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.
Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

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

Postby Marten » 19 Jul 2017 13:21

shiv wrote:I would say that a sudden missile attack
1. Will not come without some signs of preparation and shrill warnings
2. Would be a bad tactic unless they are ready to hold back Indian troops at the LAC

Never forget how effective American missiles have been in eliminating the Taliban

Is there any analysis on whether we can hold or even make a push for Lhasa if the Chinese logistical chains are disrupted?

What will our doorbusters to target the SAM sites?
How soon can SG disrupt the Lhasa rail line? Do we target just one bridge or several roads? Are there jihadi elements from Xinjiang who see this as an opportunity to join hands with the yindoo kaafir to liberate their lands?
Can we play a war of attrition where they attack from the safety of the mainland while we push into Tibet? I mean do we have the logistical strengths (via Nepal/Bhutan) to push forward on the plateau if their lines are breached (even if our defensive lines are breached elsewhere, say in Ladakh etc).

Doc, you listed quite a few but please consider elaborating your thoughts as an article. I prefer dhoti shivering in an informed manner, and am sure many others out there hold the same position.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 19 Jul 2017 13:36

We must start referring to Tibet as TIBET.All maps must show it as such "TIBET",occupied by China.It is the impotence and timidity of the MEA that is primarily responsible for this current fiasco in Indo-China affairs ,where when we were in a clear position of strength,we simply acquiesced and compromised every time China kept "skinching" on the boundary,nibbling up more and more of Indian territory! These jokers in the MEA love their dpl. dinners,banquets et al,loving the "Jaw-jaw" of diplomacy ,while "war-war" looms on our borders.

During Mrs. G's time,some of our ambassadors and HCs were former service chiefs,etc. Mr.Modi should do so ,sending security experts/former chiefs from the 3 services to head some of our sensitive postings.Furthermore,more mil attaches should also be sent and as in the case of China and other non-Eng. speaking nations,at least 50-75% of the staff proficient in the local lingo.The setting up of a high-level trade/cultural centre in Taipei,an unofficial de-facto embassy,must be established asap.But nothing stops the Chinese more than watch their enemy beef up his military forces.The GOI should take more "war measures" decisions and G-to-G deals for immediate acquisitions not just for ammo,spares,etc., but also major items/weapon systems (extra aircraft,missiles,subs,arty,MBRLs,tanks,ABM systems,etc.) in view of the current situ,where China threatens us with war almost daily.
Last edited by Philip on 19 Jul 2017 13:44, edited 1 time in total.

Mukesh.Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 1062
Joined: 06 Dec 2009 14:09

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

Postby Mukesh.Kumar » 19 Jul 2017 13:40

TKiran wrote:Gurus, why the British India had to do agreements with Chinese but not Tibetans (Tibet was a sovereign country)? What are those agreements?

Or is it that the British India made agreements​with Tibet, but that there's no more British India and Tibet, all those agreements null and void?

Is Jaishankar guilty of (due to pusillanimity) using the word China in place of Tibet? Why can't we state a historical truth that there was agreements with Tibet and not with Han China?


At that time though Tibet was sovereign, they were kind of under the sway of the Qing Dynasty. In fact in 1907 Britain and Russia kind of drew up a treaty to delineate their areas of influence and in this discussion they agreed that China had suzerainty over Tibet. Hence the need for involvement of China in all treaties with Tibet. Becomes more important when you see that as late as 1959, Tibet did not recognize Indian hold over Tawang.

It was only in 1913 that Tibetans were able to kick out the Chinese occupiers. Hence the need for keeping the Chinese in the original treaty. And the 1914 Shimla Treaty required the acquiescence of the Chinese government of Tibet's negotiated position for the treaty and McMahon line to be valid. Which the Chinese never did.

However, this being said, here things get muddy. By 1913, the Tibetans had expelled the Chinese and they went back to their earlier claims. And there was limited international recognition of this. So it's not an open and shut case. What matters is Indian interests and our ground position. We have to defend Doklam, and at the opportune moment further our holding of the Chumbi valley. If China can enter Aksai Chin, we are within our rights to takeover Chumbi valley. Just MHO.

Here's the link to the relevant agreements:
  1. Russia- Britain 1907 Accord
  2. 1907 Shimla Accord- Didn't have time but the scheule mentions a whole host of other preceding agreements

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9747
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

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

Postby Yagnasri » 19 Jul 2017 13:45

TKiran wrote:Gurus, why the British India had to do agreements with Chinese but not Tibetans (Tibet was a sovereign country)? What are those agreements?

Or is it that the British India made agreements​with Tibet, but that there's no more British India and Tibet, all those agreements null and void?

Is Jaishankar guilty of (due to pusillanimity) using the word China in place of Tibet? Why can't we state a historical truth that there was agreements with Tibet and not with Han China?


Not really. India today is a successor state of British India. All the rights and obligations of the British India are inherited by us. In the same manner, China has to recognise ( which they will not) the treaties entered by Tibet after the same "became part of China/is part of China". If I remember correctly we even have postal and other rights in Tibet.

All are gone thanks to Chacha.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13475
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

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

Postby pankajs » 19 Jul 2017 13:46

Paul wrote:A little googlnig would in finding the answer

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=0_O ... sh&f=false

I thought the link would reveal some *recent* statement / posture / action from the Bangladeshi's but all we get is a link to a book and a Chinese request to a long dead president. If we look back far enough we will find issues with every major power. If history is the benchmark we are doomed anyways. And , based in history, shouldn't we classify *America* as an enemy pronto. Why even have an expectation from them?

Paul wrote:In a few weeks we will come to know who our friends are and the extent of our relationship with the Russians and Americans.

Modi's visit to Israel must be seen in this context.

We are on the path to declare the whole world as enemy Not our friend. BTW, what do we expect from the Russians and Americans which will prove their friendship for India? What is our expectation from Israel?
Last edited by pankajs on 19 Jul 2017 13:54, edited 2 times in total.

g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2327
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

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

Postby g.sarkar » 19 Jul 2017 13:50

http://zeenews.india.com/india/amid-dok ... 24982.html
Amid Dokalam stand-off with India, China's PLA moves military vehicles, equipment into Tibet
In the wake of an Army face-off and chill in ties with India over Dokalam stand-off, China has moved tens of thousands of tonnes of military vehicles and equipment into Tibet, report said on Wednesday.
New Delhi: In the wake of an Army face-off and chill in ties with India over Dokalam stand-off, China has moved tens of thousands of tonnes of military vehicles and equipment into Tibet, report said on Wednesday.
China's Western Theatre Command transported the military equiments in northern Tibet.
Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post, quoting the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Daily said, "The project took place late last month and involved hardware being moved simultaneously by road and rail from across the entire region."
Amid the ongoing standoff between Indian and Chinese troops at the Dokalam area, the PLA also conducted live-fire exercises in Tibet.
State-run China Central Television (CCTV) reported that the PLA conducted live-fire exercises in Southwest China's Tibet Autonomous Region.
The brigade that conducted the drills was from the PLA's Tibet Military Command.
The PLA Tibet command guards the Line of Actual Control (LAC) of the India-China border along several sections connecting the mountainous Tibetan region.
China and India have been engaged in the standoff in the Dokalam area near the Bhutan tri-junction since last month after a Chinese Army's construction party attempted to build a road. Doka La is the Indian name for the region which Bhutan recognises as Dokalam, while China claims it as part of its Donglang region.
India has said Beijing's action to "unilaterally determine tri-junction points" violated a 2012 India-China pact which says the boundary would be decided by consulting all the concerned parties.
....

Gautam

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3085
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 19 Jul 2017 13:53

Singha wrote:a chinese attack to show india its place need not mobilize anything locally. it could be a surprise missile attack released from 100s of km away onto our camps in the doklam region. and there is really no onsite defence or even warning system to control this.


We just need to cuttoff and throw the entire kitchen sink at the lot sitting in the Chumbi valley. I think there is an entire brigade there. If the lot in Chumbi valley is retreating from the camps, then it's a warning an attack is coming.

If they don't, well we just need to say thank you.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 19 Jul 2017 13:54

Good ,more targets for our forces to destroy.We too should report of our own beefing up of mil forces across the entire Indo-TIbetan boundary It vos now v.clear that China intends to give us another "free lesson" in Mandarin,which we've not asked for. Time for us to tech them some "Sanskrit".

One v.imp factor we should remember,is that the fighting will take place at high alts. Therefore we have to send our troops up immediately so that they can acclimatise themselves with the harsh terrain.It is the slitty-eyed yellow-livered enemy that plans to wage war against us and will strike with impunity using the element of surprise.WE therefore have to mobilise sufficient forces right now for the same.

Mukesh.Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 1062
Joined: 06 Dec 2009 14:09

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

Postby Mukesh.Kumar » 19 Jul 2017 13:58

Yagnasri wrote:
TKiran wrote:Gurus, why the British India had to do agreements with Chinese but not Tibetans (Tibet was a sovereign country)? What are those agreements?

Or is it that the British India made agreements​with Tibet, but that there's no more British India and Tibet, all those agreements null and void?

Is Jaishankar guilty of (due to pusillanimity) using the word China in place of Tibet? Why can't we state a historical truth that there was agreements with Tibet and not with Han China?


Not really. India today is a successor state of British India. All the rights and obligations of the British India are inherited by us. In the same manner, China has to recognise ( which they will not) the treaties entered by Tibet after the same "became part of China/is part of China". If I remember correctly we even have postal and other rights in Tibet.

All are gone thanks to Chacha.



Would like to add one more point. I think we have to stop being in this eternal 'Yeh thik hai kya, log kya kahenge' frame of reference. This pseudo-Dharmic (Yes pseudo, because Dharma does not say that you become a doormat), path of thinking is what Banditji and ilk used to justify cedeing rights over Tibet. no country became a great power, or even a recognized state by following this logic. If treaties were used to justify and guide all actions today you would not have Bangladesh, the Malvinas would have been Argentinian, the US would have been limited to 13 colonies, and so much more. The only thing to consider is Indian interests. Remember "History is written by the victors."

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4249
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 19 Jul 2017 14:06

http://m.economictimes.com/news/defence ... 660926.cms

India has nearly two lakh troops stationed in the areas it disputes with China, outnumbering its neighbour's forces by as much as 15 or 20 to one.


We enjoy MASSIVE advantages in manpower. I believe this had always been the case since 1962. Years of dhoti shivering had blinded us to this fact.

We enjoy even greater advantages in the IOR.

Cheen's economy will continue to pull further away from ours during our lifetime. Along with it so will their production of military hardware, infrastructure and logistics. This can't be rectified because of the tyranny if numbers. An 11T economy growing at 4% will add three times as much to its economy per year as a 2T one will at 8%.

Waiting for our forces to upgrade in the coming years with Rafales, Scorpenes, etc. before taking action is a fool's errand. Because Cheen will be upgrading at a far more furious pace. We won't be matching the four 12K-tons DDGs they'll launch this year when we are still waiting for the first P15B at 8K tons.

Worse, every year that goes by means more chini infrastructure will be built in CPEC and with that the logistics equation will change the advantages we now own.

We need to fight now. If we can't make hay with a 20 to 1 advantage in troops along the border then we can forget about any big power dreams. We'll might as well be resigned to living in a side-show hyphenated forever with fvcking Pakistan.

Cheen is presenting us with an excuse and opportunity to unleash on it with overwhelming local superiority. Let's roll!

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23790
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 19 Jul 2017 14:07

TKiran wrote: why the British India had to do agreements with Chinese but not Tibetans (Tibet was a sovereign country)?

This is my understanding overall.

On the Eastern front, the British had demarcated the Indian boundary along the foothills of Bhutan and then along the foothills of the Tibetan plateau right up to Tawang. In c. 1907, as part of their Great Game, Britain and Russia had agreed upon Tibet as a buffer zone between the two empires on the North East just as Afghanistan was on the North West. As the Chinese power - the Manchu Qing dynasty - suddenly collapsed in Tibet by c. 1912, Tibet wanted to secure its boundaries with China and approached Great Britain for assistance. The British saw an opportunity to secure Indian borders and the British Empire called for a conference in Shimla between itself and China where it proposed Tibet as a buffer state, just like it did with Russia three years earlier. The deliberations lasted nearly nine months (October 1913 to July 1914) and mainly discussed two issues China’s suzerainty over Tibet and Tibet’s borders with India. While discussions were going on in Simla, Tibet and Great Britain signed another agreement on the India-Tibet border by March 24, 1914 at New Delhi, which is now known as the McMahon Line after the India Foreign Office Secretary, McMahon. The boundary line was drawn up on the well-known principle of watershed as natural markers of boundaries. Though the Chinese representative signed the treaty, it was also later repudiated by the Chinese government.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9747
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

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

Postby Yagnasri » 19 Jul 2017 14:10

Mukesh.Kumar wrote: Remember "History is written by the victors."


Agree. But for that, we need capabilities of all kinds. Weak leadership like that of Chaha's leadership of MMS whatever will not make us victors. Our problem is we do not have political leaders who do not understand warfare. Even NM is the same. Indira heard the leadership of the forces and game them a free hand. I am sure NM will do that same.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9747
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

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

Postby Yagnasri » 19 Jul 2017 14:15

SSridhar wrote:
While discussions were going on in Simla, Tibet and Great Britain signed another agreement on the India-Tibet border by March 24, 1914 at New Delhi, which is now known as the McMahon Line after the India Foreign Office Secretary, McMahon. The boundary line was drawn up on the well-known principle of watershed as natural markers of boundaries. Though the Chinese representative signed the treaty, it was also later repudiated by the Chinese government.


Present day China accepted similar arrangements with other countries but kept the issue open with us. It was done tactfully to ensure the pot continues to boil.

Varoon Shekhar
BRFite
Posts: 1937
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26

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

Postby Varoon Shekhar » 19 Jul 2017 14:19

That's the drab, soulless, legalistic approach, that China and its apologists in India( eg. Noorani et al) follow. India will emphasise cultural, spiritual and people ties. Indians have been making peaceful pilgrimages to Tibet for a thousand years. Do Han bureaucrats and military personnel have any such connection? There's the ideological one of desiring a democratic, independent country on India's border. And yes, there is also the important issue of the headwaters of the Brahmaputra river being in Tibet. A curse on Nehru for his mind boggling blunder.

tandav
BRFite
Posts: 593
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 08:24

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

Postby tandav » 19 Jul 2017 15:15

I think the Chinese posters and officials scanning this forum here realize that as India is the successor of the British Empire and legally inherits its rights, duties and privileges. Interestingly Chinese claims on Tibet are actually inherited via Mongol conquests, ERGO India is well positioned to similarly claim Tibet as inherited from the British. Tibet as everyone knows was a protectorate under Indo-British protection in recent history and was under Sino-Mongol protection before then. Chinese and Indian claims on Tibet are both equally valid.

A young idealistic India after independence under Nehru in good faith tried to coexist with China and in an action of monstrous foolishness ceded Tibet to China thinking that it would be a prelude to a India China peace park in Tibet as a hedge against western colonial design not recognizing its historic, spiritual centrality to India. Nehru blinded by his contempt for Dharma and Hinduism, fanciful ideas of Non Violence and weird ideas such as Police is enough world view did not appreciate the Imperial designs of China under military men such as Mao and the PLA who took massive advantage of this naivete by constructing a road to Lhasa through Aksai Chin in 1950 .

Unfortunately the CCP cabal brainwashes Han folks via "One True History" of superpower China, akin to Mullahs in Islam teaching "One True Religion" to Muslims wanting Dar ul Islam. However who can predict how this will pan out... In the long run I believe that this will only aid India's awakening from deep slumber and will constrain it to protect Dharma / Dharmic philosophy / Debate oriented rationalism starting with its near periphery such as Tibet and finally globally.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8441
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

Postby Peregrine » 19 Jul 2017 15:36

'Give up religion or face punishment,' says China's Communist Party to its members

NEW DELHI: Members of China's Communist Party need to give up religion and "be firm Marxist atheists" or face punishment, the country's religious affairs regulator has said, reported Global Times.

The Chinese Communist Party is officially atheist, but China's constitution explicitly allows "freedom of religious belief".

"Party members should not have religious beliefs, which is a red line for all members", wrote Wang Zuoan, director of the State Administration for Religious Affairs, in the latest issue of the Party's flagship magazine.

Wang's comments are line with official Party rules. The Party has by and large exhibited a cautious tolerance towards religion but it prohibits its nearly 90 million Party members from holding religious beliefs, says the Council on Foreign relations, a US think tank. The Party has often demanded the expulsion of members who belong to religious organizations.

Wang reiterated these rules. He said Party members are forbidden from supporting or getting involved in religious affairs in the name of developing the economy or diversifying culture.

"Party members should be firm Marxist atheists, obey Party rules and stick to the Party's faith ... they are not allowed to seek value and belief in religion," Wang said.

Another government official said that party unity is damaged and the party's "values based on dialectical materialism" take a hit when its officials have religious faith.

"Some people who claim to be scholars support religious beliefs in the Party, which has undermined the Party's values based on dialectical materialism," said Zhu Weiqun, chairman of the ethnic and religious committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.

Wang said "foreign forces" are using religion "to infiltrate China" which is a threat to the country's security.
"Some foreign forces have used religion to infiltrate China, and extremism and illegal religious activities are spreading in some places, which have threatened national security and social stability," Wang said.

Cheers Image

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7453
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

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

Postby Prasad » 19 Jul 2017 15:59

Marten
that long railway line from beijing to lhasa runs over numerous aqueducts and bridges in the plateau. Ripe target. They don't really have an alternate until they bring another line from the east of the plateau.

If we haven't even realised that we have muscles until now, how are we going to flex them? PRC goons in the media are blustering everyday. We know they have a massive complex in Golmud that is ostensibly for (civil) supplies into Lhasa and others. In case of an escalation, what happens to the decision making appratus with all these dhoti shivering idiots we have on our side who plug the 'gandhian' way. Already we have momota talking up nonsense of blaming modi for any potential landgrab by the chinese. This is the kind of idiots we have. Lets not even talk about the dhotishiverers in lutyens and ministries.

Will we agree to a mutual backing off from the current standoff? What will we get if we do? What concessions should we extract if we can get such a stand-down? Will PRC agree? Why aren't we needling them at a thousand other points? We aren't even talking about Tibet as a separate entity while those fu(ks fund and empower porkis and terrorists in the east. Eent ka jawab patthar se. Can we push for a few peaceful vacuum explosions in Xinjiang and recover Aksai Chin if we're pushed to war in the east? Will we? So many questions but we have nothing to go by except by our past and current actual positions and sadly, it does look like we will push back only to a bare minimum as needed and not play the high stakes game as an equal at the table.

Varoon Shekhar
BRFite
Posts: 1937
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26

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

Postby Varoon Shekhar » 19 Jul 2017 16:16

http://www.frontline.in/cover-story/the ... epage=true

Noorani is at it again, showing China as the wronged party, and India as unreasonable. Absolutely astounding article, with no mention of the threat to the 'chicken's neck', China's past transgressions in Ladakh and elsewhere, the hysteria and belligerence of the Chinese media particularly Global Times, the issue of Arunachal, and of course of Tibet itself. It's India's stubbornness and unwillingness to accept China's definition of the issue, that is the cause of the recent acrimony. I just knew Noorani would write such an article in the latest Frontline. As predictable, as they say, as night and day.

Rajeev
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 51
Joined: 20 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: New York

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

Postby Rajeev » 19 Jul 2017 16:19

Usually I wouldnt assign much weightage to what he says but these words coming out from ex defense minister of India

To Attack India, China Readies Nuclear Weapons In Pak: Mulayam Yadav

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/china-re ... av-1726690
Last edited by Rajeev on 19 Jul 2017 20:14, edited 1 time in total.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4249
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 19 Jul 2017 16:22

Rajeev wrote:Usually I wouldnt assign much weightage to what he says but the words coming out from ex defense minister of India

To Attack India, China Readies Nuclear Weapons In Pak: Mulayam Yadav

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/china-re ... av-1726690



It means we have people readying us for action.

Let's roll!

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 928
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

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

Postby TKiran » 19 Jul 2017 16:24

Of all, that crooked Mullah yum Singh has said it in parliament that Tibet sovereignty has to be tabled now. Surely this will help, atleast now someone more credible and non-pusillanimous should take the lead and say that "Tibet is not China."

There should be a hashtag #TibetisnotChina that needs to be spread in Twitter and social media.
#LetsmarchtoLhasa
Last edited by TKiran on 19 Jul 2017 16:26, edited 1 time in total.

zoverian
BRFite
Posts: 228
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 10:58

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

Postby zoverian » 19 Jul 2017 16:25

Interesting times ahead....

China moved huge military hardware into Tibet after Sikkim standoff: Report

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 665316.cms

BEIJING: The Chinese Army moved tens of thousands of tonnes of military hardware into the remote mountainous Tibet region after the standoff with Indian troops in the Doklam area in the Sikkim sector, the mouthpiece of the PLA said today.

The vast haul was transported to a region south of the Kunlun Mountains in northern Tibet by the Western Theatre Command - which oversees the restive regions of Xinjiang and Tibet, and handles border issues with India, reported the PLA Daily, the official mouthpiece of Chinese military.

The move took place late last month and involved hardware being moved simultaneously by road and rail from across the entire region, the report said.

China's state-run media has stepped up its rhetoric against India in recent weeks but there was no way to confirm the veracity of such claims.

Early this week, state-run CCTV had broadcast People's Liberation Army troops taking part in heavy military exercises using live ammunition on the Tibetan plateau.

The location was not far from the disputed Doklam area where Chinese and Indian troops are locked in a standoff, the Hong-Kong based South China Morning Post reported.

The PLA Daily report, however, did not say whether the movement of the military equipment was to support the exercise or for other reasons.

Wang Dehua, an expert on South Asia studies at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, said the scale of the troop and equipment movement showed how much easier it is for China to defend its western borders.

"Military operations are all about logistics," he said. "Now there is much better logistics support to the Tibet region."

Chinese and Indian soldiers have been locked in a face- off in the Doklam area of the Sikkim sector for over a month after Indian troops stopped the Chinese army from building a road in the disputed area.

China claimed that they were constructing the road within their territory and has been demanding immediate pull-out of the Indian troops from the disputed Doklam plateau.

New Delhi has expressed concern over the road building, apprehending that it may allow Chinese troops to cut India's access to its northeastern states.


India has conveyed to the Chinese government that the road construction would represent a significant change of status quo with serious security implications for it.


Of the 3,488-km-long India-China border from Jammu and Kashmir to Arunachal Pradesh, a 220-km section falls in Sikkim.

Iyersan
BRFite
Posts: 381
Joined: 19 Sep 2016 16:13

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

Postby Iyersan » 19 Jul 2017 16:27

TKiran wrote:Of all, that crooked Mullah yum Singh has said it in parliament that Tibet sovereignty has to be tabled now. Surely this will help, atleast now someone more credible and non-pusillanimous should take the lead and say that "Tibet is not China."

There should be a hashtag #TibetisnotChina that needs to be spread in Twitter and social media.
#LetsmarchtoLhasa

Amen

Rudraksh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 11 Jul 2017 09:32

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

Postby Rudraksh » 19 Jul 2017 16:44

Time is ripe for India to test a MT yield device and develop MIRV delivery systems.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5380
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

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

Postby Karthik S » 19 Jul 2017 17:00

Gurus slightly OT, considering we need men on both north and west, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... onnel#List, do we have proportionate active military personnel. Given our population and legacy, could it have been 3 4 lakh more in the Army. For ex, US has a quarter of our population but only half the total size.

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

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

Postby Marten » 19 Jul 2017 17:01

Prasad wrote:Marten
that long railway line from beijing to lhasa runs over numerous aqueducts and bridges in the plateau. Ripe target. They don't really have an alternate until they bring another line from the east of the plateau.

If we haven't even realised that we have muscles until now, how are we going to flex them? PRC goons in the media are blustering everyday. We know they have a massive complex in Golmud that is ostensibly for (civil) supplies into Lhasa and others. In case of an escalation, what happens to the decision making appratus with all these dhoti shivering idiots we have on our side who plug the 'gandhian' way. Already we have momota talking up nonsense of blaming modi for any potential landgrab by the chinese. This is the kind of idiots we have. Lets not even talk about the dhotishiverers in lutyens and ministries.

Will we agree to a mutual backing off from the current standoff? What will we get if we do? What concessions should we extract if we can get such a stand-down? Will PRC agree? Why aren't we needling them at a thousand other points? We aren't even talking about Tibet as a separate entity while those fu(ks fund and empower porkis and terrorists in the east. Eent ka jawab patthar se. Can we push for a few peaceful vacuum explosions in Xinjiang and recover Aksai Chin if we're pushed to war in the east? Will we? So many questions but we have nothing to go by except by our past and current actual positions and sadly, it does look like we will push back only to a bare minimum as needed and not play the high stakes game as an equal at the table.

The last time we had a stand off, a mutual stand off rollback was agreed upon. However, India blinked first, and sent Raksha Mantri KC Pant and then, MEA ND Tiwari first to discuss terms. Difference is that they had 18 divisions prepared for war, and we had ten. This time around, the numbers are vastly different. The outcome of this quite shabbily handled (by China) stand-off is that one set of folks will end up with a bruised ego. For Xi, it is a matter of not losing face, because that will inevitably lead to losing power. We could start off proceedings with non-state actors from the jamiat e xinjiangi liberation loins targeting a few nice bridges to render that railway line unusable for a few months (until Winter, when some more retirees from Syria will join the campaign, aided by friends of India). Russia already knows that its status as a prime oil and gas supplier is and will be further threatened by the OBOR. They are going along with Xi for now, but will gladly let him down at an opportune moment. I'm sure our MEA is lobbying with Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, SoKo, Taiwan, Japan and finally, Philippines to let them know how we are standing up for their territorial rights as well.

All said and done, the PRC leadership appears to have shot itself in the foot with the no religion rule. Not sure if there are three or four Chinas in conflict with each other (and some of us world citizens having to pay a price for this).
Last edited by Marten on 19 Jul 2017 18:29, edited 1 time in total.

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3564
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby Paul » 19 Jul 2017 17:06

Pankaj, You think Bangladesh need not be considered as a variable in the equation. wheras I think due to it's quasi hostile reactions against India inc. involvement of DGFI in varanasi blasts we need to watch to see their troop movement and be prepared for possible mischief by pro paki elements in BDR/BDA. If you think 1987 is too far back in time then why are we discussing 1962 and 1967.

I am being cynical here, but for India's sake I hope you are right and I am wrong. Time will tell. Let us leave it at that.

FYI...Gen Ershad is still alive and given the rank equal to cabinet minister by BD government.

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 928
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

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

Postby TKiran » 19 Jul 2017 17:35

What I see right now is that there is a hope of avoidance of war with China including some of the very knowledgeable people about China.

That could be very dangerous miscalculation.

War is being thrust upon us. Until we march till Lhasa, we should not stop, whatever may be the cost.

MaverickV
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 15
Joined: 23 Aug 2016 18:45

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

Postby MaverickV » 19 Jul 2017 17:36

Noorani is at it again, showing China as the wronged party, and India as unreasonable. Absolutely astounding article, with no mention of the threat to the 'chicken's neck', China's past transgressions in Ladakh and elsewhere, the hysteria and belligerence of the Chinese media particularly Global Times, the issue of Arunachal, and of course of Tibet itself. It's India's stubbornness and unwillingness to accept China's definition of the issue, that is the cause of the recent acrimony. I just knew Noorani would write such an article in the latest Frontline. As predictable, as they say, as night and day.

Is there any truth to the 1950s-60s border issue resolution offers by China as mentioned in the article. Did we indeed lose opportunity to negotiate by being bull-headed?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 19 Jul 2017 18:12

China may have a numerical advantage in troops but what are their naval assets in the IOR? We can indeed turn their mrrchant fleet and naval assets into a" string of flaming red pearls" should we wish so.Furthermore,Chinese troops descending into Indian territory could extend their logistic link dangerously thin and could get cut off.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

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

Postby RKumar » 19 Jul 2017 18:51

At least a year old news from horse's mouth .... we were preparing ourselves for the grand show off under direct supervision.

Since decade, our neighbour is behaving like bully with SRDEs, it was matter of time. Enough to say, we will welcome our guest properly. Ears and eyes are wide open.

Jai Hind!

PS: I took it light, just as a personal opinion.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4228
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 19 Jul 2017 19:24

Singha wrote:a chinese attack to show india its place need not mobilize anything locally. it could be a surprise missile attack released from 100s of km away onto our camps in the doklam region. and there is really no onsite defence or even warning system to control this.

they would then sit back and dare the indian leadership to respond either there or anywhere, while activating MSM/sickular subalterns to lead a shrill media campaign calling for 'statesmanship' and 'peace talks' to 'avoid a damaging conflagration' and how it is all namos fault.

the only credible response will be for prithvi/iaf to wipe out a similar well populated chinese camp at night off the map, release satellite photos and say 'your move next'.

protests and dossiers will be rudely laughed at. dragons do not talk, they burn!


Do the forces in the area have SAMs like Akash? If a layered Ads has been deployed, it won't be so easy.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3299
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 19 Jul 2017 19:33

Guys a seperate thread just to track Chinese and tsp movement. A seperate thread with the assumption that war is imminent. This will help track. Also anyone with a very high level primer on number of troops facing each other etc

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2610
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

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

Postby abhik » 19 Jul 2017 20:19

IMO notion that we will be in a better position to fight the Chinese in 5 or 10 needs to be debunked. Neither are we undergoing massive expansion/modernization nor are we inducting any silver bullet weapons. MSC, a few dozen rafales etc aren't really going to change the balance of power significantly.
On the other hand most of the Chinese investment in the last 2 decades have gone to building up the navy. They are the fastest expanding navy, but uptill now they have only been able to achieve area denial in the seas nearby. With a limited number of SSN and operational aircraft carriers their power projection in the Indian Ocean region is limited. But this won't remain true for long. As far as the air force and army is concerned, do the resident dhoti-shiverers see a 1:5 difference here? Bulk of their fighters are 2/3 gen and army is equipped with previous generation russian and western knock-offs.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23790
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 19 Jul 2017 20:37

From Doklam to Taiwan, China shows zero tolerance to ‘sovereignty’ threats - Atul Aneja, The Hindu
China’s insistence on the withdrawal of Indian troops from the Doklam plateau as a precondition for negotiations is consistent with its position on Tibet, Taiwan or the South China Sea — areas of hyper-sensitivity, where Beijing perceives that its “territorial sovereignty” is at stake.

While India’s alleged incursion into Chinese territory has grabbed headlines, the Chinese Foreign Ministry over the past week has adopted a similar unbending position on Tibet, embodied in the proposed visit of the Dalai Lama to Botswana, as well as the moves by the United States to re-open naval port calls with Taiwan.

Indonesia’s renaming

Predictably, Indonesia’s cartographic dalliance by renaming a portion of the SCS as North Natuna Sea has also drawn Beijing’s ire and China has raised the red flag on Jakarta’s decision to thus issue a new official map. The map apparently intersects a part of the Nine-Dash line, which defines China’s maritime boundary in the SCS, thus rejecting Beijing’s “sovereignty” in the entire area.

On July 14, Mr. Geng, in response to the move said he hoped that relevant country can work with China for the shared goal and jointly uphold the current hard-won sound situation in the South China Sea.”

Asked to comment on Botswana’s invitation to Dalai Lama next month, Chinese Foreign Ministry warned on Friday that the government in Gaborone must “correct” its decision. “The 14th Dalai is a political exile, who has long been engaged in anti-China separatist activities under the cloak of religion with the attempt to split Tibet from China. China is firmly opposed to Dalai’s trip to any country for activities aimed at splitting China in any capacity or name, and contact with any official in any form in any country,” said Geng Shuang, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson.

The spokesman added: “China’s stance is clear. We hope [the] relevant country can see clear the nature of Dalai, faithfully respect China’s core concern and make correct decision on the relevant issue.”

Mongolia invited ire

Last year Mongolia’s decision to welcome the Dalai Lama in Ulan Bator resulted in Beijing’s decision to impose stringent trade restrictions on its unequal neighbour. Earlier this year, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Mongolia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Tsend Munkh-Orgil by telephone that the Tibetan leader’s “furtive visit to Mongolia brought a negative impact to China-Mongolia relations.” He added: “We hope that Mongolia has taken this lesson to heart.”

China perceives any encouragement to the Dalai Lama by foreign powers or military or political support to Taiwan as a challenge to its “one China” policy — a clear and unambiguous no-go area. Consequently, Beijing had frowned on remarks by Pema Khandu, Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh, questioning the one-China policy, during the Dalai Lama’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh in April.

Slams US-Taiwan act

Unsurprisingly, China has slammed the United States on Monday, following the passage of the National Defense Authorisation Act for Fiscal Year 2018 in the US House of Congress, which asks the US Defence Secretary to look into the feasibility of re-establishing port calls between the US and Taiwanese navies.

As expected, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lu Kang went ballistic in his response to question related to Washington’s move.Relevant contents go against the one-China policy of the US and the principles of the three joint communiqués between China and the US and interfere in China’s domestic affairs. China has lodged stern representations with the US side,” the spokesperson asserted.

Mr. Lu added: “I must reiterate that it is China’s consistent position to firmly oppose any official contacts and military exchanges between the US and Taiwan. We urge the US to fully recognise the gravity of the relevant clauses in the Act. The US should not allow the Act with the relevant clauses to become law, nor turn back the wheel of history lest it should harm the general interests of China-US relations.

Coming to Doklam

Specifically on the Doklam standoff, the Chinese Foreign Ministry on Tuesday signalled that it was now ready to internationalise the issue. It highlighted that, “Some foreign diplomats in China, feeling shocked and confounded, reached us for facts through diplomatic channels.” {Relevant diplomats must talk to New Delhi to understand relevant situation}

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

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

Postby Vikas » 19 Jul 2017 20:40

I don't see any war happening anytime soon. Those who want to fight don't do this shadow boxing for such a long time giving time to enemy to settle down and prepare his own bunkers.
China may next send PLA to roam around near LOC in J&K as another hint to Bharat but probability of even a skirmish is pretty low now. Too many soldiers have moved into positions to get into a winnable shooting match.
Having said that I think Bharat should go with the assumption that China too has its own set of yahoos at the top level and intends to attack and grab our territory as long as this standoff stays.

rohiths
BRFite
Posts: 399
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 21:51

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

Postby rohiths » 19 Jul 2017 20:49

This Chinese challenge is a test of our national character and will determine where the country is destined to go. Wars are not won by those who have better equipment or larger guns but those who are willing to fight no matter what. As long as we have the fighting spirit and do whatever it takes, we will win.

This time the China threat is different. Chinese are internally in trouble with their Ponzi scheme about to be unravelled. They want to keep their people united through these nationalist adventures. Hence we cannot wish away this threat and it is going to come sooner rather than later.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7453
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

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

Postby Prasad » 19 Jul 2017 20:51

Prepare for war and make enough noises. We've been tight lipped and ready so far but there isn't any urgency insofar as public info is concerned. If you see door knob rattling the cages then you know there is something afoot.
If they up the ante, will we n test, A5 test/productionise? Will we stop trying to be the good boy and start asserting ourselves in various ways?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54179
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 19 Jul 2017 21:08

Iyersan wrote:http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/china-india-sikkim-border-standoff-doklam-pla-beijing-tibet/1/1005448.html
Now, China moves tonnes of military equipment to Tibet. Should India be scared?


Folks don't go mad on Iyersan.

That is the title of the article by India Today.
Not him

What to do with a disloyal press in India?

BTW is hostilities start and any one whines about India I personally will give permanent ban for them.

Least we can do to support the military.

During Kargil, there were whiners and only Rupak and I were on the ball.

This time we will be proactive.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54179
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 19 Jul 2017 21:13

MaverickV wrote:
Noorani is at it again, showing China as the wronged party, and India as unreasonable. Absolutely astounding article, with no mention of the threat to the 'chicken's neck', China's past transgressions in Ladakh and elsewhere, the hysteria and belligerence of the Chinese media particularly Global Times, the issue of Arunachal, and of course of Tibet itself. It's India's stubbornness and unwillingness to accept China's definition of the issue, that is the cause of the recent acrimony. I just knew Noorani would write such an article in the latest Frontline. As predictable, as they say, as night and day.

Is there any truth to the 1950s-60s border issue resolution offers by China as mentioned in the article. Did we indeed lose opportunity to negotiate by being bull-headed?



Past is past.

Not interested in how we got there.
We need to focus on present and the future.

Noorani type disloyals will always want to weaken the Center which suits their foreign masters.

For your own sanity don't read such trash.

Singha, Let them attack. India has a range of options which need not be disclosed here.
If its missiles even better.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests