Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14190
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby pankajs » 12 Jul 2020 12:24

https://twitter.com/JohnHemmings2/statu ... 3203854337
US government contractors told to prove they have no Huawei ties | Financial Times
https://www.ft.com/content/132ffcb0-e30 ... d9e14396d7
US government contractors told to prove they have no Huawei ties

“All the largest tech companies in the world do business with the federal government and will have to take stock,” said Eric Crusius, partner at Holland & Knight, adding that it was incredibly expansive.

Companies that want to secure contracts with the US government will now have to examine their businesses around the world to ensure that they are in compliance with the law.

This is in a different league because it covers every government agency and covers acquisitions of all sizes,” said Mr Crusius, who said it could even apply to companies that supply run-of-the-mill products such as staplers.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24010
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby SSridhar » 12 Jul 2020 12:49

Moving away from China? Foxconn to expand India plant - Reuters
Foxconn plans to invest up to $1 billion to expand a factory in Sriperumbudur, near Chennai, where the Taiwanese contract manufacturer assembles Apple iPhones, two sources said.

The move, the scale of which has not previously been reported, is part of a quiet and gradual production shift by Apple away from China as it navigates disruptions from a trade war between Beijing and Washington and the coronavirus crisis. “There’s a strong request from Apple to its clients to move part of the iPhone production out of China,” a source with direct knowledge told Reuters.

Foxconn said it does not comment on matters related to customers, while Apple did not respond to a request for comment. Foxconn’s planned investment in the Sriperumbudur plant, where Apple’s iPhone XR is made, will take place over three years, the second source said.

Some of Apple’s other iPhone models made by Foxconn in China will be made at the plant, said both sources, who declined to be identified as the details have yet to be finalised. Taipei-headquartered Foxconn will add some 6,000 jobs at the Sriperumbudur plant under the plan, one of the sources said. It also operates a separate plant in Andhra Pradesh, where it makes smartphones for China’s Xiaomi Corp, among others.

Foxconn chairman Liu Young-way last month said it would ramp up its investment in India, without giving details.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14190
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby pankajs » 12 Jul 2020 15:35

With the US turning the screws ...

https://twitter.com/Cold_Peace_/status/ ... 2226021376
Jeff M. Smith @Cold_Peace_

"US restrictions on the flow of American technology to China had exposed weak links in the domestic economy, Li said. 90% of China’s semiconductor manufacturing equipment was imported and the chips it can manufacture are two generations behind"
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-econ ... -needed-us
China/Xi opened their cards too early forcing America to react.

China/Xi should have followed Deng's dictum for another 10-15 years but Xi was in a rush too see China claim the top slot within his term and get his name etched forever in the Chinese history.

Good for India.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3700
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby nam » 12 Jul 2020 15:54



Taiwan, SK & Japan companies and US market. These 4 entities made China. And if they really want they can bring China down. But they won't do it that easily.

If we are serious about dealing with the Chinese threat, we need to make a deal with these lot. Made a pact with Taiwan, SK, Japan to keep PLA occupied on LAC in return for their companies opening up in India. Just like China uses Pak to keep us occupied, we can keep PLA occupied.

The LAC and our army size is out biggest trump card. We can keep PLA away from the Eastern seaboard, which the PLA is desperately trying to prevent.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14190
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby pankajs » 12 Jul 2020 15:56

Gobermint has finally decided that China cannot be appeased to buy peace at the border ... so finally non-tariff barriers are being rolled out.

https://www.business-standard.com/artic ... 064_1.html
From textiles to furniture, 350 items may face non-tariff barriers
The government is considering import restrictions on more than 350 items, including electronic goods, toys, furniture, and textiles, by putting in place non-tariff barriers to support domestic industry. Steps such as introducing an import-monitoring system for some and mandatory licensing requirements for others are being examined.

The move is in line with the “Atmanirbhar Bharat” objective, to cut import dependence, and encourage production and demand for locally made goods.
GOI should keep increasing such measures till the trade balanced either by reducing imports or increasing exports or a combo that balanced the trade. Only once the trade balances, in whatever way, should the GOI step off the pedal.

manju
BRFite
Posts: 697
Joined: 12 Feb 2003 12:31
Location: CA, USA

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby manju » 12 Jul 2020 16:27

Mollick.R wrote:
Suraj wrote: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 :)


Last year purchased this book & finished reading it. A very insightful book about china it also tells about Mao's war on sparrows and cottage steel plant adventurism. The book is worth of one's time.

Image


I read that book as well. many details of moa... good reference

Lisa
BRFite
Posts: 1149
Joined: 04 May 2008 11:25

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby Lisa » 12 Jul 2020 16:33

pankajs wrote:With the US turning the screws ...

https://twitter.com/Cold_Peace_/status/ ... 2226021376
Jeff M. Smith @Cold_Peace_

"US restrictions on the flow of American technology to China had exposed weak links in the domestic economy, Li said. 90% of China’s semiconductor manufacturing equipment was imported and the chips it can manufacture are two generations behind"
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-econ ... -needed-us
China/Xi opened their cards too early forcing America to react.

China/Xi should have followed Deng's dictum for another 10-15 years but Xi was in a rush too see China claim the top slot within his term and get his name etched forever in the Chinese history.

Good for India.


Your statement is absolutely spot on. Eleven "peaked" too early.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3973
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby kit » 12 Jul 2020 16:38

Lisa wrote:
pankajs wrote:With the US turning the screws ...

https://twitter.com/Cold_Peace_/status/ ... 2226021376
China/Xi opened their cards too early forcing America to react.

China/Xi should have followed Deng's dictum for another 10-15 years but Xi was in a rush too see China claim the top slot within his term and get his name etched forever in the Chinese history.

Good for India.


Your statement is absolutely spot on. Eleven "peaked" too early.


they can always try to steal tech !.. welcome to cold war 2.0

darshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 28 Jan 2008 04:16

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby darshan » 12 Jul 2020 18:45

Xi may think that they have enough tech and doesn't need to have the parity as the knowledge can be acquired by all chinese assets across the world.

One way to track device manufacturing move would be to track their test equipment manufacturers within India. Vietnam and Malaysia were on the docks for this moves as far as 2015. So, for India to jump ahead of them would have to be due to some other pressures and faith in present GoI to make headways for next few years. No one wanted to deal with India due to various internal and external reasons when this moves were planned.

US gov't could have left things little general by mentioning chinese firms acting against US interests. Not sure why they think it's only Huawei. US seems to be only taking minimum required steps instead of going after china in general. Their interest seems to be limited to Xi.

darshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 28 Jan 2008 04:16

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby darshan » 12 Jul 2020 19:06

With Message For China, India Appoints Key Diplomat As Its New Envoy To Taiwan
https://swarajyamag.com/insta/with-mess ... -to-taiwan
In a move that is set to irk China which asserts Taipei is a rogue nation and claims Chinese sovereignty over it, incumbent Joint Secretary (Americas) at the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) Gourangalal Das's appointment as the new Envoy to Taipei will be formally announced soon.

Meanwhile, Taipei has also effected a change in its guard to bolster bilateral relations with India, appointing its incumbent East Asian and Pacific Affairs Director-General Baushuan Ger as its new representative at the Taipei Economic and Cultural Centre which serves as its diplomatic representation in India.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14190
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby pankajs » 12 Jul 2020 19:37

kit wrote:
Lisa wrote:
Your statement is absolutely spot on. Eleven "peaked" too early.


they can always try to steal tech !.. welcome to cold war 2.0
Stealing works for low to medium tech mostly and is very tricky for the real high tech!

As an example, while the Chinese stole the blueprint for F-35, they have not even been able to get their copy to physically demonstrated the level of stealth that the F-35 has just by its physical shaping. IIRC, some Indian force commander did comment that the Chinese stealth fighter could be tracked without going for any fancy equipment. Same story in multiple "very high tech" fields.

https://www.ntd.com/us-professor-charge ... 84435.html
US Professor Charged for Illegally Using US Research Grants to Aid China
A U.S. professor has been arrested for using over $4 million in federal grant money to benefit China’s research in rheumatology and immunology.


US does seem serious enough that is is investigating all their universities and all kings of fields while the FBI, by its own admission. is registering a new case of espionage every 10 hour/days/ <<whatever is the correct metrics>>.

This is proof enough that US is really serious now that it feels its hegemony is really threatened. Infact, the news that I posted, that talked out the companies doing business with Hwaiwei, has been rammed past the objections of the trade and business lobby that is usually the strongest lobby after the MIC lobby. The commentary was that the measure, while simple, is far reaching and will call into question global business of all companies interested in doing business in/with US.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14190
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby pankajs » 12 Jul 2020 19:44

https://twitter.com/YusufDFI/status/1282178931135623169
Yusuf Unjhawala @YusufDFI

China and Iran near trade and military partnership that will see China invest $400bn over 25 yrs in return for regular & discounted supply of oil from Iran & potential Chinese military base in Iran

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/11/worl ... -deal.html
Defying U.S., China and Iran Near Trade and Military Partnership
The partnership, detailed in an 18-page proposed agreement obtained by The New York Times, would vastly expand Chinese presence in banking, telecommunications, ports, railways and dozens of other projects. In exchange, China would receive a regular — and, according to an Iranian official and an oil trader, heavily discounted — supply of Iranian oil over the next 25 years.

<snip>

The partnership — first proposed by China’s leader, Xi Jinping, during a visit to Iran in 2016 — was approved by President Hassan Rouhani’s cabinet in June, Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, said last week.
Everyone is playing and balancing.

darshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 28 Jan 2008 04:16

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby darshan » 12 Jul 2020 19:45

What's changing is the other side and not the FBI or other investigating agencies. They are finally getting cooperation from the victims. Previously they would do everything possible to keep the facts about their technology being stolen out of public domain and keep away from involving federals. Right now it's all about closing the door after horses have escaped. Everyone joining the bandwagon of being nude. I was personally involved in early 2000s when a company decided to not approach federals about losing all their technology to the famous chinese company.

nvishal
BRFite
Posts: 868
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:03

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby nvishal » 12 Jul 2020 19:57

Low cost manufacturing is a Chinese skill which was ideal for attracting companies and investments since the 70s. India doesn't have this skill. The immediate alternative to chinese manufacturing is Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia etc. India barely forms a part of any supply chain. We do injection moulding(TV bezels, phone/electrical enclosures etc) for foreign brands which they actually do for tax and political reasons.

nandakumar
BRFite
Posts: 1179
Joined: 10 May 2010 13:37

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby nandakumar » 12 Jul 2020 20:43

darshan wrote:What's changing is the other side and not the FBI or other investigating agencies. They are finally getting cooperation from the victims. Previously they would do everything possible to keep the facts about their technology being stolen out of public domain and keep away from involving federals. Right now it's all about closing the door after horses have escaped. Everyone joining the bandwagon of being nude. I was personally involved in early 2000s when a company decided to not approach federals about losing all their technology to the famous chinese company.

Why would the tech companies not want to involve law enforcement agencies in this? Is it the fear of being seen by their peers as being shown up as 'fools'?

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14190
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby pankajs » 12 Jul 2020 21:11

https://twitter.com/M_Miho_JPN/status/1 ... 0191893510
Mihoko Matsubara @M_Miho_JPN

China reportedly launched DDoS attacks on Indian government websites and the banking system including ATMs on June 16 and 17 but they were mostly unsuccessful. Most of the attacks were traced back to Chengdu, where PLA cyberwarfare Unit 61398 is based.

sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2378
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby sudarshan » 12 Jul 2020 21:39

X-post from military thread:

AdityaVM wrote:Part 2 of the Post on the thought process behind recent Chinese, behaviour and what can we gleam from the same.

It is my opinion that before we analyse the thought process of the Chinese in the recent incident, we need to first understand what is their “default” mentality. What are the primary motivations that guide Chinese behaviour and how can we understand the same, keeping Chinese history in mind?

Now, more important than analysing Chinese motivations and behaviour, it is important for us to understand what the Chinese DO NOT understand about us.

Because what I have observed here, (and I am guilty of the same as well) is that we assume by “default” that the Chinese understand us, our motivations, our fears, our aspirations and attitude. It is my belief that this is not the case, and the actions the Chinese have taken bears ample testimony to that fact.( I request all the gurus to feel free to pick apart my argument if there are any inconsistencies and things you don’t agree with. The aim here is to start a proactive discussion, allowing us to take advantage of the current Chinese psychological frailties and weakness. This is my aim here and Ego has no place in it. )

I will divide my presentation into Two parts. First part deals with how can we understand Chinese motivations and behaviours regarding us. Second will deal with the things Chinese (individually, as a society and at state level) do not understand about us.
So, allow me to get on with the first part.

I have always believed that the best way to understand a country is to look at how they view their history. Where do they draw the line from the part of their history that is modern ( i.e directly affecting the present state they see) and Ancient. In the Chinese case the modern Chinese history taught to the Chinese begins with the Opium wars. But before we begin with our analysis of the same, we need to understand a historical Chinese pattern that has been repeating cyclically without fail for thousands of years.
Going back to ancient times, Chinese history has had a cycle of events, where periodically, the “Lebensraum” of the Chinese ( Han) shrinks and expands.

Strong Empire- Expanded borders and conquering new territories Expanded military operations causes Imperial Overstretch Rebellions Loss of Centralised Power External enemies attack together - China defeated, Lebensraum shrinks, Chaotic times causes the rise of warlords and local states which fight for dominance From which the Winner establishes himself Strong Empire.
And the Cycle repeats. (This is a very simplistic assessment of the historical perspective, so please excuse)


This cyclical way of things has caused the basic nature of the Chinese state to be a one which expects subservience from its immediate neighbours. Because, your neighbours are not just your neighbours, they are also your primary threat and to neutralise them required you to “show them their place” and “teach them a lesson”. Requiring periodical raids and conquests to subjugate the “Barbarians”.

The way of the Chinese state when looking at war is to look at it in terms of “What price do I have to pay if I have to do this? “and so on. So, the reason the Chinese occupy Spratly and other Sundry Islands in the Champa sea, is because in their calculation, the price they pay for these transgressions is largely overshadowed by the benefit they get. Same principle applies to the LAC.

The Chinese were not following the “no guns” RoE because they have signed an agreement with us. The worth of that Agreement is not worth even toilet paper in a Public restroom. They follow that rule because in the event of escalation with guns, they will have to pay an “unacceptable price” for their misadventure and Salami Slicing.

But here is the more important point. The “unacceptable price “does not remain constant. It varies depending on the expectations from the Centralised authority, and most importantly if they are trying to “stave off” something even more calamitous. Because if they think that there is a situation that is so dangerous, that if they do not avoid that calamity, then the price they have to pay to preserve themselves is more than the “unacceptable price” they have to pay in a misadventure that can stave off that calamity, then what was “unacceptable” before becomes a “something they can live with”.
This distinction is important for us to understand Cheen behaviour in a given situation. The measuring stick should always be “What has changed that made the Chinese Accept a higher amount of “acceptable price” ?

So, in order to make an analysis of the nature of the State-to-State relationship between India and China, we must understand what is the approach of the two countries towards state relations. What is the expectation and the “default” nature of the relationship from their point of view?

India: Equality. The basic nature of the modern Indian state is to deal with any country with a level of equality and expecting the same in return. This can be seen in how India settled its maritime dispute with Bangladesh by accepting UNCLOS judgement that substantially favoured Bangladesh despite being larger and more powerful than it.

China: China’s default expectation in the state relations is “SUBSERVIANCE” The world is a hierarchy with the Middle Kingdom at the top. The only expectations from other states of the world is vassalage and be graced with Chinese magnanimity in return.

Pertaining to the relationship between the two countries, we must understand that the Chinese impressions of India were formed not by the works of Huan Tsang or any other Buddhist pilgrims, but by the Indian troops who were employed by the British in China.
The Sikhs, Dogras, and Madras Sappers along with the others in BIA, actually took part in the opium wars. IIRC the Dogra regimental centre still has an inverted flag of Imperial China from the Second Opium war.

Now, the Opium wars are the beginning of what the CCP terms as its “Century of humiliation” forcing China to sign “Unequal treaties”. A real oxymoron, that is because if you look at the objectives of the Western forces during the opium wars, one of the main objectives was to establish a permanent presence in Beijing. This was resisted by the Qing empire till the end, since it implied “Equality” between the European powers and the Chinese empire.

What we can gleam from this is that, all the treaties that the Chinese ever sign are ”Unequal Treaties” in favour of China which are called as a “natural and harmonious relationship” but the reverse is “Unequal treaties forced upon China when we were weak”, that they see no reason to follow when they see themselves as strong enough to break them.

The only treaties the Chinese complain about being Unequal are the ones NOT in their favour. Any in their favour is “natural and stable”, “Sustainable”, “in friendly spirit”. Now, do people get why these words keep propping up in PRC MoFA press conferences so much, especially when defending Han perfidity?

The Treaty of Peking in 1860 ( Ratified by Prince Gong, since the Xianfeng Emperor actually fled from Beijing.) which the victors forced China to sign, was particularly galling and embarrassing to the Chinese, since the Anglo-French troops were outnumbered by them in a ratio of 10 to 1 and still the Chinese lost. This is one of the events that shaped Modern Chinese thinking, and one of the pivotal moments to understand the worldview of the CCP.

The foreign policemen employed by the British to police the Chinese were Sikh policemen (RaviB garu has elaborated on this) , who in fact used to apprehend multiple Chinese men by tying up their hair braids together and leading them to jail in a procession.

Indian troops took part in the burning of the “Summer Palace” in the Forbidden City, an event so traumatic that it still rankles modern day Chinese. There are photographs available of Indian Cavalry riding into the Summer Palace. In fact, without the Indian troops it would have been very difficult for the Brits to come up with enough numbers to subjugate the Chinese army.

So, what we can get from this is that the Primary experience of Chinese with Indians in living memory is not as Buddhist monks and scholars but as soldiers who conquered them, under the British. (Hence, their paranoia about India teaming up with US and Japan)
During 20th Century Chinese history, by the End of WW2, when China was still in the midst of a countrywide Civil war, with the entire country’s administrative and economic systems in shambles, India had the largest and most battle hardened force in all of Asia and its administrative, judicial and economic framework was robust and stable. If India had the ambition, it could grow into a powerful economy and it could replicate to a small extent what the British accomplished militarily using Indian troops. India had the capability to directly affect China negatively, especially in Tibet.
This was a thoroughly unnerving prospect to the CCP, to have such a powerful state right next to it who could become a very dangerous threat that China would not be able to defend against, at least not without substantial cost. Hence, Mao’s initial friendly attitude and overtures along with Panchsheel nonsense. They wanted to get a feel of the Indian leadership, and estimate their capacity for Ambition and decisive action. We know what they thought of Nehru, so I won’t go there and depress people about lost oppurtunities.
Suffice to say that the CCP has got the measure of the Indian leadership of that time and had seen fit to impose a war not only to “Teach India a lesson” but also to buy a time of Peace for 20-30 years to consolidate their own country. And since 1967, they have been appreciative of India’s capacity to militarily dominate their borders. (At least till Deng Xiaoping)

Now, coming to the recent Galwan valley incident, it is important to remember that while the Chinese use the “Price “aspect to calculate whether a plan of action is feasible or not, some actions which under normal circumstances would be too “costly” become acceptable under specific circumstances as I have mentioned before.

The rise of Xi Jinping and his appointment of himself as “Chairman for life” has had a number of unintended side effects, especially the rise of “Yes men” in his coterie, who do not have the courage to inform him about unfavourable circumstances and force imbalances. They in turn, dump this onto their subordinates and expect them to do whatever the GEISHA Xi asked them to do, damn the reality of the circumstances.
The Expectations from the Chinese side during the clash was, they would take the IA by surprise, kill a few men, and retreat before the Counterattack into their side of the “LAC”. By doing this, they would have calculated that they can tolerate the “Cost” of this adventure so long as it was limited to India huffing and puffing diplomatically, Grinding its teeth in rage at its inability to impose costs on China ( Which would require crossing the LAC) finally forcing us to concede the encroached no mans land.

What they did not count on, was the Ferocious response of 16 Bihar, coupled with their willingness to cross into Chinese controlled territory to butcher them. That has completely thrown their entire Cost Benefit analysis of this entire operation into disarray. They were not counting on taking casualties, especially when they outnumbered us and had higher ground.
And they were especially not counting on the Casualties being so many.

Thus, they resorted to what the Chinese do when things do not go their way. They threaten and warn about “Consequences” and “Miscalculations”

So, what made the Chinese escalate so much on the LAC, even risking a small-scale war? What actually happened that suddenly made a previously “unacceptable price” of tangling with India “a price they can live with”?

Its because there is a silent storm brewing both inside and outside China.

Outside, the world has got a taste of what happens when the Chinese control the manufacturing of essential commodities, medicines and medical equipment. They will bully you by threatening the lives of your innocent citizens, for financial gain and advantage. (Who were put at risk because of a Bio weapon the Chinese intentionally released into the world.)
There is a silent movement of boycott of Chinese products and bringing back manufacturing from China. Countries are openly calling for investigations into the source of the Wuhan virus and how it spread around the world. There are calls for China to pay reparations to the world and the People who lost their lives because of the Chinese virus.

There is slowly but surely a backlash building against China. A silent gathering storm, that can rock the foundations of the wealth and power of the CCP. Because China’s economic growth has come mainly from export-oriented industries, any move to block, sanction, substitute or curtail these exports coming from China will have a disproportionate cascading effect on the Chinese economy and employment figures.

Already there are major protests against CCP because of large scale unemployment and growing food inflation. What most people do not know is that China is a net food importer. They do not grow enough food to feed their own population. They import food. (this is not the case with India, we are a net food exporter. Our problems of food security come from distribution side constraints. Anyway OT for this topic.) Any lack of consistent double digit or high single digit % economic growth, or sanctions will mean, there will be a problem for China in importing food. They will have to burn Forex to import food items to supply their population. Which is only a temporary fix anyway.

What I am getting at here, is that unlike India, which has a large internal market and is food self-sufficient, China is not. It has a small internal market for its size not sufficient to keep its industries afloat.

Which means lack of economic growth and any actions from the outside world on China in revenge for unleashing Wuhan virus, will result in direct financial pain to the “man on the ground” by rising food prices and lack of jobs. Already people in China complain of rising meat prices because of large scale culling of their pig population due to African swine flu. An increased inflation in other basic food items will mean increased unrest in China.
Because the CCP will have failed in two basic things to provide to the people. Food and Employment. No amount of propaganda can fill an empty stomach.
So, in this situation, the external storm will create the perfect conditions for an internal storm in China.
Remember, by appointing himself as Chairman for life GEISHA Xi has made a lot of enemies. These enemies are looking for an opportunity to bring him down and this will be a perfect situation for them to enact a “Purge” like the “Gang of Four” were purged in the 1970s.
If the external storm I mentioned comes to pass, the internal storm WILL always follow. Because, it’s the last opportunity for a generation of Chinese leader “hopefuls” and their backers to claw back their own space before they too are purged for “Corruption”.
GEISHA Xi and his internal coterie know this. They are probably already monitoring diplomatic channels and are getting strong indications of the actions to follow. So, if the external storm comes, then the only way for GEISHA to weather it is to pre-empt the internal storm with a distraction.
Hence, the constant stream of Chinese needling everyone and picking fights with everyone. It’s to create so much noise in the system that, any situation can be escalated with a prepared scenario of China “teaching a lesson “ to those who have wronged her under the revolutionary leadership of GEISHA Xi.
Hope this was useful and will start a conversation that will allow us to understand The present situation better.


It seems we have some new members now who understand lizard pisko pretty well. I found the above post pretty informative and encouraging. Will post further comments soon.

Suraj san, if you could lay down the law to this new member - henceforth, no free time; day job to be kept to bare minimal; spend maximal time posting on BRF; if GHQ/ SHQ exists, find ways to resist pressure (refer to me for pointers in this, I have a pretty good idea of what does NOT work).

sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2378
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby sudarshan » 12 Jul 2020 22:07

So from the above, it seems the Chinese views on India are tempered more by their experiences with the Sikh and Dogra regiments during British times, than any ancient history and contacts. They are genuinely terrified of India's military (it seems there is a reputation for "barbarity" or "ferocity" - understandable), but they thought they'd found the weak point - the political class. From Nehru's time, they noticed that India's military was firmly under the control of its political leadership, unlike a certain unnamed western neighbor. So they took pains to cultivate and intimidate the politicians instead. The overtures to pappu must be seen in that light. Modi is now their worst nightmare, a politician who has the spine that was so far seen only in the military, and who, moreover, refuses to lose an election and just "go away."

The Bihar regiment (bless them) must have confirmed their fears. From the reports of the captured Indian soldiers, for the 48 hrs that they spent in captivity, their observation of the Chinese was, that they were jittery and nervous, not knowing when and where the next retaliation by the IA was going to come from. I thought that was a new-found respect and fear, based on the ferocious attack they witnessed, but it seems that fear has always been in them. They see the actions by the Indian soldiers during British times as "India joining together with the west to pulp China" (that India had no choice and that Indian soldiers were simply "doing their Dharma" seems to be lost on them), and they now see any reconciliation between India and the US as continuation of that "joining together with the west to pulp China."

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13494
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby Suraj » 12 Jul 2020 22:07

sudarshan wrote:Suraj san, if you could lay down the law to this new member - henceforth, no free time; day job to be kept to bare minimal; spend maximal time posting on BRF; if GHQ/ SHQ exists, find ways to resist pressure (refer to me for pointers in this, I have a pretty good idea of what does NOT work).

:rotfl:
It’s good to see that the forum increasingly gets the big picture about China. It’s high time we stopped with the combination of whiny grievances and moral grandstanding . Neither amounts to anything . We have far more capability to hurt long term Chinese interests by killing the trade surplus they build during UPA1 .

As a big power, India needs to understand the dynamics of power. Chinese act a certain way because it gets the other side to whine and wag fingers, but accomplish nothing that harms Chinese interests . Ergo China retains power ascendancy. Indian goals must always involve establishing points where we harm Chinese interests and promise to stop doing so in exchange for what we want of them .

It may be the language of a bully in some ways, but it’s time we understand how great power status is achieved. Danda and bheda are as much a part of the language as sama and dana.

darshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 28 Jan 2008 04:16

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby darshan » 13 Jul 2020 00:13

nandakumar wrote:
darshan wrote:What's changing is the other side and not the FBI or other investigating agencies.

Why would the tech companies not want to involve law enforcement agencies in this? Is it the fear of being seen by their peers as being shown up as 'fools'?

As far as reasons in the public domain: arrogance, underestimating chinese, screwed up CEO culture with one quarter at a time thought process, bad legal advise, lack of modern laws, flawed thought process of involvement with law agencies would lead to further discussion on trade secrets and IP that will allow competitors to catch up, herd mentality, flawed thinking of by the time chinese come up with copy we will have new product out so it's not worth the bad publicity, a section of US gov't itself gave bad signals to commercial entities by not enforcing ITAR, everyone involved covering their asses and giving wrong assessment to company's decision makers, etc.

Someone had posted a write up on case of Nortel in Canada few days ago that has some public domain call outs on thought process.

To give another example, in early 2010s, a US chip company occupying modem IC space in handheld devices shrugged off losing balls to chinese. Executives of this company had shrugged off the loss as not of importance when they first learned about it but now they have different opinion as by end of 2015, a chinese company had come out with competitive Hi balls of silicone and since then has continued to iterate over it each year.

sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2378
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby sudarshan » 13 Jul 2020 02:36

AdityaVM wrote:Already there are major protests against CCP because of large scale unemployment and growing food inflation. What most people do not know is that China is a net food importer. They do not grow enough food to feed their own population. They import food. (this is not the case with India, we are a net food exporter. Our problems of food security come from distribution side constraints. Anyway OT for this topic.) Any lack of consistent double digit or high single digit % economic growth, or sanctions will mean, there will be a problem for China in importing food. They will have to burn Forex to import food items to supply their population. Which is only a temporary fix anyway.

What I am getting at here, is that unlike India, which has a large internal market and is food self-sufficient, China is not. It has a small internal market for its size not sufficient to keep its industries afloat.


Still reading and slowly digesting that excellent post. But this part is fascinating.

How the heck, I ask? How can a nation which eats anything which moves, be a food importer? Sounds contradictory? India is the nation where a large segment of the population willingly restricts its food sources, even the meat eaters mostly avoid beef. Surely the combined weight of the flora and fauna in China should be enough to keep them sated?

History teacher long ago told us - "don't be in awe of the Chinese and their habit of eating everything, it's because they don't have enough to eat."

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3700
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby nam » 13 Jul 2020 03:02

Chinese are heavy meat eater, especially pork. Vegetarian is apparently not common. The regular pandemic like swine flu has hit the food source hard.

Chinese don't have large fertile land like we do. But they can probably increase the efficiency like Israelis.

I wonder if one of the Chinese objective to Lord over us is making us a source of food.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13494
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby Suraj » 13 Jul 2020 03:16

It is necessary to look at facts when discussing the Chinese food situation. They may be food importers, but their food production levels - and production yield - are quite significant and nothing to be scoffed at. In the production of most things common to both countries, they significantly outproduce us - this has been the case for decades. Don't make the mistake of being ignorantly arrogant about this. It does not serve us to mock without first having decisive superiority.

sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2378
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby sudarshan » 13 Jul 2020 03:22

Not mocking at all, just trying to understand, it seemed a bit strange to me given their food habits. The Gangetic plains are a source of great envy to India's neighbors and other countries as well, the Chinese are no exception. Food security certainly does seem to be on their minds when they eye Indian lands. On a related note - the "lebensraum" thing that AdityaVM mentions is something which I've actually seen mentioned (not that particular word, but the concept was the same) on a Chinese forum. They were actually talking like - "how much land can we after all grab from Vietnam, or islands from Japan? India is the only option to expand our living space." Not kidding, apparently Russia was off limits.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13494
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby Suraj » 13 Jul 2020 03:26

Chinese production yields are a little or a lot higher than India's. There are few items where we have either greater production or decisively better yields and practices. The concept of India being lebensraum to them is rather laughable. They don't want 1.25 billion more mouths to feed, particularly when they see our agricultural production levels and know we're behind them. Check out cereal and vegetable production. They may be meat eaters, but they produce extraordinary amounts of vegetables too. E.g. cabbage, carrots, cauliflower, brinjal, tomato, lettuce... they're #1 in all these, in many cases by several times more than #2 (which is often us). There are a few things like mangoes and bananas where we are the biggest producer like this, but in a range of vegetables and fruits, the Chinese have extremely high gross productions and yield numbers. They have a great record of agricultural engineering and irrigation management when it comes to producing quantities to support their population.

Like I said, don't start thinking of conclusions like expansionary needs without understanding hard data. First, it is important to understand the situation in depth, then look at their stated and unstated motives. It does not serve us in any way to shoot off with wild conclusions.

darshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 28 Jan 2008 04:16

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby darshan » 13 Jul 2020 03:34

Chinese garlic everywhere. Chinese also produce and consume lot of hot peppers. Lot of Chinese food products are found in US. Seaweed is another area that chinese products are increasing in.

sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2378
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby sudarshan » 13 Jul 2020 03:42

Suraj ji, since this is going OT, I'll stop with this post.

What I have trouble understanding is - their population is only slightly larger than India's; they produce more than India in most food items; the average Chinese isn't much bigger than the average Indian (i.e., per capita, they don't eat a whole lot more); in fact, the average Indian has a much more restricted diet than the average Chinese; so how is it that, as AdityaVM states above, China is a net food importer, but India is self-sufficient, and in fact an exporter? Doesn't that sound contradictory?

As for living space - I'm not saying that official Chinese policy views India as living space, I'm saying, the average Chinese guy (probably clueless about their official policy) debating on their forums was talking in those terms, which means their aam junta do see it as a game of grabbing living space for themselves.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13494
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby Suraj » 13 Jul 2020 03:52

Vegetables aren’t as calorie dense as cereal or meat but are significant to a balanced diet . You need to question your assumptions regarding self sufficiency in food - Indians remain quite malnourished and are not getting the balanced set of macronutrients they need in their diet. In any case this isn’t the thread for it . I’m simply pointing out that the Chinese food imports aren’t any sort of significant weakness for them . Cut off all their imports and they’re not about to starve anytime soon..

AdityaVM
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 03 Jul 2020 23:23

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby AdityaVM » 13 Jul 2020 11:55

sudarshan wrote:Suraj ji, since this is going OT, I'll stop with this post.

What I have trouble understanding is - their population is only slightly larger than India's; they produce more than India in most food items; the average Chinese isn't much bigger than the average Indian (i.e., per capita, they don't eat a whole lot more); in fact, the average Indian has a much more restricted diet than the average Chinese; so how is it that, as AdityaVM states above, China is a net food importer, but India is self-sufficient, and in fact an exporter? Doesn't that sound contradictory?

As for living space - I'm not saying that official Chinese policy views India as living space, I'm saying, the average Chinese guy (probably clueless about their official policy) debating on their forums was talking in those terms, which means their aam junta do see it as a game of grabbing living space for themselves.


Saar, The total arable land of China is 103.4 million hectares. India's is 159.65 million hectares.

Source : https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Agriculture/Arable-land/Hectares

This means that for more population than India, China has almost 33% less arable land than India. So, that in itself is a handicap. But on top of that, China made a devil's bargain in terms of development. The major Chemical and manufacturing industries have contributed to a level of pollution that has to be seen to be believed. Coupled with a lax and corrupt system of environmental protection, has ensured that majority of water in China (including groundwater) is unfit for human consumption.

It is not uncommon to find stories in China of Chemical industries dumping waste by pumping it into bore-wells dug into the earth and just releasing it into rivers. So, the limiting factor is not just arable land here.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2017/jun/02/china-water-dangerous-pollution-greenpeace

Moreover, the high yield farming practices are only practiced by a fraction of farms across China. Majority of Chinese farms are operated by marginal farmers just like India. So, it is difficult to replicate the industrial farming of the West in China, if not impossible.

It’s difficult to overstate the importance of food safety to Chinese consumers. Besides fatal levels of melamine in baby formula, scandals have included long beans treated with a banned pesticide and adulterated fox meat passed off as donkey. A 2016 McKinsey & Company study found that nearly three-quarters of Chinese customers worry that the food they eat is harmful to their health. The vast number of small farms makes China’s food system “almost completely unmanageable in terms of food safety,” says Scott Rozelle, an expert on rural China at Stanford University. Industrial dairies and slaughterhouses make traceability and accountability for quality possible, and this is something Chinese consumers want.


Source : https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/02/feeding-china-growing-appetite-food-industry-agriculture/

So, the reason majority of Chinese middle class prefers imported food is because they dont trust homegrown Chinese products.
It is also the reason why Chinese students studying in the West fill their luggage with western baby formula when coming home to China. It is a lucrative business to sell these baby formula packs at a premium to new parents who dont want to take a risk with Chines baby products.

So, it is not just because of a large population but also because of mismanagement on an epic scale that the Chinese face this conundrum.

AdityaVM
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 03 Jul 2020 23:23

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby AdityaVM » 13 Jul 2020 12:06

Suraj wrote:Vegetables aren’t as calorie dense as cereal or meat but are significant to a balanced diet . You need to question your assumptions regarding self sufficiency in food - Indians remain quite malnourished and are not getting the balanced set of macronutrients they need in their diet. In any case this isn’t the thread for it . I’m simply pointing out that the Chinese food imports aren’t any sort of significant weakness for them . Cut off all their imports and they’re not about to starve anytime soon..


Suraj-san, I agree with what you wrote above. It is a vulnerability that is perhaps not as large but it is something underappreciated.
My point was that, since domestic food production in China is questionable in terms of safety, any well to do family will prefer imported food.

It might not be possible for the normal middle class folks, but they sure aspire to the same.

Any action by the world that makes it difficult for the Chinese to import food, doesn't mean that they will starve. But it does mean that if it comes to pass, then the majority of the Chinese will be stuck eating overpriced, poisoned food.
Whether it is because of mass scandals caused by poisoned food, or food inflation burning a hole in the pocket of anyone wanting something as basic as healthy food, it will cause the conditions I mentioned above which will contribute to the internal storm I mentioned.

It is not a vulnerability that is enough to perhaps bring China to its knees. But, it sure is enough to make life difficult for GEISHA and give a handle to his rivals to do mischief.

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13494
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby Suraj » 13 Jul 2020 12:33

I'm not convinced that Chinese have any significant food security concerns, partly because we're in a significantly worse off position in terms of absolute availability of food per capita, given that they have a heavily non-vegetarian diet and yet are the biggest producer of most vegetables and fruits. This can be seen across a range of food and health metrics including birth weight data, IMR, and daily caloric intake figures. Unless these indicate a persistent problem with inability to move the needle much, there's not enough proof that they're having a hard time managing. I suggest looking at FAO or similar data - they've shown a consistent trend of improvement.

They may import processed food and may have scandals associated with adulterated processed food, but also export a lot of their basic production. Their absolute production numbers are readily available, and are nothing to be discounted - they produce incredible amounts of some Indian food staples, e.g. 3x as much brinjal as Indian production.

As much as this topic has gone beyond the scope of this thread, I'd just like to emphasize the pointlessness of talking about lesser arable land of a country that significantly outproduces us in most things that matter to us, like the vegetables listed above. There are certain matters where there are vulnerable, but it's rather strange to emphasize a topic where our concerns are notably greater - even the political cost of food inflation has impacted Indian policy much more than it has in their case.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14190
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby pankajs » 13 Jul 2020 15:56

From threat to request now ... The same trajectory also in India/China relationship between Doklama and Galwan. While the contempt for India has not disappeared from their commentary, the stream of direct threats have gone down quite a bit.

Hitting back is the only language that a bully understands.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/huaw ... -x6xsr33nc
Huawei urges Britain: Don’t drop us till after next election
Huawei bosses have asked for a last-ditch meeting with Downing Street as ministers prepare to approve plans to kick the company out of Britain’s 5G network.

The Chinese telecoms firm wants to strike a deal with Boris Johnson to delay its removal from the mobile phone network until after the next election in 2025, in the hope that a future government might reverse the decision. In return, Huawei will pledge to maintain its equipment, which is also used in the 2G, 3G and 4G networks.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14190
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby pankajs » 13 Jul 2020 16:07

re:UNCLOS

https://twitter.com/GregPoling/status/1 ... 7681795078
Greg Poling @GregPoling {Senior Fellow for @SoutheastAsiaDC & Director of @AsiaMTI}

This week's SCS fun fact: the PRC joined the UN Seabed Committee in December 1971. It took part in all subsequent preparatory work leading to UNCLOS III, which began 2 years later. So not only did Beijing help write the rules it now disavows; it helped set the agenda!

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 1785
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby yensoy » 13 Jul 2020 16:41

Chinese food production numbers is all about quantity and nothing about quality. In particular fruits/vegetables and milk - where even if they are top producers in a particular category, the locally produced stuff is poor quality and they end up importing the same item for domestic consumption.

RaviB
BRFite
Posts: 155
Joined: 09 Jun 2020 14:32

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby RaviB » 13 Jul 2020 16:53

sudarshan wrote:Suraj ji, since this is going OT, I'll stop with this post.

What I have trouble understanding is - their population is only slightly larger than India's; they produce more than India in most food items; the average Chinese isn't much bigger than the average Indian (i.e., per capita, they don't eat a whole lot more); in fact, the average Indian has a much more restricted diet than the average Chinese; so how is it that, as AdityaVM states above, China is a net food importer, but India is self-sufficient, and in fact an exporter? Doesn't that sound contradictory?


Sudarshan ji, if I may. To get the same amount of calories from meat requires about 3 times the inputs of vegetables or grain and a lot more water. A large amount of grain production is fed to animals to produce meat, if people ate that directly, they would only need one-third. Indian vegetarianism is a very smart way of cultural adaptation.

By the way, pork for them has a similar role in domestic troubles as onions have for us. Price increases or shortage of pork, especially around new year is a major cause of popular anger.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3973
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby kit » 13 Jul 2020 17:44

pankajs wrote:From threat to request now ... The same trajectory also in India/China relationship between Doklama and Galwan. While the contempt for India has not disappeared from their commentary, the stream of direct threats have gone down quite a bit.

Hitting back is the only language that a bully understands.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/huaw ... -x6xsr33nc
Huawei urges Britain: Don’t drop us till after next election
Huawei bosses have asked for a last-ditch meeting with Downing Street as ministers prepare to approve plans to kick the company out of Britain’s 5G network.

The Chinese telecoms firm wants to strike a deal with Boris Johnson to delay its removal from the mobile phone network until after the next election in 2025, in the hope that a future government might reverse the decision. In return, Huawei will pledge to maintain its equipment, which is also used in the 2G, 3G and 4G networks.


So that means Huwaei will actively work to undermine the current administration "the Chinese way" .. the Brits gonna be stupid to agree.. and I think they will :rotfl:

darshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 28 Jan 2008 04:16

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby darshan » 13 Jul 2020 18:05

Getting competition to Huawei ready? Everyone's getting seat at Jio.

Qualcomm Ventures, investment arm of Qualcomm incorporated to invest Rs. 730 crore in Jio Platforms
https://www.deshgujarat.com/2020/07/12/ ... platforms/

KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4177
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby KLNMurthy » 13 Jul 2020 19:31

pankajs wrote:From threat to request now ... The same trajectory also in India/China relationship between Doklama and Galwan. While the contempt for India has not disappeared from their commentary, the stream of direct threats have gone down quite a bit.

Hitting back is the only language that a bully understands.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/huaw ... -x6xsr33nc
Huawei urges Britain: Don’t drop us till after next election
Huawei bosses have asked for a last-ditch meeting with Downing Street as ministers prepare to approve plans to kick the company out of Britain’s 5G network.

The Chinese telecoms firm wants to strike a deal with Boris Johnson to delay its removal from the mobile phone network until after the next election in 2025, in the hope that a future government might reverse the decision. In return, Huawei will pledge to maintain its equipment, which is also used in the 2G, 3G and 4G networks.

Strange request. Why would any government agree to ceding its policy making to the opposition?

M_Joshi
BRFite
Posts: 172
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:06

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby M_Joshi » 13 Jul 2020 23:32

One more reason in China's list of reasons to needle India at this hour..

China's Incursions into India Are Really All about Tibet

Why does China so crave these remote mountain territories that it is willing to repeatedly risk war with and make a permanent enemy of one of the world's most powerful countries? The twentieth century is over and China is not preparing for an armored blitzkrieg into the Ganges Plain. It has no ambitions to conquer north India or annex Uttar Pradesh. Its real goals are much more modest, but no less moral. China's border incursions in the remote mountains of northern India are all about its repression of Tibet.

A new ethnic unity law promulgated in January by the local Communist Party authorities in Tibet has raised Tibetans' fears to a new level. The Tibet ethnic unity law, which is similar to the Hong Kong security law that is now attracting so much global attention, slipped through virtually unnoticed by the international press. It makes ethnic Tibetans themselves responsible for embracing the "motherland" of China and fighting "separatism." It also contains a provision encouraging the relocation of majority Han Chinese people to Tibet -- all in the spirit of ethnic unity, of course.

Like the Hong Kong security law, the Tibet ethnic unity law was apparently a response to pro-independence protests last November and December in Sershul/Shiqu, a county in Sichuan province's Garze Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture. Braving conditions much harsher than those that prevail in Hong Kong, more than thirty Tibetans were imprisoned for advocating independence and calling for the return of the Dalai Lama.

China's expansionism along Tibet's southern border with India thus has a much more limited aim than the acquisition of territory of the conquest of India. It is intended to widen the buffer zone that surrounds Tibet. Trucks and trains may not stream across the India-China frontier, but people and yaks do. China wants to cut off all contact across the border, whether physical or even online. Its infrastructure-building near the Line of Actual Control (LAC) is more likely targeted at controlling its own restive subject population than at provoking an international incident.

In addition to tightening and deepening its own direct (but undefined) frontiers with India, China is attempting to shore up relations with Nepal and Bhutan, the small, landlocked countries that partially separate Asia's two behemoths. Both are home to many Tibetan refugees. In Bhutan, they have the opportunity to live relatively normal lives but are prohibited from protesting against Chinese rule. In Nepal, they are effectively held stateless in former detention camps. China seems to be seeking to incorporate both countries into its border-in-depth, making them, like Aksai Chin, part of the cordon sanitaire between India and Tibet.

For the Dalai Lama and many other Tibetans, that means self-government not only for the current Tibet Autonomous Region but for the entirety of the three traditional provinces of Tibet, including areas that are now administered under neighboring provinces of China. Obviously, the current Chinese regime has no intention of letting that happen, ever. Beijing believes that time is on its side, and with enough repression, it can ensure that it proves itself right. Respecting the authority of the Dalai Lama, Tibetans in exile have so far refrained from instigating violence. But the Tibetan Central Administration is a real parliamentary democracy, and in a democracy, you can only push the people so far. Future Tibetan governments in exile may not be as quiescent as the current one has been.

Much like Xinjiang but much less reported in the international media, China has turned Tibet into a virtual police state within the larger Chinese police state. China has also subordinated its genuine desire for friendlier relations with India to the all-important domestic goal of political control. It may be more than 800 miles from Lhasa to the LAC in Ladakh, but China isn't taking any chances. As it has shown with the Hong Kong security law, the Communist Party is willing to pay any economic price to achieve its political goals. China will pay dearly indeed for picking a fight with India. But for China, money is no object with repression is the goal.



Why China wants a Himalayan dispute with Bhutan

While China de-escalates one Himalayan standoff with India, it is stoking another in neighboring Bhutan.

There is likely another reason why those talks are important now. In the past, China has offered to give up its claim to a 495 square kilometer (sq km) area in northern Bhutan and part of a 269 sq km patch in the west in exchange for a nearly 100 sq km area in Doklam, near the China-Bhutan-India tri-border junction.

With the new disputed area, which is not far from Doklam, Chinese officials will get a new opportunity to meet with their Bhutanese counterparts.
Analysts suggest that opportunity could be leveraged by Beijing to drive a wedge between the Bhutanese and Indians, who are again likely to intervene in a matter so close to its territory and of such strategic importance.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3700
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

Postby nam » 14 Jul 2020 01:51

Chini milkpowder and choclate smuggling saga..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQm5FZMforg


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mahendra and 56 guests