PRC Political News & Discussions

renukb · Post by **renukb** » 17 Dec 2008 14:33

This is big news...

China, Taiwan Start Direct Air, Sea, Postal Links

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 18 Dec 2008 18:16

shyamd wrote:Chinese at it again, they are now actively supporting ULFA once again. ISI served as an intermediary by delivering the ULFA terrorists to training camps in Yunnan. Bangla's and ISI are both training terrorists at Chittagong.

State security and Public security chiefs of chin intel are now in charge of training the terrorists. So expect an increase in problems in Assam. Chinese want to destabilize India for playing host to Tibetan govt in exile.

Tibetans have penetrated Chinese government! The head of the United Front Workers Department(UFWD is one of the CCP political intelligence agencies) incharge of intel collection on Tibetan affairs spied for the Tibetan govt in exile.

ukhrul · Post by **ukhrul** » 29 Dec 2008 20:01

Guy, check out this Chinese defence site

http://www.sinodefence.com/electronics/ ... efault.asp

ukhrul · Post by **ukhrul** » 29 Dec 2008 20:10

We need dedicated satellite over North East to monitor the Chinese incursions, no wonder they will be pushing in their own operatives now, and try to rejuvenate the NSCN links they had. If India does not act on terrorists in North East, you can bid farewell to that part of the country.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 19 Jan 2009 22:02

Let's keep our eye on the ball, friends... even in the middle of all this Pak drama.

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org//paper ... r3016.html

China: Rising Pitch for a War with India to Recover Arunachal Pradesh.

By D.S.Rajan

It may be recalled that some influential strategists in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) visualized a ‘partial war’ with India to recover ‘Southern Tibet’ (The PRC’s name for India’s Arunachal Pradesh) (Reference South Asia Analysis Group paper No.2939 dated 24 November 2008,

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers ... r2939.html.

Quite a few comments supporting such views have since appeared and been carried in authoritative strategic portals.

The latest to join the camp of protagonists of a war with India to recover Southern Tibet, is an analyst, who appears to be a high level cadre dealing with the subject, perhaps with a military background. The writer’s article, though hawkish in content, is in-depth, spread over four parts; official blessings to it look obvious as a prominent strategic think tank in the country has chosen the same for publication (Online edition of the Well-connected China International Institute for Strategic Studies, Chinese language, 11 January 2009, under the column ‘China Strategy’, http://str.chinaiiss.org/content/2009-1 ... 2275.shtml).

The article, described as a follow-up to a question raised recently by some experts in China as to whether or not China should show its determination to recover Southern Tibet, declares that the return of Indian troops into ‘Southern Tibet’ after two years of Chinese withdrawal to the north of ‘illegal’ McMahon line in 1962 and India’s settlement of a large migrant population in that territory for the purpose of rationalizing its occupation, seriously damaged China’s interests, flagrantly creating ‘greatest obstacle’ to building trust between the two nations.

The write-up then lays stress on the following four points:

* Looking from the viewpoints of history, law, national sentiment and custom and tradition, Southern Tibet (Zang Nan in Chinese) is a region, which is inhabited in a concentrated way by China’s Tibetan nationality people. Border tensions like what was seen in 1987-89 and India’s stepping up of its war preparedness as in recent period, cannot lead to any wavering on China’s part in its resolve to recover that region. The PRC has no reason to abandon its claim on Southern Tibet.

*Though China has had a long period of development resulting in increase in Comprehensive National Power, the attitudes of the Western world towards issues concerning Tibet and Southern Tibet can still affect it. India is courting the West and Russia and the strategic demand of all of them is to restrict and balance China. Japan’s ‘Arc of Freedom and Democracy ’ concept, is nothing but one aimed at containing China, joined by the West and India. The West including France and Germany intend to seize the last opportunity to exploit ‘Dalai’ and they ‘shamelessly’ supported the March 2008 Tibet unrest. Overall, judging from Western attitudes, it is clear that once a war happens, the West will once again come to the support of India forcefully. This pressure needs to be paid attention by China if it wants to fight against India.

* For reasons of nationality and India’s stubbornness, it would be difficult for China to avoid a war with India on the Southern Tibet issue. What can be said in certain is that China has completed its military preparations to solve that issue. Its economic strength, technological expertise, military power and logistics support capability, will help the country in completing a military attack on Southern Tibet. Also, as a point of certain significance, China has attained ability to deal with a possible nuclear conflict with India. The best for China would be its ‘direct dismemberment’ of India and make the latter to ‘spit what it has swallowed’ – making Sikkim independent, rejuvenating Pakistan and restoring freedom of choice to Bhutan and Nepal.

* In principle, if vital interests of countries clash, there is no scope for a compromise among them and war is the only remedy. Russia’s action against Georgia in August 2008 is an example; Moscow could utilize that opportunity to stop the US-led NATO expansion in Europe. China must attend to the Southern Tibet issue in the same way. It should be done considering the overall strategic situation in Central Asia, the target for US infiltration and in the South Asian Sub-Continent. While, in this regard, Pakistan and Iran are specifically important for China, Myanmar also needs the PRC’s attention as, if a war with India erupts, Indian troops may try to enter and attack China’s Yunnan province. 14th Army of Chengdu MR should be stationed in Kunming, Yunnan’s capital. The position that 80% of China’s strategic bomber force is in Lanzhou MR, may not be ideal. India cannot win a war with China in view of latter’s military preparedness and especially the superiority in armoured and rocket forces. It is estimated that once a war on the Southern Tibet issue starts, 80 percent of India’s deployed troops in northern part can become targets for the Chinese army. Beijing should grasp opportunities for attacking and hitting India to recover Southern Tibet. If India is clever, it should stop depending on the US support and sit for sincere talks with China.

The article is the worst instance seen so far of a Chinese war mongering vis-à-vis India. This hardest line on Arunachal Pradesh issue, being adopted at least by a section of Chinese strategists, ostensibly under an indirect government nod, contrasts with Beijing’s present official position that China and India are no threat to each other and that the boundary issue can be solved on the basis of ‘mutual understanding and mutual accommodation’ and dialogue on ‘equal terms’. Special Representatives of China and India have held a series of talks to reach a framework agreement on the border based the bilateral agreement on political parameters and guiding principles.

The two sides have also in the meanwhile agreed that bilateral relations should not be held as a hostage to the border problem, which is complex and requires time, to solve. As other positive factors, bilateral trade is picking up, both sides have a signed a Vision document and a strategic partnership relation has been established between them. The article on the other hand creates a hostile atmosphere to Sino-Indian relations, giving rise to a key question- is China deliberately blowing hot and cold on the border issue?A probable explanation could be that there can be internal differences in China on the Arunachal Pradesh issue- strategic and national security establishments, which give priority to national sovereignty on one side and the diplomatic machinery which accords primacy to ‘harmonious world’ and ‘peaceful periphery’ concepts to suit to China’s modernization requirements, on the other.

The top PRC leadership presumably is yet to reconcile the two different approaches. Admittedly, there is no convincing proof for this prognosis, but it would be in India’s interests to watch carefully for signs of such differences, with a scrutiny on how they will play out in future if they are found to exist. Another possibility is that pronouncements like what have been made in the article could be meant a Chinese pressure tactic against India for the purpose of extracting territorial concessions during future border negotiations, for e.g on the status of Tawang.

In any case, it would be strongly advisable for New Delhi to keep itself alive to the likelihood of China carrying out any military misadventure in the border, however illogical that may appear at this juncture. Considering the present India-Pakistan tensions, such an alert on the part of India becomes all the more necessary.

This may be mere sable-lattring by the PRC on behalf of their "Tarrel than mountains, deepel than livels" ally... trying to put a scare into Indian strategists by publishing papers recommending a war to secure Arunachal Pradesh, so that we become cautious about initiating military action against TSP.

OTOH, our current GOI's pusillanimous non-reaction to the 11/26 attacks may have encouraged the PLA hawks who have been propagating this idea. If we won't lift a finger against Pakistan in response to the murder of civilians in our financial capital, what are the chances we will act decisively to stop the seizure of distant Arunachal Pradesh, after all?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 19 Jan 2009 22:59

This may be mere sable-lattring by the PRC on behalf of their "Tarrel than mountains, deepel than livels" ally... trying to put a scare into Indian strategists by publishing papers recommending a war to secure Arunachal Pradesh, so that we become cautious about initiating military action against TSP.

OTOH, our current GOI's pusillanimous non-reaction to the 11/26 attacks may have encouraged the PLA hawks who have been propagating this idea. If we won't lift a finger against Pakistan in response to the murder of civilians in our financial capital, what are the chances we will act decisively to stop the seizure of distant Arunachal Pradesh, after all?

Maybe PRC is using the same tactics we use on BR forums : who knows even at this moment a PRC guy is looking at your comments. I know this from my own blog. Initially they began to scan my writing from different cities - so this was common surfer. Then they all were swept off to hits coming from a single location, that appeared to have hooked on to a RSS feed, to get alerted at new posts. They still keep track. PRC monitors Indian interest sites, and could be reading even some of our own postings as a second hand interface of India's policy makers (imagining I mean).

If PRC wants to do anything it has to do it very quickly. In 5-10 years, the situation will be against it. What makes PRC think, that there are not basic trends in Indian politics that will not make India itself think of liberating Chinese occupied Indian territories? And what limits India to only defend AP, and not create substantial problems in NE China? In fact any further attempt by PRC to meddle in what is essentially Indian territory - TSP and POK, can prompt India to seriously think of liberating Tibet itself, or joining Russia in helping Mongolia and consider completing the Japanese arc.

I would say to PRC, "bring-it-on"

It will hasten our own obejectives about what to do with your south! There is some still remaining support/affection for you within India - some of us would love to see you ruin forever your Indian lovers.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Jan 2009 23:23

as you know in 2006 the UPA woke up and ordered a urgent pgm of building roads in the border areas - mainly roads parallel to the border - a 180' reversal of a decades old policy.

a article in TOI last week said only 7 of 74 such projects are on schedule and
the delay is mostly due to lack of clearances from the ministry of env & forests.

did you know that even large sized residential projects have to seek approval
from this stalinist ministry and builders have to send expensive delegations all
the way to delhi for the monthly review meetings that give the approvals for making presentations on their "waste water treatment plant" and such things.
the size where the state env board hands over to delhi is quite small around 100acres iirc.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 19 Jan 2009 23:27

a article in TOI last week said only 7 of 74 such projects are on schedule and
the delay is mostly due to lack of clearances from the ministry of env & forests.

Should be part of agenda of a new GOI. Strategic cloudyness throws wool. But this must go.

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 20 Jan 2009 00:08

The position that 80% of China’s strategic bomber force is in Lanzhou MR, may not be ideal. India cannot win a war with China in view of latter’s military preparedness and especially the superiority in armoured and rocket forces. It is estimated that once a war on the Southern Tibet issue starts, 80 percent of India’s deployed troops in northern part can become targets for the Chinese army

errr..a fixation of 80% I can see, I din't pretty much get the part about 80% of India's desployed troops in norther part becoming targets for Chinese army...do they mean long range artillery/CM/air attacks etc?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 20 Jan 2009 05:22

errr..a fixation of 80% I can see, I din't pretty much get the part about 80% of India's desployed troops in norther part becoming targets for Chinese army...do they mean long range artillery/CM/air attacks etc?

Oh, If A is in range of B, B is also in range of A. The thing is that only way PRC can overreach India in range is if it uses super long-range missiles. But two can play the game. India can increase the nuclear weapons capability of its navy, or if possible submarines. In fact Indian navy should be fitted out to work with Japan and Russia in the Pacific. Most of China's coastal nerve centres would be equally at range.

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 20 Jan 2009 07:11

brihaspati wrote:
errr..a fixation of 80% I can see, I din't pretty much get the part about 80% of India's desployed troops in norther part becoming targets for Chinese army...do they mean long range artillery/CM/air attacks etc?
Oh, If A is in range of B, B is also in range of A. The thing is that only way PRC can overreach India in range is if it uses super long-range missiles. But two can play the game. India can increase the nuclear weapons capability of its navy, or if possible submarines. In fact Indian navy should be fitted out to work with Japan and Russia in the Pacific. Most of China's coastal nerve centres would be equally at range.

Exactly

, both being in range was what I was thinking about, so I was not pretty sure get the 80% thingy....to add to what you said, also we should get the base in Vietnam, if its still available (sorry OT)...

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 22 Jan 2009 03:42

the chinese have come out with a whitepaper
for anybody interested

China's National Defense in 2008

renukb · Post by **renukb** » 23 Jan 2009 09:54

Chinese Missiles Aimed At Nowhere
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/hticbm ... 90122.aspx

January 22, 2009: China has announced that its nuclear armed ballistic missiles are not aimed at anyone. Like most countries, China has long refused to say who its nuclear armed missiles are armed at. Most of those missiles only have enough range to hit Russia, or India, or other nearby nations. For a long time, most were very definitely aimed at Russia, which had rocky relations with China from the 1960s to the 1990s. But after the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, the new, much smaller, Russia became much friendlier with the wealthier (more capitalist, but still run by communists) China. Relations between China and India also warmed up.

For the last two decades China has had about two dozen DF-5 ICBMs. These are their only missiles that can reach the United States (but only Hawaii and Alaska and the west coast of North America). But the U.S. has recently installed 18 ICBM interceptor missile systems in Alaska. There are to deal with North Korean missiles, but could also destroy most Chinese missiles headed for the western United States. Thus it makes sense for China to simply say that it is not aiming any of its missiles at anyone. Modern guidance systems can be quickly (in less than an hour) programmed for a new target, so it doesn't really matter that, normally, the missiles have no target information in them.

Rishirishi · Post by **Rishirishi** » 23 Jan 2009 22:28

Maybe PRC is using the same tactics we use on BR forums : who knows even at this moment a PRC guy is looking at your comments. I know this from my own blog. Initially they began to scan my writing from different cities - so this was common surfer. Then they all were swept off to hits coming from a single location, that appeared to have hooked on to a RSS feed, to get alerted at new posts. They still keep track. PRC monitors Indian interest sites, and could be reading even some of our own postings as a second hand interface of India's policy makers (imagining I mean).

They are not only looking. Most probably multiple agencies like ISI, CIA, FSB etc probably have their agents in here. They may actively try to interact with senior members and try to find out pices of information. Remember that 95% of the inteligance gathring happnes from open sources. We routinely see information as xx plane obesrved at xx time with xx equipment. Other examples include information that is obtained from friends, family and service, that in it self may seen to be harmless. But the information may enable someone to pice to gather information, and draw a larger picture. An example of this can be that xx is a great frind of xx and loves to walk a dog. Great you just got to know how get close to a firend of so and so. Just get a dog and start walking it near xx house. For the trained eye, there is a lot of hard fact, information here.

shynee · Post by **shynee** » 23 Jan 2009 23:18

India bans Chinese toy imports

NEW DELHI: India banned imports of toys from China on Friday in an apparent bid to shield domestic manufacturers from cheap imports.

"This restriction will remain in force for a period of six months," said an official from the directorate general of foreign trade, which imposed the ban.

The government agency did not give a reason for the restriction but the PTI said the ban was to protect local manufacturers and out of concern over the safety standards of Chinese-made products.

According to the Mumbai-based All India Toy Manufacturers Association, Chinese products make up more than half the Indian retail toy market, which was estimated to be over 25 billion rupees ($500 million dollars) in 2007.

China's toy industry has come under close scrutiny since millions of goods were recalled globally last year amid fears that they had been made with toxic lead paints or had dangerous design flaws.

China's toy exports have also taken a beating from the global financial crisis, with demand shrinking in the key US and European markets.

India has already banned imports of Chinese milk products following a milk scandal that led to the widespread poisoning of babies in China and dairy recalls around the world. Despite a border dispute which took India and China to war in 1961, bilateral trade has grown to $15bn and is targeted to reach $20bn by 2010.

Sudip · Post by **Sudip** » 24 Jan 2009 08:32

Readers might find this link and the videos associated relevant

http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Econom ... tures_2290

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 24 Jan 2009 12:40

ukhrul wrote:We need dedicated satellite over North East to monitor the Chinese incursions, no wonder they will be pushing in their own operatives now, and try to rejuvenate the NSCN links they had. If India does not act on terrorists in North East, you can bid farewell to that part of the country.

The sad part is that anything that is far from Delhi, is forgotten.

Only when a swift kick is given that one is woken from their reverie!

Otherwise, leave it to the Army to hold the can!

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 25 Jan 2009 03:06

President Barack Obama believes Beijing is "manipulating" its currency

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 25 Jan 2009 05:09

RayCji,
there must be some dedicated military satellites? Or general sats doubling up as military ones?

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 28 Jan 2009 07:11

A peek into China's military mind

Good story

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 02 Feb 2009 14:31

China official says 20 million migrants lost jobs

By Chris Buckley BEIJING (Reuters) - About 20 million Chinese rural migrants have lost jobs as the nation's economic growth has faltered, a senior official said on Monday, promising policies to boost incomes and a softer approach to potential unrest ... ..

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 03 Feb 2009 05:15

A protester on Monday threw a shoe at Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao as he was giving a speech at Britain’s Cambridge University, just missing him. “This is a scandal” he shouted before security staff bundled him out of a concert hall at the university, where Wen was speaking on the last day of a five-nation tour of Europe. The protester, a young Western-looking man in a T-shirt, added: “This dictator here, how can you listen to the lies he’s telling? You are not challenging him.”

“How can the university prostitute itself with this dictator?”, he added. Echoing the incident in December when an Iraqi journalist hurled two shoes at US President George W Bush in Baghdad, he threw the well-worn trainer from near the back of the auditorium. It landed about a yard from the Chinese premier, but did not hit him. Security officials went on to the stage and kicked it off and a Chinese official took it away under his jacket.

http://thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=160538

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 03 Feb 2009 12:15

Stan_Savljevic wrote:

“How can the university prostitute itself with this dictator?”, he added. Echoing the incident in December when an Iraqi journalist hurled two shoes at US President George W Bush in Baghdad, he threw the well-worn trainer from near the back of the auditorium. It landed about a yard from the Chinese premier, but did not hit him. Security officials went on to the stage and kicked it off and a Chinese official took it away under his jacket.

http://thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=160538

Had earlier posted it in China Military thread.
I wonder if it was chinese made shoe. If not, expect its style to be copied.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 03 Feb 2009 12:20

In google maps, the border between China & Tajikistan is not well defined. any known acrimony between the two?
http://maps.google.co.in/maps?ie=UTF8&l ... 50.625&z=5

Nitesh · Post by **Nitesh** » 04 Feb 2009 10:59

interesting

Chinese earthquake may have been man-made, say scientists

An earthquake that killed at least 80,000 people in Sichuan last year may have been triggered by an enormous dam just miles from the epicentre

The 511ft-high Zipingpu dam holds 315 million tonnes of water and lies just 550 yards from the fault line, and three miles from the epicentre, of the Sichuan earthquake.

Now scientists in China and the United States believe the weight of water, and the effect of it penetrating into the rock, could have affected the pressure on the fault line underneath, possibly unleashing a chain of ruptures that led to the quake.

Fan Xiao, the chief engineer of the Sichuan Geology and Mineral Bureau in Chengdu, said it was "very likely" that the construction and filling of the reservoir in 2004 had led to the disaster.

"There have been many cases in which a water reservoir has triggered an earthquake," said Mr Fan. "This earthquake was very unusual for this area.

There have been no seismic activities greater than a magnitude seven quake along this particular seismic belt before."

The 7.9 magnitude quake struck last May and left more than five million people homeless. It remains a raw and emotional topic for most Chinese, and the government has been quick to quash any suggestion that Zipingpu may have been responsible for the catastrophe. Researchers have been denied access to seismological and geological data to examine the earthquake further.

Zipingpu is only one of nearly 400 hydroelectric dams in the earthquake zone. Mr Fan said the government had been warned of the danger of building so many large-scale projects in a seismically active area, but that the warnings had gone unheeded.

"I not only opposed the construction of Zipingpu, but also the overdevelopment of the reservoirs on Minjiang River. There are ten major reservoirs on the main river, 29 on its tributaries and a lot more smaller-scale reservoirs, all of which block the flow of the entire river, and are very hazardous to the local geology," he said.

Although Sichuan is an earthquake-prone region, many scientists were caught by surprise by the magnitude of the quake. Christian Klose, a scientist at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, said there had not been any "major seismic activity" on that fault line for millions of years.

He argued that the sudden shift of a huge quantity of water into the region could have simultaneously relaxed the tension between the two sides of the fault, allowing them to move apart, and also increased the direct pressure enough to cause a violent rupture. The effect was "25 times more" than a year's worth of natural stress from tectonic movement, he said.

Although the official government line is that its massive construction projects had nothing to do with the quake, some state researchers in Beijing have called for a full investigation. Lei Xinglin, of the China Earthquake Administration, said that the Zipingpu reservoir "clearly affected the local seismicity and it is worthwhile to study the role it played in triggering the earthquake further". He added that firm conclusions remain "premature" however.

There is a history of earthquakes triggered by dams, including several caused by the construction of the Hoover dam in the US, but none of such a magnitude.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 04 Feb 2009 23:15

China said Tuesday it had expressed its strong dissatisfaction to the British government over a protester throwing a shoe at Premier Wen Jiabao

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/China_u ... t_999.html

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 06 Feb 2009 15:43

xpost
China-India Naval Duel? Not Quite

One poster on a Chinese bulletin board soon pointed out that story lifted several parts verbatim from a 2008 story about a training mission in PLA Life magazine.

derkonig · Post by **derkonig** » 06 Feb 2009 18:56

So after fake goods, Chinese have started exporting fake stories as well.

jaladipc · Post by **jaladipc** » 07 Feb 2009 10:33

Workers protest as Italian sofa maker folds in China: govt

One of the Chinese government's main worries amid the global crisis is the impact the tougher conditions will have on unemployment, and the risk of social unrest as millions lose their jobs.

About 20 million have already lost their jobs in the crisis, according to central government data.

lol........china feeling the cold now.
sooner or later i wish it will turn into a social unrest in the communist nation.and own nationals throwing shoes at WHO(hu) instead of england citizens.

Nitesh · Post by **Nitesh** » 07 Feb 2009 10:35

Russia and China 'approval down'

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 07 Feb 2009 15:23

A job fair in Beijing

And we thought CST was crowded!

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 07 Feb 2009 21:54

China's official figures obscure sharp decline

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 08 Feb 2009 09:27

China drought deprives millions of drinking water

Sat Feb 7, 2009
SHANGHAI (Reuters) - Millions of people and cattle in north China face shortages of drinking water because of a severe drought, the government said on Saturday, promising to speed up disbursement of billions of dollars of subsidies to farmers.

State television quoted disaster relief officials as saying 4.4 million people and 2.1 million cattle lacked adequate drinking water. Official media have described the drought as north China's worst in half a century.

The Ministry of Finance said it would accelerate disbursement of 86.7 billion yuan ($12.7 billion) of annual subsidies for farmers to assist grain production and minimize the impact of the drought on rural incomes.

The government is particularly anxious to avoid a drop in rural incomes because of the threat of social unrest as millions of migrant workers, laid off from urban jobs during China's economic slump, return to the countryside. ... . . . .

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 08 Feb 2009 17:10

Interesting account...I will pick this book up..

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/natwa ... a/420766/0

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 09 Feb 2009 03:34

"PLA Destroyers Serving as Escort Ships Off Somalia Coast Confront Indian Submarine" Hoax Uncovered

China Free Press reports that the Wednesday February 4 English-language South China Morning Post, as well as the mainstream mainland newspaper Qingdao Morning News and web portals Sina and QQ reported the alarming news that two PLA destroyers--while serving as escort ships off the coast of Somalia--engaged in sonar jamming with an Indian navy submarine and that the Chinese destroyers had forced the Indian sub to surface. The source of this story was a past issue of the PLA-produced "Peoples Liberation Army Life" monthly magazine. But that story was about a PLA Navy training operation. A Qingdao Morning Newspaper reporter plagiarized the "Peoples Liberation Army Life" monthly magazine story and presented it as a real event instead of a naval exercise. The South China Morning Post, Hong Kong's leading English-language daily specializing in covering China, is very influential internationally this story circulated quite widely and caused significant alarm before being exposed as a fake.

Full Chinese report at: http://bbs.voc.com.cn/topic-1783146-1-1.html

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 17 Feb 2009 22:39

This person behaves more like chairman mao.

You "foreigners" better behave or ...

China's 'next leader' in hardline rant

Xi Jinping, the man earmarked to become China's next president, has roundly attacked his country's critics while giving a speech in Mexico.

By Malcolm Moore in Shanghai
Last Updated: 11:56AM GMT 16 Feb 2009
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -rant.html

Mr Xi, 55, is touring South America in his role as deputy president and, although it is widely acknowledged that he will be Hu Jintao's successor as China's leader, very little is known about him.

Despite his high rank, he keeps a far lower profile than either Mr Hu or Wen Jiabao, the current prime minister.

Until Mr Xi was appointed to the politburo last year, he was most famous for being the son of Xi Zhongxun, one of the founders of the Chinese Communist Party.

While passing through Mexico, however, Mr Xi launched into an outspoken rant that provided a rare insight into his character.

After proudly claiming that China has already made its contribution to the financial crisis by making sure its own 1.3 billion people are fed, he said that "there are a few foreigners, with full bellies, who have nothing better to do than try to point fingers at our country".

He added: "China does not export revolution, hunger, poverty, nor does China cause you any headaches. Just what else do you want?"

Commentators suggested that Mr Xi was lashing out at his Mexican hosts for siding with Britain and the United States in calling for China to improve its human rights record.

China has also recently come under attack from the US for "manipulating" its currency and distorting world trade, although these comments were toned down at last week's G7 meeting in Rome.

The phrase "having a full stomach and nothing better to do" is an earthy insult in Chinese for cynical troublemakers.

His speech was judged far too inflammatory by censors inside China, and was instantly deleted from websites and news reports.

Chinese nationalists instantly jumped on Mr Xi's words, offering support for his hardline position and criticising the government for being too diplomatic in its dealings with foreigners. They lauded Mr Xi's frankness in comparison to the staid caution of Mr Hu and Mr Wen.

However, their support was shortlived. Bloggers trying to write about Mr Xi's speech soon had their posts taken down by censors.

Liu · Post by **Liu** » 18 Feb 2009 16:18

Avinash R wrote:This person behaves more like chairman mao.

You "foreigners" better behave or ...

China's 'next leader' in hardline rant

His speech was judged far too inflammatory by censors inside China, and was instantly deleted from websites and news reports.

another CNN-style report? Western medias are really the good student of CCTV,which does nothing but "cover" ,"distort" and "lie".

Chines websited now is flooded by XI's speech and the video .....

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 18 Feb 2009 20:43

Why would the government censor a Chinese nationalist? It seems to me that his speech would be exactly what they wait for in reporting.

Liu · Post by **Liu** » 19 Feb 2009 07:53

Keshav wrote:Why would the government censor a Chinese nationalist? It seems to me that his speech would be exactly what they wait for in reporting.

Since internet penetrated into Chinese daily , Chinese government's censorship has become useless and uneffective.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 20 Feb 2009 05:57

Liu wrote:
Keshav wrote:Why would the government censor a Chinese nationalist? It seems to me that his speech would be exactly what they wait for in reporting.
Since internet penetrated into Chinese daily , Chinese government's censorship has become useless and uneffective.

That's not true. The Internet Service Providers(ISPs) and various chat portals are always scared of offending government. Since the government is not specific about the regulations. So the hosts and ISPs are even more stringent than government in self-censoring.