to China that the Quad — U.S., Australia, Japan, and India — are de facto conducting joint naval exercises, even if not technically conducted under the auspices of a Quad event.”
China has been uncomfortable with the informal coalition of four democracies, which was first formed in 2004 to help nations in the Indo-Pacific after the tsunami and revived in 2017. Post the coronavirus pandemic, the grouping has been coordinating efforts every month with Vietnam, South Korea and New Zealand.
Indian Navy Spokesperson Commander Vivek Madhawal declined to comment.
A spokesperson for Australia’s defence department said in an emailed statement on Friday that while the nation was yet to receive an invitation to Exercise Malabar, “Australia sees value in participating in quadrilateral defense activities in order to increase interoperability and advance our collective interests in a free, open and prosperous Indo-Pacific region.”
Strengthening Ties
While the Malabar exercises between U.S. and Indian navies were instituted in 1992, they have been more regular since 2004 with other Asian nations joining in the annual event. China had objected to the only other time Australia participated in the drills along with India, Japan, U.S. and Singapore in 2007.
India’s inclusion of Australia this year follows a defence agreement and upgrading ties to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. The Mutual Logistics support agreement announced in May by Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and Scott Morrison allows access to each other’s bases and ports. India has a similar agreement with the U.S.
Canberra’s inclusion in the games was “only a matter of time” given improving defense and economic ties, according to Biren Nanda, former Indian High Commissioner to Australia and senior fellow at Delhi Policy Group. Australia’s merchandise trade with India for the year ended June 2019 was A$21.1 billion ($14.5 billion), according to Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
“There’s no direct relation between inviting Australia and what’s happening at the Sino-Indian border,” said Nanda in a phone interview. “This was a natural progression. Yet the question will be raised: how would the Chinese regard this? And they will react negatively. Just like they had done earlier.”
Weaponized Quad
China objected to Japan’s inclusion in the U.S-India annual Malabar event in 2015 with the then foreign ministry spokesperson Hong Lei warning “relevant countries” to not “provoke confrontation and create tension” in the region. Five years later, with an assertive China pushing neighbours across the Asian seas, Nanda expects a similar response.
Yet, there may be more acceptance to the idea of “like-minded democracies that seek to keep the Indo-Pacific free and open” amid India’s rapidly souring China ties, purely out of frustration, said Rajeswari Pillai Rajagoplan, distinguished fellow at New Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation and author of ‘Clashing Titans: Military Strategy and Insecurity Among Asian Great Powers.’
Although India and China are now in the process of disengaging along their 3,488 kilometer (2,167 mile) unmarked boundary in the Himalayas after high-level military and diplomatic talks, the deadly clashes that followed the months-long standoff in the Galwan valley was a blow to relations between the nuclear-armed neighbours.
“Especially after Galwan, there’s a growing realization in New Delhi’s elite circles that its increasingly difficult to trust China. They have broken more than four decades of agreements. Good trade ties are no guarantee of peace,” said Rajagoplan. “They have time and again tried to interfere in other nations’ foreign policy. But there’s an agreement in India that China should not have a say in who our friends are.”
With Washington indicating its willingness to back the region through an increased force deployment in Asia, the Malabar exercises may take on more importance.
“The Quad has always been a security platform but didn’t have a military context to it,” said Rajagopalan. “The Malabar exercises may give it just that thanks to China upping its ante and threatening the region’s security.”
SSridhar wrote:In clear message to China, India to invite Australian Navy for Malabar drill - Economic Times
Ryan Browne @rabrowne75
The State Department has approved a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Japan of 105 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft and related equipment for an estimated cost of $23.11 billion.
After the founding of the People’s Republic in 1949, China was initially focussed on the consolidation of the “homeland”. Its horizons broadened as its economy went global, and the consequent challenge was encapsulated by President Hu Jintao in November 2003 to party cadres as China’s “Malacca Dilemma”. They imagined that others would block the Malacca Straits to “contain” the Chinese. From that point forward, China has strategised to dominate not just the Malacca Straits, but the ocean beyond it. The PLA Navy (PLAN) made its first operational deployment in the Gulf of Aden in 2008; in December 2009 retired PLAN Admiral Yin Zhuo referred to a possible overseas base or facility; in 2010 a China State Oceanic Administration report alluded to plans to build aircraft carriers.
By 2012 China was ready to make the move into the Indian Ocean. A Maritime Rights and Interests Leading Group was established inside the Communist Party. The Report to the 18th Party Congress in the same year saw the first official reference to “building China into a sea-power nation”. The plan was presented as the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road in Jakarta in October 2013, carefully wrapped in terms of trade and finance, in order to disguise its dual purpose. While some Chinese scholars advanced the idea of building a “harmonious ocean”, in May 2014 three Chinese researchers affiliated to the China Naval Research Institute laid out the real game-plan in their article, “The Strategic Scenario in the Indian Ocean and the Expansion of Chinese Naval Power”.
India has be be subdues/subjugated else there is simply no way for the Chinese to dominate the IOR. That is a strategic Chinese imperative. India, OTOH, if it makes progress on its growth trajectory and invests in sea denial capacity, could single highhandedly scuttle the Chinese plans in 10-15 years. In the interim, it is in our interest to align with like minded nations in the Indo-pacific region to build a joint counter.Acknowledging that US hegemony and India’s regional influence in the Indian Ocean posed challenges to the Chinese plan, the authors laid out the inherent deficiencies that China needed to overcome, namely that (a) it is not a littoral state; (b) its passage through key maritime straits could be easily blocked; and (c) the possibility of US-India cooperation against China. They suggested that these deficiencies might be overcome by (1) carefully selecting sites to build ports — Djibouti, Gwadar, Hambantota, Sittwe and Seychelles were specifically named; (2) by conducting activities in a low-key manner to “reduce the military colour as much as possible”; and (3) by not unnerving India and America by cooperating at first, then slowly penetrating into the Indian Ocean, beginning with detailed maritime surveys, ocean mapping, HADR, port construction and so on. The Chinese have moved precisely along those lines.
While the official establishment continues to deny that the BRI has military or geo-strategic intent, a Chinese scholar at Jiao Tong University has recently acknowledged that the dual-use ports are likely to support future projection of military power.
Good thing is that IF ex-FS is cognizant of the Chinese strategy, the GOI too would be aware.The Indo-Pacific idea might potentially derail their carefully crafted plans. It is inclusive, participative and evolving through open discussion; the Maritime Silk Road by contrast is a Chinese fait accompli. After initially disparaging the idea, they now wish to cause alarm by raising fears about Great Power “strategic collision” caused by the so-called American-led “containment” strategy. This is the classic Chinese ruse of deflecting attention from the real issue on hand, their efforts to dominate the Indian Ocean. It is important to look past their propaganda. In September 2019, Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng said: “We are firmly against attempts to use the Indo-Pacific strategy as a tool to counter the BRI or even contain China”. China still thinks in terms of balance of power while speaking about a Community with a Shared Future of Mankind. It should re-consider its position and view the Indo-Pacific idea as an instrument for advancing common interests, and not make it a source of conflict or tension.
Amazon says employees are not being forced to delete TikTok
https://www.androidcentral.com/amazon-e ... eir-phones
Update, July 10 (5:00 pm ET): NBC reporter Kevin Collier has received an email from Amazon that says this message was sent "in error".
https://twitter.com/rabrowne75/status/1281334910620446721The State Department has approved a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Japan of 105 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft and related equipment for an estimated cost of $23.11 billion.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/lone-wolf-the-west-should-bide-its-time-friendless-china-is-in-trouble-20200709-p55adj.html
Lone wolf: The West should bide its time, friendless China is in trouble
India has to be very careful because we share a common but disputed border while others can wait China out form farr.
India, unlike west, had to climb the economic and military ladder to ensure peace of its shared border with China.
Jeff M. Smith @Cold_Peace_
Now Italy too?
"Telecom Italia excluded China’s Huawei Technologies from a tender it launched this month for 5G equipment for the core network it is preparing to build in Italy and Brazil."
Approved suppliers: Cisco, Nokia, Ericsson, Mavenir/Microsoft.
I guess that BRI MoU Italy signed with China hasn't worked out as expected.
Aldonkar wrote:Kenya has a new railway built by the Chinese.
SSridhar wrote:In Kenya, China has invested in the Port of Mombasa and is also building a 450-Km long railway line from the port city to capital Nairobi under a BOT scheme (launched c. 2017) at a total cost of USD 4.5 B. In June 2020, the Kenyan Supreme Court declared a $3.2 billion railways contract awarded to China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC) to be illegal. It said that state-run Kenya Railways violated the country's law in procuring the $3.2 billion Chinese funded Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project. Mombasa is one of the 18 foreign naval bases that China has been planning as was leaked in c. 2014.
Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”
Users browsing this forum: greatde and 24 guests