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

[kiranA]

We failed and we lost. I am unable to comprehend many posts here. Its one thing to be a patriot but quiet another to be delusional. It was poorly executed, poorly communicated and utlimately buckling and blinking by GoI. I made a post in another thread on this and I havent seen anything that contradicts my narrative - and for gods sake stop this nonsense we stopped them from building a road at frigging 100 meters from the border .

BRICS this year is a china show - as they are hosting it. Every time Modi smiles and waves in the show the glory goes to 11 as it is his show and he got Modi to behave exactly like the ideal guest despite serious allegations made by his Army and despite India's concerns about protecting Bhutans area.

China not only made India vacate its army in time for its BRICS show it also got Indias PM behave exactly the way it wanted to - without a single concession from its side apart from temporary road building works where too we dont have an official commitment.

China wont stop - it will dilute India's role in BRICS by going for BRICS plus and ultimately makes redundant any threat of India boycotting BRICS.

And after Nepal fiasco this is the second time India so sharply reversed and buckled it self after being shown a firm hand. Nepal was a bigger humiliation.

[pankajs]

Though occassionally chinnamma "Sushma​Swaraj" was giving indications of "thuss" ending, for atleast 1month almost all the brfites were swelling their chests with pride that We are checkmating our == Han at Doklam and nobody had even an iota of doubt or "dhotishiver", the stand-off ended in "thuss" and back to == pakis. Frustrating

Let me add further to you point. What you call "thuss" ending was the GOI stand from initial days not just from Susma Swaraj's statement.

So going by your *thuss* logic which was set during the initial stage, India asked for *thuss* and got *thuss*. So India got what it wanted. Where it the confusion?

OTOH we just need to re-read all of China's statement from start of the standoff to the BRICS Xi-Modi meeting to get a clear picture of the Chinese achievements.

[uddu]

@Tkiran. Very poor attempt of psyops. Modi hate turning to India hating huh. Fails miserably even to reach Rahul Gandhi level of intelligence. Admins either he be asked to improve himself or better is not having these kind of useless posts dirtying the forum.

[pankajs]

He wanted China to spank Modi but obviously that did not happen. No wonder he is not happy with the *thuss* ending.

I don't have time/energy/interest today but I can bet you that his post from the initial days of the standoff will prove quite educative.

[salaam]

Admins kindly ban KiranA, Dipanker and maybe maybe TKiran.

First two are pure trolls, bring nothing to any forum they participate in, except to derail it. There ideology is complete opposite of normal brf thinking. Dipanker specially seems to have ample time to keep posting in huge quantities to completely derail any conversation.

Last one just can't decide which side he is on, maybe he is more refined, but still a troll.

[pankajs]

We failed and we lost. I am unable to comprehend many posts here. Its one thing to be a patriot but quiet another to be delusional. It was poorly executed, poorly communicated and utlimately buckling and blinking by GoI. I made a post in another thread on this and I havent seen anything that contradicts my narrative - and for gods sake stop this nonsense we stopped them from building a road at frigging 100 meters from the border .

BRICS this year is a china show - as they are hosting it. Every time Modi smiles and waves in the show the glory goes to 11 as it is his show and he got Modi to behave exactly like the ideal guest despite serious allegations made by his Army and despite India's concerns about protecting Bhutans area.

China not only made India vacate its army in time for its BRICS show it also got Indias PM behave exactly the way it wanted to - without a single concession from its side apart from temporary road building works where too we dont have an official commitment.

China wont stop - it will dilute India's role in BRICS by going for BRICS plus and ultimately makes redundant any threat of India boycotting BRICS.

And after Nepal fiasco this is the second time India so sharply reversed and buckled it self after being shown a firm hand. Nepal was a bigger humiliation.

Bhai it is not your fault. You are smart and we I am a duffer and hence you are unable to comprehend our my posts.

There are too many points to go over so to understand you own brilliance in contrast to our my duffergiri you just need to meditate on the 2nd highlighted line.

BTW, if you have any other word for me instead of duffer please use that. I promise not to report your post no matter what you call me.

[Karthik S]

We failed and we lost. I am unable to comprehend many posts here. Its one thing to be a patriot but quiet another to be delusional. It was poorly executed, poorly communicated and utlimately buckling and blinking by GoI. I made a post in another thread on this and I havent seen anything that contradicts my narrative - and for gods sake stop this nonsense we stopped them from building a road at frigging 100 meters from the border .

BRICS this year is a china show - as they are hosting it. Every time Modi smiles and waves in the show the glory goes to 11 as it is his show and he got Modi to behave exactly like the ideal guest despite serious allegations made by his Army and despite India's concerns about protecting Bhutans area.

China not only made India vacate its army in time for its BRICS show it also got Indias PM behave exactly the way it wanted to - without a single concession from its side apart from temporary road building works where too we dont have an official commitment.

China wont stop - it will dilute India's role in BRICS by going for BRICS plus and ultimately makes redundant any threat of India boycotting BRICS.

And after Nepal fiasco this is the second time India so sharply reversed and buckled it self after being shown a firm hand. Nepal was a bigger humiliation.

Aren't you the periyarist guy from "Link Language Thread" ? The one subtly spewing hatred against brahmins and praising periyar? Thought you were banned. No wonder you come back and indulge in idiocy and nonsense.

[sum]

We failed and we lost
....
And after Nepal fiasco this is the second time India so sharply reversed and buckled it self after being shown a firm hand. Nepal was a bigger humiliation.

Say what? Which humiliation is being referred to?

[TKiran]

Del

[samirdiw]

People should be able to accept and discuss different positions and not resort to name calling, asking for "safe space" by banning posters of differing viewpoints.

[chola]

People should be able to accept and discuss different positions and not resort to asking for "safe space" by banning posters of differing viewpoints.

Half of BR would be banned by now if we listen to Salam.

[salaam]

People should be able to accept and discuss different positions and not resort to asking for "safe space" by banning posters of differing viewpoints.

Half of BR would be banned by now if we listen to Salam.

@samirdw I could have flagged there posts, but I wanted others to actually say something that's why i wrote an open post. Dipanker and KiranA are not really "posters of differing viewpoints". They are actual trolls who obfuscate, raise inane issues, shoot and scoot and most importantly derail the topics.

I don't want to put them on ignore list, because its not just for my benefit. I want the action to be taken so rest don't have to go through and react to said posts.

[KLNMurthy]

People should be able to accept and discuss different positions and not resort to name calling, asking for "safe space" by banning posters of differing viewpoints.

I don't know what you are talking about. BRF is the opposite of whatever that "safe space" pejorative buzzword is supposed to mean.

BRF is private property and is run by the mods who act (or decide not to act) at their discretion. There is no appeal against their decision. It is not a democracy.

Since you are a newbie I'll remind you that Bredator drones can swoop down on any one, any time. Or a poster may be spared to troll another day.

[chola]

Half of BR would be banned by now if we listen to Salam.

@samirdw I could have flagged there posts, but I wanted others to actually say something that's why i wrote an open post. Dipanker and KiranA are not really "posters of differing viewpoints". They are actual trolls who obfuscate, raise inane issues, shoot and scoot and most importantly derail the topics.

I don't want to put them on ignore list, because its not just for my benefit. I want the action to be taken so rest don't have to go through and react to said posts.

Don't know about those two but you leave TKiran and his butt-plugging karela alone! We need him in the sex nukkad.

[KLNMurthy]

People should be able to accept and discuss different positions and not resort to asking for "safe space" by banning posters of differing viewpoints.

Half of BR would be banned by now if we listen to Salam.

Nothing will happen if we listen to Salam. Only mods can make something happen at their discretion.

[yensoy]

Let's be the "devil's advocate" for MKB's analysis.Did we win,did we lose or was it a draw and do unltra-nationalists want the GOI to "raise the bar"?

Facts and Chronology:
...
2.India responded to an SOS from Bhutan with whom we have a def. and security agreement,India in the role of protector of Bhutanese sovereignty.
India troops rushed to the scene and prevented Chinese troops from further intrusion.Argy-bargy broke out between the two opposing forces.
...

Good analysis but don't agree with the above point.
1. From all indications, earlier regimes have thrown Bhutan under the bus when it comes to encroachment by the Chinese. Evidence is clear in the road which leads to Doklam which crosses the other area mistakenly referred to as Doklam which Bhutan claims as well. There have been incursions on the Northern boundary claims also. I doubt Bhutan would have raised an SOS with India.
2. I think we responded when our own interests were directly threatened. Bhutan "issued an SOS" when asked to issue an SOS. That's the way it is, I make no apologies for it as an Indian, yes Bhutan will do our biding when it comes to security vis-a-vis the Chinese and that's because they don't want to become another Tibet.
3. Indian troops were already "at the scene" just a few hundred meters away. This was an extremely important factor which allowed both observation as well as quick and robust response without straining supply lines or passage through Bhutan in order to get to the scene of action.

Anyway, the point of diplomacy is to achieve your objectives while avoiding war. This is not about us giving a face-saver by allowing them 6 hours after our withdrawal to reciprocate, it's about us standing up against their bullying and ranting for 73 days.

Honestly, I don't think China is prepared and set up to wage war. But I don't think we really want to rock the boat either, especially when the stakes are low. We aren't talking about a country directly indulging in terrorism against us, or active cross-border firing. We are talking about a road which has the possibility of causing damage; a road over which we have a height and strategic advantage; a road which is frozen much of the year, yet we prevented construction of that road without disturbing peace. We showed the world our resolve, we showed them how to deal with China. Why would we want to go to war? People, please get a perspective.

[pankajs]

I think there's some misunderstanding of my posts, let me attempt to clarify (I am not sure if I would be able to articulate my point of view correctly though).

I really appreciate Modi Sarkar for giving free hand to Army. I also appreciate Indian Diplomacy during the stand-off. I thought we have come of age to be able to handle a dynamic military stand-off. It was producing desired results of showing to the world the limitations of Han strategy of deception and we have been the first and perhaps the only nation capable of checkmating Hans.

But we didn't heldup to exhaust Han. It would have ended the same way it ended now, even if we held up for a year or two, but would have got many more concessions on PoK, OBOR/CPEC and also a chance to see the world reactions and developed more alliances and many more things regarding Han dumping of finished goods etc.,

But it would have been Han Diplomacy that we could have tested and completely exhausted all their options before they would have asked for a stand down. This stand-off didn't take the course it was supposed to take and die naturally. We could have got PoK without fighting in exchange for stand down.

There was much more scope for diplomacy. It's like India playing with whites, and in good position but suddenly for unexplainable reason, you choose stalemate.

Our initial position was restoration of status quo ante and that was reiterated on every occasion. We got that through negotiations so we withdrew.

It was possible to keep the standoff alive longer but GOI decided to stick to its initial position. Not being insiders we do not know the thought process but I can certainly think of a few.
1. Not put Bhutan in awkward position by going back on our initial understanding on the endgame.
2. Not create more bad blood with China than was required to get to our endgame.
3. Forget Bhutan and China for a moment. A lot of countries in our neighborhood and around the world were watching. We are going to be a big power in the not too distant future and a lot of smaller countries will seek alignment with us. You want to come out of a small episode like this looking like you have no territorial ambitions. Prolonging the standoff beyond the initial endgame was likely to be misread.

[chola]

Why would we want to go to war? People, please get a perspective.

THEY threatened war on us. And we had all the advantages. How often does a setup like that comes along?

It was a missed opportunity. To rectify 1962. To vault Cheen to the top of the Asian hierarchy. To put a crimp in their OBOR and CPEC schemes.

But I appreciate you mentioning perspective. Maybe my perspective is different since I live in the States. Proximity to the lizard might engender a different set of feelings in Bharat.

All I can say is Cheen has not fought in five decades and has shown poor ability in the few war situations it has been in (peacekeepers running away in Sudan, being slaughtered by Viets in its last proper war, no reaction after Yugo embassy bombing, etc.) It was a ready-made victory with historic implications.

[chola]

3. Forget Bhutan and China for a moment. A lot of countries in our neighborhood and around the world were watching. We are going to be a big power in the not too distant future and a lot of smaller countries will seek alignment with us. You want to come out of a small episode like this looking like you have no territorial ambitions. Prolonging the standoff beyond the initial endgame was likely to be misread.

We are a big power today. The only issue is in Asia Cheen is the bigger power.

This will not change in the "not too distant future" if things are allow to go on peacefully.

They have OBOR, CPEC, ports in Greece, Pakiland, Djibouti, increasing markets that puts pressure even on Japan, SoKo and Taiwan. What have we for our future plans? They will have more carriers, larger and more destroyers, more frigates and more nuke subs. Look at our pipeline in comparision.

Doka La was the opportunity that would have allowed us to vault over all that with an epochal victory guaranteed by numbers on the ground.

[Karthik S]

3. Forget Bhutan and China for a moment. A lot of countries in our neighborhood and around the world were watching. We are going to be a big power in the not too distant future and a lot of smaller countries will seek alignment with us. You want to come out of a small episode like this looking like you have no territorial ambitions. Prolonging the standoff beyond the initial endgame was likely to be misread.

We are a big power today. The only issue is in Asia Cheen is the bigger power.

This will not change in the "not too distant future" if things are allow to go on peacefully.

They have OBOR, CPEC, ports in Greece, Pakiland, Djibouti, increasing markets that puts pressure even on Japan, SoKo and Taiwan. What have we for our future plans? They will have more carriers, larger and more destroyers, more frigates and more nuke subs. Look at our pipeline in comparision.

Doka La was the opportunity that would have allowed us to vault over all that with an epochal victory guaranteed by numbers on the ground.

China assumed the same and now we know how that turned up. BTW still some distance to go before we can call ourselves big power.

[pankajs]

@Chola

I had posted views of 3 people on our offensive capacity wrt Tibet as it exists today. All of them have stated that while we are good on defense, our offensive capability is limited. It is not just a question of fighting men and their skill/willingness, it also wrt decent logistics infra on the border and fighting equipment that then needs to be taken to the plateau.

Because I had posted their views I remember the names. One was Jurno Nitin Gokhle the second was former FS Sibal and last was General Panang. I think I am spelling their names wrong but you know who I am referring to. Three very different people from three very different fields but all with a focus on defense and/or foreign policy. A good triangulation IMHO. Yesterday I also read the same view expressed by SJha on twitter. I will post shortly post his tweets.

[pankajs]

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/904914035497361408

Saurav Jha‏ @SJha1618 Sep 4

It has been plainly obvious that we need air mobility in the Eastern theatre and the China front in general. Ergo, continued ALH orders.

- In the years ahead, the Indian Army will continue to invest significantly in HAL Dhruvs, Rudras, LCHs and the IMRH as well.
- At the moment, the Chinese can at any point in time, helo-lift 2-3 battalions from locations on the Tibetan plateau.
- But given our budget, what we can hope to achieve is brigade sized air mobility by the mid-2020s.
- Sunderji's 2 air-mobile division dream will be achieved only by the 2030s, if it is sanctioned.
- And whether anybody likes it or not, any Indian offensive into Tibet for the foreseeable future will be only 15-30 kms deep.

I don't know about air-brigade, etc but this is the fourth person in the last 2 weeks talking of our limited offensive capacity wrt Tibet.

[chetak]

Why would we want to go to war? People, please get a perspective.

THEY threatened war on us. And we had all the advantages. How often does a setup like that comes along?

It was a missed opportunity. To rectify 1962. To vault Cheen to the top of the Asian hierarchy. To put a crimp in their OBOR and CPEC schemes.

But I appreciate you mentioning perspective. Maybe my perspective is different since I live in the States. Proximity to the lizard might engender a different set of feelings in Bharat.

All I can say is Cheen has not fought in five decades and has shown poor ability in the few war situations it has been in (peacekeepers running away in Sudan, being slaughtered by Viets in its last proper war, no reaction after Yugo embassy bombing, etc.) It was a ready-made victory with historic implications.

the very fact that we stood our ground and faced them down has caused an enormous loss of face to the hans.

Such an outcome, achieved, as it was, without loss of life or disruption of the economy, without resorting to futile threats and frenzied breast beating is better than war. A war that the hans will think twice about imposing on India in the future, simply because they are not sure of the outcome of such an event.

Historically, India has given already the hans a bloody nose on earlier occasions, after the 62 imbroglio. No country in the region has the least doubts about the professionalism of India's Armed Forces nor their war fighting capabilities.

Unless the hans have the overwhelming tactical advantage, they will not take the war route with India. Defeat will make them a global laughing stock, especially, at this stage of their power projection game.

Some Indian delegation would have already whispered quietly into their ear about red lines not to be crossed, where upon India will be forced to look at its nuclear options.

Surprise has little chance of success with India as we have enough satellite based assets to keep a watch on their military movements in the border regions.

Mindlessly hankering for war as retribution for 1962 is as meaningless as it is futile. Big power automatically means we should be big picture players.

[chola]

THEY threatened war on us. And we had all the advantages. How often does a setup like that comes along?

It was a missed opportunity. To rectify 1962. To vault Cheen to the top of the Asian hierarchy. To put a crimp in their OBOR and CPEC schemes.

But I appreciate you mentioning perspective. Maybe my perspective is different since I live in the States. Proximity to the lizard might engender a different set of feelings in Bharat.

All I can say is Cheen has not fought in five decades and has shown poor ability in the few war situations it has been in (peacekeepers running away in Sudan, being slaughtered by Viets in its last proper war, no reaction after Yugo embassy bombing, etc.) It was a ready-made victory with historic implications.

the very fact that we stood our ground and faced them down has caused an enormous loss of face to the hans.

Such an outcome, achieved, as it was, without loss of life or disruption of the economy, without resorting to futile threats and frenzied breast beating is better than war. A war that the hans will think twice about imposing on India in the future, simply because they are not sure of the outcome of such an event.

Historically, India has given already the hans a bloody nose on earlier occasions, after the 62 imbroglio. No country in the region has the least doubts about the professionalism of India's Armed Forces nor their war fighting capabilities.

Unless the hans have the overwhelming tactical advantage, they will not take the war route with India. Defeat will make them a global laughing stock, especially, at this stage of their power projection game.

Some Indian delegation would have already whispered quietly into their ear about red lines not to be crossed, where upon India will be forced to look at its nuclear options.

Surprise has little chance of success with India as we have enough satellite based assets to keep a watch on their military movements in the border regions.

Again, it seems we are sacrificing real changes on the ground and in the Asian hierarchy that a military victory would bring in exchange for artificial constructs like "loss of face" that is already being muddied by commie propaganda.

[pankajs]

@Chola [Better this way than tagging you post]

This is the stage I am thinking about. It does not assume any major disruption both for India and China. This is one projection and there are many but because we need numbers to make sense I am using this.

https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/econom ... -2050.html
The World in 2050

[chetak]

the very fact that we stood our ground and faced them down has caused an enormous loss of face to the hans.

Such an outcome, achieved, as it was, without loss of life or disruption of the economy, without resorting to futile threats and frenzied breast beating is better than war. A war that the hans will think twice about imposing on India in the future, simply because they are not sure of the outcome of such an event.

Historically, India has given already the hans a bloody nose on earlier occasions, after the 62 imbroglio. No country in the region has the least doubts about the professionalism of India's Armed Forces nor their war fighting capabilities.

Unless the hans have the overwhelming tactical advantage, they will not take the war route with India. Defeat will make them a global laughing stock, especially, at this stage of their power projection game.

Some Indian delegation would have already whispered quietly into their ear about red lines not to be crossed, where upon India will be forced to look at its nuclear options.

Surprise has little chance of success with India as we have enough satellite based assets to keep a watch on their military movements in the border regions.

Again, it seems we are sacrificing real changes on the ground and in the Asian hierarchy that a military victory would bring in exchange for artificial constructs like "loss of face" that is already being muddied by commie propaganda.

whats with you??

you want soldiers to die so that some cockamamie idea of yours can be validated or what passes for validation??

what if we were to be defeated?? where would that leave us??

You, of course, would be safely sitting at home.

There is nobody paying attention to commie propaganda, including many in the paki press who have been surprised by India's resolve. Read papers published in any country and monitor the press.

no one gives a shit about people like muthrakumar, venting his frustration in some silly paper.

[pankajs]

BTW, There is one more reason why settlement was the preferred option instead for going in to rub it in their face. I know many are not going to like it but it is what it is. China has surplus capital while India needs external funding. Modi is hoping to convince the Chinese to put substantial money into India.

So while we wanted to send across the message that we will fight if forced to but we did not want to prolong the standoff. I don't foresee India making any foray into Tibet or even across the LAC without a major Chinese provocation say till at least 2050. If China leaves us alone we will leave them alone.

This is not to say that all will be hunky dory on the border from now on or China will make substantial investments into India but the drivers of Modi diplomacy including at Doklam are clear in my view.

[TKiran]

Del

[shiv]

When the Doklam face off started there was some apprehension that there would be war and this very thread hosted discussions about wild mijjile attacks on Delhi and other cities and our inability to return the compliment to Beijing and Shanghai. The Chinese indignantly claimed that they were building a road on their own territory

This was followed by 2 months which started with majorly aggressive Chinese rhetoric and almost no statements from india. Then almost overnight the Chinese rhetoric changed to conciliation (in the media). Still nothing from India. And then an announcement from India that there would be disengagement and that the Chinese would stop building a road on their own territory into which Indian troops had illegally transgressed.The Indian troops pulled out from Chinese territory

I need to find out why the Chinese stopped building their road on their territory after Indian troops illegally interfered with their work. I am seeing now that China actually stopped building a road on its own territory and backed down to pressure from unarmed Indian troops just to get Modi smiling at BRICS. What a resounding victory for China. War won without firing a single shot - if you exclude farts

Sure. We lost that one. LSD sure makes me see things I could not see earlier

[shiv]

Is there any body (chola, please don't reply) who thinks that there was still a lot of steam left for diplomacy to get more concessions and it was a diplomatic failure in not being able to extract more? Or am I alone?

We could have stayed on Chinese territory which we had illegally occupied. Instead we withdrew meekly. It was a great loss of face for us and though the Chinese did not gain territory they gained prestige.

[chola]

@Chola

I had posted views of 3 people on our offensive capacity wrt Tibet as it exists today. All of them have stated that while we are good on defense, our offensive capability is limited. It is not just a question of fighting men and their skill/willingness, it also wrt decent logistics infra on the border and fighting equipment that then needs to be taken to the plateau.

Because I had posted their views I remember the names. One was Jurno Nitin Gokhle the second was former FS Sibal and last was General Panang. I think I am spelling their names wrong but you know who I am referring to. Three very different people from three very different fields but all with a focus on defense and/or foreign policy. A good triangulation IMHO. Yesterday I also read the same view expressed by SJha on twitter. I will post shortly post his tweets.

Pankaj-ji, I'll stand down if that is actually the case. But we do not need to go to Lhasa to change the border and rectify 1962. I'll research more. But from what I read, our advantages are overwhelming and the PLA regulars are not only sparse but stationed far back from the front.

[ramana]

Both the kirans, Why don't you stop posting as you don't like the forum consensus.


I have never seen so much defeatist mind set even in the epics.

[shiv]

I find it amazing that we are so naive that we believe the fake story that Doklam was Bhutanese territory which the Chinese were trying to build a road on. There is an 1890 agreement between China and Bhutan that places Doklam firmly in China. I mean Tibet. er China

The Chinese who are going to build roads for the entire world were simply completing their border road network - which will benefit Bhutan in the years to come. India had NOTHING to do with it.

Indian troops interfered and were caught with their pants down. The Chinese threatened and we were obviously scared. We we should be. China is a superpower and we had illegally occupied the Chinese territory of Doklam. Luckily as part of the peaceful rise of China they relented and allowed Indian troops out of their own territory unscathed. China believe in peace and tranquility with its neighbours. And yes India was humiliated and shown its place.

Maybe we should call ourselves "Cheena rakshaks" with the sort of shit I am reading. And typing I guess.

[srin]

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/904914035497361408

Saurav Jha‏ @SJha1618 Sep 4

It has been plainly obvious that we need air mobility in the Eastern theatre and the China front in general. Ergo, continued ALH orders.

- At the moment, the Chinese can at any point in time, helo-lift 2-3 battalions from locations on the Tibetan plateau.

I have a lot of respect for Saurav Jha, but I'm trying to verify the above statement. At 15000 ft altitude, even if they have Mi-26's, they'll be limited to around 6-8 tons of useful payload (extrapolating from http://thebetacoefficient.blogspot.in/2 ... 26-is.html) for a flight of one hour. To lift a single battalion might take easily 10-15 Mi-26's. And going by one link I found, they don't have so many.

They do seem to have lots of Mi-17s, but MTOW of Mi-17 is just 13T, compared to Mi-26's 56T, so will require a lot of Mi-17s.

[chetak]

BTW, There is one more reason why settlement was the preferred option instead for going in to rub it in their face. I know many are not going to like it but it is what it is. China has surplus capital while India needs external funding. Modi is hoping to convince the Chinese to put substantial money into India.

So while we wanted to send across the message that we will fight if forced to but we did not want to prolong the standoff. I don't foresee India making any foray into Tibet or even across the LAC without a major Chinese provocation say till at least 2050. If China leaves us alone we will leave them alone.

This is not to say that all will be hunky dory on the border from now on or China will make substantial investments into India but the drivers of Modi diplomacy including at Doklam are clear in my view.

we would be buggered and beggared economically if we instigated a needless war.

Our international ratings would have dropped and investor confidence would have been severely shaken, taking easily a decade or more to recover.

we have now made a very crucial point to the hans and that is 'don't mess with us" Let us leave it there and get on with growing our country.

[kiranA]

When the Doklam face off started there was some apprehension that there would be war and this very thread hosted discussions about wild mijjile attacks on Delhi and other cities and our inability to return the compliment to Beijing and Shanghai. The Chinese indignantly claimed that they were building a road on their own territory

This was followed by 2 months which started with majorly aggressive Chinese rhetoric and almost no statements from india. Then almost overnight the Chinese rhetoric changed to conciliation (in the media). Still nothing from India. And then an announcement from India that there would be disengagement and that the Chinese would stop building a road on their own territory into which Indian troops had illegally transgressed.The Indian troops pulled out from Chinese territory

I need to find out why the Chinese stopped building their road on their territory after Indian troops illegally interfered with their work. I am seeing now that China actually stopped building a road on its own territory and backed down to pressure from unarmed Indian troops just to get Modi smiling at BRICS. What a resounding victory for China. War won without firing a single shot - if you exclude farts

Sure. We lost that one. LSD sure makes me see things I could not see earlier

Shiv, india moved troops in to their or bhutans territory. And you blame their reaction as " heated rhetoric " . How exactly should one rhetoric when somebody else's troops enter their claimed land ? Mildly you think ?
China stopping road is really no big deal. The road already is already within 100 meters of Indian border. Think about it 100 metres . Also no public commitment from china that they will stop .

Seriously what is india objective here ? If it is Indian border then you got a Chinese road at 100 meters. India didn't change that . China temporarily did not curve that road in to Bhutan. If it is bhutan concern then nothing changed on the ground china already built a lot of road in disputed territory and did not give up its intent to build more.And goi did not even publicly challenge the intent of china to continue to do what it wants to
Do.why ?
India failed to articulate why it is doing what it is doing. In addition Bhutan is suspiciously silent.

It's not about whose side you are on . its about not deluding oneself.

So you still have china transgressing well in to Bhutan border, a road within 100 meters of our border and they got modi smiling at their summit.

Of course their rhetoric changed as they got what they wanted but it's fully back and even more vehement after rawat statement.

[shiv]

I have a lot of respect for Saurav Jha, but I'm trying to verify the above statement. At 15000 ft altitude, even if they have Mi-26's, they'll be limited to around 6-8 tons of useful payload (extrapolating from http://thebetacoefficient.blogspot.in/2 ... 26-is.html) for a flight of one hour. To lift a single battalion might take easily 10-15 Mi-26's. And going by one link I found, they don't have so many.

They do seem to have lots of Mi-17s, but MTOW of Mi-17 is just 13T, compared to Mi-26's 56T, so will require a lot of Mi-17s.

I have lost the little respect I had for him when he got into a nasty spat with someone we all know and blocked that guy and later blocked me for no reason whatsoever.

No use saying "Chinese can do this. Do that" Airlift form where? Where are those battalions based now? Where will helos airlift them from? Anything less than that is fluff. Anyone can say "Chinese will do this that and the other" We saw a lot of that when the Doklam spat started

[kiranA]

But it's a good question from shiv why did china stop border work while publicly still claiming the intent to do so if it wants . And why does India not challenge China's intent ? Did china stop because winter is anyway coming and not let its brics party be pooped . Did china stop because it figured a better and more secure way to station their border other than this road .

It's clear Chinese themselves did not see the road as some strategic asset . They stationed no army to protect their construction crew . Just some lazy border police lightly armed .

We don't know I would like Indian government to say something as we put our soldiers in the firing line.

[shiv]

Shiv, india moved troops in to their or bhutans territory. And you blame their reaction as " heated rhetoric " . How exactly should one rhetoric when somebody else's troops enter their claimed land ? Mildly you think ?

What do you mean "Bhutan's territory" It was Chinese wasn't it? Please tell me whose territory it was. Clearly. Then we can talk. If it was Bhutanese territory why did the Chinese go "more than mild" rhetoric?

China stopping road is really no big deal. The road already is already within 100 meters of Indian border. Think about it 100 metres . Also no public commitment from china that they will stop .

China stopped building a road on their own territory because Indians objected? Why did they do that? because they wanted Modi to smile?

Seriously what is india objective here ? If it is Indian border then you got a Chinese road at 100 meters. India didn't change that . China temporarily did not curve that road in to Bhutan. If it is bhutan concern then nothing changed on the ground china already built a lot of road in disputed territory and did not give up its intent to build more.And goi did not even publicly challenge the intent of china to continue to do what it wants to
Do.why ?

I have already agred with you that India lost. It was Chinese territory. We moved in. We moved out and China will build a road later. Fine. We will put fingers in Musharraf and watch them build that road. Later

In addition Bhutan is suspiciously silent.

Methinks you are selectively deaf. Or blind

It's not about whose side you are on . its about not deluding oneself.

Cut the crap sir. Stick to facts

So you still have china transgressing well in to Bhutan border, a road within 100 meters of our border and they got modi smiling at their summit..

Was it Chinese territory or Bhutanese territory. Let us get that clear.

[shiv]

We don't know I would like Indian government to say something as we put our soldiers in the firing line.

That I agree was bad. Putting soldiers in the firing line of unarmed construction workers as you rightly pointed out. They could have put someone else there. Maybe gau rakshaks?