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

[UlanBatori]

Not so well-dressed:

[UlanBatori]

Sorry to flood the thread with those, but it is essential to remind people here of the realities of China. They are not some sort of super-race: just a huge number of people driven by a tyrannical bunch of thieves. By now, with One-Brat Policy, reduced to a nation of automatons.

[sanjaykumar]

Good to read that. But why the sudden spurt in umbrella-wielding foul-mouthed 媸 types? If it is a spurt, not normal Vancouver haute-Han arrogance?

Because many Indians are an obvious Caucasian race, anthropologically considered, irrespective of shade of skin colouration.

Because they have hair like the White Gods, high noses, Indo-European language like the said White Gods, democracy like the White Gods, English language like the White Gods. (I know, it is stupid).

[ArjunPandit]

[
You are in an illustrious league of individuals with the highest number of Whatsapp/FB views.

Flippin heck..

Shivji, I have been saying this from my initial posts, that videos/posts like yours should become mainstream. I am very happy to see this become reality.
It has been shared on many wa groups I am part of, courtesy yours truly. Comments like, "is this true", "never knew it or thought of it" are very common.
May i request you to please create the other side of '62 war, especially on areas where yak herder is visiting these days.

[Rudradev]

Meanwhile US attitudes towards the Chinese (and specifically, towards recognizing and confronting the Chinese threat) are evolving quickly.

See this article, all but explicitly naming and shaming Henry Kissinger as a Chinese Agent. Must read. Cross posted on the Korea thread as well.

http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/ ... 12511.html


Also this threat on how Steve Bannon plans to counter the Chinese Threat to the United States:

http://prospect.org/article/steve-bannon-unrepentant

...

I told the assistant that I was on vacation, but I would be happy to speak by phone. Bannon promptly called.

Far from dressing me down for comparing Trump to Kim, he began, “It’s a great honor to finally track you down. I’ve followed your writing for years and I think you and I are in the same boat when it comes to China. You absolutely nailed it.”

“We’re at economic war with China,” he added. “It’s in all their literature. They’re not shy about saying what they’re doing. One of us is going to be a hegemon in 25 or 30 years and it’s gonna be them if we go down this path. On Korea, they’re just tapping us along. It’s just a sideshow.”

Bannon said he might consider a deal in which China got North Korea to freeze its nuclear buildup with verifiable inspections and the United States removed its troops from the peninsula, but such a deal seemed remote. Given that China is not likely to do much more on North Korea, and that the logic of mutually assured destruction was its own source of restraint, Bannon saw no reason not to proceed with tough trade sanctions against China.

Contrary to Trump’s threat of fire and fury, Bannon said: “There’s no military solution [to North Korea’s nuclear threats], forget it. Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about, there’s no military solution here, they got us.” Bannon went on to describe his battle inside the administration to take a harder line on China trade, and not to fall into a trap of wishful thinking in which complaints against China’s trade practices now had to take a backseat to the hope that China, as honest broker, would help restrain Kim.

“To me,” Bannon said, “the economic war with China is everything. And we have to be maniacally focused on that. If we continue to lose it, we're five years away, I think, ten years at the most, of hitting an inflection point from which we'll never be able to recover.”

Bannon’s plan of attack includes: a complaint under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act against Chinese coercion of technology transfers from American corporations doing business there, and follow-up complaints against steel and aluminum dumping. “We’re going to run the tables on these guys. We’ve come to the conclusion that they’re in an economic war and they’re crushing us.”

But what about his internal adversaries, at the departments of State and Defense, who think the United States can enlist Beijing’s aid on the North Korean standoff, and at Treasury and the National Economic Council who don’t want to mess with the trading system?

“Oh, they’re wetting themselves,” he said, explaining that the Section 301 complaint, which was put on hold when the war of threats with North Korea broke out, was shelved only temporarily, and will be revived in three weeks. As for other cabinet departments, Bannon has big plans to marginalize their influence.

“I’m changing out people at East Asian Defense; I’m getting hawks in. I’m getting Susan Thornton [acting head of East Asian and Pacific Affairs] out at State.”


But can Bannon really win that fight internally?

“That’s a fight I fight every day here,” he said. “We’re still fighting. There’s Treasury and [National Economic Council chair] Gary Cohn and Goldman Sachs lobbying.”

“We gotta do this. The president’s default position is to do it, but the apparatus is going crazy. Don’t get me wrong. It’s like, every day.”

Bannon explained that his strategy is to battle the trade doves inside the administration while building an outside coalition of trade hawks that includes left as well as right. Hence the phone call to me.

There is a BIG internal shake-up going on in Duplee City regarding America's China policy. The old guard in Foggy Bottom (and even some in the Pentagon) still reel under the influence of Kissinger's chloroform prescriptions. They, like many Think Tanks, Politicians, and Mainstream Media Corporations in the US, have been heavily bribed by Beijing to toe the Chinese line.

Ultimately the US is not going to "help" India neutralize or defeat our own Chinese threat. However, a sea change in US policy towards China will influence Chinese thinking in many ways that will impact how they formulate their own policies towards other nations.

I can see things going both ways. As America begins to talk tough, some "neo-con" types in the CPC Politburo Standing Committee will want to lash out and start fights, including with India, to demonstrate their muscle in contrast to what they believe is "fading" American power and prestige. They would like to call the Americans' bluff, and prove China's big-dog status by demonstrating that for all its words America doesn't have the stomach to support anybody whom the Chinese want to push around.

Conversely, others in the Standing Committee will want to pursue a sort of "taqqiya" policy, especially with regard to the bigger and more militarily/economically capable neighbours like India, to try and avoid a bandwagoning of Asian countries with the US against Beijing. If this faction wins out, Xi will either be ousted or emerge in November as a much more leasonable-sounding readel.

[Pathik]

Just because white pakis are top class racists doesn't mean Chinese are not. I have friends living in both HK & SN and all have faced racism in overt & covert forms. Australia is another matter altogether though.

But agree that words like chinkis etc do more harm than good. Even doubting their 'martial ability' is a page out of the Paki book. I am sure Indian Army doesn't think on those lines.

Racist propaganda is the highest form of immaturity for a society. We can ignore these as barking dogs and focus our attention on kickin some real butt

[UlanBatori]

Good to read that. But why the sudden spurt in umbrella-wielding foul-mouthed 媸 types? If it is a spurt, not normal Vancouver haute-Han arrogance?

Because many Indians are an obvious Caucasian race, anthropologically considered, irrespective of shade of skin colouration.

IMO the situation is that Vancouver has a huge population of "fresh off the boat" Han elite, who are completely unwashed types as far as any world knowledge or experience of multiculturism goes. Its like bringing Mami from Guntur to Atlanta. Mami, lovely coal-black in complexion, nevertheless shudders in disgust at seeing ******* people. I once was in Savannah, GA, a port where a lot of Japanese are seen - several coming off supertankers or auto-delivery container ships. We were at a fast foods place, there was this Japanese family that looked like they had come on one of those. The woman was looking at us with a hate and disgust that shocked me.

OTOH, my experience of walking around in Japan, particularly in far-out Fukuoka, is of absolutely gracious, friendly people, though they could not speak a word of English.

Vancouver is practically a Chinese city: HongKong Fal East. The rich ugly ones have probably never had a dose of good old American/Canadian Equalization applied to them. BUT HEY!! Publicize that video all over, especially in Vancouver if possible!

[SriKumar]

WATCH: Xinhua attacks India with racist propaganda video on Doklam border dispute

http://shanghaiist.com/2017/08/17/india-seven-sins.php

This video is a propaganda godsend for us. .

Strange video. It was not even funny. The Indian guy in the video is supposed to be mimicing a sardarji (I am going by the get-up). And it is curious she speaks in an American accent....was the intended audience USA or is that the de facto English accent now, supplanting clipped Brit stuff. And the seven seeeens (sins), wow....putting the Christain angle in there. Nice try. What's really funny is this woman good English speaking but not be knowing that 'foot' is pronounced 'fut' and not 'fooooot', similarly, it is 'bull' dozer, not booooldozer. And lastly, the map shown in the first minute of the segment is strange. India is shown to the North (and West) of Bhutan. Clearly they are not showing the trijunction but some other place. Same map was plastered on the side of the rich-kid car-borne China rakshak in Australia.

It had the cadence/presentation of a cheap skit in a B grade TV comedy show.....but, as is well-known, cheap quality comes with the territory here.

[Atmavik]

It's a bad sign. The CCP and PLA are getting their population ready for a serious war, with the hate and dehumanizing in progress.

I have been passing the Chinese version of Globaltimes (huanqiu.cn) through Googal translate for years now. They've been depicting us like this all this while - we just haven't been aware of it because it's in their language. the English versions of Beebuls Daily , Globaltimes etc are completely different sanitized creatures.

About 4 years ago I posted here in a PRC thread asking posters not to read the English versions but instead run the Chinese versions through translator. They're not the same. After the first canisterized Agni V test, they went ballistic (pun intended) on the Chinese language version, with dozens of 'nuke them before they get more dangerous' comments, while the English version was just regurgitated PR response and no comments.

so pakis and yellow pakis have similar tricks

[UlanBatori]

India is shown to the North (and West) of Bhutan.

Map made by Chinese American-speaking women. They like to show West(erners) on Top. Like James Bond women.

[g.sarkar]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... r-standoff
Indians decry 'racist' Chinese video on Bhutan border standoff
Propaganda spoof mocking India’s response to land dispute lambasted for depiction of Sikh soldier wobbling his head
ndians have reacted with bemusement and outrage at a “racist” video posted online by Chinese state media, as a highly charged border dispute between the two countries enters its third month.
The Chinese state broadcaster Xinhua published a video on Wednesday highlighting India’s “seven sins” in relation to a standoff between the countries’ armies at the Bhutan-China border.
.....
As a presenter lists India’s perceived misdeeds, the video repeatedly cuts to a Chinese man wobbling his head, wearing a fake beard and turban, and appearing to feign an Indian English accent.
The turbaned character in the video mocks India’s reaction to the Chinese roadwork, which he likens to someone “building a path in his garden”. It portrays Bhutan, which asked Delhi for military assistance to repel the Chinese, as an unwilling participant in the conflict and a victim of Indian bullying.
.....

Gautam

[ashish raval]

I believe China is preparing for a major war in the region. From what I infer from development is that they are preparing their country men mentally for it. Indian Army should be prepared for every eventuality including increased demand for blood, med, weapons and food to be transported for long haul battle. I think we should be ready for assymetric war and all border guys need to have weapons training. Trap them in mountain passes and anti aircraft guns should be in hidden trenches and tunnels and should make merry when slit eyes are around here.

We have to solidly protect all possible areas of incursion as well as new areas too. If I were PM I would ask Tibetans in India to get arms training to liberate their motherland too. After all it I their fight too. We need to activate spy network in the region, harden out electronic networks and perhaps do an ASAT test to validate our preparedness for the same.

We should expect unseen war strategies to be put in place by Chinese here. Straights of Malacca and Karachi block should be in place too.

If they send missile to Delhi Beijing and Shanghai skyline should not be seen from Indian ocean. Make them realise that they will loose economically more if they try any misadventure. It might be they are planning misadventure ala Kargil type in winter. Better be prepared for anything.

I will sell Brahmos to Vietnam for sure. Taiwan is heavily hacked by Chinese...Air superiority is vital in this situation.guess they want to test their made in china weapons to be sold to whoever wants to buy and this will be good chance for PLA to try and do that..

No dhoti shiver but disaster management and war drills in cities should be done.

[Hari Seldon]

Domestically, after hajaar bluster, it finally emerges that removing Art 370 only needs a presidential notification and nothing else.

Similarly, dealing with cheeni aggression about 'undisputed chinese land' will only need a GoI notification derecognizing TAR as part of PRC and going back to the pre-1949 status, officially. Onlee.

Like yak-herder says, we'll undisputedly dispute everything west of the 100 E longitude ....

[g.sarkar]

Even Khan is taking notice!

http://www.newsweek.com/china-riles-ind ... off-651851
WORLD
CHINA RILES INDIA WITH 'RACIST' VIDEO OVER TENSE BORDER STANDOFF
BY SOFIA LOTTO PERSIO ON 8/17/17 AT 9:15 AM
Tensions between China and India over a border area disputed with Bhutan along the Himalayan Mountains have reached a new peak after the Chinese state media released a video mocking India's stance with "racist undertones."
China state-controlled news agency Xinhua published a video on its English-language YouTube channel under the title "7 Sins of India," an apparent attempt to ridicule India’s stance on the ongoing border standoff while advertising China’s position to a foreign audience.
The video is the latest installment of a recently launched web show called The Spark, which aims to discuss news items with an irreverent tone. Running for just over three minutes, the video published Monday criticizes India's actions in seven points: "trespassing, violating a bilateral convention, trampling international law, confusing right and wrong, putting the blame on the victim, hijacking a small neighbor and sticking to a mistake knowingly."
The video also featured an actor wearing a turban, aviator sunglasses and a curly fake beard, who was purportedly impersonating India, tilting his head as he spoke with a caricatural Indian accent. At one point, he intimidated another actor, representing Bhutan, with a pair of scissors.
The video was labeled "racist" in the Indian press and among social media users. The Hindustan Times newspaper said the video had "racist overtones." The Financial Express called it a "bizarre racist propaganda video."
....

Gautam

[UlanBatori]

I think the nations of the world should get together on that one. If Russia, India, Bhutan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Mongolia and US all band together, Hana can be cut to size: east of Longitude 100.

[Singha]

http://www.livemint.com/Industry/K4oG4i ... s-rul.html

Taking aim at China, India tightens power grid, telecom rules
India is tightening rules for businesses entering the power grid and telecom sector, a move that industry officials say aims to check China’s advance into sensitive sectors
Sudarshan VaradhanNeha Dasgupta

Companies have to detail where they procure the raw materials for power transmission systems, and will be barred from further operations in India if their materials contain malware. Photo: Bloomberg

New Delhi: India is tightening the rules for businesses entering its power transmission sector and making stringent checks on both power and telecoms equipment for malware — moves that government and industry officials say aim to check China’s advance into sensitive sectors.

Chinese firms such as Harbin Electric, Dongfang Electronics, Shanghai Electric and Sifang Automation either supply equipment or manage power distribution networks in 18 cities in India.

Local firms have long lobbied against Chinese involvement in the power sector, raising security concerns and saying they get no reciprocal access to Chinese markets.

With India and China locked in their most serious military face-off in three decades at Doklam bordering Bhutan, the effort to restrict Chinese business has gathered more support from within the administration of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, worried about the possibility of a cyber attack.

The Indian government is considering a report prepared by the Central Electricity Authority (CEA) that sets new conditions for firms bidding for power transmission contracts, tipping the scales in favour of local companies.

According to an official involved in drafting the report, who asked not to be named, it says companies looking to invest in India should have been operating there for at least 10 years, have Indian citizens as top executives, and employees of the foreign firm should have lived in India for a certain period, the official said.

Those companies have to detail where they procure the raw materials for transmission systems, and will be barred from further operations in India if their materials contain malware.

Though the report makes no direct reference to China, the official said the recommendations are intended to deter China from making further headway in India, because of the security risks.

CEA chairman R.K. Verma said the possibility of a crippling cyber attack on India’s power systems was a key consideration while drafting the policy. “Cyber attacks are a challenge,” he told Reuters.

A representative of a Chinese enterprise engaged in exporting electric power equipment in India told China’s state-run Global Times that India’s industry has long tried to block foreign competition under the garb of safety issues.

“Now, as Sino-Indian relations are getting intense, the old tune is on again. But in fact, it is unrealistic to completely ban China and India power investment cooperation. India will pay a huge price for this,” the paper said.

Shanghai Electric, Harbin Electric, Dongfang Electronics and state-run China Southern Power Grid Co Ltd, all involved in India or trying to enter, did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment on the proposed Indian investment rules.

Telecoms

The Indian government is moving simultaneously on the telecoms sector, demanding higher security standards in an area dominated by Chinese makers of equipment and smartphones.

In a letter reviewed by Reuters, the ministry of electronics and information technology has asked 21 smartphone makers, most of them Chinese, to provide details about the “safety and security practices, architecture frameworks, guidelines, standards, etc followed in your product/services in the country.”

Chinese vendors such as Xiaomi, Lenovo, Oppo, Vivo and Gionee together account for over half of India’s $10 billion smartphone market. The letter, dated 12 August, was also sent to Apple, Samsung Electronics and local maker Micromax, a ministry source said.

India has also privately raised objections to Chinese firm Shanghai Fosun Pharmaceutical Group’s proposed $1.3 billion takeover of Indian drugmaker Gland Pharma, it emerged last month.

“There’s a lot of resentment against China for meddling in our internal affairs, supporting Pakistan’s cross-border terrorism, and, on the other hand, posing a huge loss to our trade and industry each year,” said Satish Kumar, national president of the Swadesh Jagran Manch, a right-wing nationalist group with ties to Modi’s ruling party.

The group has this year run a campaign asking Indians not to buy Chinese goods to protect local industry and reset a trade deficit of more than $51 billion.

Cheap goods

India has used Chinese equipment for power generation and distribution as it looks to provide affordable electricity to an estimated 250 million people who are off the grid.

China Southern Power Grid, in association with CLP India Pvt Ltd, is among Chinese firms bidding for power transmission lines, power minister Piyush Goyal told Parliament this month.

Sunil Misra, director-general of the Indian Electrical and Electronics Manufacturers’ Association, said the new rules for power transmission would help local industry and were in line with the limited access China gives to foreigners in its market.

Indian firms engaged in the power sector include Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd, Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals Ltd and Larsen & Toubro Ltd.

Security agencies have implemented a series of protocols and checks for Chinese equipment coming into the power sector, said another person involved in drafting the CEA report.

“This is recent and happening quietly,” he said. Reuters

First Published: Thu, Aug 17 2017. 07 17 PM IST

[samirdiw]

A war might actually be good for any UNSC ambitions for India. None of the UNSC members are "good" boys. Few unwritten rules any UNSC member probably needs to prove (besides others)

1. Can fight for another country (All 5 do this, India will show this through Bhutan so check. If do it for Vietnam/Japan next time a war happens with China and those countries then even better)
2. Can create havoc on their own (All 5 have done in the past and still possess the capability) if their interests are not met. It's a bad boys club after all.
3. Can produce their own weaponry and can supply to others - Hopefully, we see this as very important and make it a goal.
4. Nuclear weapons - check


Why are these important? Cos the UNSC is nothing more than Mafia godfathers maintaining peace among themselves allowing each to dominate some places but also knowing that if each is not given their share then that godfather has the potential to create a mess for the others so better to include him. Whats the point of a veto to the other members if a member is not capable and has the attitude to threaten the other members or other countries?

We go around this 'support' missions and no one cares. Show that we can be bad boys sufficiently and create trouble for other's sufficient times and at least 4 out of the 5 will come to the door step and the 5th begrudgingly has no option.

Other contenders
Japan - easily bad boys, can supply weapons, but no nukes, no interest to create a havoc or fight for others.
Germany - No attitude now to create havoc, no nukes, heck they don't have the interest to fight even against the Islamist refugees who are raping their women
Brazil - Who is at threat from them?

We have to bring something to the Table and offer which cannot be refused. Largest democracy will get claps but doesn't cut it.

[Singha]

the USNC is a closed book like the Koran and not amenable to reform.

it is better we do best to discredit it past the point of no-return and a new body takes its place.

[NRao]

Need to see if Bannon prevails in the WH. He is up against the likes of Cohen and G&S, pretty formidable. But, he is one that can actually help India in unintended ways.

However, there seems to be critical mass against China, at this moment. Which plays into Indian hands. The best China can do is come up with bad vids.

[Prasad]

If you want to play the game you need to know where to play it. The entire western belt is a massive headache for China. As the yakherder says ribelate everything west of that 100E long. China is massively invested in the CA countries of turkmenistan, tajikistan and kazakhstan. Their OBOR project is putting many locals out of work even while unemployment is a problem. Their border issues stem from their disagreements with the USSR including fighting along the china kazakh border in the late 60s. I'll ask for a bit of leeway from the mods to link a few articles on the issues and situation in and along Xinjiang

Tajikistan Cedes Disputed Land to China (2011)
https://jamestown.org/program/tajikista ... -to-china/

Tajik Foreign Minister, Khamrokhon Zarifi, hailed the border deal as a “great victory” for Tajik diplomacy, noting that China had previously claimed about 20 percent of the country’s territory (Shabakai Yakum TV, January 12). The territorial dispute dates back to 1884, when a border demarcation agreement between the Qing dynasty China and Tsarist Russia left large segments of the frontier in the sparsely populated eastern Pamirs without clear definition. At the time of independence, Tajikistan inherited three disputed border segments, constituting about 28,500 square kilometers (11,000 square miles), which China and the Soviet Union had been unable to resolve. In 1999, Tajikistan and China signed a border demarcation agreement, defining the border in two of the three segments. Under the 1999 deal, Dushanbe ceded about 200 square kilometers (77 square miles) of land to Beijing (http://www.ca-oasis.info/oasis/?jrn=109&id=817).
The deal was not submitted for parliamentary ratification immediately after its signing, possibly because the Tajik leadership feared repeating the Kyrgyz scenario where the 1999 decision to cede land to China had led to massive public outcry and an attempt to impeach the then President, Askar Akayev. Nevertheless, for China the deal symbolized the “final and complete solution” of its border dispute with Tajikistan (http://www.mfa.gov.cn/eng/wjb/zzjg/tyfl ... t22820.htm).
It is unclear where exactly the land will be ceded to China and whether it is populated. Beijing had been claiming the area to the south of the Uz-Bel Pass, including the Rangkul Lake, in mostly arid, high mountains in Tajikistan’s eastern Murgab district. The district is only sparsely populated, mostly by Kyrgyz nomads.
Tajik experts and geologists say the Sarikul Valley which encompasses the ceded area is rich in gold and has some deposits of other rare metals, including uranium, nickel, and mercury. There are also significant salt and fresh water reserves.

Tajik land deal extends China's reach in Central Asia
A quarter of Kazakhstan's oil production is Chinese-owned and Beijing has built a pipeline to pump natural gas from the world's fourth-largest reserves in Turkmenistan. In Tajikistan, a Chinese company is majority owner of the largest gold mine.

China's westward expansion across its 2,800-km (1,740-mile) border with Central Asia has inflamed passions within the former Soviet region, where opposition activists say governments are giving up too many of their precious resources.

"This process is capable of stirring up tension within the local population, who perhaps cannot accept such a mass influx of Chinese," said Tajik political analyst Zafar Abdullayev.

In the capital Dushanbe, Chinese firms have won contracts to repair roads and construct the national library and new premises for the Foreign Ministry.

"My husband works in Russia because he can't find work here, while the government is bringing in Chinese to build our roads. How can this be right?" said Zarrina, 35, a Dushanbe resident.

Around 6,000 Chinese citizens live in Tajikistan, mainly engaged in building roads and tunnels in the mountainous republic, where arable land is at a premium.

After Russia, China is Tajikistan's biggest trade partner, with an 18 percent share of the country's total trade turnover.

Tajikistan also owes China $700 million, 36 percent of its national debt. Loans from Beijing have been granted with a 20-year repayment period and 2 percent annual interest.

Tajikistan: China’s Advance Causing Increasing Unease among Tajiks

China’s rise to prominence as Tajikistan’s second largest foreign investor has been sudden; trade increased eightfold from 2007-10, according to official Tajik statistics. Last year trade turnover stood at $685 million, accounting for 17.8 percent of Tajikistan’s foreign imports and exports. The investment can be seen in new roads and tunnels and low-quality commercial goods bearing colorful Chinese characters.

The Labor Migration Service, a state agency, says there are currently 82,000 Chinese workers in Tajikistan, up from 3,000 in 2006. Their presence is a sore point for many Tajiks who cannot find work in their own country.

Two recent events have heightened resentment. On January 12, Tajikistan’s lower house of parliament ratified an agreement with Beijing to demarcate their shared border, ending a 130-year dispute dating back to the Tsarist era. Tajikistan ceded 1,142 square kilometers of remote, mountainous land, or roughly 1 percent of its territory. Days later, on January 18, Dushanbe announced plans to bring 1,500 Chinese farmers to Khatlon Province to begin cultivating rice on 2,000 hectares of land.

Critics argue, without presenting evidence, that the ceded land could contain large deposits of gold, uranium and other metals. Zarifi denies the land is mineral-rich.


For many Tajiks, the land concession is a distant concern. But in a country where only 6 percent of the territory is arable and unemployment so widespread that as many as a million men migrate abroad in search of work, the leasing of land to Chinese farmers is deeply unpopular. “Our people don't have enough land and many have to go to Russia to find work, yet we invite foreigners to work here. It makes no sense," said a Dushanbe resident worried about the Chinese “occupation.” Others note that Tajik farmers do not have enough land for themselves.


In 1999, when Askar Akayev’s government in Kyrgyzstan ceded land to China, a public outcry and attempted impeachment ensued. Proposals to lease a million hectares of Kazakh land to China in December 2009 stirred powerful public opposition there. In Tajikistan, an unusual level public discontent has appeared on social networking websites and in informal conversations. But it has not yet manifested itself publicly in Tajikistan. “We are in danger of losing not only our national land,” a Khujand resident said, “but more importantly, our national identity.”

The Tajik government in its dealings with China seems powerless, a man in Dushanbe said, echoing a widely held fear that nothing can stop Beijing’s advance: “The Chinese have already grabbed some Tajik land, and now they are renting more. Why stop? Our government cannot resist Chinese influence in the long term.”

And finally we get to the meat -

China and Kyrgyzstan: So Near, Yet So Far

In the first quarter of 2014 China’s economy slowed to 7 percent, revealing the inability of the coastal provinces alone to support further recovery throughout the country. It is here that neighbors from west of the Great Wall come into play. Beijing has already prepared a “plan B”: draw a new pan-Asian connectivity in order to stimulate trade and cultural exchanges across the entire region. The project includes hardware (new roads, energy pipelines, railways) as well as software elements (cultural centers, free exchange of ideas and know-how). Despite its being officially a “win-win strategy,”from a geostrategic point of view it would ultimately return to China –whose power is traditionally terrestrial, more than maritime–the role of the Middle Kingdom lost in the 1800s. The difference is that this time, Beijing will eventually serve as the nerve center not just for mainland Asia, but for an African-Eurasian Empire, as explained by David Gosset, Director of Academia Sinica Europaea.


The One Belt, One Road project involves an area potentially covering 55 percent of the world’s GNP, 70 percent of its global population, and 75 percent of its known energy reserves. Enriched by a sea route that will reach as far as the African shores, the New Silk Road has its center of gravity in the “Heart of Asia.” As emphasized by Chen Gong, chief researcher at Anbound Consulting, the original project had a single land branch, projected towards Central Asia for the sake of Xinjiang and the neighboring countries, which share with Western China the same religion, idioms, customs and traditions.

Xinjiang shares about 2800 km of its border with three of the five Central Asian republics (Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan). With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the newly independent states inherited the territorial disputes pending between tsarist Russia and the Qing empire, the last of the Chinese dynasties. The disputes were finally closed in 2011, leaving in the hands of Beijing only a fraction of the lands claimed: respectively 3.5, 22 and 32 percent of what was initially asked from Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. An unusual concession allegedly accepted by Beijing in return for support from local governments in managing the Uyghurs, a Muslim group living in Xinjiang and Central Asia that speaks a Turkic language and with its aspiration for independence has been a major source of concerns for Beijing .

Beijing is deeply worried by Kyrgyzstan’s volatile political environment, as a “democratic oasis” subject to frequent political reversals, surrounded by totalitarian regimes. Chinese concerns have grown, especially after insistent voices began to point out an unusual radicalization among the most marginalized fringes of Kyrgyz society. All of this raises several unknowns about the future of the New Silk Road, in particular concerning Nanjiang, southern Xinjiang bordering with Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Pakistan , Afghanistan. and India. Currently, 83 percent of Xinjiang’s total trade is focused on Central Asian states, and 80 percent of China’s total trade with Central Asia transits Xinjiang. In addition to the colossal push to the “Go West Strategy,” right after the 2009 Urumqi riots, the autonomous region was granted “extraordinarily important strategic status” in the nation’s development program. A complex of measures resulted in the establishment of the new Special Economic Zone in Kashgar and the status of special trade zones to the ports of Alatau and Korgas, making the region China’s most important gateway to Central Asia.

[DavidD]

It's a bad sign. The CCP and PLA are getting their population ready for a serious war, with the hate and dehumanizing in progress.

I have been passing the Chinese version of Globaltimes (huanqiu.cn) through Googal translate for years now. They've been depicting us like this all this while - we just haven't been aware of it because it's in their language. the English versions of Beebuls Daily , Globaltimes etc are completely different sanitized creatures.

About 4 years ago I posted here in a PRC thread asking posters not to read the English versions but instead run the Chinese versions through translator. They're not the same. After the first canisterized Agni V test, they went ballistic (pun intended) on the Chinese language version, with dozens of 'nuke them before they get more dangerous' comments, while the English version was just regurgitated PR response and no comments.

That's exactly right, the English and Chinese versions are completely different beasts. Since you've been keeping up, tell me, what's the Chinese version of Xinhua or People's Daily saying about Doklam, or India in general? Are they preparing the population for a war with India? Can you find a single article about India in general on their front page the past few days?

So why is it that you can find news about Doklam on the English versions front and center, but not a peep on the Chinese version? I'll let you ponder that as I've already said my piece.

[DavidD]

Meanwhile US attitudes towards the Chinese (and specifically, towards recognizing and confronting the Chinese threat) are evolving quickly.

See this article, all but explicitly naming and shaming Henry Kissinger as a Chinese Agent. Must read. Cross posted on the Korea thread as well.

http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/ ... 12511.html


Also this threat on how Steve Bannon plans to counter the Chinese Threat to the United States:

http://prospect.org/article/steve-bannon-unrepentant

...

I told the assistant that I was on vacation, but I would be happy to speak by phone. Bannon promptly called.

Far from dressing me down for comparing Trump to Kim, he began, “It’s a great honor to finally track you down. I’ve followed your writing for years and I think you and I are in the same boat when it comes to China. You absolutely nailed it.”

“We’re at economic war with China,” he added. “It’s in all their literature. They’re not shy about saying what they’re doing. One of us is going to be a hegemon in 25 or 30 years and it’s gonna be them if we go down this path. On Korea, they’re just tapping us along. It’s just a sideshow.”

Bannon said he might consider a deal in which China got North Korea to freeze its nuclear buildup with verifiable inspections and the United States removed its troops from the peninsula, but such a deal seemed remote. Given that China is not likely to do much more on North Korea, and that the logic of mutually assured destruction was its own source of restraint, Bannon saw no reason not to proceed with tough trade sanctions against China.

Contrary to Trump’s threat of fire and fury, Bannon said: “There’s no military solution [to North Korea’s nuclear threats], forget it. Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about, there’s no military solution here, they got us.” Bannon went on to describe his battle inside the administration to take a harder line on China trade, and not to fall into a trap of wishful thinking in which complaints against China’s trade practices now had to take a backseat to the hope that China, as honest broker, would help restrain Kim.

“To me,” Bannon said, “the economic war with China is everything. And we have to be maniacally focused on that. If we continue to lose it, we're five years away, I think, ten years at the most, of hitting an inflection point from which we'll never be able to recover.”

Bannon’s plan of attack includes: a complaint under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act against Chinese coercion of technology transfers from American corporations doing business there, and follow-up complaints against steel and aluminum dumping. “We’re going to run the tables on these guys. We’ve come to the conclusion that they’re in an economic war and they’re crushing us.”

But what about his internal adversaries, at the departments of State and Defense, who think the United States can enlist Beijing’s aid on the North Korean standoff, and at Treasury and the National Economic Council who don’t want to mess with the trading system?

“Oh, they’re wetting themselves,” he said, explaining that the Section 301 complaint, which was put on hold when the war of threats with North Korea broke out, was shelved only temporarily, and will be revived in three weeks. As for other cabinet departments, Bannon has big plans to marginalize their influence.

“I’m changing out people at East Asian Defense; I’m getting hawks in. I’m getting Susan Thornton [acting head of East Asian and Pacific Affairs] out at State.”


But can Bannon really win that fight internally?

“That’s a fight I fight every day here,” he said. “We’re still fighting. There’s Treasury and [National Economic Council chair] Gary Cohn and Goldman Sachs lobbying.”

“We gotta do this. The president’s default position is to do it, but the apparatus is going crazy. Don’t get me wrong. It’s like, every day.”

Bannon explained that his strategy is to battle the trade doves inside the administration while building an outside coalition of trade hawks that includes left as well as right. Hence the phone call to me.

There is a BIG internal shake-up going on in Duplee City regarding America's China policy. The old guard in Foggy Bottom (and even some in the Pentagon) still reel under the influence of Kissinger's chloroform prescriptions. They, like many Think Tanks, Politicians, and Mainstream Media Corporations in the US, have been heavily bribed by Beijing to toe the Chinese line.

Ultimately the US is not going to "help" India neutralize or defeat our own Chinese threat. However, a sea change in US policy towards China will influence Chinese thinking in many ways that will impact how they formulate their own policies towards other nations.

I can see things going both ways. As America begins to talk tough, some "neo-con" types in the CPC Politburo Standing Committee will want to lash out and start fights, including with India, to demonstrate their muscle in contrast to what they believe is "fading" American power and prestige. They would like to call the Americans' bluff, and prove China's big-dog status by demonstrating that for all its words America doesn't have the stomach to support anybody whom the Chinese want to push around.

Conversely, others in the Standing Committee will want to pursue a sort of "taqqiya" policy, especially with regard to the bigger and more militarily/economically capable neighbours like India, to try and avoid a bandwagoning of Asian countries with the US against Beijing. If this faction wins out, Xi will either be ousted or emerge in November as a much more leasonable-sounding readel.

Bannon is a smart guy, he sees the big picture, and it's very important for China to silence him. As he said, China is only a few years away from setting on an irreversible trajectory to overtake the US, it's not time for the boat to be rocked. Those other Asian countries are not significant players, they'll lean whichever direction the wind blows for the most part, so the important thing for China is to get the wind to blow in their direction.

The Chinese play will be pretty obvious, it'll be a classic stick and carrot strategy. The next U.S. election is only 3 years away, and the only thing Trump has going for him right now is the economy is doing fairly well. A trade war can be deadly for his chances at re-election, that'll be the stick. A few Chinese industries are now mature enough to open to the outside, e.g. autos, so China can say offer a free market to Ford and GM (they have better reputation in China than they do in their home country), for example, and that'll be the carrot. A revitalization of Detroit based on exporting cars to China, that's a story Trump can and will sell with the utmost glee. It can be made to come at the expense of German and Japanese automakers as well, giving him an extra incentive as he can punish the currency-manipulating Germans and Japanese at the same time, while minimizing impact on Chinese automakers. Can Bannon fight against that? I guess we'll see.

[Pulikeshi]

So why is it that you can find news about Doklam on the English versions front and center, but not a peep on the Chinese version? I'll let you ponder that as I've already said my piece.

Unfortunately for you David, this is supposedly your experience and not the case for several Chinese American friends that have asked specific questions on this issue based on what they read in the Chinese media. The other problem you have is that the Indians have been deeply sensitized to what is said in English vs. what is said in the native via your "new Chick" who have been doing it for decades now - that is say one thing in the Urdu press and another for "Western" consumption in the English press.

This is where we are now... China overreacted in Chinese and English and put itself into the exact BOX that India offered it to place itself in! Congrats!
Now you will start seeing the Chinese downhill skiing given some bonhomie is needed before the BRIC summit - multilateral or not...
Heck in this video at around 21 mins - the question gets clearly asked ~ will India get aligned with US if a peaceful soln is not found with China?
Them Hindu Nationalist are such evil chaps to send their buffalo to munch grass in the Doklam
Like I've said before - this is a lose-lose move by China - seems Sun Tzu got drunk on Strategyms 36 and fell asleep at the wheel on ChiPak (CPEC)!

HINDU NATIONALISM IS THREAT IN PEACEFUL NEGOTIATION CHINESE MEDIA

[Prasad]

Next - Its the Oil stupid.
We know the issues related to the TAPI project that the porkis were shilling and our fellows were pining for too under UPA. There is an opportunity there if we could do something about it. It is clear from the above that much like the saudis gas+oil exports are a major source of revenue for these CA -stans and they have very little else to bring prosperity to their peoples. China knows this and plays them just as they do with OBOR. Keeping that in mind read -

First a list - FT- Map: Connecting central Asia

Connecting central Asia China’s “One Belt, One Road” project aims to make central Asia more connected to the world, yet even before the initiative was formally announced China had helped to redraw the energy map of the region. It had built an oil pipeline from Kazakhstan, a gas pipeline that allowed Turkmenistan to break its dependence on dealings with Russia and another pipeline that has increased the flow of Russian oil to China.

Chinese companies have funded and built roads, bridges and tunnels across the region. A ribbon of fresh projects, such as the Khorgos “dry port” on the Kazakh-Chinese border and a railway link connecting Kazakhstan with Iran, is helping increase trade across central Asia.

I don't want to fall foul of copyright issues so won't quote more. Please do read up. Also map -


We are limiting ourselves in thinking only about the porkis and the CPEC. We have to think bigger if we are to tackle the chicoms. Like the Varyag case "lessons learned", don't leave anything on the table for the enemy to use against you. If they miss something or can't do something, pick it up and use it as you see fit. Zero sum game in some matters really.

Also Pay particular attention to Line D in the map above. Then read -

The End Of The (Gas Pipe-) Line For Turkmenistan

Line "D" of the Turkmenistan-China gas pipeline network was to be more than just the largest of four pipelines connecting western China to gas fields in Turkmenistan -- it also would have been the largest single gas pipeline connecting Turkmenistan to any consumer state.

Line D was supposed to carry some 30 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas annually to China. The line took a different route. Lines A, B, and C all went from Turkmenistan through Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan before reaching China. To include all the Central Asian states, Beijing decided to route Line D through Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan, and then into China.

Already at the end of 2014, it was clear that there were problems in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan with forming joint ventures with Chinese companies to construct and later operate the pipeline, and some disagreements over the route.

Neither of those Central Asian countries was going to receive any gas from the line, but they would have taken in millions of dollars in transit fees. This is a real blow to Turkmenistan. The country is experiencing the worst economic crisis in its 25-year history, in large part due to Turkmenistan's dependency on revenues from gas sales.

This is partly due to the drastic fall in gas prices in the last three years, but also due to Russia canceling its contract for Turkmen gas imports at the start of 2016 and the suspension of Turkmen gas supplies to Iran at the start of 2017 over a contract dispute.

That leaves Turkmenistan with only China as a customer. There are already three operating gas pipelines from Turkmenistan to China. Lines A and B can each carry 15 bcm and Line C can carry 25 bcm, for a combined 55 bcm of gas annually to China, though all the lines have not yet reached full capacity.

Since the three lines pass through Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, also gas-producing countries, both of which have contracts to supply 10 bcm to the pipelines, though Kazakhstan has already signaled it wants to export more gas to China.

That leaves 35 bcm of space in the three lines for Turkmenistan. It gets worse. China loaned Turkmenistan billions of dollars to develop Turkmen gas fields and build the pipelines to China, so some of the gas Turkmenistan ships to China goes toward paying off Ashgabat's debt.

Worse still, after Russia canceled its contract for Turkmen gas, Russian gas giant Gazprom renegotiated deals with Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. According to a recent article in Russia's Life News, Gazprom reached a deal to pay Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan some $140 per 1,000 cubic meters. The article said Gazprom annulled the contract with Turkmenistan because Ashgabat was demanding $240 per 1,000 cubic meters.

So Turkmenistan faces the possibility of a price war with its Central Asian neighbors to supply gas to China. Berdymukhammedov talks often about projects that will enrich Turkmenistan even further, such as the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline. That pipeline would carry 33 bcm of Turkmen gas. Turkmenistan says it has started construction of its segment of TAPI, though there has been no proof of this so far, and Pakistan claimed to have started its section in early March.

Turkmenistan probably just lost Iran as a customer. Winter is coming to an end, and Iranian officials have spent the weeks since the suspension of Turkmen gas supplies rerouting domestic electricity supplies. Construction of internal gas pipelines from southern Iran to areas in the north that were supplied by Turkmen gas has speeded up. Iran probably won't need Turkmen gas next winter.

The Central Asia-China Gas Pipeline Network: Line D(ead)
The line’s collapse represents yet another unsuccessful attempt at regional integration.
The line already represented China’s largest investment in Tajikistan, where construction had already begun. Likewise, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, still reeling from Russia’s ongoing recession, were looking to rake in millions — and potentially more, in Bishkek’s case — in transit fees. Paired with the pipelines already running from Turkmenistan through Kazakhstan, the gas network would have provided a reason for Central Asian governments to finally coordinate on a successful region-wide project, at least as it pertains to the energy sphere.

Now, all of that’s disintegrated. With no suppliers, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan have watched the promise of transit fees evaporate. China’s just seen its foremost regional venture collapse. And with no Line D, the latest attempt at some form of Central Asian integration has followed nearly all the others: in disappointment.

Chinks in the armour galore.

Also, yakherder's favourite city Urumqi is pretty much 75% Han. Keep that in mind while reading this - http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/03/02/blo ... -xinjiang/

[Pulikeshi]

Only wish they shown the Chinese tank losing a wheel during the hot air show!

[kancha]

Folks, posted another blog last night .. a continuation of a previous blog on calling the PLA's bluff. May have a look

Blog Link

Twitter Link

.. So when I reached Juba to reinforce Sect south we used to see Chinese soldiers in well equipped and modern attire with hi tech equipment. Therefore my belief of Chinese soldier being better to Indian soldier strengthened. So I always used to be afraid of its negative effects on our boys ..

.. By the time No 7 platoon of Indian Company reached the perimeter, Chinese had abandoned their posts and moved back to safer places exposing IDPs to fire from outside. When one of the Chinese officer was asked for the reason they have withdrawn, he said , “It’s not safe out there.

.. Next day, When rebel forces were fighting the Govt forces at Northern perimeter, a CHINBAT soldier was busy shooting the war scenes. Ill trained militia aimed and shot a RPG at CHINBAT soldier recording ongoing war from BMP, killing two Chinese soldiers and injuring 5 others.

It was known to every south Sudanese​ and UN employee in South Sudan that they were saved by Indian company.

.. Secondly, Chinese refused to perform the task assigned by force HQ. Task was to evacuate NGO workers who were threatened by south sudan Govt forces. Later on it was revealed that they were raped by Govt forces.

But at the same time when I ask my boys of their opinion about Chinese troops, the war had changed their and my impression or opinion about Chinese.

[g.sarkar]

Pro China anti India article from NYT. Is this NYT Chinese edition?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/worl ... ml?mcubz=0
Squeezed by an India-China Standoff, Bhutan Holds Its Breath
查看简体中文版 查看繁體中文版
By STEVEN LEE MYERSAUG. 15, 2017
....
In 2012, the prime minister at the time met with his Chinese counterpart at a Group of 20 summit meeting in Rio de Janeiro. Not long afterward, India cut subsidies to Bhutan for cooking oil and kerosene. The move was widely seen as retaliation, and the ruling party in Bhutan lost the next election.
Part of the lure of better relations with China is money. In addition to the shuttle trade, there is tourism, one of Bhutan’s biggest industries. Indians do not need visas to travel to Bhutan, but Chinese must pay $250 a day in advance for vacation packages. Still, for the first time last year, more visitors came from China than from any other country besides India.
Chinese fascination with Bhutan bloomed after one of Hong Kong’s biggest movie stars, Tony Leung, married the actress Carina Lau here in 2008. The wedding three years later of the current king, Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck, also stoked interest after footage of it went viral in China.
Pema Tashi, who manages Happiness Kingdom Travel and advertises “a sojourn in paradise,” caters to Chinese clients with eight guides who speak Mandarin. He complained that there were no direct flights between Bhutan and China, and expressed suspicion that India had worked to prevent a normalization of relations that would open up such routes.
“We try to protect the interest of our big brother,” he said, referring to India, “but they feel that if we get closer to the north, we might not be as dependent on them.”

Gautam

[ryogi]

For a frame of reference, here's an old BBC documentary on the Tiananmen square massacre of 1989.

The reporter mentions an incident where an unarmed soldier surrenders to protesters, and gets lynched.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SACHK-W4o1E

I think that most of all, more that the Japanese, Americans or Russians, the CPC fears it's own populace.

The pent-up fury is a nuke waiting to detonate, and war could be a trigger.

[Philip]

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/ ... eyond.html

DOKLAM STAND-OFF NOW AND BEYOND
Friday, 18 August 2017 | Lt Gen SL Narasimhan (Retd) | in Big Story

Doklam stand-off Now and Beyond
The stand-off in Doklam is entering the third month. It is worrying to see the kind of coverage that this incident has generated. Practically, every analyst seems to have war on his mind and they have been taking lot of pleasure in painting various scenarios. Television channels have been running operational discussions and some analysts from the West have been painting war scenarios and working on games theory. It appears the whole world would be happy to see India and China go to war. Needless to say, most of the people, covering the issue, do not know the Doklam area well.

Some reporters and analysts have written about the three warfares. Readers would recall a series of articles on that subject published by Defence Aviation Post. It is quite likely that China has put into action the three warfares technique.

The frequent question that one hears everywhere in India these days is that whether there will be a war between India and China. War is a very serious business and it should not be thought of in a cavalier manner like this. Fates of countries and societies change due to wars. One does not have go far to realise this. Let us take our minds back to the 1962 War.

Though the Indian Armed Forces alone cannot be blamed for the outcome of that war, it worked on their minds in addition to that of politicians, bureaucrats, diplomats and people of India, for almost three decades. This affected the bilateral relations between India and China adversely. Thankfully, it is fading away. Similarly, the result of 1971 war is still hurting all Pakistanis. The century of fumiliation has been on the minds of the Chinese and that may be a reason for the present stand-off in Doklam.

Coming on to Doklam issue, the rhetoric from the Chinese side shows no signs of abating. Media picked up and flashed a statement by Hu Zhiyong, a research fellow at the Institute of International Relations at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, that China will launch an operation in two weeks and India’s Ministry of External Affairs will be informed prior to that. China put out a 15-page fact sheet, incorporating all statements that were made earlier.

However, it failed to address the queries raised by India, Bhutan and others. On August 10, Colonel Zhao Xiaozhuo of Academy of Military Sciences wrote an article with a veiled threat to India in the People’s Liberation Army website. It was not available in English. Many such articles have appeared for local audience in China. The spokesperson also put out reports saying that 48 Indian Army soldiers and one dozer were present in Chinese territory on the last day of July. Approximately one week later, he said 53 personnel and one dozer are still there in the Chinese territory.

It appears that China’s strategy is not to let this issue go away from the media, its population and international glare. This is also one of the rare occasions in which China is trying to defend its action through various means by putting out a map and photograph first and there after the white paper. All-China Journalists Association hosted some Indian journalists to convey their view point. However, all these have been efforts to convey China’s position in a unilateral manner. It seems to be oblivious to the fact that there are others who have different positions to China’s on this issue.

Bhutan’s Foreign Ministry, while speaking to the news agency, ANI, mentioned that Doklam belongs to Bhutan which was contrary to what Wang Wenli, Deputy Director General of Boundary and Ocean Affairs of China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated. This statement put paid to some sceptics who claimed that the statement issued by Bhutan on June 29 was under coercion from India. India’s reaction has been consistent. It has been one of quiet, calm, firm and mature diplomacy.

The reaction to China’s White Paper on Doklam issue was a simple statement that “India considers that peace and tranquillity in the India-China border areas is an important prerequisite for smooth development of our bilateral relations with China” and mentioned that there is no change to the June 30 statement issued by it.

A section of analysts have started feeling that it may be alright for India to pull back to give an option to China. Tactically that may be sustainable. But it will have disastrous consequences. Second, they will do well to remember that China respects strength and abhors weakness. Any show of weakness will be detrimental for all our future negotiations with China. It is not only about Doklam but also about the larger India-China relations.

As per reports, a major general level flag meeting held at Nathula on August 11 remained inconclusive. There were also reports that the Indian side suggested Chinese troops withdraw 250 m from their present positions that was rejected by Wang Wenli. He also asked how India will feel if China enters Kalapani area which is located at the tri-juntion of India, Nepal and China.

One is not sure whether India suggested such a thing. Both sides have mentioned that normal diplomatic channels have been functioning. Sushma Swaraj, India’s Foreign Minister, has made two statements saying war is not an option but diplomatic solution is. All these indicate to the fact that despite the rhetoric, diplomatic discussions have been going on to resolve the issue.

As suggested by this writer in an earlier article, simultaneous phased withdrawal by both sides will be a workable solution. For that, the Chinese side has to accept that any changes to the area of tri-junctions need the concurrence of all the three countries involved. That may not be a difficult thing to do as it was a party to the understanding reached in 2012 regarding the tri-junction areas.

If China’s spokespersons and some of its media continue to throw barbs at India, it will make it difficult for both sides to come to a solution to the present crisis. Since both the sides have taken strong positions, the Doklam issue is likely to take longer to get resolved. As the efforts to resolve this issue go on, it will also be prudent to get into an agreement to avoid such incidents in future.

As we celebrated the 71st anniversary of our Independence, we need to thank the officers and men who have braved harsh weather and terrain conditions to stand their ground not only at Doklam but all along our borders to ensure territorial integrity and sovereignty of our motherland.

Readers may recall that we had started a series on One Belt One Road (OBOR). Doklam incident has overshadowed all other things. It is time to return to other important things and take the glare away from this incident which may actually facilitate resolving the issue. Therefore, heads up for the next part of the OBOR series.

(Courtesy: Defence Aviation Post)

[Dumal]

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/india ... 170818.htm

Clearly there seem to be more options for how this could play out!

Asked about military options that could provide China with a face-saver, a senior general believes the PLA might choose to occupy another strategic border pass, such as the 17,500 foot Lipulekh on the India-China-Nepal tri-junction.

Lipulekh is controlled by India, but is also claimed by Nepal, providing a striking parallel with the India-China-Bhutan context at play at Doklam.

"China could occupy Lipulekh, and use that as a face-saver for a mutual withdrawal from Doklam. Then, after the 19th Party Congress is concluded, all sides could return to the status quo," projects the general, speaking off the record.

[Javee]

^^This is a scenario that was talked about in the Nepali circles when the vice premier lizard visited Nepal last week. But if IA is already controlling it, the only way China can occupy it is by using force and that will be responded in kind by IA. It wont be hand combat, stones at this point, and the first escalation will be from Chinese side.

[g.sarkar]

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/india ... 170818.htm
Indian Army divisions move to Sikkim-Tibet border
August 18, 2017 11:08 IST
The operational alert allows troops to get acclimatised to high altitudes, renovate the bunkers and trenches from which they would fight, break out ammunition, and carry out the coordination needed to fight an integrated defensive battle.
Ajai Shukla reports.
Although army planners are not expecting a Chinese attack on the disputed Doklam bowl, where some 150 Indian soldiers have been in an eyeball-to-eyeball face-off against some 40 Chinese border guards since June, the army is taking no chances.
Villagers in Nathang, a border village 10 to 12 kilometres as the crow flies from Doklam, have been asked to evacuate their homes and move elsewhere. Nathang is overlooked directly by mountain features at Doklam, like Gyemochen, which China claims as the disputed India-China-Bhutan tri-junction. Another Indian village nearby, Kuppup, is significantly closer to the border. But it is shielded from the Doklam area by high mountains that Indian troops occupy.
Army spokespersons deny the military has asked for Nathang to be evacuated. The civilian administration, however, is unlikely to have taken such a step unilaterally. Simultaneously, two Indian mountain divisions -- the 17 Division, headquartered in Gangtok, and the 27 Division, based in Kalimpong -- are discreetly moving troops to their battle stations on the Sikkim-Tibet border, including areas far removed from Dolkam. Military sources downplay this move as "precautionary." Says one senior officer: "We have our annual operational alert in October every year. This year, because of the tension at Doklam, we have advanced it by a couple of months." The operational alert allows troops to get acclimatised to high altitudes, renovate the bunkers and trenches from which they would fight, break out ammunition, and carry out the coordination needed to fight an integrated defensive battle. Even as the army takes these precautions, policymakers in New Delhi are optimistic that diplomacy would resolve the issue without the need for military action.
"This is China's 'Kargil moment', where a crisis has been created by gung-ho military commanders, who appear to have misled the leadership in Beijing that India would quietly accept Chinese road-building in Doklam," says a former top diplomat with decades of experience in dealing with China.
"Although Beijing knows it has erred, China cannot pull back without losing face. That means the faceoff will continue at least until the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, most likely to be held in October,"says the former diplomat.
"Xi Jinping is not going into that crucial Congress from a position of weakness given that his leadership for the next five years will be shaped there," the former diplomat adds.
Yet China would face significant military disadvantages in mounting a frontal attack to evict Indian troops from Doklam.
This would involve advancing through the narrow Chumbi valley, overlooked by Indian troops deployed on the heights.
Even an airborne strike, like the spectacular staged for Xi Jinping at Zhurihe on July 31, on the PLA's (People's Liberation Army) 90th anniversary, would find it difficult to dislodge Indian troops at Doklam without using massive air power and escalating the crisis dramatically. Asked about military options that could provide China with a face-saver, a senior general believes the PLA might choose to occupy another strategic border pass, such as the 17,500 foot Lipulekh on the India-China-Nepal tri-junction.
Lipulekh is controlled by India, but is also claimed by Nepal, providing a striking parallel with the India-China-Bhutan context at play at Doklam. "China could occupy Lipulekh, and use that as a face-saver for a mutual withdrawal from Doklam. Then, after the 19th Party Congress is concluded, all sides could return to the status quo," projects the general, speaking off the record.
.....

Gautam

[Dumal]

**Dhoti Shiver Alert**

I hope IA is already controlling it! But why would the "senior general" believe that "China could occupy Lipulekh"?

**Alert off"

^^This is a scenario that was talked about in the Nepali circles when the vice premier lizard visited Nepal last week. But if IA is already controlling it, the only way China can occupy it is by using force and that will be responded in kind by IA. It wont be hand combat, stones at this point, and the first escalation will be from Chinese side.

[vijaykarthik]

Domestically, after hajaar bluster, it finally emerges that removing Art 370 only needs a presidential notification and nothing else.

Similarly, dealing with cheeni aggression about 'undisputed chinese land' will only need a GoI notification derecognizing TAR as part of PRC and going back to the pre-1949 status, officially. Onlee.

Like yak-herder says, we'll undisputedly dispute everything west of the 100 E longitude ....

We just should claim all of China. Let them claim whatever they want and lets make those idiots realize that it aint matter because China is India (minus the people). Lets do a China on China.

[Javee]

The construction of the crucial road link to the last Indian post of Lipulekh Pass in Uttarakhand on the Chinese border could take several more months, the Border Roads Organisation (BRO), which is undertaking the project, has hinted even as experts have stressed on accelerating the work on a ‘war footing’ amid an escalating tension with China.
...The BRO is undertaking the 76-km road project through a rugged mountainous terrain between Ghatiabagarh and Lipulekh. BRO officials said the challenging stretch of the road is yet to be built and could take ‘many more’ months.

“A 50-km stretch of the road has been laid and remaining 26-km rocky portion is the most challenging,” Major Manish Narayan, commanding officer (BRO), told the Hindustan Times recently.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... vvyQN.html

[Javee]

Here are some public eye-witness information on Lipulekh, the author is a known India hater, so take it with a pinch of salt.

The Indian military, when pulling back, came to realize that the Lipulekh Pass could be a potential strategic point, given that it is located at located at 5,029 metres in the Nepali frontier. They established a camp at Kalapani area. The camp, which is outfitted with underground bunkers, is near about ten kilometer west of the Lipulekh pass. It is notable that there is a hillock (6,180 m) as a strategic place at Kalapani.

If someone gazes from this hillock, it could be recognized even posture and colour of men who have been travelling through Lipulekh Pass, so that the Indian army would be alert as per situation. In due course of time India deployed army battalions and constructed seven brick-built barrack houses with heating system and underground bunkers and three more administrative buildings at Kalapani. There are modern arms and ammunition including satellite communications.

http://nepalforeignaffairs.com/authenti ... rder-pass/

This region was controlled by the Indian Army and the Chinese Army. We had to wait until the Chinese Army officer arrived and then cross over under the supervision of both armies.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/saumil/35 ... otostream/

[Malayappan]

This should make many on the board happy -

Vietnam confirms purchase of cruise missiles from India

Vietnam's government has confirmed it has taken delivery of a batch of short-range ramjet supersonic cruise missiles from India.

She said the strategic comprehensive partnership between Vietnam and India is growing in various areas and contributing to peace, stability and development in the region and the world.

[Singha]

the solid line seems to be indian claim line. the dotted line is the nepal claim line. they both meet the lipulekh pass at the top and at kalapani camp at the bottom
https://earth.google.com/web/@30.210511 ... YXNzGAEgAQ

if you follow the dotted line up the valley and zoom in there is another indian camp for kailash manasarovar yatra at Nabithang. the pass itself has no post.

[Singha]

reason for nepal claiming the pass with claim line unusually along the valley floor would be extract tax from the pilgrims on the route. the nabithang camp is on their side of the claim line.

[Philip]

If India and Nepal can wrap up an agreement on the line/border,it will checkmate Chinese claims to it,as it would have to antagonise the Nepalese as a result. Nepal also being a Hindu (formerly kingdom)nation,India must leverage this to the max.In fact there should be a separate Min. of State or point-man equiv,dealing with every neighbour ,so that quicker politico-FM decision-making and execution of for. policy happens faster.

LIke the tri-service combined ops/theatre commands formed by the services,so too must special "commands" involving tri-min (political,military/intel and MEA.) members,under a political head,be tasked with all related affairs of the country/neighbour in Q. Perhaps there could be a separate Min of State for FM (Neigbhbouring countries),or Dy.FM tasked for the same.