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

darshan · Post by **darshan** » 12 Jul 2017 08:45

chinese bringing up 1962 is a golden chance for GoI to openly discuss with her citizen that it was a war where china did not really win. Many many opportunities to discuss various angles from oncoming winter to not knowing which chinese soldier really to kill (forceful conscripts and potential Tibetans). Indian military showed humanity and are Pandavs led by Krishna while chinese are Kauravs led by Duryodhan.

TKiran · Post by **TKiran** » 12 Jul 2017 09:50

Tibet ‘govt-in-exile’ takes advantage of border standoff

Sovereignty over Tibet non-negotiable: China

This is typical psyops, what India has not said is implied to have been said, and then push their point of view.

What I don't understand is that typically such psyops have target audience. In this particular case the target audience seems to be Han, so that they get anxiety and seek to vote eleven out of fear that he is a strong leader and the only capable person to smother India into submission.

But why are they publishing it in English language news paper, where the audience is everyone except Han?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Jul 2017 10:08

ramana wrote:Shiv,
China playing the Doklam issue means its trust in Pak as its foil is reduced and has to take matters into own hands.

What is your view on this?

Ramana - personally I think the Chinese will lose face if they openly show loss of trust in Pakistan. They will continue support and try to keep pressure on the LAC elsewhere. I also suspect that there are many LAC areas where India can overrun Chinese controlled territory and they know that.

We have also heard for some time Chinese complaints and alarm about increasing Indian military vigilance at the LAC. To me that means that in those vast, hostile border regions Chinese patrols had a free run without actually meeting any Indians in the disputed areas which are on "hold" by mutual agreement . Now they meet Indians more often. So it appears that they have tried to do in the Himalayas - what they are doing in the South China sea- that is to gradually encroach by bullying small countries, Bhutan this time As we were informed by the gurus of the China psychology thread - the Chinese have contempt for the small and weak from whom they expect obedience.

So meeting Indian soldiers at Doklam probably came as a nasty surprise. They don;t like it, but they will have to adjust to new realities

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Jul 2017 10:10

darshan wrote:chinese bringing up 1962 is a golden chance for GoI to openly discuss with her citizen that it was a war where china did not really win. Many many opportunities to discuss various angles from oncoming winter to not knowing which chinese soldier really to kill (forceful conscripts and potential Tibetans). Indian military showed humanity and are Pandavs led by Krishna while chinese are Kauravs led by Duryodhan.

I suspect that discussing 1962 will become political. Talking about '62 would mean showing up Nehru and the Khangress, The opposition would react and say that the BJP is trying to win 2019 election based on 1962 stories

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 12 Jul 2017 10:42

https://majorgauravarya.wordpress.com/2 ... half-wars/
China well need 10:1 ration to battle IA in NE . One defensive Corp could tie up 1/2 of their army.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Jul 2017 11:28

Meanwhile, India to celebrate Falun Gong - Kallol Bhattacherjee, The Hindu

Falun Gong, the ancient Chinese holistic system that is banned in China, will be celebrated in India on July 15 with a parade and Human Word Formation in the capital. Organisers of the event, Falun Dafa Association of India, which has been teaching Falun Gong in India, said the event would highlight the persecution against the practitioners in China.

Apart from the parade of July 15, the group will hold events and public interactions at Gandhi Smriti, Rajghat on July 14 and 15.

“On this occasion, over 200 practitioners of Falun Dafa from India and other countries will participate in a Peace Parade and Human Word Formation at Connaught Place to spread the message of Truth, Compassion and Tolerance which are the basic principles of Falun Dafa,” said a release from the Falun Dafa Association of India.

The organisation also claimed that despite years of “brutal torture” in China, Falun Dafa practitioners are not surrendering to Beijing’s strict rules. “This peaceful activity aims to create awareness of the severe persecution being suffered by Falun Dafa practitioners in China for over several years. We hope more and more people will take a stand to end this crime against humanity,” said the release.

Creating awareness

The Falun Dafa Association of India has been campaigning for months to familiarise the challenges that the followers of this group are facing in China. Earlier this year, the group brought noted human rights lawyer David Mata from Canada to India in a bid to raise awareness among Indians of the challenges posed by China against the group.

The association said that the government in Beijing had been trying to “eradicate” the group as it was “extremely popular”.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Jul 2017 11:43

Malabar submarine drills worry China - Atul Aneja, The Hindu

China is closely monitoring the ongoing Malabar naval exercises between India, the U.S. and Japan, in view of the Indian Navy’s growing clout to detect Chinese submarines and surface ships in the Indian Ocean, using newly acquired weaponry from Washington.

A detailed article in Pengpai, an online portal, analyses whether Chinese submarines are the unstated target of the large naval exercises, which started on Monday in the Bay of Bengal.

The article underscores that the presence of three aircraft carriers of three countries in the military exercises is “most noteworthy”.

It points out that the focus of the drills is anti-submarine warfare (ASW).

In turn, this has “got people really concerned”, whether the exercise is “targeted at Chinese submarines”.

“The Malabar exercise used to be a comprehensive drill that had included air defence, anti-ship elements etc. But now the subject of the drills started to show that there is more focus on anti-submarine warfare. It shows that they have someone as the target,” observes Li Jie, a Chinese naval expert.{Oh yes, undoubtely PLAN, Mr. Li Jie. You seem to have woken up and now smell the coffee too}

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Jul 2017 13:15

Let's not fudge the issue.Our MEA are famous for fudging delicate issues like this one,"differences should not become disputes".
That's the issue! It is a DISPUTE which has been going on since China invaded and grabbed hold of thousands of sq kms of Indian territory in '62,which it has never given back and on the contrary has been steadily,stealthily expanding its land-grab with impunity. It simply keeps on makign more outrageous demands each year,demanding that more and more Indian territory belongs to it.Wait for the day when these (***** - go easy on the language Philip please man - JE Menon) demand the "return" of Cochin simply because their are Chinese fishing nets still being used in Fort Cochin!

IT's long past time for India to call China's bluff,demand that the Chinese occupation of Tibet is illegal ,that it is an Indian protectorate,that "there ARE two Chinas" and formalise some kind of dpl. relations with Taipei asap.China should be diplomatically,economically and culturally punished by India.It is the master-puppeteer of Asia,goading Pak on to continue with its relentless terror campaign against India ,esp. in J&K,and trying to encircle us by bribing corrupt leaders of neighbouring nations into handing over land/ports to them for their naval ops in the iOR. "teaching" China a military lesson from our side this time,should be the last resort,but we must be massively prepared for it.The Chinese always act militarily with surprise ,when one least expects it.In the event of such a miscalculation by the PRC,we should be in a forward mil. position to dsestroy its forces right in their own backyard if poss., sanitising the IOR entirely of Chinese merchant and naval forces.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Jul 2017 13:46

The only way to deal with the Chinese is directly, says Shivshankar Menon - Suhasini Haidar, The Hindu

Q: You have been Ambassador to China, Foreign Secretary, National Security Adviser and the Special Representative on border talks. How serious is the situation in Doklam?

A:I think it is different from previous such occasions. The last most serious one was Depsang in 2013 and we had Chumar after that (2014). But basically you could say that since the 1980s we have had a modus vivendi with the Chinese. It was formalised during Rajiv Gandhi’s visit in 1988 and then during the border peace and tranquility treaty of 1993, which contained both sides to maintaining the status quo and where they had doubts about a part of the boundary, they would actually sit down and talk their way through the problem. And that has helped keep this more or less peaceful for many, many years.

Q:What is different this time?

It is much more complicated for three reasons. One, it is happening near the western tri-junction of India, Bhutan and China. So it involves three countries. And that’s a tri-junction area where, in principle, all three countries have to agree on the posts. Two, it represents a change in the status quo, and a considerable change, because to build a road represents a permanent presence.Three, I can’t recall this kind of rhetoric for a very long time. The spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Office saying this is very serious, and so on. In the past we have handled this sort of thing with quiet diplomacy. It wasn’t always easy, but both sides were able to achieve a resolution satisfactory to both. In most cases, it amounts to restoring the status quo and then discussing whatever issues either side might have.

That’s for the immediate incident, but there is a broader context as well. India-China ties are under stress for some time, whether it is the Chinese attitude toward the membership of the NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group), or Masood Azhar’s listing (as a global terrorist by the UN), or the CPEC (China-Pakistan Economic Corridor), all of which have come up in the last few years. My own sense that both of us must sit down and worked out a new modus vivendi to govern the relationship. We have both since the ’80s been rubbing up against each other in the periphery we share. So we do need a new strategic dialogue to discuss how we should sort out problems. Can it be done, will it be difficult and so on? Maybe, but we must make the attempt. It is in both our interests to do so.

Q:Isn’t it particularly worrying that the Doklam incident is taking place in an area previously considered settled, or at least not an active part of the boundary?

A:The Sikkim tri-junction is basically the watershed between the Amo (also called the Torsa river) and the Teesta rivers in the Chumbi valley, so it is clear, and parts of it have been settled. Since 1960, when this was discussed by both sides, both sides have constantly said that this boundary is not such a problem. But the tri-junction remained to be settled, and that is a part of the issue.

Q:It does seem as if China is not only changing the status quo, it is taking control, however temporarily, of a significant part of the Doklam plateau by setting up tents there. What is the message China is giving here?

A:I am not aware of what is actually happening on the ground. On the message, you need to ask the Chinese. They are very clear about what they mean to say. And I think you should take what they say at face value. Certainly, what their Foreign Office spokesman says must be taken seriously.

Q:Is there a similarity between what China is doing in Doklam and what is has done previously in the South China Sea… laying claim to certain areas, pushing the boundaries on where its armed forces are placed?

A:I’d rather not get into historical analogies, parallels and all the rest of it. And rather than guessing at their motives, I would much rather test propositions by actually sitting at a table and talking things through. That’s a more practical way than assuming and drawing lessons from around the world. You can construct beautiful theories, and many people have. But the only way to deal with the Chinese is directly, both on the ground and through a negotiation.

Q:You mentioned theories, so I want to list some. One is that this is a reaction to India’s new alliance with the U.S. The other is that statements made in India, for example a Chief Minister questioning whether our borders are with Tibet or China, have triggered this…

A:There are clearly a thousand such irritants on both sides. I consider them as symptoms of stress in the relationship, a relationship that needs to be recalibrated.

Q:Some suggest the stress point is internal for China, and President Xi Jinping is showing strength ahead of a possibly difficult Chinese Communist Party National Congress this October-November.

A:As a general rule, I don’t think foreign policy affects domestic politics in either India or China, certainly not to the extent most foreign policy wonks [assume it does]. India and China have very complex internal politics. None of our elections, for example, hinge on foreign policy. And in China too, like before 1962 with the Sino-Soviet polemic, foreign policy can be used in domestic debates, but it’s not what drives it. We should deal with what is on the ground and what we have, rather than where it has come from. This is not a mind-reading exercise. It is clear that we are not on the same page, which is why we need to evolve a new modus vivendi.

Q:When it comes to the rhetoric from the Chinese side, has India adopted the correct course by not responding, issuing only one statement in the face of the barrage from Beijing?

A:I don’t want to second-guess the government, as I don’t know what they know. I presume they are doing what they are on the basis of facts that they possess. The ultimate test of what they do is the end result. Some of these situations take a long time to resolve. The situation at Sumdorong Chu (Wangdung, north of Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh, that saw action in 1986), for example, took eight-10 years to resolve.

Q:Is it also significant that everyone is speaking of an India-China stand-off, when in fact the area under dispute is claimed by Bhutan, not India?

A:It is Bhutanese territory, but we are there because of Bhutan and we have a certain relationship and certain obligations to Bhutan. In this case, China’s actions have disturbed the status quo, and that needs to be addressed.

Q:You’re saying India came to Bhutan’s rescue…

A:I wouldn’t use such dramatic terms; there is a relationship with them, which took us [to Bhutan]. According to our treaty, it says we will respect each other’s national interests, we don’t need more than that.

Q:Is there a need to strengthen that treaty from 2007, as some have suggested, to include a military pact?

A:If you feel that you need to signal anything more politically, that you need to show more resolve towards each other than you can change it at that point, that is a political choice. I don’t think the treaty requires any changing.

Q:A Chinese scholar has suggested that if India could come to Bhutan’s aid, then a “third country” would be justified coming to “Kashmir’s aid”, referring to Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Is China playing for a broader equivalence here?

A:I have lived long enough to hear all kinds of rhetoric from China, from the Cultural Revolution onwards. I am not going to judge China’s official policy by what a scholar or someone trying to build a reputation says, or someone who seeks fame at home by riding a wave of nationalism. We have scholars like that too, and let them deal with each other. But I’d rather go by what China does officially, and what they communicate to us officially.

Q:Has China’s decision to invest a considerable amount in terms of resources and reputation in the CPEC also changed the calculations?

A:China has gone in different directions with Pakistan in the past. In 1996, for example, President Jiang Zemin stood in the Pakistan National Assembly and counselled them to put political problems with India aside, and work on other aspects of a normal relationship, trade, travel, etc. Pakistan never took that advice. China’s stand on Kashmir has gone from calling for self-determination to calling it a bilateral problem for India and Pakistan to sort out. Today they have a commitment to Pakistan that is explicit, in terms of the CPEC. But let’s see how this evolves… We should be worried more about our own interests with China, rather than with others.

Q:But were CPEC and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) a factor? One must note that India and Bhutan are the only countries in the region that declined to be a part of the BRI.

A:The CPEC is a much bigger semi-permanent commitment to Chinese presence in Pakistan, and to Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, and that should be noted by us. And we should deal with our direct sovereign interest with China in our relationship.

Q:In your recent book ‘Choices’, you have spoken of the inevitability of India and China challenging each other. Is the Doklam stand-off part of that trend?

A:What I wrote was that China will be increasingly assertive, and so will we. It is part of our development. Our dependence on the rest of the world for our own economy has grown tremendously. In our case, when we started reforms (in early 1990s), merchandise trade was about 18% of GDP. By 2014, it had gone up to 49.3% at its peak (it has since shrunk). But the fact is, our need for the world in terms of trade has gone up many times, and the same is true for China. So we will act abroad much more, trying to create an environment that enables us to grow, to shape the environment. We have interests abroad, we will be involved in the politics of other countries as well. This is a natural consequence, and India and China have done this faster than any other economies in history.

Q:Is the clash inevitable then?

A:That depends on whether we can work out a new way of dealing with each other in this changed scenario. At one stage, both our leaderships would say there is enough space for both India and China to grow. I don’t hear that so much any more, but they haven’t said the opposite either.

These are man-made issues, and that means there are solutions to them, so long as we respect each other’s core interests and manage our differences.

Q:Given your own experiences in negotiating previous stand-offs in Depsang and Chumar, what do you think are the chances of de-escalation?

A:I don’t know enough about this situation. I think what worked in previous such occasions was the fact that neither side wanted to get into trouble or be embarrassed militarily. The simplest way forward is to restore the status quo ante, which means clearing the area of both armies and then talking about it. We have had stand-offs that have lasted a long time in the past too, so there are no timelines.

Q:But do you think talks are the only way forward, or do you see the risk of a military escalation?

A:What would a military conflict solve from either side’s point of view? But both India and China would have to reach that same conclusion at the same point of time to avoid it.

Q:You’re not ruling it out? Since the Chinese Foreign Ministry has invoked 1962, our Defence Minister has responded with an equally aggressive tone…

A:That’s an extreme, but part of any negotiation is also the threat of violence. Some of the rhetoric is often meant to make space for negotiation. So right now, we are working out the terms of engagement, but I don’t see it in either side’s interest to have a military conflict.

Q:Since 1988, there have been incremental improvements on managing the boundary between us. Do you think the clock has been reversed?

A:No, not yet. They are clearly signalling that the situation is a new one. But whether they have done it to reverse the clock, or other reasons, I would be very careful to jump to any conclusions. We don’t have enough knowledge yet to draw conclusions.

Q:Does the situation require the top leadership to be involved to clear the logjam?

A:Well, even when Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping meet for the BRICS summit in September in China, there will be some sort of preparatory meetings. We are in touch, we have Special Representatives, and we have had a series of visits from both sides. Our ministers have been in Beijing this month. So I presume they will find the ways and means to talk at all levels.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 12 Jul 2017 15:08

^^^^ SSM is a master of stating the obvious in manner which sounds like he made a pathbreaking revelation.

Bart S · Post by **Bart S** » 12 Jul 2017 17:28

Prem wrote: https://majorgauravarya.wordpress.com/2 ... half-wars/

China well need 10:1 ration to battle IA in NE . One defensive Corp could tie up 1/2 of their army.

This article is a masterpiece and a must-read, not just for the China situation but also Pakistan and J&K. Please spread and re-tweet it as much as possible, I have seen very few articles ever that so succinctly and clearly explain the situation from a rational point of view.

venug · Post by **venug** » 12 Jul 2017 17:52

LIVE! Pak's BFF China willing to play 'constructive role' over Kashmir

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 12 Jul 2017 17:58

darshan wrote:Indian military showed humanity and are Pandavs led by Krishna while chinese are Kauravs led by Duryodhan.

Lets not get into this analogy. One can debate (till the cows come home) if the Pandavs were the good guys. But, point well taken.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 12 Jul 2017 18:01

Prem wrote:https://majorgauravarya.wordpress.com/2 ... half-wars/
China well need 10:1 ration to battle IA in NE . One defensive Corp could tie up 1/2 of their army.

Also, don't forget to use the air force this time.

chola · Post by **chola** » 12 Jul 2017 18:09

Bart S wrote:
Prem wrote:https://majorgauravarya.wordpress.com/2 ... half-wars/
China well need 10:1 ration to battle IA in NE . One defensive Corp could tie up 1/2 of their army.
This article is a masterpiece and a must-read, not just for the China situation but also Pakistan and J&K. Please spread and re-tweet it as much as possible, I have seen very few articles ever that so succinctly and clearly explain the situation from a rational point of view.

Yes, it is.

"The Dragon will not fight." So it is up to us to use our advantage not wait around so they can use theirs.

It is time to go to war.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 12 Jul 2017 18:10

SSridhar wrote:Meanwhile, India to celebrate Falun Gong - Kallol Bhattacherjee, The Hindu
Falun Gong....

Now we are talking serious comebacks. This will get the chini's goat and, after the chini pronouncement earlier today (possibly at the behest of their sidekicks, the pakis) about taking a proactive mediator's role in l'affaires de Kashmir, this will surely wake up CPC. Two can play this game. Nothing irritates the chinis more than Falun Gong and Shen Yun.

India may also want to offer its mediation in other burning chini affairs. If invited, of course, by one or both parties!

In Hindi, there's a proverb that goes something like this - sau sunar ki, ek lohar ki.

DrRatnadip · Post by **DrRatnadip** » 12 Jul 2017 18:15

venug wrote:LIVE! Pak's BFF China willing to play 'constructive role' over Kashmir

Reminds me of old proverb: sau chuhe kha ke billi Haz ko chali..

.. Chinis are still clueless after unexpectedly stiff resistance from GOI and IA.. I dont know what objectives they are going to achive by bringing in unrelated issues like kashmir..

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 12 Jul 2017 18:31

Actually, this is good for India. India has given up too many cards in the hope of getting Chinese co-operation. Instead all we got was a cold shoulder even while India was reticent.

Now at least we will start needling the Chinese same as they have done in the past.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 12 Jul 2017 18:40

And there is a bigger problem for China ....

Being 10x greater than India and blah .. blah ...
China and India needle each other point for point with the whole diplomatic corp in New Delhi watching. IF China does NOT "teach India a lesson" in full view of the world it will come out as the looser.

Farts and fictions will satisfy the hans but not the diplomatic corp. Paper giri will not work. China will have lost face where it matters. India would have stood up to the bully right when it was supposed to be its year, decade and century.

Not good for a *Soup power* to be shown up .. Sometimes all it takes to bring down a bully is to break the illusion.

venug · Post by **venug** » 12 Jul 2017 18:43

Chinese are scared/concerned about India spoiling their CPEC plans which are in full swing. "What if India retakes PoK" is bothering them, even though arrogantly they are moving ahead with CPEC/OBOR. Now with "3rd party can interfere" in Kashmir they are trying to muscle their way into Kashmir. They want to make CPEC immune to Indian interference I feel.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Jul 2017 19:12

China dismisses S Jaishankar's remarks, wants Indian troop withdrawal - IANS

China on Wednesday said troop withdrawal by India from Doklam remained the precondition to resolve the border crisis in the Sikkim sector.

Beijing also dismissed Indian Foreign Secretary S. Jaishankar's remarks that differences over the border between India and China occurred in the past also and were resolved.

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang said the trespass by Indian troops in Doklam was different from the "frictions in the undefined sections of the boundary" between India and China.

Geng said what happened in Doklam was a dispute.

Jaishankar, who on Tuesday was at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore to deliver a lecture, said "differences should not become disputes".

Gang said: "China has pointed out many times that the illegal trespass of Indian border troops of the mutually recognised border line is different in nature from the frictions in the undefined sections of the boundary.

"The Sikkim section has a special historical background and this is only defined boundary between India and China. And this is totally different from the undefined boundary in the east, middle and west part.

"According to the 1890 convention, the Sikkim section has been recognised by both China and India and this convention is effective for both countries.

"We again request India to withdraw the border troops to the Indian side of the boundary and properly settle this dispute at an early date."

Exactly why Jaishankar should not have talked about the incident. Their Foreign Secretary is keeping quiet and letting his minions handle our Foreign Secretary.

sudhan · Post by **sudhan** » 12 Jul 2017 19:25

I believe that was India's attempt at handing China a face-saver, had the Chinese been a little less arrogant, they would have used SJ's statement as a slab to lean on and make some statements along the lines of "We are studying the Foreign Secretary's statement, China's rise is as harmless as a bufoon's f*rt.. China wants peaceful resolution to all boundary disputes etc.." and then reduce the rhetoric and then let this incident fade from people's memory.

But no, China wants to pack itself in a corner and set up a permanent residency between a rock and a hard place..

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 12 Jul 2017 20:09

sudhan wrote:I believe that was India's attempt at handing China a face-saver, had the Chinese been a little less arrogant, they would have used SJ's statement as a slab to lean on and make some statements along the lines of "We are studying the Foreign Secretary's statement, China's rise is as harmless as a bufoon's f*rt.. China wants peaceful resolution to all boundary disputes etc.." and then reduce the rhetoric and then let this incident fade from people's memory.

But no, China wants to pack itself in a corner and set up a permanent residency between a rock and a hard place..

The border war will happen post Malabar. And it will be a 2.5 front war. 0.5 already started

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 12 Jul 2017 20:10

Doklam border dispute: Villagers near India-China border worried but won't leave their homes
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/dokl ... 00298.html

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 12 Jul 2017 21:23

http://www.firstpost.com/india/sikkim-s ... 05429.html
Sikkim standoff: India better equipped today than in 1962, says Jitendra Singh

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 12 Jul 2017 21:25

China urges India to withdraw troops from boundary after Indian FM calls for management of disputes
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1056073.shtml

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 12 Jul 2017 21:36

Q: Yesterday Indian Foreign Secretary Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said about the current standoff at the Doklam of the Sikkim sector that there were border differences in the past which have been resolved. At the same time, it is a long border, of which no part has been agreed upon on the ground. Therefore, it's likely that from time to time there are differences. But differences should not become disputes as they can be resolved just as in the past. What is your reaction?

A: China has explicitly pointed out that the illegal trespass of Indian border troops into China's territory this time took place at the defined Sikkim section of the China-India boundary, which is utterly different in nature from the previous frictions between the two sides at the undefined sections of the China-India boundary. The Sikkim section of the China-India boundary has come to existence against special historical background, and it is the only delimited section of the China-India boundary, which is totally different from the undefined eastern, central and western sections. The Convention Between Great Britain and China Relating to Sikkim and Tibet (1890) has officially delimited this particular section, whose validity is recognized by both the Chinese and Indian governments. This convention is effective and legally binding to both sides. The Chinese side demands that the Indian side immediately pull the Indian border troops back to the Indian side of the boundary and properly settle this incident.
http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_66 ... 7422.shtml

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 12 Jul 2017 21:44

http://en.people.cn/n3/2017/0712/c90000-9240652.html
Who is bullying Bhutan, China or India?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Jul 2017 22:45

I think NaMo has decided to confront the Chinese at their own game.

All India has to do is resist and the gas gets taken out of the paper dragon.

The not backing down at Doklam, Dali Lama touring Arunachal Pradesh, the activation of Falun Gong all are synchronized.

Recall the Buddhist summit about two years ago at Gaya?

Even thought Doklam La is at the tri-junction of Bhutan, China and India, due to the 2007 security treaty its is really between India and China. So using technicalities doesn't defuse the problem.
Its between China and India.
China escaltated the situation by building a road shown their intention to settle the previously unsettled area. India confronted the Chinese troops in Bhutanese territory. That is the crux of the matter.
having been found out, China is crying foul and threatening.

This is same as Aksai Chin, where IB found out China was building a road through Indian territory and for what ever reasons, India could not confront them till too late and that too with penny packets leading to the 1962 debacle.

I wish the SSM had not given that interview for it undercuts the current govt.

What does he mean talks after removal of forces?*

This is the Chinese line.

Has he thought through the implications?

Same with Jaishankar.
No need to talk at his level.

Whole MEA is inflected with Nehruvian virus.

Yes SSM is right one thing Indian domestic politics is unaffected by Foreign Policy unless it a clear victory.

Eg. 1972 elections that handed Indira Gandhi with big majority and 1999 elections after Kargil War.

Eg. 1962 China debacle nor 26/11 attack affected the elections. Congress won both times..

* On Twitter I suggested he keep quiet.

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 12 Jul 2017 23:07

Army vice-chief now authorized to be 'war-ready
Army vice-chief gets financial powers to maintain combat-readiness for 'short wars'
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 565814.cms

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 13 Jul 2017 04:12

I think war is coming, perhaps not with Cheen, but with clapistanis. All this emergency stockpiling, points to that. Once we have crucial supplies, a jhapad will be given. Can the knowledeable comment, whether ammunition such as anti tank missiles etc that we are buying have an expiration date and is it short or quite long.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 13 Jul 2017 04:17

SSridhar wrote:The only way to deal with the Chinese is directly, says Shivshankar Menon - Suhasini Haidar, The Hindu

He sounds like a very intelligent and level-headed individual. Key takeaways: 1) Ignore the noise (e.g. threats and speculations) and focus on actions. 2) Foreign policy has little impact on domestic politics in either country and should be analyzed separately. 3) The fundamentals of war = bad hasn't changed, so don't expect a hot war.

Shankas · Post by **Shankas** » 13 Jul 2017 04:26

5 Ways China Is Trying to Dominate India | China Uncensored

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 13 Jul 2017 04:41

Guddu wrote:I think war is coming, perhaps not with Cheen, but with clapistanis. All this emergency stockpiling, points to that. Once we have crucial supplies, a jhapad will be given....

While I was reviewing a financial presentation posted via a link in the econ thread, I ventured into checking out other presentations posted by the same presenter on the company's website. I came across a Financial update providing some financial updates at the end of first quarter of 2017. The topic is completely unrelated (i.e. risk of exchange traded funds in the frontier markets), but what grabbed my attention was following. Financial analysts say a lot of stupid things and Puskistan is known for emitting trash through its musharraf.

MARKET COMMENTARY: Q1 2017 Update

...
In past reviews, we’ve titillated you with some of the more startling and story-wor-thy examples of the distortions caused by the indexation vortex, as we sometimes call it. Such as the iShares Frontier Markets ETF (FM), labelled as 91% lower risk1 than the S&P 500, because of its Beta of 0.09. That magic number says you can ignore the 10% weighting in Pakistan, which is now contemplating the greater wisdom of a nuclear first-strike strategy against India, as well as the 20% in Kuwait, smaller than New Jersey and surrounded by Saudi Arabia, Iraq and, 5 miles off its Persian Gulf coast, Iran. Or that almost 50% is in financial stocks. Another was the iShares Italy ETF (EWI), fascinating for the fact that seven of the top 10 holdings get an average 72% of their sales from outside Italy.
...

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 13 Jul 2017 04:55

Red alert over Chinese firms eyeing BSNL cable project - Business Line

Even as Indian and Chinese troops remain locked in a tense military standoff along the Sikkim sector of their border, the prospect of Chinese companies bidding to lay a submarine telecom cable system for the state-owned Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL), with defence implications, has set off alarm bells in some quarters.

Sections of the government and industry are against allowing Chinese bidders for the cable system between Chennai and the Andaman & Nicobar Islands, but BSNL’s detailed notice inviting tender does not prohibit them, sources said.

“The tender for design, engineering, planning, supply and implementation (including management and coordination) of the submarine cable system between mainland Chennai and A&N Island using four fibre pair with 100 Gbps initial traffic capacity consisting of six segments with one being repeatered from Chennai to Port Blair and five unrepeatered segments from Port Blair to 5 different landing points at Havelock, Little Andaman, Car Nicobar, Kamoria & Great Nicobar,” the BSNL tender floated on July 7 said.

Sources said that of the eight fibre cables (four pairs), two fibres will be dedicated to defence use. To some, the prospect of a Chinese company or consortium bidding for, and possibly securing, the tender is cause for concern.

Defence Ministry’s stand

However, the Defence Ministry does not appear to share that concern. “It is not up to the Defence Ministry to decide. The Ministry of Home Affairs will take a final call on this issue,” a top Defence Ministry official told BusinessLine.

Ever since BSNL floated a draft tender in November, after Cabinet approval for the project in September 2016, murmurs have been growing against allowing Chinese firms to bid.

Industry associations, such as the Telecom Equipment Manufacturers Association, have written to the Department of Telecom (DoT) to exclude Chinese players and include at least one Indian company to partner any global company.

However, DoT sources say that since it is a global tender, the government may not have a choice but to select a Chinese firm or one of its partners if their bid is the most attractive. But the maintenance job will not be given to them.

“We have to check all the provisions from a national security perspective,” said a DoT source.

“The project may not necessarily go to a Chinese company or partner, but even if it does, rules can be set for the maintenance work.” In any case, he said, the fibres to be used by defence will be managed and maintained by defence personnel.

‘Aggressive’ participation

Industry sources said Chinese firms were set to “aggressively” participate in the bidding process. “Chinese companies have their government’s support for such bids. Our government should be wary of giving them tenders that can render us vulnerable later,” an industry veteran said. Over the next few years, the government also plans to extend the cable to Singapore.

Asked if BSNL would be open to Chinese firms bidding for the project, its CMD Anupam Srivastava said: “The notice inviting the tender is out...the tender is under preparation...and will also be out within a week.”

Global firms such as NSW (Germany), NEC (Japan), Alcatel Submarine Networks (UK) and Tyco (US) may bid for the project, as will Chinese firms such as Huawei Marine (China) and ZTT Submarine, sources said. Among the Indian companies likely to participate are Sterlite Technologies, Himachal Futuristic Communications and Paramount Wires and Cables.

SriKumar · Post by **SriKumar** » 13 Jul 2017 04:56

ramana wrote:I think NaMo has decided to confront the Chinese at their own game.

The not backing down at Doklam, Dali Lama touring Arunachal Pradesh, the activation of Falun Gong all are synchronized.

If you are talking about the visit of dalai lama 2 days ago, he went to Thoise, Nubra Valley which is in Ladhakh and not Arunachal. Thoise is also the base for Siachen glacier troops/supply line. Prior to that, there was the unfurling of the Tibetian flag at the LAC border on Pagong Tso lake. Falun Gong is certainly a new item on the list of escalation. Modi is speaking with his actions.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Jul 2017 07:36

^^ that BSNL case is a perfect example of the loosey goosey uncoordinated approach to national security that GOI always operates in.

^^ thoise is also a scramble alert airbase for kargil - nubra region and hosts a few Mig29 on rotation.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 13 Jul 2017 07:42

That's because we don't yet have a comprehensive policy regarding what we can procure from China and what we shouldn't. Wasn't there news that government officials were using gmail for official purposes. Our private companies have strict policies and enforcement of such rules, govt and babus can learn from them.

rahulm · Post by **rahulm** » 13 Jul 2017 07:50

And we fret and fume about boycotting Chinese goods. The Nagpur metro project was awarded to the Chinese. Assuming the government is not clueless and is in control then one can possibly safely assume that this dhokla business is all theatrics like 2 neighbours yelling at the top of their voice at each other and will quite. down eventually come tea time in the afternoon.

Or, the left government hand does not know what the right babu hand is doing.

Or they all know what each other is doing but since no sarkari gazette has expressly prohibited Chinese participation its, therefore, purposefully allowed.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 13 Jul 2017 08:38

Alls quite on the Chinese front ?...looks like reality is hitting the Chinese. All the bravado seems to be gone (unless its the quiet before the storm !). The news below is interesting. Such meetings are typically called when war is a real possibility.

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... a-4748235/

Government calls Opposition meet over stand-off with China
Sources confirmed that External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj has personally called some Opposition leaders, requesting them to attend the briefing on this issue. The meeting is likely to be organised at the residence of Home Minister Rajnath Singh

By: Express News Service | New Delhi | Published:July 13, 2017 7:34 am
India-China, NDA government, opposition, india-china stand off, govt-opposition meeting The current military stand-off with China has drawn public attention in the wake of provocative statements from the Chinese foreign office in the run-up to the G-20 summit last week.

GIVEN THE sensitive nature of the military stand-off with China in the Sikkim sector, the government has called a meeting of top Opposition leaders to sensitise them about the situation ahead of the monsoon session of Parliament that begins early next week.
Sources confirmed that External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj has personally called some Opposition leaders, requesting them to attend the briefing on this issue. The meeting is likely to be organised at the residence of Home Minister Rajnath Singh.
The current military stand-off with China has drawn public attention in the wake of provocative statements from the Chinese foreign office in the run-up to the G-20 summit last week.
India-China relations have been delicately balanced over a host of differences, including the boundary between the two countries. Given the sensitive nature of bilateral relations between the two countries, the government is keen to keep the opposition parties in the loop on this issue.
This meeting will also help the Opposition parties calibrate their statements in Parliament so as to avoid making remarks that may impinge adversely against the bilateral relations between the two countries.