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

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 05 Sep 2017 17:56

The thing is that this incident comes across as a bar brawl but it must have been far worse for all the noise to occur. It's not as if the entire 1.6B sheep of PRC are soooo well-disciplined that a simple fist-fight makes it to the national news. So UBCNews is projecting by our usual conservative and ultra-careful procedures that over 2,375 people were dead at last count, with some 57 pregnant Han women disemboweled, and 25 buses full of Hans burned. Martial law has been imposed on most of North China, with 50 divisions of the PLA rushed there. This is why China had to withdraw in disgrace from Doklam.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 05 Sep 2017 20:18

kancha wrote:
That said, would you say that the Indian Army of today will once again get overwhelmed in face of such tactics? Can our existing logistics sustain in face of 'wave upon wave' of cannon fodder? And can the Chinese logistics sustain it on their own side?

The Indian army in 1962 was unable to withstand those waves because they were asked to hold unfavourable ground rather than move into advantageous position. In Ladakh the air force should have been used. It was not. If the nation makes the same errors again we may have the same results

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 05 Sep 2017 23:53

The BRICS summit seems to have gone very favorably for India. Modi appears to have clearly taken the position of biggest visiting head, something that traditionally falls upon Putin. All the airport arrival tamasha and the order of leaders in the photo are just impotent little pinpricks, to be reciprocated in kind at a suitable time. Otherwise they don't matter. Modi practically smirked and made Eleven look uncomfortable with the extended handshake photo op, before striding across the stage.

But the meat of the whole thing for me were:
a) China cautioning India against bringing up TSP terror before the summit
b) The joint declaration ultimately containing the language we want

Until recently, this is just not the done thing. PRC doesn't give, or worse, give in, publicly. It takes from others publicly and gives out privately, unless its trying to establish an implied tributary relationship by making a public show of giving. The facade of superiority over others is maintained without fail. And yet it has now fallen apart. First they say 'please please don't bring it up' and two days later the joint declaration contains the text anyway.

Making public concessions strikes me as very... odd behavior. It's almost like parts of their establishment are working at cross purposes , which in turn might suggest there are greater disagreements under the surface on their side, that they're not publicly stating. Of course such opaqueness of their system is par for the course.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 05 Sep 2017 23:56

RajeshA wrote:
chetak wrote: The hans, it is rumoured, have 30 odd million excess males that they would well do to get rid of. This is because of their misguided one child policy as well as the han preferences for the male child over the female.
So quality may well be replaced by the overwhelming quantity that may not be so easy for any opposing army to match or tackle.
The 30 million bachelors, if true, may still be the ones who do not make the grade because of overindulgence in kaunputtar games with joystick, so no good, and if they don't have families, have no religion, then many would ask why fight?

We at BRF tend to underestimate the lizard. The Liz can think out of the box and make the 30 mil boys useful fighters. For example send them to Afghani warlords, who will indulge in chickna bachhebazi, and teach them to be fighting mard-e-momins. In return they will offer concessions to the Chinese industry. A win-win solution for both parties.
Gautam

vimal · Post by **vimal** » 06 Sep 2017 00:20

Brahma Chellaney

Indian media spun BRICS mention of Jaish, LeT as "win" for India when China (and Pakistan) allowed the same language in Amritsar Declaration.

https://twitter.com/Chellaney/status/905016364598833152

Mihaylo · Post by **Mihaylo** » 06 Sep 2017 01:55

anupmisra wrote:
Iyersan wrote:Has anyone noticed the alignment of the flags at the BRICS summit. The Indian flag is the last. Generally BRICS flags are aligned as BRICS. Elven didn't want Modi between him and Putin
It is funny how protocol defies logic. The host nation naturally gets to stand in the middle - i.e., #3 (downside of an odd number). It would have been a diplomatic and political disaster (for the chinis) to have eleven and Modi hold hands after the dhokla affair (viz., Modi being either #2 or 4). Therefore, Modi could only be #1 or #5. When India is the host, the process can be repeated with Modi and eleven gin pegs (or whoever gets to be the party chairman in October) exchanging positions.

In Goa, It was BR, IN, CH, RU and SA in that order. Why would we give up # 3 to Ch ? Even if CH would never agree to be #4 (Number signifies death in their culture), CH could have been # 2. Me thinks, IN being # 5 is a slight. Never mind, we are not backward looking but forward looking according to Jaishanker.
-M

Mihaylo · Post by **Mihaylo** » 06 Sep 2017 01:58

Mihaylo wrote:
anupmisra wrote:
It is funny how protocol defies logic. The host nation naturally gets to stand in the middle - i.e., #3 (downside of an odd number). It would have been a diplomatic and political disaster (for the chinis) to have eleven and Modi hold hands after the dhokla affair (viz., Modi being either #2 or 4). Therefore, Modi could only be #1 or #5. When India is the host, the process can be repeated with Modi and eleven gin pegs (or whoever gets to be the party chairman in October) exchanging positions.
In Goa, It was BR, IN, CH, RU and SA in that order. Why would we give up # 3 to Ch ? Even if CH would never agree to be #4 (Number signifies death in their culture), CH could have been # 2. Me thinks, IN being # 5 is a slight. Never mind, we are not backward looking but forward looking according to Jaishanker.
-M

Added later: I could be wrong, I saw BR,RU,IN,CH,SA in one of the Goa pics. Maybe there is nothing to it...or is it ?

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 06 Sep 2017 02:10

Who cares ? Next time we host the event, just make them #4. That will really hit them and they'll yowl .

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 06 Sep 2017 02:13

Mihaylo wrote:Added later: I could be wrong, I saw BR,RU,IN,CH,SA in one of the Goa pics. Maybe there is nothing to it...or is it ?

BRICS in Brazil 2014.

BRICS in Russia 2015

BRICS in Goa 2016

BRICS in chinisthan 2017

One common feature - the South African is always on the outside, holding hands with Eleven Gin Pegs.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 06 Sep 2017 02:17

Making public concessions strikes me as very... odd behavior. It's almost like parts of their establishment are working at cross purposes

IMO Eleven has put the PLA lobby in the corner, and taken over PLA with his TianAnMen Tanker buddy in charge. Maybe seen that a bissing contest over LAC and POK is counterproductive. Tarrel Fiend is anyway GUBO. If u think about it - NoKo having gone thermonuke in public, TSP can be tossed like a used condom. Except that Road to Gwadar is now 100% Chinese-owned since Pak Govt had to pass the law selling out to PeeAllSee, even firing ministers who objected at violation of Sovirginity.

Support to Islamist TSP is probably not very popular in Hana right now, with lynchings and disembowelings from Tangshan and Urumqui

Mihaylo · Post by **Mihaylo** » 06 Sep 2017 03:57

anupmisra wrote:
Mihaylo wrote:Added later: I could be wrong, I saw BR,RU,IN,CH,SA in one of the Goa pics. Maybe there is nothing to it...or is it ?
BRICS in Brazil 2014.

BRICS in Russia 2015

BRICS in Goa 2016

BRICS in chinisthan 2017

One common feature - the South African is always on the outside, holding hands with Eleven Gin Pegs.

They make a good couple..

-M

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 06 Sep 2017 06:28

Does Eleven wear platform shoes? He can't be a real han, that tall, can he? Part Uighur? Mongol? Panda? (the WTP nose I mean..)

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 06 Sep 2017 06:33

UlanBatori wrote:Does Eleven wear platform shoes? He can't be a real han, that tall, can he? Part Uighur? Mongol? Panda? (the WTP nose I mean..)

He has a big giant head.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 06 Sep 2017 06:42

Well.. I guess NaMo and Putin are not that tall. But for a chinese person, Eleven is surely very tall, and yes, the head is abnormal. Must wear an XXXL Mao cap in winter. I bet its a pair of 4-inch platform shoes. The vanity of Chinese must be seen to be believed.

arun · Post by **arun** » 06 Sep 2017 06:54

Looking at the pictures posted by Anup Misra it seems that the protocol order of country heads, left to right, follows the BRICS name order save that host country is always in the middle.

Thus Brasil 2014 had Russia, India, Brazil (HOST), China, South Africa.

Russia 2015 had Brazil, India, Russia (HOST), China, South Africa.

India 2016 had Brazil, Russia, India (HOST), China, South Africa.

Thus China 2017 should have had Brazil, Russia, China (HOST), India, South Arica.

Instead China 2017 had Brazil, Russia, China (HOST), South Africa, India.

National Flags followed that same order indicating this novel protocol changing order of heads was know in advance to hosts China and was at their behest.

So that begs the question why Xi did not have our Prime Minister Narendra Modi next to him.

Doklam Effect

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 06 Sep 2017 06:56

That standing order is based on the letters BRICS. Hence SA is always to the right. Also the hosting nation takes the center stage replacing the I

Only this time in China, S got to be in the inner BRCSI

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 06 Sep 2017 07:02

Dokalam effect? Could be. You'll notice the flags arranged in the same BRCSI way instead of BRCIS. So if the standing is already planned to take place that way, then may be 11 ping don't want to show to his Han audience holding Modiji's hand. May be he and his Han feared an equal equal Happening there. The thoughts of the Han.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 06 Sep 2017 07:13

Have a heart. Eleven must have watched the Pangong Tso videos. Fear keeps him away from NaMo's chappals.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Sep 2017 07:34

There is a pattern to Chinese expansionism that we saw in Doklam: Former foreign secretary Shyam Saran - Indrani Bagchi, ToI

The Doklam standoff is resolved for now. However, how long the understanding between the two countries will sustain would depend on how Beijing perceives the India-China relationship going forward, feels former foreign secretary Shyam Saran.

China's Doklam adventure, like in the South China Sea or Senkaku Islands, is part of a massive Chinese effort to rewrite their own history, he says, adding, "there is a pattern to Chinese expansionism that we saw in Doklam this summer."

"By themselves, each action is not large enough to invite retribution. But taken together, they end up changing the reality on the ground. We saw this in the South China Sea, now we're seeing it here," the former foreign secretary said.

Until 1983, China had no presence in the Doklam plateau, said Shyam Saran. "Only their graziers came there seasonally, as did the Bhutanese. But soon after, China started objecting to Bhutanese shepherds, then they started sending patrols to the area, slowly moving towards building a dirt track, then upgrading to a jeep track. Finally, they sought to change the reality on the ground this summer by building a proper road all the way to the Jampheri ridge," he said.

Saran said Bhutan is appreciative of India's actions over the past couple of months. Bhutan believes the Chinese escalation was directed less against India than Bhutan, forcing the issue with Thimphu and pushing it to make a decision on the Chinese swap offer. China has offered to give Bhutan some areas in the north in return for Thimphu relinquishing claim to Doklam.

As a result of the crisis where India stepped out to protect both Bhutanese and Indian security interests, this has been staved off for the time being. The Chinese decision to agree to stepping back, Saran says, is largely due to the fact that Beijing did not want to put the BRICS summit at risk.

The recent standoff convinces Saran that a China-centric world is not inevitable for the world. In a forthcoming book, "How India sees the World", Saran argues China's rise will not be uncontested. "There will always be a coalition of powers who will not readily accept that there is something natural about China becoming a dominant power. It is important to get this alternative narrative out, otherwise the Chinese narrative becomes uncontested."

China does not have the "cosmopolitan spirit" necessary to become a leading power in a globalised and inter-connected world.

Through most of its history, Saran says, China has been a rather insular power. "China seems to be suggesting that its emergence as a major power is nothing more than a reversion to its historical place as the dominant power in Asia. I have tried to point out that is not quite the case. There were phases when China was itself invaded and ruled. So, the Chinese version of its history needs to be re-examined."

In fact, he goes on to say, "Chinese have neglected to mention that there were several period in history when they themselves were tributary to others {like the Yuan or Mongols and the Manchus}, specially those that had sacked their capital, like the Tibetans for example, or some of the tribes living on the borders of China. Therefore it is a selective history and we should not take all Chinese assertions of their history as a given, but what is surprising is how much of that narrative has taken root."

Seen in this context, China's extreme reaction to India's reaction to its road-building he said, is because "they had not expected that there would be this move by India to confront and that too in a third country."

"Whereas a decade ago, China agreed it was an emerging country and had more in common with countries like India ... today it believes it has already a developed power - hence the harping, that "we're five times your size".

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 06 Sep 2017 08:03

What India should come up with is a "Rogue Nations' classification - that would be linked to ability to trade with India.

Pakistan, and its backers (including China) would fall in that category in case of any continued refusal to align with international norms on terrorism. Once they come under the Rogue Nations bucket - sanctions should apply in terms of any imports from the country.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Sep 2017 09:28

Japan wants to develop missiles - Kallol Bhattacherjee, The Hindu

Japan faces an unprecedented threat to its existence from North Korea’s possession of hydrogen bomb, said an adviser to Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

Speaking at an event organised by a think tank, Katsuyuki Kawai indicated that Japan faced twin nuclear threats from North Korea and “expansionist” China and, therefore, wanted to develop long range missiles, ending its post-World War II stance.

“Our national security environment has been drastically changed since the crisis in the Korean peninsula escalated. Under the present conditions Japanese Self Defence Forces may consider acquiring Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles and cruise missiles to deal with the threat we are facing,” said Mr. Kawai who is in town [New Delhi] to lay the grounds for an upcoming visit by Prime Minister Abe.

Call for rollback

Mr. Kawai indicated that North Korean thermo-nuclear tests had shaken the security arrangement in East Asia which came up following the Second World War. Tokyo was considering all options to deter North Korea’s missile and thermo-nuclear capabilities.

“I am sure Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is also thinking daily about how to ensure security for Japanese lives and property,” he said. “The situation is so serious that we will not be secure if North Korea gives up its ICBM programme. We are demanding total rollback of the nuclear facilities of North Korea.”

The upcoming visit of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to India is also significant in view of the recent tension on the India-China border. Mr. Kawai welcomed the end of the standoff at Doklam. “Both India and China have disengaged their army at Doklam, which is a positive move. This was achieved because of persistence and resilience.” But he also pointed out that Japan faces “Chinese expansionist behaviour everyday,” hinting that China’s aggressive behaviour was likely to be on Mr. Abe’s agenda.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 06 Sep 2017 12:58

UlanBatori wrote:Does Eleven wear platform shoes? He can't be a real han, that tall, can he? Part Uighur? Mongol? Panda? (the WTP nose I mean..)

Northern Chinese are rather tall, especially ones from Shandong province and of course the Mongols. It's the Southern Chinese who are short, and these folks have been the most mobile and diasporic; therefore when one meets random Chinese in SE Asia or even in typically visited cities like Shenznen and Shanghai, they are likely to be from Fujian or Guangdong or other southern provinces.

The coming generation of Chinese are much taller than their parents (true in India too, to some extent) due to more food, especially hormone-infused meat based food. Accompanying this change of diet is also more obesity and propensity to diabetes & lifestyle illnesses.

nits · Post by **nits** » 06 Sep 2017 13:02

SSridhar wrote:Japan wants to develop missiles - Kallol Bhattacherjee, The Hindu
Japan faces an unprecedented threat to its existence from North Korea’s possession of hydrogen bomb, said an adviser to Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

Speaking at an event organised by a think tank, Katsuyuki Kawai indicated that Japan faced twin nuclear threats from North Korea and “expansionist” China and, therefore, wanted to develop long range missiles, ending its post-World War II stance.

“Our national security environment has been drastically changed since the crisis in the Korean peninsula escalated. Under the present conditions Japanese Self Defence Forces may consider acquiring Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles and cruise missiles to deal with the threat we are facing,” said Mr. Kawai who is in town [New Delhi] to lay the grounds for an upcoming visit by Prime Minister Abe.

Call for rollback

Mr. Kawai indicated that North Korean thermo-nuclear tests had shaken the security arrangement in East Asia which came up following the Second World War. Tokyo was considering all options to deter North Korea’s missile and thermo-nuclear capabilities.

“I am sure Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is also thinking daily about how to ensure security for Japanese lives and property,” he said. “The situation is so serious that we will not be secure if North Korea gives up its ICBM programme. We are demanding total rollback of the nuclear facilities of North Korea.”

The upcoming visit of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to India is also significant in view of the recent tension on the India-China border. Mr. Kawai welcomed the end of the standoff at Doklam. “Both India and China have disengaged their army at Doklam, which is a positive move. This was achieved because of persistence and resilience.” But he also pointed out that Japan faces “Chinese expansionist behaviour everyday,” hinting that China’s aggressive behaviour was likely to be on Mr. Abe’s agenda.

Dear Friend India can provide some as a stop gap arrangements till they develop missile of there own or can have a joint development with them to assist

"Hindi - Japani Bhai Bhai"

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 06 Sep 2017 15:25

>>ET Defence‏ @ETDefence 2m2 minutes ago
General #BipinRawat warns of 2-front war. Watch details:
(1 minute video available at this link)
https://twitter.com/ETDefence/status/905367242652581888

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 06 Sep 2017 15:48

That is the right approach i.e. to be wary of the Chinese inspite of a good BRICS summit or Doklam settlement.

I feel that GOI is also sending a message to China through the General that we will not lower our guards.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 06 Sep 2017 15:54

There was an ET article by Kanwal Sibal about the Xi-Modi meet where it seems that India has continued to stress the requirement of peace and tranquility on the borders for progress in the relationship.

Added later: I might have mixed up the source but here is the statement from a different source
http://www.livemint.com/Politics/qIG3tK ... -S-Ja.html

“One of the important points made during the meeting was that peace and tranquillity in the border areas was a prerequisite for the further development of our relationship,” Jaishankar told reporters.

This has been India's line at the diplomatic level. After that GOI chooses to speak through the General on the risks at our northern border. Both must be read together and is clear that GOI is very much aware of the risks and a token statement/gesture here or there is not going to change the vigilance/preparation at the border.

chola · Post by **chola** » 06 Sep 2017 16:41

pankajs wrote:That is the right approach i.e. to be wary of the Chinese inspite of a good BRICS summit or Doklam settlement.

I feel that GOI is also sending a message to China through the General that we will not lower our guards.

We have to be wary of Cheen for the right reasons. As with any opponent we need to understand its strengths and weaknesses to know what blows to block and what chinks to exploit.

Cheen IS a trade and manufacturing power. The challenge to us comes from the fact it can fund things like OBOR and CPEC to spread its strategic claws across Eurasia and beyond. That it can manufacture 28 million vehicles, for example, to our 4 million on a yearly basis. That it sends 130 million tourists into the outside world to our 20 million. That its manufacturing capacity allows it to change facts in the SCS by flooding it with ships, aircraft and man-made islands. These things inceases their influence everywhere, even in erstwhile enemies like Japan and SoKo. They squeeze the space for any other Asian power to wield countering influence during peacetime when money, markets and production are king.

Cheen is NOT a military power. It has not fought in five decades because unlike the TSP, it knows its weakness in warfare. It is a non-warrior trading/shopkeeping culture addicted to profit (at all cost) not military honor. It is not Japan or Vietnam. Not only is it a poor fighting culture that produces exceptionally weak soldiers who run from Sudanese tribesmen its warfighting capacity is also handicapped by a little emperor generation now of service age. The PRC itself reports that the potential recruiting class is too fat. Play too much video games. And MASTURBATE in excess. Along our front, their military is further limited by geography and the geo-politics of needing to defend against great powers on its core territories in the East. We outnumber them up to 20 to 1 along the LAC. We have 30 plus airbases within striking distance of the border to their five in Tibet.

So if you are India how do you counter such an opponent?

Peace allows them to build and bribe all over the world at a pace we cannot match. War exposes the weakness of their SYRE culture.

Should we strike at the glaring chink in their armor?

Or do we sit and wait in peace for the constricting coils of their money, their production and their schemes to relentlessly strangle our strategic space even in South Asia and the IOR?

Doka La shows me that, unfortunately, we will opt for the latter.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Sep 2017 17:01

chola wrote: It is a non-warrior trading/shopkeeping culture addicted to profit (at all cost) not military honor.

Pah blather. All this is good only for psy ops but worthless in real terms. They may be useless but they will fight and cause pain and we have much to lose even if we bring them down by a notch or two. It will only serve as V1agra to the US's failing strength. That apart this useless idea shows complete ignorance of India and maybe you are gaming political reality in India like a stockbroker trading somebody else's shares on some stock market "Sell Sell Sell" (a useless idea)

rohiths · Post by **rohiths** » 06 Sep 2017 17:15

chola wrote:
pankajs wrote:
Cheen is NOT a military power. It has not fought in five decades because unlike the TSP, it knows its weakness in warfare. It is a non-warrior trading/shopkeeping culture addicted to profit (at all cost) not military honor. It is not Japan or Vietnam. Not only is it a poor fighting culture that produces exceptionally weak soldiers who run from Sudanese tribesmen its warfighting capacity is also handicapped by a little emperor generation now of service age. The PRC itself reports that the potential recruiting class is too fat. Play too much video games. And MASTURBATE in excess. Along our front, their military is further limited by geography and the geo-politics of needing to defend against great powers on its core territories in the East. We outnumber them up to 20 to 1 along the LAC. We have 30 plus airbases within striking distance of the border to their five in Tibet.

Sounds like the Martial race theory of Pakis. We should never underestimate any enemy. We should be wary of Chinese and they can improve exponentially in a few years. If Dhoti shivering against Chinese helps us in better preparation, it is even ok to shiver and cover in our dhotis.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 06 Sep 2017 18:14

peace and tranquillity in the border areas was a prerequisite for the further development of our relationship

No biss no buy

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Sep 2017 18:49

India's way of handling China has just solved the biggest policy puzzle for world powers - Pranab Dhal Samanta, Economic Times

So, is there now an India model to emulate while dealing with a confrontational China? While that would receive some detailed attention in the days ahead, what’s clear is that there were certain distinctive contours to the Indian approach. And while these worked for India, it’s also a fact that they proved effective because of a larger context that continues to weigh heavily on China.

The context is now becoming increasingly embarrassing for China. The North Korean tests, including the missile that was fired over Japanese territory on the day Doklam issue was resolved, underline the weight of that embarrassment.

Terror Has a Capital

The other country pulling down China in a similar manner is Pakistan, which is under fire for sponsorship of terrorism not just by India alone, but by now a growing spectrum of countries. These start with Afghanistan and go on to include countries in West Asia, Europe, and the US, as exemplified in President Donald Trump’s South Asia strategy address.

In short, North Korea and Pakistan are not the best advertisements of friends for a country aspiring global economic leadership. At a time when the US is looking insular as an economic power, China has thrown in its hat to lead the free trade pitch. The Brics, for instance, is a key forum to strengthen this claim. And just then, to have Pyongyang set off a nuclear device doesn’t help matters.

This kind of ‘Notoriety Club’ had a utility for China, but that time may have passed. This is a conclusion only Beijing can make. But it cannot stop other countries drawing their own meanings in their national interest.

It’s in this context that the shrill rhetoric on Doklam did not help. There were very few takers for China’s case, frankly, even before it was articulated. The reason for that being China’s lack of credibility in sub-continental matters, given its own long-term strategic commitment with Pakistan. Further, the tone and content of the official attack did not help either, sending signals that made others equally insecure.

In contrast, India had a more nuanced approach, which can now be fleshed out along few parameters. To begin with, there was a conscious, clear decision to halt Chinese construction activity and stand by Bhutan regardless of how the situation evolved. This was a departure from the past practice to avoid direct confrontation. But this time, the overall military assessment was that China had come too close for comfort.

The initial action was done swiftly. Thereafter, India decided to keep quiet, not aggravate matters. So, New Delhi had, early in the day, recognised the principle that there could be no gain made by humiliating China.

New Delhi followed this edict to the point that it did not allow itself to be provoked by any Chinese humiliation. The next principle at play was that China has much bigger stakes in the international system and the global commons for it to just abandon all of that in favour of military action against a global systems-compliant country and emerging economy like India. That assumption was correct. Which is why China did not cross the Brics deadline.

Cultivation Season

And, finally, it was assessed that in the bigger picture, Beijing’s aspirations require cultivating more positive relations with New Delhi. Which is why the condemnation of Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed in the Brics statement is better understood as a rethink in China than a victory for India.

The Doklam handling tells us that there’s indeed an effective way to talk tough issues with China, and not by giving in or speaking out, but by showing up and conversing relentlessly to find convergences. China, after all, cannot have an ambition at the cost of everyone else.

chola · Post by **chola** » 06 Sep 2017 19:14

rohiths wrote:
chola wrote:
Sounds like the Martial race theory of Pakis. We should never underestimate any enemy. We should be wary of Chinese and they can improve exponentially in a few years. If Dhoti shivering against Chinese helps us in better preparation, it is even ok to shiver and cover in our dhotis.

I absolutely agree with you that one should be wary and prepared. But come on, at least be wary of the correct things!

It is not the martial theory of the Pakis. The PRC's rise is accompanied by a distinct absence of war, though full of salami slicing and intimidation. The US and Russia fought continuously through this period. Hell even the UK and France deployed in overseas action. Nothing from Cheen. This is cultural. They don't like to fight because they are not good at it. They, unlike the pakis, are dangerous precisely because they know they are not good at it.

And the fact they might improve "exponentially" in the future should make us exploit this weakness sooner rather later. If we pretend they are not culturally SYRE and unsuitable for warfare, then we should go to war now. Before they build up bases in the IOR, before long range fighters and bombers like the J-20 and H-20 are inducted and in numbers, before their Type 002/003 carriers arrive and begin patroling the IO.

The military numbers on the border and the IOR is THE glaring advantage we have over them now. Failure to use it means we take our chances by allowing their money, production and schemes like OBOR to run their course unhindered during peace.

The issue is not whether we should be wary but whether we are wary of the right thing. Being wary of their military, especially in our theaters, is being scared of our biggest advantage over cheen. Afraid of the very thing that would allow us to be successful in this confrontation.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 06 Sep 2017 20:43

This NYT expose/article in today's print edition could very well belong to the STFUP thread as well. But, since it implicates al chinisthan as well as al bakistan in their mutual connivance in providing covert nuclear weapons technology to N. Korea (chinisthan's bete noire), I think it rightfully belongs in this thread. Another possible way to defang and neuter the chini wardogs.

Short excerpts, onree.

North Korea’s Nuclear Arsenal Threatens China’s Path to Power

China has made little secret of its long-term goal to replace the United States as the major power in Asia and assume what it considers its rightful position at the center of the fastest-growing, most dynamic region in the world.

Other major hurdles litter China’s path. The United States, despite signs of retreat in Asia under the Trump administration, remains the dominant military power. And India and Japan, China’s traditional rivals in the region, have made clear that they intend to resist its gravitational pull.

Yet North Korea — an outcast of the international order that Beijing hopes to lead, but also a nuclear state in part because of China’s own policies — presents a particularly nettlesome challenge.

The Trump administration has bet on China to stop North Korea’s nuclear program, shunning talks with Mr. Kim and gambling that Beijing can be persuaded to use its economic leverage over the North to rein it in.

the White House may be misreading the complexity of China’s relationship with North Korea, one that successive generations of Chinese leaders have struggled to manage.

China keeps North Korea running with oil shipments and accounts for almost all its foreign trade. But to many Chinese, the young leader seems ungrateful.

The spread of nuclear weapons, he added, would thrust China into “a new Cold War” in Asia, perhaps with a beefed-up American military presence.

President Xi Jinping is said to be aware of such risks and to have privately expressed disdain for Mr. Kim.

And, the paki connection in creating this mess: The Pakistan Connection

China has more nuclear-armed neighbors than any country in the world: Russia, India, Pakistan and now North Korea. But that situation is partly one of its own making.

The origins of North Korea’s nuclear program can be traced to a deal in 1976 between an ailing Mao Zedong and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, then the prime minister of Pakistan.

India had tested its first nuclear bomb two years earlier, and Mr. Bhutto wanted to keep up. China viewed India as a potential threat; the two had fought a brief border war. So it agreed to help.

In 1982, China shipped weapons-grade uranium to Pakistan. And in 1990, it opened its Lop Nur test site to Pakistan and secretly let the country test its first nuclear bomb there, according to “The Nuclear Express,” a book by two veterans of the American nuclear program.

At about the same time, Pakistan was sharing nuclear enrichment technology with North Korea — including centrifuges, parts, designs and fuel essential for its nuclear bombs — in exchange for Korean missile technology and design help.

By 2002, the trade was so brazen that Pakistan sent an American-made C-130 cargo plane to North Korea to collect a shipment of ballistic missile parts, a flight that was detected by United States satellites.

Some analysts argue that Beijing was complicit in the deal, either encouraging Pakistan to share nuclear technology with North Korea or looking the other way as it happened. China allowed the transfers to occur through Pakistan to maintain plausible deniability, they say.

“I think it is fair to assess that North Korea wouldn’t be where it is today without the earlier trade with Pakistan”

Others say that while there is no doubt that China helped Pakistan acquire the bomb, Beijing would not have wanted that know-how passed on to North Korea.

While China wanted Pakistan to counterbalance India, it is less clear how it would have benefited from the North’s obtaining nuclear technology.

The rest of the expose is purely drivel that talks about the chinis fascination and annoyance (at the same time) with their client state, NK.

But North Korea got in the way. After the North conducted its fourth nuclear test in early 2016, South Korea’s president at the time, Park Geun-hye, tried to call Mr. Xi to ask for his help in restraining Kim Jong-un. Ms. Park’s aides were unable to arrange the call, according to local news reports. Chinese analysts said Mr. Xi was unwilling to accept Ms. Park’s demand for “the most severe” sanctions against the North. By refusing to abandon Pyongyang, Mr. Xi lost ground in Seoul.

My chini takeaway from the above is that while the chinis encouraged NK as a counter to the russkies and the Americans, the transfer of nuclear technology in exchange for missiles was purely a paki enterprise. The chinis knew about it but chose to ignore it. But now, as they say, sow the wind, reap the whirlwind. The chinis will have to pay.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/worl ... collection

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 06 Sep 2017 21:08

British were awful but they were also past masters in the art of divide and rule, and we Indians really need to memorize these lessons.

China is huge and has just as many fault-lines as India. On top of that it has a hard but brittle political shell which can be brought to an implosion.

In order to deal with China, we would have to learn something from the British.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 06 Sep 2017 21:17

PeeAllSee is launching full-scale media campaign to stop US from acting against NoKo. CNN, LATimes, NYT... all lifafa

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 06 Sep 2017 22:11

Eleven Gin Pegs is apparently 5' - 9" tall. But in the above photus, it seems he is 6' compare him to Putin who is 5' - 7"). Must be the pratfolm shooj. No wonder he looks discomforted and constipated. Diabolical!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... t-G20.html

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 07 Sep 2017 01:45

UlanBatori wrote: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-chin ... SKCN1BG0JY
China's Xi wants to put relations with India on 'right track'
XIAMEN, China (Reuters) - China wants to put its relationship with India on the “right track”, President Xi Jinping told Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Tuesday, as the two countries sought to mend ties damaged by a recent tense Himalayan border standoff.
The meeting was the first between the two leaders since Chinese and Indian troops ended a standoff in the Doklam border region about a week ago that was the neighbors’ most serious military confrontation in decades.
Talks between Xi and Modi had been in question before the de-escalation, which came just in time for China to host the BRICS summit of emerging economies, which also includes Brazil, Russia and South Africa, in the southeastern city of Xiamen.
Healthy, stable ties were in the interests of both countries, Xi told Modi in a meeting on the sidelines of the summit, according to a statement from China’s foreign ministry. “China is willing to work with India ... to increase political trust, advance mutually beneficial cooperation and promote the further development of China-India relations along the correct path,” Xi said.
“China and India must maintain the fundamental determination that each other constitute mutual development opportunities and do not constitute a mutual threat,” Xi said, adding that peaceful, cooperative relations were the “only correct choice”.
Xi and Modi spoke for more than an hour and the discussions were “constructive”, Indian Foreign Secretary Subrahmanyam Jaishankar told reporters in Xiamen after the meeting.“There was a sense that if the relationship is to go forward, then peace and tranquility on the border area should be maintained,” Jaishankar said, adding that both sides agreed that strong contacts between their defense personnel were needed to prevent another border incident.
“On both sides there was a sense that more efforts need to be made to ensure that these kinds of situations don’t reoccur.”
Pressed on how the Doklam dispute was discussed, Jaishankar said, “Both of us know what happened. This was not a backwards looking conversation. This was a forward-looking conversation.”
....

Sticks and stones will break my bones, but talk is cheap.
Gautam

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 07 Sep 2017 01:53

http://www.firstpost.com/india/brics-su ... 06341.html
BRICS Summit 2017: As India, China march in opposite directions, grouping likely to fade further into irrelevance
Mumbai: The future of the BRICS looks toxic. China and India stepped back from a border dispute just in time for a summit of the bloc of large emerging market countries. That helps Chinese president Xi Jinping keep up appearances ahead of a crucial political reshuffle. But the unusual tensions between the two Asian giants suggests the three-day gathering underway could be a last hurrah.
....
Now a potentially fatal problem is heightening distrust between its most populous members. The source of friction is Beijing’s “Belt and Road” initiative, an ambitious global infrastructure push. New Delhi sees it as a debt-fuelled attempt to buy influence and, in places, a threat to its sovereignty. Indeed, construction of a road by China led to the recent India-China border spat. A separate project runs through Pakistan and Kashmir, another disputed region.
Ultimately, the sums being invested in Xi’s set piece dwarfs China’s commitment to things like the New Development Bank, a BRICS-backed lender set up two years ago to rival the World Bank. That does not mean there will not be more summits and self-important communiqués. But as China and India march in opposite directions, the BRICS are likely fade further into irrelevance.

Gautam

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 07 Sep 2017 03:34

Here's some new thinking on CPEC, link might fit better in this thread.
http://strategicstudyindia.blogspot.com ... .html#more

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 07 Sep 2017 03:45

Putin is only 5' 7, but Eleven looks more than 2 inches higher because he steps one pace forward in the photos (typical Chinese behavior, always cross the LAC) and the cameras are aimed tilted upwards and closest to him. Plus his stilt wooden shoes. Infantile in the extreme.