Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Locked
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

X-posted from the Space thread.

Did ISRO just put a Chinese satellite into orbit? - AJ Vinayak, Business Line
After the mega launch of 104 satellites in February, ISRO’s relatively modest launch of 31 satellites on Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) C38 on Friday should have attracted little attention. After all, barring the 712-kg Cartosat-2 series satellite, the other passengers were small satellites from different countries, mostly built by universities across the globe (including India) for research purposes.

But the origin of one of the tiny passengers has been causing a buzz among space and satellite launch circles around the globe. Reason: ISRO may well have put a Chinese satellite into space.

Eight of the small satellites deployed on Friday were Cube Sats — miniaturised research satellites — of the QB50 project, sponsored by the European Commission and managed by the Von Karmann Institute from Belgium. Orbiting in a string-of-pearls configuration, the QB50 constellation is a network of 50 Cubesats built by university teams world-over to carry out long-duration exploration of the lower thermosphere.

NASA’s Spaceflight.com website, which lists all payloads launched into space, says one of the QB50 satellites belonged to China’s National University of Defence Technology. “The two satellites which carry INMS (Ion-Neutral Mass Spectrometer) payloads are NUDTSat for China’s National University of Defence Technology and UCLSat for University College London”, it said.

With the two Asian giants being bitter rivals on earth as well as in space (China is way ahead in manned spaceflight; India beat China to Mars), there was consternation in some circles about ISRO carrying a Chinese payload.

According to an entry on social news aggregator Reddit: “There is a bit of confusion as ‘BE06’ isn’t on any list and is probably a typo…”. It noted that BE is a country code for Belgium but that NUDTSAT is from China. The NASA site named the satellite name as CN06.

ISRO denied there was any Chinese satellite aboard PSLV C38. ISRO’s official launch brochure said the satellite in question was Belgian — but that may well be because of the Belgian oversight of the QB50 project.

GBtimes, a website that says it “introduces Chinese businesses to the world”, said that not only was NUDTSat Chinese but that the earlier, record-setting launch of 104 satellites had also included a Chinese passenger — Chen Jiayong 1, another cubesat.


Clearly, it’s Hindi-Cheeni bhai-bhai once more — at least in space.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by ramana »

So Chinese says are hiding origin of their payloads. Need to exercise due diligence and ensure payload aggregators certify origins of payloads. Next time dangerous cargo could be in space thanks to such disinterest.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

China stops Kailash pilgrims - The Hindu
The annual Kailash Mansarovar yatra, which was flagged off earlier this month by External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, has been disrupted. Reports suggest that China has declined permission for the first group of 50 pilgrims to proceed to the holy Mount Kailash through the Nathu La pass.

The pilgrims have returned to Gangtok in Sikkim after the denial of permission.

“Yes, there are some difficulties being experienced in movement of Kailash Mansarovar Yatris via Nathu La. The matter is being discussed with the Chinese side,” said Official Spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs.


Short route

The route through the Nathu La pass that opened two years ago shortens the entire route making the pilgrimage less arduous.

It is not yet known why the Chinese authorities have denied permission.
shashankk
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 73
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 03:53

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by shashankk »

SSridhar wrote:China stops Kailash pilgrims - The Hindu
The annual Kailash Mansarovar yatra, which was flagged off earlier this month by External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, has been disrupted. Reports suggest that China has declined permission for the first group of 50 pilgrims to proceed to the holy Mount Kailash through the Nathu La pass.

The pilgrims have returned to Gangtok in Sikkim after the denial of permission.

“Yes, there are some difficulties being experienced in movement of Kailash Mansarovar Yatris via Nathu La. The matter is being discussed with the Chinese side,” said Official Spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs.


Short route

The route through the Nathu La pass that opened two years ago shortens the entire route making the pilgrimage less arduous.

It is not yet known why the Chinese authorities have denied permission.

Chinese are getting restless as they are expecting Trump and Namo to issue joint statement against China in Washington. First Open NO to our NSG aspiration, then statement regarding South china sea warning USA and India and now this. Chinese are getting nervous or belligerent only time will tell but they have realized that their monster pet Pukistan has lost the face in international and they have to come out in the open to confront India.
sivab
BRFite
Posts: 1075
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by sivab »

https://twitter.com/Swamy39/status/878251770404716545
Subramanian Swamy‏Verified account @Swamy39

The Chinese army I.e., PLA is getting restive. So fasten your seatbelts folks

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/878607408477519872
Saurav Jha‏ @SJha1618

Yup, there are reports of PLAA destroying bunkers in the Sikkim-Bhutan-Tibet tri-junction.

Saurav Jha‏ @SJha1618 7h7 hours ago

The Chinese seem to be getting jittery about their position in the Chumbi valley. They destroyed the Indian bunker in the Dokala area.

Saurav Jha‏ @SJha1618 7h7 hours ago
Replying to @SJha1618

Not only does the PLA want to offset its vulnerability in the Chumbi Valley they are also signalling towards the Siliguri Corridor

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

China wants to strike us at the narrow Siliguri Chicken's Neck area. China also has a border dispute with Bhutan most probably because of this reason. India and Bhutan remain the only two countries with whom China has not settled its border. The dispute goes back to 1950 when China published maps showing certain portions in the west and north of Bhutan as belonging to it. Bilateral talks however started only in 1984 on the border dispute. In c. 2012, China made a package offer to Bhutan through which it conceded its claims to 900 Sq. Kms of territory in the north for a 400 Sq Km territory in the west. This is a typical Chinese ruse of falsely and deliberately 'claiming' two areas and then offering a package conceding 'magnanimously' one in order to get the other. China has been claiming Doklam, Charithang, Sinchulimpa and Dramana pasture land in Western Bhutan leading up to the Chumbi Valley which is almost a wedge between India (Sikkim) and Bhutan. The idea of the Chinese is to increase the shoulder leading to the narrow Chumbi valley to enable building road and rail network. The Chumbi Valley is hardly 500 Kms from the strategic and narrow Siliguri Corridor (or, ‘Chicken’s Neck’) that connects the North East to mainland India.

Simultaneously, China has been putting up pressure on Bhutan diplomatically also. In June, 2012, China proposed to establish its diplomatic mission in Bhutan and demanded Bhutan conceding 400 Sq. Kms of land leading up to the Chumbi Valley. This was discussed when the Bhutanese Prime Minister Jigme Thinley, held a first-ever meeting with then Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, on the sidelines of a United Nations conference in Brazil in June 2012. Later, a commentary in the Communist Party-run tabloid Global Times accused India of influencing the c. 2013 domestic elections in Bhutan and treating the country “like a protectorate” by withdrawing petroleum subsidies. In June 2014, on the eve of Indian PM Narendra Modi’s state visit (his first foreign tour upon assuming office), the Bhutanese Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay said regarding the Chinese diplomatic mission, “China has not advanced such a proposal to the Royal Government, but that as a neighbour of China we engage regularly with it to resolve the border issue.” After the conclusion of Modi’s visit to Bhutan, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said that there was no competition between India and China for strategic space in Bhutan. Such a claim cannot be taken at face value because the Chinese are relentless.

As it does along the Indian border or even elsewhere, PLA makes regular deep intrusions and carries out road extension works into or near disputed areas even violating the 1998 China-Bhutan Agreement for Maintenance of Peace and Tranquility. In c. 2016, China made efforts once again to establish diplomatic relationship with Bhutan.
Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 1054
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by Guddu »

With Modi and Doval out of the country, I think China is testing our response times with these border post destructions. It also sends
a friendly reminder to Trump, hey they still exist and are a pain in the ar$e. When XI visited India, the chinese were playing games on the border, they seem to never let an opportunity to test us go waste.
rsangram
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Sep 2016 17:54

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by rsangram »

The Hidden Motives Of The Chinese Silk Road

Oilprice.com
June 24, 2017


https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hidden-m ... 00173.html
The long-term strategic consequences of OBOR for India could also allow China to consolidate its presence in the Indian Ocean at India’s expense. Indian critics contend that China may use its economic power to increase its geopolitical leverage and, in doing so, intensify security concerns for India. CPEC gives China a foothold in the western Indian Ocean with the Gwadar port, located near the strategic Strait of Hormuz, where Chinese warships and a submarine have surfaced. Access here allows China greater potential to control maritime trade in that part of the world – a vulnerable point for India, which sources more than 60 percent of its oil supplies from the Middle East. What’s more, if CPEC does resolve China’s “Malacca dilemma” – its over-reliance on the Malacca Straits for the transport of its energy resources – this gives Asia’s largest economy greater operational space to pursue unilateral interests in maritime matters to the detriment of freedom of navigation and trade-energy security of several states in the Indian Ocean region, including India.

Related: Saudi Reshuffle Could Completely Shake Up Oil Markets

More generally, the Maritime Silk Road reinforces New Delhi’s concerns about encirclement. Beijing’s port development projects in the Indian Ocean open the possibility of dual-use facilities, complicating India’s security calculus.

India has its own set of connectivity initiatives such as Myanmar’s Kaladan project, the Chabahar port project with Iran, as well as the north-south corridor with Russia which could be potentially leveraged. The proposed 7200-kilometer International North South Transportation Corridor is a ship, rail and road transportation system connecting the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf to the Caspian Sea via Iran to Russia and North Europe. The Indian and Japanese governments are working on a “vision document” for developing an Asia-Africa Growth Corridor largely meant to propel growth and investment in Africa, in part a response to China’s ever-growing presence on the continent.

The Belt and Road Initiative is a highly ambitious undertaking in line with China’s aspirations to emerge as the central economic power at a time when the United States makes plans to step back from global affairs. Its success depends on China’s ability to move beyond the bilateral framework and allowing a truly multilateral vision for the project to evolve. Otherwise, China can expect to contend with opposition from more countries than India.
" Otherwise, China can expect to contend with opposition from more countries than India". Yeah, then China will really have something to worry about !
sivab
BRFite
Posts: 1075
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by sivab »

http://www.news18.com/news/india/china- ... 42213.html
China Refuses Entry To Kailash Mansarovar Yatris After ‘Border Skirmish

According to sources, the situation in Nathu-la evolved after an incident of skirmish at Dokala area of Sikkim. The sources said Chinese PLA troops destroyed a newly repaired bunker of India around 10 days ago. This has led to a tense border situation between the two sides. A recent flag meeting also failed to resolve the situation.
rsangram
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Sep 2016 17:54

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by rsangram »

sivab wrote:http://www.news18.com/news/india/china- ... 42213.html
China Refuses Entry To Kailash Mansarovar Yatris After ‘Border Skirmish

According to sources, the situation in Nathu-la evolved after an incident of skirmish at Dokala area of Sikkim. The sources said Chinese PLA troops destroyed a newly repaired bunker of India around 10 days ago. This has led to a tense border situation between the two sides. A recent flag meeting also failed to resolve the situation.
So, this has been going on for at least 10 days now. Why is the Indian government not leveling with the Indian people on this ? Why is the government totally silent ? No coverage of this in the press either. What is the government hiding ? Why is no one talking about it ? Should not the Defense Minister or even the Prime Minister address the nation on this issue ? Or at least a televised press conference ?

Something looks awfully fishy here. Was the Indian government really looking to sweep this under the rug, and actually give up on that particular post where the destroyed bunker was located ?
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

Gaps in India-China dialogue led to 'innuendo': Indian envoy - ToI
Dialogue between India and China on critical issues has not kept pace with developments leading to gaps filled by "innuendo", India's envoy here [Beijing] said on Saturday as think-tanks of the two countries discussed how to stem the growing differences that has strained bilateral ties.

"While we are neighbours and friends, dialogue among us has not quite kept pace with the fast-paced developments of the last half-century," Indian Ambassador to China Vijay Gokhale said at the 2nd India-China think tank meeting here.

As the two nations grow rapidly and become the pillars of Asian, if not global, growth and stability, the need for better understanding each other's motivations, concerns and strategic priorities grows even stronger, he said.

A sustained dialogue is a pre-requisite to the "deeply enmeshed relationship", he said.

"We have seen that gaps in understanding due to lack of dialogue are quickly filled by innuendo. Yet, we have also seen in this very relationship that both sides have the wisdom and maturity to confront and solve problems whenever we have engaged each other in honest dialogue," Gokhale said.

A delegation led by the Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA) Director-General Ambassador Nalin Surie today held the 2nd India-China Think-Tanks Forum organised by the ICWA and Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS).

The delegation, which included former Indian Ambassador to China Ashok Kantha, consisted of Indian scholars and experts on regional, economic, and strategic issues from 11 institutions in India.


They deliberated on strategic communication, bilateral trade and investment cooperation, science and technology and people-to-people exchanges.

After the talks here, the delegation will proceed to southern Chinese cities of Guangzhou and Shenzhen for additional exchanges with think-tanks there and site-visits.

The Forum is a bilateral platform established by an MOU during the visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to China in 2015. The first meeting was held in New Delhi last year.


Speaking at the Forum, Surie, who was also former Indian Ambassador to China, said, "we have variety of reasons that requires us to cooperate and collaborate other than enter into needless competition and rivalry".

"We have differences. However, it is necessary to ensure that they do not become disputes but instead converted into opportunities for even greater cooperation," he said.


Referring to a recent meeting between Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping, Surie said, "our leaders are of the opinion that we need to address each other's concerns very seriously. We need to take heed of this in our think tank community also."

For its part, China has fielded its top think-tanks to deliberate with their Indian counterparts to look for a way out growing differences between the two countries, specially on the USD 50 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, China blocking India's membership bid in the Nuclear Suppliers Group as well as UN ban on JeM leader Masood Azhar.

Those from the Chinese side who took part in the deliberations included Kong Xuanyou, Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs, Prof. Wang Weiguang, President of CASS and Prof. Hu Shisheng, the director of the Institute of South and Southeast Asian and Oceania Studies of the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR). {Ok, what did they say?}
Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 1054
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by Guddu »

I suspect GOI wants to negotiate with chinese...advertising it means no negotiations can occur, without H&D being involved. Journalists should however raise these issues...
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by shiv »

Minor action on the border. Time to panic and buy adult diapers and assume the worst.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

rsangram wrote:
So, this has been going on for at least 10 days now. Why is the Indian government not leveling with the Indian people on this ? Why is the government totally silent ? No coverage of this in the press either. What is the government hiding ? Why is no one talking about it ? Should not the Defense Minister or even the Prime Minister address the nation on this issue ? Or at least a televised press conference ?

Something looks awfully fishy here. Was the Indian government really looking to sweep this under the rug, and actually give up on that particular post where the destroyed bunker was located ?
rsangram, there is no need to froth at the mouth corner like that Kashmiri poster boy who mysteriously no longer makes his appearance.

The Defence Minister went to Russia on a scheduled trip, the PM went on a three-nation tour and the chiefs of the armed forces are going about their job normally. So, all is well and under control. We know these are regular incidents handled at the local level. If it cools you down, let me say that the Chinese are not always the ones having their way. We have stood our ground too many times and we have also dismantled Chinese structures.

The Chinese PLA could not have forgotten the Nathu La incident of 1967. I am sure we can give them a bloody face once again. Take it easy.
rsangram
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Sep 2016 17:54

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by rsangram »

SSridhar wrote:
rsangram wrote:
So, this has been going on for at least 10 days now. Why is the Indian government not leveling with the Indian people on this ? Why is the government totally silent ? No coverage of this in the press either. What is the government hiding ? Why is no one talking about it ? Should not the Defense Minister or even the Prime Minister address the nation on this issue ? Or at least a televised press conference ?

Something looks awfully fishy here. Was the Indian government really looking to sweep this under the rug, and actually give up on that particular post where the destroyed bunker was located ?
rsangram, there is no need to froth at the mouth corner like that Kashmiri poster boy who mysteriously no longer makes his appearance.

The Defence Minister went to Russia on a scheduled trip, the PM went on a three-nation tour and the chiefs of the armed forces are going about their job normally. So, all is well and under control. We know these are regular incidents handled at the local level. If it cools you down, let me say that the Chinese are not always the ones having their way. We have stood our ground too many times and we have also dismantled Chinese structures.

The Chinese PLA could not have forgotten the Nathu La incident of 1967. I am sure we can give them a bloody face once again. Take it easy.
I am sorry for frothing at the mouth. Thanks for not using the phrase "dhoti shiver", although I sometimes Dhoti Shiver too.

And also, sorry for not having the knowledge that you do, about the "Chinese not having their way, all the time". Since this information, about the "Chinese not having their way, all the time", is not available anywhere, other than in posts at BRF, I hope you can forgive me for not knowing. I only know of several major incidents when the Chinese came way inside Indian territory and there was a standoff, which did not always end in India's favor - in fact most recent standoffs, ended with Indians capitulating. I know about Nathu-la and Cho-la, which could be perceived as ending somewhat in favor of India, but even these standoffs were inside Indian territory and way back in 1967 at that. The recent incidents INSIDE Ladakh, such as Burtse, Depsang Bulge, Nyoma, Trig Heights, Pangonso Lake, Chumar, just to name a few - Indian government itself has admitted to more than 700 incidents of Chinese transgressions in the past three years, most ended "not in favor" of India.

Please see Zachary Keck's article of just yesterday, where Brahma Chellaney, India's foremost expert on China, is extensively quoted saying that the Chinese have been grabbing Indian territory, inch by inch, mile by mile, and now the stage has come where there is just about no buffer left in the Himalayan territory between India and China, meaning that the Chinese have gobbled up most of the disputed territory or undemarcated territory by now. I post the link below again, which I have posted yesterday, either on this thread or the other China thread.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... -sea-21296

So, what would you call, "Chinese not having their way". Please educate me. Does the Indian Army regularly transgress miles into Chinese territory and then retreats when confronted ? To a simpleton like me, that proactivity would signal that the "chinese dont always have their way". Allowing hundreds of Chinese transgressions a year, without any significant response, and ending most of them, by capitulation on the Indian side, even to the point of allowing Indian territory to be gobbled up "inch by inch, and mile by mile", by the Chinese does not appear to at least inferior minds like me, to be "Chinese not having their way".

And the "defense minister going on his regular trip to Russia and the PM going on this trip to the US", again, does not signal to me, and I may be dense, that the "Chinese dont get their way all the time", or "did not get their way this time", either, even if it is Lord Modi himself going to the US. I may not know much, and there you are correct, but I remember Muhommad Shah Rangila.....who kept watching his favorite dancing girls perform and maintained his normal daily routine, well until Nadir Shah reached the gates of Delhi, all the time proclaiming when his alarmed courtiers informed him of the rapid Nadir Shah advance towards Delhi - "Dilli abhi Door Hai". Dilli is still far from China, but today, it is not as far as it was a decade ago or even five years ago.

But I am open to being educated. Maybe, you can show me that this "China coming closer to India", is a good thing. And maybe I will buy it too. After all, I am an Indian and a common Indian at that.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

rsangram, I am giving you two months' vacation to 'educate yourself'. If that were not enough, I will consider handing over a lifetime education leave for you.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by shiv »

I think Modi's words about the border need to be seen in the overall context of India-China relations - an aspect that has been clearly dealt with by Shivshankar Menon in his book "Choices". He points out that huge areas of the border are so hostile to life that they are not inhabited or patrolled. It is just that China and India have reached an agreement (post Narasimha Rao) where each is aware of the other's claims but have simply agreed not to push their claim by creeping up and building something. In other words - over huge areas there is no marked border. This ambiguity means that Indians will be regularly patrolling areas that the Chinese claim while the Chinese intrude into areas that Indians claim. As long as no structure is built (or even if a structure is built) it is dealt with by dismantling followed by talks rather than shooting. There are areas where India might build a wall or a bunker that the Chinese object to and vice versa. We have seen numerous reports of this.

That said - Nathu La is pretty much the only area where Indian and Chines troops exist face to face. Face to face encounters have occurred in other areas - of which we have read reports. But Shivshankar Menon makes it a point to stress that the Indian presence used to be very thin on the ground till the mid 80s or early 90s. After that the Indian presence has expanded massively - so Chinese incursions are detected and reported and dealt with as per established procedure. This increased Indian presence has definitely caused concern to the Chinese.

Finally - a personal note - in the last BRF+DFI meet I had during Aero India - deejay told us a very funny story where a group of Air Force and army personnel went hunting for the wreckage of an aircraft at the border. They wandered into Chinese territory - a fact that was known to the accompanying army men but not to the Vayusena explorers until much later. But what ultimately chased them off was a bear if I recall correctly.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by Prem »

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 450_1.html
Bilaspur-Manali-Leh line: World's highest rail track survey to commence
The Railways will kick off the final location survey of the 498 km long Bilaspur-Manali-Leh line at Leh in Jammu and Kashmir this week.
Coming up at a high of 3,300 metres, the strategically important rail project is touted to become the highest rail track in the world, overtaking China's Qinghai-Tibet Railway.The all-weather Leh rail network is one of the four important railway connectivities identified by the defence ministry along the China border.Railway Minister Suresh Prabhu will inaugurate the work for the final location survey on June 27 at an estimated cost of Rs 157.77 crore. The survey is funded by the defence ministry.The proposed new rail line will connect all important locations between Bilaspur and Leh namely Sunder Nagar Mandi, Manali, Tandi, Keylong, Koksar, Darcha, Upshi and Karu.The final location survey has been entrusted to RITES, a Railways PSU."RITES has deployed its expert team to carry out this challenging task. The survey will be carried out in three phases and is slated to be completed by 2019," said a senior Railway Ministry official.Presently, the road route is open only for about five months in a year.Apart from strategic considerations, the line connecting Bilaspur in Himachal Pradesh to Leh in Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir is expected to give immense "socio-economic benefits" to the region, including tourism.The defence ministry had initiated rail line projects along China, Nepal and Pakistan borders as strategic lines.Fourteen strategic lines have been identified, out of which four - Bilaspur-Manali-Leh, Missamari-Tenga-Tawang, North Lakhimpur-Bame-Silapathar and Pasighat-Tezu-Rupai - will be taken up in the first phase.The Bilaspur-Manali-Leh line is along Himachal-J&K border and the last three lines along Assam-Arunachal border.Once the Bilaspur-Manali-Leh railway line is completed, Leh will be directly connected to Himachal Pradesh and the rest of India by railway.Personnel and equipment will be transported more easily to the strategic military base of Leh with the commissioning of the line.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

Suspicious ‘signals’ of GJM activists picked up
Ham radio operators working with the security forces to track down radio communications of underground GJM leaders have picked up “suspicious and coded signals” of the activists to other countries and states.

The security forces and intelligence agencies first got the clue that the GJM was using radio signals as a mode of communication when two radio sets were seized during the June 15 raid on the premises of some Gorkha Janamukti Morcha (GJM) leaders.

It was then that the police administration decided to deploy a group of Ham radio operators to track the radio communication of GJM activists. The operators picked up the suspicious cross border signals during the drill. “Most of the coded signals and communications were in Nepali and Tibetan languages. After decoding the words, we came to know about some kind of consignment that is about to come. The rest is classified and we cannot disclose it,” an official privy to information said.
I suspect involvement of Chinese in the unrest.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

India-Afghanistan air corridor reflects New Delhi's stubborn thinking: Chinese daily - PTI
Bypassing Pakistan in a direct air corridor with Afghanistan reflects India's "stubborn geopolitical thinking" and its opposition to Beijing's connectivity project, a Chinese daily has said.

The Global Times in a commentary advised India "to develop economic and trade relations" with China's "all-weather ally" Pakistan where Beijing is building a multi-billion-dollar worth economic corridor that passes between Islamabad and New Delhi.


Last week, India and Afghanistan opened a direct commercial air route, bypassing Pakistan with which ties of both the neighbours have soured over the issue of terrorism.

Pakistan lies between India and Afghanistan and has not allowed overland trade between both countries.

"India and Afghanistan inaugurated a direct air freight corridor last week, a dedicated route designed to give a boost to trade between the two countries. This begs a question: Will India bypass Pakistan to develop trade with Afghanistan and other Central Asian countries?" Global Times' reporter Wang Jiamei asked in the online commentary.

"All such connectivity efforts have not only signalled India's desire to more actively participate in regional economic development, but have also highlighted the country's stubborn geopolitical thinking."

"India has always been pushing back against the Belt and Road initiative, so its intention to create its own connectivity network appears to be a strategy to counterbalance the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), especially to bypass Pakistan, which has prohibited India from transporting any goods through its territory due to their tense relationship." {So, if China acknowledges that Pakistan prohibits India's transit, then what is the problem with air cargo?}

India is opposed to the CPEC which cuts through Gilgit-Baltistan, in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir claimed by New Delhi.

So much so that India boycotted a two-day Belt and Road Summit organised by Beijing in May, citing sovereignty issue over the project.

"India has also started another project to develop the Iranian port of Chabahar, with the aim of opening another direct transport route to Afghanistan and Central Asian countries," {Is it that only Chin can develop ports, create connectivity etc and India cannot? What is this reference to Chahbahar?} the article noted, referring to a media report.

India is a developing Chabahar port in Iran which is 72 km away from Gwadar port in Balochistan being built by China under the CPEC.

"It is undeniable that geopolitical issues are complicated in this region, but it would still be better for India to develop economic and trade relations with Pakistan."

"From the point of view of connectivity, regardless of India's mindset behind the air freight corridor, the new route will somehow boost the development of trade relations, which will of course facilitate regional economic growth, but the big question is whether the air route is commercially viable and sustainable for trade exchange."


"No matter how India is thinking, if the country really wants to participate more in regional economic development, it should not bypass Pakistan, which offers the most efficient and cost-effective land route. Regional connectivity cannot live without the cooperation between both India and Pakistan."

"In this sense, the Belt and Road has actually created the opportunity and platform for cooperation between India and Pakistan, and now we will see if India can eventually seize the opportunity," the commentary concluded.
Like always, the Chinese use logic that can easily be turned against them. And, they continue to plead with India to join the BRI.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by Philip »

A global threat looming thanks to China.The next global eco recession.India could kick-start the downfall of the Chinese eco-bubble by a ban on all Chinese goods unless the trade deficit is equalised!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 07811.html
Great recession fears as bankers warn next global crash could arrive 'with a vengeance'
Next major recession could be brewing in countries like China, a new report warns

Caroline Mortimer
The Independent Online

Central bankers have voiced fears about the Chinese economy as corporate debt rises faster than GDP Getty Images
A new financial crisis is brewing in the emerging economies and it could hit “with a vengeance”, an influential group of central bankers has warned.

Emerging markets such as China are showing the same signs that their economies are overheating as the US and the UK demonstrated before the financial crisis of 2007-08, according to the annual report of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).

Claudio Borio, the head of the BIS monetary and economic department, said a new recession could come “with a vengeance” and “the end may come to resemble more closely a financial boom gone wrong”.

READ MORE
Britain ‘facing lost decade of economic growth’
Behind China's $1 trillion plan to shake up the economic order
China sees surprise boost to exports but concerns remain over economy
The BIS, which is sometimes known as the central bank for central banks and counts Bank of England Governor Mark Carney among its members, warned of trouble ahead for the world economy.

It predicted that central banks would be forced to raise interest rates after years of record lows in order to combat inflation which will “smother” growth.

The group also warned about the threat poised by rising debt in countries like China and the rise in protectionism such as in the US under Donald Trump, City AM reported.

Chinese corporate debt has almost doubled since 2007, now reaching 166 per cent of GDP, while household debt rose to 44 per cent of GDP last year.
i
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

In touch with India over Mansarovar pilgrimage issue: China - PTI
China said today that it was in touch with India over continuing the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra through the Nathu La pass in Sikkim, days after refusing entry to pilgrims citing damage to roads in Tibet due to landslides and rains.

"According to my information the two governments are in touch over this issue," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Suhang told reporters.

The Chinese statement came days after China denied entry to the first batch of nearly 50 Indian pilgrims
who were scheduled to travel to Kailash Mansarovar through the Nathu La pass.

The pilgrims were stopped by Chinese officials at the Sino-India border. They were scheduled to cross over to the Chinese side on June 19 but failed to do so due to inclement weather and had to wait at the base camp.

On June 23, China denied entry to them due to damage to roads. External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Gopal Baglay has said some difficulties were being experienced in the movement of pilgrims through the Nathu La pass and India was taking up the matter with China.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

Chinese troops trangress Sikkim sector, jostle with Indian forces - PTI
In another transgression, Chinese troops entered India in the Sikkim sector and jostled with Indian army personnel guarding the Sino-India frontier, besides destroying two bunker.

The face-off has been going on in Doka La general area in Sikkim for the past ten days and the Chinese troops have also stopped the batch of pilgrims that was proceeding for Kailash Mansovar yatra, official sources said today.

The Indian troops had to struggle hard to stop the Chinese personnel from advancing further into Indian terrotory. They formed a human wall along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) to stop the PLA personnel, some of whom also videographed and click pictures of the incident.

The bunkers has been destroyed in Lalten area of the Doka La area.

A flag meeting was also held between senior army officers of both the sides on June 20, but the tension still continues.


It is not the first time that such a transgression has happened at the Doka La, a place at the Sikkim-Bhutan-Tibet tri-junction.

The Chinese forces had in November 2008 destroyed some makeshift Indian army bunkers at the same place.
sivab
BRFite
Posts: 1075
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by sivab »

https://twitter.com/globaltimesnews/sta ... 4677604352
Global Times‏Verified account @globaltimesnews

#Indian troops’ provocation in border areas has violated Sino-Indian consensus and endangered peace: Chinese MoD

Image
sivab
BRFite
Posts: 1075
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by sivab »

https://twitter.com/PTI_News/status/879718433180352513
Press Trust of India‏Verified account @PTI_News

After #Dokala area skirmish, Centre reviews situation along #SinoIndia border; Army, ITBP, home ministry officials in attendance
anjan
BRFite
Posts: 448
Joined: 08 Jan 2010 02:42

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by anjan »


This isn't strictly military(It's about the organ trade the Chinese govt./PLA are involved in) but that channel is interesting and gives a viewpoint on the internal power struggles. A large part of the military flashes I think are also based on their internal politics and goes some way to explain the low-key way in which the GOI deals with them.

As has been pointed out about the muslim populations not being monoliths, China isn't either. Understanding that is critical to understanding and managing them.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by Singha »

https://www.facebook.com/Tamildefense/v ... 021816923/

video of the jostling going on at the border - why dont we just use tear gas?
VenkataS
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 03:38

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by VenkataS »

Chinese only understand show of force. Us not showing it is considered a sign of weakness.

We should publicly lay a claim to larger and larger land parcels in Tibet as our own until they stop with this foolishness. For every 100 SQ Kms of Indian territory that they lay a claim on we should lay a claim on 200 Sq Kms of occupied Tibet.

Let us start with Manasasarovar. Since it is civilizationally bound to us it should not be under the context of Chinese occupied Tibet.
Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4226
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by Rudradev »

Bush 43-era GOTUS strategist Zalmay Khalilzad lays out his case for "Congagement" of China by the US.

http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/ ... 12407.html

He observes:

Three factors will be particularly important in how Chinese foreign policy unfolds.

First, Beijing’s perception of the relative balance of power with the United States is critical. At present, that balance still favors the United States. China does not want direct conflict with the United States. It understands the implications of America’s military and technological leadership, the value of Chinese investments in the United States, the vital role of its market for Chinese exports and economic growth, and U.S. global influence. China remains conscious of its need to “catch up.”

At the same time, Chinese leaders see the United States as a country in decline and unable to sustain its global preeminent role over time. This encourages Beijing to pursue its objectives patiently. (There have been exceptions to this patience, however. After the financial crisis a decade ago, perhaps believing that U.S. decline had accelerated, it pursued its regional goals more aggressively.)

Second is in internal instability. A healthy economy has helped China sustain stability, but there are multiple sources of potential instability. The perpetuation of the gap between economic and political progress could produce increased demands for political freedoms, and the government’s refusal to accommodate these demands could produce a dynamic leading to instability. There are also regional and ethnic sources of instability. (SSridhar has given an excellent summary of the faultlines in a post earlier on this thread.) A serious downturn in the economy could accelerate instability and even lead to conflict and fragmentation—especially if the downturn affected different regions or subsets of the population unequally.

No matter the cause, significant political instability would alter China’s economic viability and its foreign and national-security policies. Predicting the nature and extent of such an impact is, of course, difficult. The result could be a China that grows more slowly and is more inward looking, but also a China that is externally more aggressive. Such aggressiveness could function as a means of distracting an unruly populace from domestic illegitimacy.

Third are regional developments and Chinese responses. Many Asian countries are alarmed by the surge of Chinese power and Beijing’s push for hegemony under Xi Jinping. Some convey their concerns openly. But others, including some U.S. allies, exercise restraint because they do not want to jeopardize economic ties. Japan, Vietnam and India are among those expressing the most alarm. Moscow seems more ambivalent, opting to cooperate with China to avoid isolation in the face of its deteriorating relations with the West. Russia is also concerned, however, that the balance of power is shifting significantly in favor of Beijing. Indeed, the two countries are competitors in Central Asia.

Regional concerns about China’s aggressive policies can produce responses that ought to constrain Beijing. Already, neighboring powers are aligning with the United States to balance against China. It is not outside the realm of possibility that China could miscalculate and become involved in a protracted and costly regional conflict.
He goes on to recommend:

...the Trump administration needs a different strategy, one that could accomplish three things: preserve the hope inherent in engagement; preclude Chinese domination of Asia, limiting the relative growth of Chinese power along the way; and hedge against a strong China challenging U.S. interests. I propose a strategy of “congagement”—a mix of containment and engagement.

The Trump administration should embrace this new tack, tilting toward containment without abandoning engagement. The goal would be to plausibly convince the Chinese that while the United States is open to cooperation and mutual accommodation, American actions and messaging should aim at convincing the Chinese leaders that a push for hegemony would be resisted by the United States and its allies and partners, including other major regional powers.

Under congagement, the United States would adopt the following twelve tenets:

1) Strengthen America’s overall economic and military power to maintain a favorable global position;

2) Maintain America’s technological lead and discourage friends and allies from contributing to the growth of Chinese military capabilities by strengthening existing export controls that restrict access to Western technology;

3) Pursue a balance-of-power strategy in Asia, by encouraging U.S. allies and partners to build up their military capabilities and to cooperate among themselves to prevent Chinese regional hegemony;

4) Seek to strengthen its own relative capabilities in Asia so it can play the role of balancer and avoid facing a fait accompli when a critical U.S. interest is threatened—for example, by forcing the United States to risk major escalation and high casualties to reinstate the status quo;

5) Dissuade Taiwan from reuniting with the mainland;

6) Use access to American markets and those of regional allies—on which Chinese prosperity depends—as leverage to condition China’s behavior;

7) Rebalance trade to reduce the huge trade deficit;

8) To preserve its technological advantage and preclude new or increased vulnerabilities, review existing agreements with allies and partners, to update and add necessary steps to protect the stealing of technology by the Chinese and avoid the transfer of sensitive technology;

9) At a minimum maintain, but preferably expand, political interaction, military-to-military relations and cultural ties with China;

10) Adjust economic relations by insisting on reciprocity, such as rebalanced trade relations that reduce the huge balance-of-trade deficit;This will not go down the Chinese gullet easily.

11) Enhance cooperation on regional issues, including North Korea and terrorism;China already uses NoKo as a source of "leverage" (i.e. blackmail) against the US and allies. It is positioning itself in AfPak to do the same w.r.t. terrorism (indeed, is already using support for terrorism as leverage against India, see Masood Azhar etc.)

12) To increase regional cooperation, crisis prevention and crisis management, encourage an OSCE-type organization in the Asian region with Chinese and U.S. participation. The East Asia Summit might be the best candidate to evolve into such a role, because it has the right membership, but it will need to be properly institutionalized and provided with the right mandate.

This congagement strategy would clarify to Beijing that it is best served by pursuing its interests without undermining the international system. What is the possibility that Trump does not care about the "international system" as long as his own/family's economic interests are seen to? It would communicate to China the potential costs of turning hostile by demonstrating that the United States is prepared to protect its interests. It also would highlight that the United States will reciprocate positive Chinese actions. A congagement strategy would provide the flexibility to adjust the balance between engagement and containment, depending on the state of Chinese capabilities, objectives, policies and actions. Chinese cooperation on security and economic issues would invite more engagement. Conversely, inadequate cooperation on, say, North Korea, aggressiveness in the South China Sea and bellicosity on Taiwan would trigger a tilt toward containment. So Khalilzad is specifying US redlines as Korean peninsula, SCS, and Taiwan. He is leaving unsaid what the US would do if Vietnam, India, or even Japan were threatened by China, under his "congagement" strategy. Japan may be another redline, but Vietnam and India are probably the bargaining chips that will be thrown under the bus when the time comes for Washington to "calibrate" between containment and engagement of China.
ManSingh
BRFite
Posts: 312
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 17:30

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by ManSingh »

Singha wrote:https://www.facebook.com/Tamildefense/v ... 021816923/

video of the jostling going on at the border - why dont we just use tear gas?
This is so hilarious. Reminds me of drunkards back home. It sets me thinking, what would have happened if 2 or 3 of the Chinese had managed to cross the Indian human wall. What would he have done singularly? Mark himself as the Chinese border outpost??
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by shiv »

Of course the men are all up at 4000 plus meters where one gets short of breath very quickly and the effort of that exertion must be exhausting. That is why they are all panting. Fit men nevertheless. Salute. I think our soldiers came in jeeps to intercept the Chinese - those look like IA jeeps in the background. The Chinese are not accustomed to this. From the 1950s - the Chinese have taken advantage of the fact that India has not manned and watched the borders closely. We paid for that in 1962 and again in 1999
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

shiv wrote:Of course the men are all up at 4000 plus meters where one gets short of breath very quickly and the effort of that exertion must be exhausting. That is why they are all panting. Fit men nevertheless. Salute. I think our soldiers came in jeeps to intercept the Chinese - those look like IA jeeps in the background. The Chinese are not accustomed to this. From the 1950s - the Chinese have taken advantage of the fact that India has not manned and watched the borders closely. We paid for that in 1962 and again in 1999
A few things are happening all over the India-China border. the distance between the border posts is getting reduced with sanctions for more of them. Motorable roads are being laid at frenetic pace. High resolution cameras are being mounted that can see deeper ( ~20 Kms) and better into the Chinese side. At many places, we have height advantage too. It is the cameras that many a time got the Chinese goat. I am sure that besides all these, the eyes in the sky are also watching these vulnerable areas in the East as they do on the West.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

The two countries signed the Border Defence Cooperation Agreement’ (BDCA) in c. 2013. The BDCA forbids ‘tailing’ of intruding forces, night patrols and eyeball-to-eyeball confrontations with intruding forces. Crucially, India and China have also agreed that if the two sides come face-to-face in areas where they have differing perceptions of the LAC, “both sides shall exercise maximum self-restraint, refrain from any provocative actions, not use force or threaten to use force against the other side, treat each other with courtesy and prevent exchange of armed conflict”. It also envisages periodic meetings between officers of the Chengdu Military Region (CMR) and India’s Eastern Command (Kolkatta) and Lanzhou Military Region (LMR) and the Northern Command (Udhampur). Now, it must be the new 'Western Command' of the PLA (after merger of Lanzhou & Chengdu in c. 2015) that Indian Army's Northern & Eastern commands must be communicating with. The two sides are to establish meeting sites for border personnel, as well as telephone and telecommunication links on the LAC. We can see that the ITBP soldiers are not carrying arms, neither the Chinese.
g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4382
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by g.sarkar »

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/27/worl ... order.html
With Modi in Washington, China and India ‘Jostle’ on Their Border
By ELLEN BARRY and YUFAN HUANGJUNE 27, 2017
NEW DELHI — As Indians savored Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s effusive welcome in the White House Rose Garden this week, another, less friendly image kept stubbornly interfering.
High in the hills of the Himalayas, Indian troops had halted a Chinese road-building project in a disputed border area, and Beijing was angry. News channels kept cutting to old video of troops bumping torsos, trying to force one another backward without escalating to slaps or punches, a tactic often described here as “jostling.”
Beijing released a complaint against India on Monday, just as Mr. Modi walked into a meeting in Washington with Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. On Tuesday, Global Times, a state-run nationalist tabloid, warned India to back down in a harshly worded editorial, saying that its “capacity is nowhere near China’s, and the so-called strategic support from the United States is empty, too, so it won’t be of any help when it is needed.”
The interruption of diplomatic ceremonies by border flare-ups is a regular feature of the Indian-Chinese relationship. To Indian analysts, the outburst conveyed Beijing’s dissatisfaction with President Trump’s plans to carry forward the United States-India strategic maritime partnership begun under President Barack Obama.
“They look at India as a critical swing state in Asia, and they see India now moving inexorably toward the U.S., which makes it very difficult for China to carve out a Sinocentric Asia,” said Brahma Chellaney, an analyst affiliated with the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi.
He said events of recent months — particularly India’s refusal to participate in the “One Belt, One Road” project, the vast, strategic transportation network supported by China’s president, Xi Jinping — have galled Chinese officials.
“Without India’s entry,” he said, “O.B.O.R. will never be complete.”
Analysts on both sides could reel off examples of diplomatic visits that had been interrupted by border spats. In 2014, when Mr. Modi hosted Mr. Xi for his first visit in eight years, the two men were at an opulent riverfront banquet when news broke of a skirmish between their armies.
Mr. Chellaney said the incursions had been ordered by the Chinese side “to remind India that diplomacy is an opportunity for India to concede to Chinese demands, or else China will use its muscle.” Chinese analysts, not surprisingly, saw the current conflict the other way around: Some theorized that Mr. Modi had ordered his troops to cross the border to impress upon Mr. Trump that India could play a central role in containing Chinese ambitions. Han Hua, an associate professor of international relations at Peking University in Beijing, called the timing “very strange.”
.......
Gautam
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

China sends out a strong signal - Dinakar Peri, The Hindu
A day after China accused the Indian Army of violating the border, the military authorities were tight-lipped over the claims.

Despite the official silence, most sources within and outside the military warned that the latest developments, especially the Chinese move to close the Nathula Pass route to Kailash Mansarovar Yatra, should be treated as a diplomatic message from Beijing.

“While the past trends have shown these kinds of incidents are initiated by the Chinese during high-profile bilateral visits, I don’t think we should read too much into the timing of the incident with respect to the Prime Minister’s visit to the U.S.,” former Army chief General Bikram Singh told The Hindu.

‘No reason to worry’

Gen. Singh said there was no reason to be unduly worried about the incursions.

“This is a regular feature. Our patrols also go into Chinese-held areas and they come in due to differing perceptions on the LAC and the International Border. There are robust mechanisms in place to defuse such situations and ensure they don’t go out control.” However, several other sources in the security establishment said the turning away of the pilgrims was a diplomatic signal that should not be ignored.

According to military sources, soldiers of both sides are in a stand-off along the Sikkim border for the past few days. Indian sources insist that Chinese soldiers entered Indian territory and destroyed two bunkers in Doka La region, on the tri-junction between Sikkim, Bhutan and Tibet.

Sources said the two sides engaged in some scuffle, and also formed human walls to prevent each other from moving further ahead.

A retired Lt. General, who had commanded a corps in the area, said, “Sikkim is a settled boundary, barring the finger area in the plateau which came up during 2007.”

Jayadeva Ranade, president, Centre for China Analysis and Strategy, told The Hindu that the development was significant. “I would say that because of the prolonged face-off, and the kind of articles appearing in the Chinese media. Global Times has put out at least three strong pieces on this. It all happens at a time when the relations are already under strain and also during the Prime Minister’s visit to the U.S. This is one warning shot.”

Mr. Ranade said the location where it has happened is also significant. “They have been trying to build a road there. For us it is strategically important. It is just 30 km from the Siliguri corridor or the Chicken’s Neck,” he pointed out. “It is a combination of strategic, sovereignty and territorial issues bundled into one,” Mr. Ranade said. {That's the best description I have seen so far}
g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4382
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by g.sarkar »

http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/arm ... 44589.html
Army Chief General Dalbir Singh reviews security along India-China border
Army Chief General Dalbir Singh on Friday reviewed the operational preparedness along the India-China border in Himachal Pradesh, an official statement said.
New Delhi: Army Chief General Dalbir Singh on Friday reviewed the operational preparedness along the India-China border in Himachal Pradesh, an official statement said. Singh reviewed the operational preparedness in Puh and Sumdo areas in Himachal Pradesh, which he visited on Friday.
...
Gautam
g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4382
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by g.sarkar »

http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/chi ... 12295.html
Chinese soldiers spotted in Uttarakhand's Chamoli; defence ministry says 'no incursion'
The Uttarakhand government said on Wednesday that Chinese troops had been spotted within its territory on July 19 by local officials who were asked to return. Army sources however said the incident took place on July 22.
Dehradun/New Delhi: The Uttarakhand government said on Wednesday that Chinese troops had been spotted within its territory on July 19 by local officials who were asked to return. Army sources however said the incident took place on July 22.
The defence ministry however maintains that there are no incidents of "incursion" by Chinese troops and the "transgressions" occur due to different perception of borders.
Senior state government officials said the incursion was spotted in Badahoti in Chamoli district. District Magistrate Vinod Kumar Suman told IANS that he had sent a report to "appropriate authorities" but refused to elaborate.
Uttarakhand Chief Minister Harish Rawat also confirmed the incursion, saying he had reported the matter to the Union Home Ministry. "It is a serious matter. I am sure the central government would look into the issue," he added.
Uttarakhand shares a 350-km-long boundary with China and incursions have been reported in the past too. Only last year some boys grazing cattle were beaten up by Chinese troops and asked to retreat.
....
Gautam
Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4102
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by Neela »

Ananth Krishnan , The Hindu's correspondent in Beijing
Revealing China statement, suggests acc to them Doka La (Donglong) issue betn China/Bhutan, anger at India 'interfering with hidden agenda'
Image

Three things to note:
1. Typos
2. Suhasini and this rat seems to have access to China, Chinese POV pretty easily.

Suraj, SS ji , please would like to hear your views on above , both the statement and my comments.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

Neela, I could not locate Doka La on the map. I always felt that it was near Chumbi Valley which is on the Bhutan side of the Tibetan wedge that juts into the Chicken's Neck corridor between Sikkim & Bhutan. This letter with typographical errors nevertheless confirms that suspicion of mine. The Indian Army (Special Frontier Force) and the ITBP always had presence in that area of Bhutan. It is strategically very important for us and that was why India-Bhutan relationship is very important both diplomatically & militarily.

Now, China has been pressurizing Bhutan to concede some shoulder space leading from its side into the Chumbi valley because it wants to build road & rail network. This would be very strategic for China. Already a branch road leading from the famous Highway G219 from Lhasa to Xinjiang cutting across Aksai Chin, leads all the way into this Tibetan wedge upto Yadong. This branch road goes across a corner of the Chumbi Valley just like that notorious G219 across Aksai Chin.

It is my suspicion that China was trying to strengthen this road or bring it much closer to Bhutan or/and India, lately. This probably violated the BDCA signed in 2013 which I have alluded to earlier. I surmise therefore that the project should have been objected to by both Bhutan & India. The Chinese anger is likely to be a consequence to whatever happened.

I may be totally wrong on this because the details are very sketchy.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Post by SSridhar »

China justifies construction of road in Sikkim sector - PTI, New Indian Express
China has justified the construction of a road in the Sikkim sector, saying the area "undoubtedly" is located on its side of the border as per the 1890 Sino-British Treaty. "According to the treaty, 'zhe' is the ancient name of Sikkim," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said in a statement. "

As per this treaty, the area over which the Indian Army has raised objection is undoubtedly located on the Chinese side of the border," he said yesterday.

The statement came a day after the Chinese military accused the Indian army of stopping the construction of the road in what it claims to be China's "sovereign territory" in the Sikkim section of the India-China border.

Lu said the Sikkim segment of the China-India border was recognised by both China and India. "Indian leaders, the Indian government-related documents, the Indian side in the Sino-Indian boundary issue Special Representatives meeting confirmed that the two sides signed the treaty in 1890, the 'Sino-British treaty' and the China- India boundary of Sikkim to have the direction of a consensus," he said. "Compliance with these treaties and documents is an international obligation that not to be shirked by the Indian side," he added.

A Chinese foreign ministry statement, issued on Monday night, said "the Indian border guards crossed the boundary in the Sikkim section of the China-India border and entered the territory of China and obstructed normal activities of the Chinese frontier forces in the Donglang area recently, and the Chinese side has taken counter-measures."

Lu, earlier yesterday, said China lodged a diplomatic protest with India accusing Indian troops of "crossing the boundary" in the Sikkim section and demanded their immediate withdrawal. He also asserted that China has shut the Nathu La pass entry for Indian pilgrims travelling to Kailash Mansarovar because of the border standoff. Also a hard-hitting article posted on the website of the state-run Global Times tonight on the issue said, "Indian troops' provocation brings disgrace to themselves" and they should be forced to retreat "by all necessary means". "The Indian government made no objection to the Sikkim section of the China-India border. Allegations of intrusions along the western section of the China-India border often emerge, but face-offs in the Sikkim section are rare.


The Nathu La pass in Sikkim was reopened in 2006, because there is no border dispute between China and India over this area," it said. "It remains unclear whether this flare-up is the fault of low-level Indian troops or a tentative strategic move made by the Indian government," it said. "Whatever the motive is, China must stick to its bottom line.

It must force the Indian troops to retreat to the Indian side by all means necessary and China's road construction mustn't be stopped," the article said. As the China-India borderline has not been demarcated completely and the two countries have a different understanding about the Line of Actual Control, troops from both sides often stray across in some areas, it noted. "However, almost all frictions are fed to the Indian media by the Indian military which they hype time and again". "China avoids making an issue of the border disputes, which has indulged India's unruly provocations. This time the Indian side needs to be taught the rules," the article said. "India cannot afford a showdown with China on border issues.

It lags far behind China in terms of national strength and the so-called strategic support for it from the US is superficial," the article said
, adding that China has no desire to confront India. "Maintaining friendly ties with New Delhi is Beijing's basic policy. But this must be based on mutual respect. It's not time for India to display arrogance toward China," it said.
Locked