India is using the Dalai Lama as a diplomatic leverage to challenge China's "bottom line", Chinese state media said today, threatening that New Delhi may have "underestimated" Beijing's determination to protect its core interests.
The Chinese reaction to the Dalai Lama's visit to Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh came in an article in the state-run Global Times, which is part of the ruling Communist Party publications an is known for striking nationalistic postures.
"Beijing has voiced concerns over the issue, but New Delhi claimed that China shouldn't intervene in its 'internal affairs'," the article said, referring to minister of state for home affairs Kiren Rijiju's comments yesterday.
"This is absurd," the article said.
Rijiju has said India never interfered in Beijing's affairs, has respected the "One China" policy, and thus China should not interfere in India's internal affairs or object to the Dalai Lama's visit. "There is no political angle behind his holiness's visit to Arunachal Pradesh. It is completely religious."
Separately, external affairs ministry has said that no "artificial controversy" should be created about the visit.
The Chinese foreign ministry is yet to react to Rijiju's comments or the external affairs statement yesterday.
However, the state media asked India to "overcome its suspicion" of Beijing. "China doesn't allow India to free ride on its economic growth while jeopardising Beijing's core interests."
It warned, "New Delhi may have underestimated Beijing's determination to safeguard its core interests. Many countries have pledged not to extend invitations to the Dalai Lama. As the two largest emerging economies, China and India have great potential for cooperation."
Today's article also accused India of playing the "Tibet card" as it is dissatisfied with Beijing's stance on India's bid for Nuclear Suppliers Group membership and its attempts to add Masood Azhar, the chief of Pakistan-backed militant group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), to a UN Security Council blacklist.
"Therefore, Delhi attempts to play the Tibet card against Beijing," it said, adding that "unlike his predecessors, India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi seems to have taken a different stance on the Dalai issue, raising public engagements with the monk and challenging Beijing's bottom line," it said.
India and China have had discussions on the two issues, yet the matters are far from being resolved, leading to strain in ties. Also, China is sensitive to the visit of the Dalai Lama, who it calls an "anti-China separatist", to Arunachal's Tawang region which happens to be the birthplace in 1683 of the sixth Dalai Lama and is at the centre of Tibetan Buddhism.
China has in recent days upped its rhetoric on claims to parts of Arunachal Pradesh, which it calls southern Tibet, and even warned India of "serious damage" to ties if New Delhi allowed Tibet's exiled spiritual leader's visit to go ahead.
The article added, "India is also exploring the option of linking the strategic border district of Tawang with a railway network, another provocation against Beijing. India has also invited a 'parliamentary delegation from Taiwan in February'."
Citing other instances like the Dalai Lama's meeting with President Pranab Mukherjee in December, which Beijing sees as a "provocation", it quoted Rijiju as having said to an international news agency in an interview that "it's a behavioural change you are seeing. India is more assertive."
It said that the Dalai Lama is "now openly used by India as a diplomatic tool to win more leverage."
Last night, another piece on the newspaper's website said India was using the Dalai Lama's visit to Tawang "to upset" China.
An unnamed Chinese analyst told the newspaper that the 14th Dalai Lama's visit to Tawang will hurt Sino-Indian ties.
"The Dalai's visit to the controversial area, especially Tawang, which China hopes will be returned, will affect relations between China and India," the analyst from the Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences told the paper on the condition of anonymity.
The analyst too pointed out the religious significance of the Tawang to Tibetans, saying it's the birthplace of the sixth Dalai Lama Tsangyang Gyatso.
The analyst said this was not the first time India has used the Dalai Lama to express its displeasure to China, especially when bilateral talks fail {Though it might come from an unnamed analyst, this is the clearest indication yet that the last round of talks by our Foreign Secretary at Beijing ended in failure} to include their demands or to "pander to domestic anti-China issues".
Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
India may have underestimated Beijing's resolve: Chinese media - ToI
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
chinese are rattled. They know taiwan will soon be recognized.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
in fact that needs to taken up a notch too ..how about upgrading the taiwan embassy status in New Delhi and a consulate in mumbai .. good for trade as wellBheeshma wrote:chinese are rattled. They know taiwan will soon be recognized.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Hope the Chinese are preparing to teach us a lesson.
Our private companies are waiting for large defence orders and Japanese for a alliance!
Our private companies are waiting for large defence orders and Japanese for a alliance!
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
since this week i have started seeing chinese tourism promotion adverts on indian tv & radio.
what gives?
what gives?
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
they very well wont directly .. risks are too great , and India will most certainly go for a military alliance , an asian NATO will result for sure and this time china will be at the receiving endnam wrote:Hope the Chinese are preparing to teach us a lesson.
Our private companies are waiting for large defence orders and Japanese for a alliance!
howvever they will *certainly* use pakistan to fight a war with india .. the risk is growing each day . and they will make sure it is armed to the teeth.This war is almost certain and will witness the chinese forces mass up on the eastern front to put pressure .. tawang is what they want and what they wont get !
India will calibrate its response to each scenario and act accordingly. China forgets it own history .It has more powerful neighbours both militarily and economically that can literally break it. India has just to contend with one. ( pakistan is afterall a chinese province ! )
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
The last time they "taught us a lesson", it resulted in India building up the 3rd largest army on this planet and a massive expansion of IAF & IN.kit wrote:
they very well wont directly .. risks are too great , and India will most certainly go for a military alliance , an asian NATO will result for sure and this time china will be at the receiving end
It can only get more exciting if the Chinese walk the talk.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
China vows 'necessary measures' after Dalai Lama visits Arunachal - PTI
China warned on Wednesday that it will take "necessary measures" to defend its territorial sovereignty and interests after India "obstinately" allowed the Dalai Lama to visit the "disputed" parts of Arunachal Pradesh causing "serious damage" to the bilateral ties.
China also lodged a protest with India's Ambassador in Beijing Vijay Gokhale over the Dalai Lama's visit.
"India in disregard to China's concerns obstinately arranged the Dalai Lama's visit to the disputed part of the eastern part of China-India border, causing serious damage to China's interests and China-India relations," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told reporters.
China firmly opposes this move, she asserted.
"China's stand on the eastern part of the borders is consistent and clear. India is keenly aware of the role played by the 14th Dalai Lama.
"Arranging his visit to those sensitive and disputed areas not only runs counter to the Indian side's commitment to the issues related to Tibet but also escalates disputes over the border area," she said.
Hua stated that it goes against the momentum of the sound growth of bilateral relations and will not benefit India in anyway.
"The visit will for sure trigger China's dissatisfaction. This will not bring any benefit to India," she said.
China will firmly take necessary measures to defend its territorial sovereignty and legitimate rights and interests, Hua asserted.
Asked what measures China would take, Hua did not elaborate.
"I don't have much to add. I want to add the issues concerning Tibet has a bearing on China's core interests. India in disregard of China's concerns obstinately arranged the visit," she said.
"We demand the Indian side immediately stop its actions using the Dalai Lama to undermine China's interests and not hype up sensitive issues between the two countries, not artificially damage the foundation of the talks between the two countries on the border issues and bilateral legislations and take concrete actions to safeguard the China-India relations," she said.
"We hope we can work together to maintain growth of India China relations. We know India and China are two close neighbours and countries in Asia. Cooperation between us will serve interests of the region," Hua said.
"We hope to maintain good momentum of growth but this move runs counter to this wish, so we hope India stop doing things that undermine our interests," she said.
The Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson rejected Rijiju's comments, saying "China upholds the policy of not interfering with other countries internal affairs. This is unquestionable."
"But in disregard to China's concerns India arranged the visit of Dalai Lama to the disputed areas. This issue goes beyond internal affairs," she said.
"The role played by the Dalai Lama is clear to all. China's position on the eastern section of the boundary is also very clear," she said.
"The arrangement of Dalai's visit to the disputed area by India runs counter to its commitments on issues related to Tibet and it runs counter to benefits of bilateral relations. We demand that India stop this wrong action," she said.
About Rijiju's comments that it was a religious visit and should not be politicised, she said, "We have noted the statement of the official from the Indian side."
"Could you tell me honestly do you seriously believe that Dalai is only a religious leader. I think the answer is known to all. He is not just a religious figure.
"Therefore, his visit to the place will not be purely of religious purpose. So using the empty words to defend this arrangement is not reasonable. We demand the Indian side to stop this move of undermining Chinese interests," she said.
Chinese officials in off the record conversations with the media said China is really angry about the Dalai Lama's visit specially because he was accompanied by a minister.
Unlike previous visits, the officials said the Dalai Lama was accompanied by a minister which makes it different.
-
ranjan.rao
- BRFite
- Posts: 520
- Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Of course Dalai lama is not...Masood Azhar is. Acupuncture needle has gone too deep below their neck this time. What they are underestimating this time around is our resolve and capabitlies
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
https://mobile.twitter.com/undefined/st ... 8957346820
Chellaney : Amid Chinese threats over the Dalai Lama's Arunachal visit, Indian minister Rijiju gratuitously states, "India respects 'one-China' policy"
Chellaney : Amid Chinese threats over the Dalai Lama's Arunachal visit, Indian minister Rijiju gratuitously states, "India respects 'one-China' policy"
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Dalai Lama’s Arunachal visit “will escalate dispute in border areas”: China - Atul Aneja, The Hindu
The row between India and China on the visit of the Dalai Lama to Arunachal Pradesh spiraled on Wednesday, with the Chinese foreign ministry asserting that the Tibetan leader’s visit to the State “will escalate dispute in border areas”.
Reuters is quoted Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh Pema Khandu as saying that the State does not share a boundary with China, but with Tibet. “As far as the boundary issue is concerned, I have also maintained that we don't share our boundary with China, but we share our boundary with Tibet,” he said.
Analysts say the statement can be interpreted as questioning the “one-China” principle. {But, an Union Minister from Arunachal Pradesh has talked of relevant Indian policy. China should therefore realize that the Indian policy on Tibet is consistent and clear. It is a colonial legacy, remnant of history and will take time to resolve this complex issue. As two of the largest developing economies and in pursuance of friendly relationship, the two nations must not let these issues affect their goals. We hope we can work together to maintain growth of India China relations. We know India and China are two close neighbours and cooperation between us will serve interests of the region. India also wants to add that the issues concerning terrorism has a bearing on India's core interests. China in disregard of India's security 'core concerns' obstinately has been taking a contrarian view in the UNSC 1267 Committee. China is keenly aware of the role played by the leader of the terrorist group of Jaish-e-Muhammad, Maulana Masood Azhar. Such an obstinate position by China against India's 'core interests' has triggered India's dissatisfaction. This will not bring any benefit to China. Opposing the inclusion of the terrorist Chief's name in the UNSC 1267 list without assigning any valid reason every time, not only runs counter to the Chinese side's commitment to the issues of fighting terrorism but also escalates tensions in our relationship. We demand the Chinese side immediately stop its actions of using the terrorism issue to undermine India's interests and not damage the growing economic relationship between the two countries and take concrete actions to safeguard the India-China relations}
Long Xingchun, Director of Center of India Studies, China West Normal University, told The Hindu that the move of allowing the Dalai Lama to visit Arunachal is “not helpful for winning China’s support for India’s membership to the NSG and the listing of Masood Azhar in the UN 1267 committee.” {Even without the Dalai Lama's visit, China wasn't allowing these. So?}
He said that India may have the motive of “reinforcing its legitimacy over the disputed area, with the Dalai Lama as the vehicle”.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
India can reassure China that this is not the case because Dalai Lama is only visiting Tawang district which is undisputed and undisputable Indian territory.He said that India may have the motive of “reinforcing its legitimacy over the disputed area, with the Dalai Lama as the vehicle”.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
India should prepare for some aggressive action by China regarding Brahmaputra.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
I think this time we are ready.
Otherwise the idiots would have put up a tent like asylum seekers somewhere in the indian side of the border.
Otherwise the idiots would have put up a tent like asylum seekers somewhere in the indian side of the border.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Being ready for aggression on Brahmaputra would be a long-term matter. We would be looking at Chinese building upriver dams, destroying the ecosystem and other actions which will affect the ecology of the northeast.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
There are enough Brahmos deployed now. Things can be settled without resorting to A-III/IV. Or maybe its the confidence of having Arihant on the prowl.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 034687.cms
and to rub it right into the chinese ..
"China has no business telling us what to do and what not to do (regarding the Dalai Lama's movement). It is not our next-door neighbour. India shares boundary with Tibet, not with China," he told reporters here.
"In reality, the McMahon Line demarcates the boundary between India and Tibet," he said. .
and to rub it right into the chinese ..
"China has no business telling us what to do and what not to do (regarding the Dalai Lama's movement). It is not our next-door neighbour. India shares boundary with Tibet, not with China," he told reporters here.
"In reality, the McMahon Line demarcates the boundary between India and Tibet," he said. .
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
did some one say " one china " 
-
sanjaykumar
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6110
- Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Finally, an Indian who states it explicitly.
-
ranjan.rao
- BRFite
- Posts: 520
- Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
yes it is one china. However, there are "varying perceptions of that one china". That one china is the china without Aksai chin, tibet, taiwan and SCS island chains and all other places where they are laying fake claims.kit wrote:did some one say " one china "
-
ranjan.rao
- BRFite
- Posts: 520
- Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Hope modi doesnt blow hot and cold like he's been doing that with Pakistan (on balochistan) and follows a reactionary approach. It is high time that our foreign policy sheds the lofty ideals of nehruvian philosophy and comes to grip with the reality of this world and starts playing the dirty games with ChiPak
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/c ... roups.html
The thought of a second proxy war is deeply troubling. India should make it clear that if a second proxy war is started, MT tests and a forward deployment is baked into the proposition.Guwahati: In what has alarmed the Ministry of Home Affairs, China has roped in militant groups of Northeast to launch a proxy war against India.
Authoritative security sources in the home ministry told this newspaper that a recent statement of outlawed Ulfa-I against the Dalai Lama was dictated by China.
The statement of Ulfa-I was aimed more at propagating Chinese view point on territorial dispute between India and China, than targeting the Dalai Lama.
The security sources said that Ulfa chairman Abhizeet Asom’s statement was framed and dictated by China. “In the list of Indian illegal occupation is of course Nan Zang (Southern Tibet). The cunning Indian premier of the day, Nehru grabbed the opportunity of attempting to undo the acceptance of Tibet a part of China in 1951,” the Ulfa-I’s statement said.
A few Chinese agencies drafted the statement of Ulfa-I, which was released to media on March 28, a day before China launched its aggressive campaign against the visit of the Dalai Lama to Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh, security sources said.
-
ranjan.rao
- BRFite
- Posts: 520
- Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
China summons Indian envoy to protest Dalai Lama's Tawang visit
(which has been set on fire)
By going bombastic on this issue they have set themselves for failure, darned if they do and darned if they dont
BEIJING: The Chinese foreign ministry summoned Indian ambassador Vijay Gokhale at the ministry office here on Wednesday to lodge an angry protest against the Dalai Lama's ongoing tour of Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh.
This is the first time an Indian ambassador has been summoned by the Chinese foreign ministry to lodge a protest since April 2008, when then envoy Nirupama Rao was called past midnight after Tibetans scaled the wall of the Chinese embassy in New Delhi in March 2008 protesting against the Beijing Olympic torch
I like the phrase Bottom line. They have given a new meaning to the word bottom line"Unlike his predecessors, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi seems to have taken a very different stance on the Dalai Lama issue raising public engagements with the monk and challenging Beijing's bottomline," it said.
(which has been set on fire)By going bombastic on this issue they have set themselves for failure, darned if they do and darned if they dont
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
best way is to cap chinese imports of toys footwear electronics etc
-
ranjan.rao
- BRFite
- Posts: 520
- Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
^^another ways could be
1. anti dumping duty
2. raids on merchants importing to address the under invoicing
3. utilize our red tape hassles for imports, actually this is the easiest one. We are not yet addicted to cheap chinese good just as US is and we should keep it that ways.
Why restrict it to only these items, there are 100s of other things they are literally dumping. Every city and market has those "China bazaars" or "china markets". Those need to be stopped. If not anything, we will gain on precious FX and have better BOP, why fund our enemies
All the wet dreams of chinese FDI and Indo china are long gone in air (if there were any to start with).
But then I read this on my china made phone and commenting from probably china made laptop.
1. anti dumping duty
2. raids on merchants importing to address the under invoicing
3. utilize our red tape hassles for imports, actually this is the easiest one. We are not yet addicted to cheap chinese good just as US is and we should keep it that ways.
Why restrict it to only these items, there are 100s of other things they are literally dumping. Every city and market has those "China bazaars" or "china markets". Those need to be stopped. If not anything, we will gain on precious FX and have better BOP, why fund our enemies
All the wet dreams of chinese FDI and Indo china are long gone in air (if there were any to start with).
But then I read this on my china made phone and commenting from probably china made laptop.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
That would be monumentally stupid of them. India can play the Uighur, the Tibetan and Taiwan cards. ''SuddepJ
The thought of a second proxy war is deeply troubling. India should make it clear that if a second proxy war is started, MT tests and a forward deployment is baked into the proposition.
I think the Chinese are reading India wrong this time. Things are happening at Mar a Lago tomorrow that will decide the course of events. T-Rump a$$ is on the line to stick it to Prez 11. Let's see what the morrow morn brings.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
The e-tailers (US based) entry and the booming internet access is making it easy for them.ranjan.rao wrote:We are not yet addicted to cheap chinese good just as US is and we should keep it that ways.
-
ranjan.rao
- BRFite
- Posts: 520
- Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
https://www.wsj.com/articles/india-move ... 1491384609
Some interesting tidbits and pictures.
Some interesting tidbits and pictures.
-
ranjan.rao
- BRFite
- Posts: 520
- Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
still nowhere like US where almost everything is made by mithas bhai'svasu raya wrote:The e-tailers (US based) entry and the booming internet access is making it easy for them.ranjan.rao wrote:We are not yet addicted to cheap chinese good just as US is and we should keep it that ways.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
My suggestion is to give Jinnah house as Taiwan consulate.kit wrote: in fact that needs to taken up a notch too ..how about upgrading the taiwan embassy status in New Delhi and a consulate in mumbai .. good for trade as well
Watch what Chindu editorials say., they are the official mouthpiece of china in India.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
What does China want Indians to do? Not respect 'one-China' policy? I think Indian minister Rijiju is right., so far we are gratuitously respecting 'One-China' policy. If China starts showing its red burnt arse around by making baki like statements - we will have to stop respecting 'One-China' policy gratuitously only.TKiran wrote:https://mobile.twitter.com/undefined/st ... 8957346820
Chellaney : Amid Chinese threats over the Dalai Lama's Arunachal visit, Indian minister Rijiju gratuitously states, "India respects 'one-China' policy"
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
one of the junior ministers of state should say one china policy may be revisited .. just to keep the tempo on..next comes the uighurs
.. just to keep the tempo on..next comes the uighursRe: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
industries look at profit and access .. if India can give both., every company will beat a path to the indian economic zones .. Those cheap china trinkets ..time they are levied . not to forget the Indian bureaucrats on the Chinese pay roll .. free trips and all
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
We have to also understand the middle Kingdom syndrome, there was very good information about that in the very early pages of this thread, China is only Han core, they have 5 countries concentric with the Han core, China is the middle Kingdom. It's a great strategy, I must admit grudgingly. Any thing happening at the periphery would not affect the middle Kingdom, in fact, they keep appending other Kingdoms, people call this as "revisionist". But that is not the complete understanding of China middle Kingdom syndrome. It has more depth and it is uniquely Chinese in nature.
If at all we have to confront, we can only confront the peripheral Kingdoms, but can't hurt the core.
Only way we can defeat China is to limit China to Han core. CPEC may be a strategic hubris of this syndrome. If we can defeat CPEC, the whole middle Kingdom will unravel., Thats the reason for the hyperbole of China today. We are the only challengers. They will not let us defeat CPEC.
We have recognised the threat very late, or, we never recognized the opportunity to unravel China through defeat of CPEC. So far we have been losing. After Uri attack, we had the opportunity to annexe some land, now only a breakup of Pakistan can defeat CPEC and thence the middle Kingdom.
If at all we have to confront, we can only confront the peripheral Kingdoms, but can't hurt the core.
Only way we can defeat China is to limit China to Han core. CPEC may be a strategic hubris of this syndrome. If we can defeat CPEC, the whole middle Kingdom will unravel., Thats the reason for the hyperbole of China today. We are the only challengers. They will not let us defeat CPEC.
We have recognised the threat very late, or, we never recognized the opportunity to unravel China through defeat of CPEC. So far we have been losing. After Uri attack, we had the opportunity to annexe some land, now only a breakup of Pakistan can defeat CPEC and thence the middle Kingdom.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
From may years ago, April 29, 1983
http://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/29/busin ... rders.html
" The French Government announced today that it was ending the cumbersome inspections of all imported Japanese video recorders at a tiny customs depot in Poitiers in central France. The inspections had virtually cut off the flow of foreign video recorders into France."
I have often thought that the same should apply to some chinese imports in a very small town somewhere in Bihar.
http://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/29/busin ... rders.html
" The French Government announced today that it was ending the cumbersome inspections of all imported Japanese video recorders at a tiny customs depot in Poitiers in central France. The inspections had virtually cut off the flow of foreign video recorders into France."
I have often thought that the same should apply to some chinese imports in a very small town somewhere in Bihar.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Indonesia must lead for sake of its interests in South China Sea: - Straits Times
JAKARTA (THE JAKARTA POST/ASIA NEWS NETWORK) - Over the past quarter century, Indonesia has sought to play the role of an honest broker in the South China Sea disputes, facilitating negotiations over a proposed Code of Conduct for claimants to the sea, and hosting workshops on technical issues and other barriers to cooperation. These efforts, though admirable, are no longer equal to the challenge presented by Chinese actions, which now pose a much broader risk to Indonesian interests.
Since 2013, Beijing has constructed three large air bases and four smaller islands on top of coral reefs in the South China Sea, and has begun to place military personnel and weapons systems on them. The total area reclaimed is 15 times greater than that of Merdeka Square, and far greater than that reclaimed by Vietnam, the Philippines and Malaysia.
China's increased presence will help it to enforce its maritime claims for example, by pressuring other claimants to allow Chinese fleets to fish in their waters, or by restricting the operation of foreign survey vessels in international waters.
Were it not for the United States' Navy's continued presence in the area, Beijing would be close to achieving a dominant position in nearby waters.
Such extensive Chinese maritime claims, encompassed by Beijing's "nine-dash line," have no basis under international law. When China had an opportunity to offer arguments in support of its claims before an arbitral tribunal in The Hague from 2013 to 2016, its fundamentals were so flawed that the Chinese leadership chose not to mount a case.
The tribunal's decision dismissing the claims is now international law, yet Beijing continues to disregard it.
These developments have security implications for Indonesia. The new Chinese airfield on Fiery Cross Reef, built to accommodate military jets, is 1,000 kilometers from the Chinese mainland in Hainan, but only 750 km from Indonesian territory in the Natunas.
Standoffs between Indonesian and Chinese security forces in the waters around the Natunas have increased as Chinese fishermen sail further and further south in search of a catch, backed up by a bigger and more aggressive Chinese Coast Guard.
Under President Joko "Jokowi" Widodo, Indonesia has responded to these developments in a robust but narrow way, reinforcing the Indonesian base on Natuna Besar, seizing two Chinese vessels found fishing illegally in Indonesia's exclusive economic zone (EEZ) last year, and seeking to accelerate economic development in the waters around Natuna. The president's two visits to Ranai last year left no doubt as to Indonesia's claim to the islands.
These are important steps that will help protect Indonesian territory and maritime rights in the short-term. But it is not clear that they will prove a durable deterrent in the long term, as the People's Liberation Army Navy and the Chinese Coast Guard grow increasingly powerful relative to Indonesia's much smaller maritime forces.
Moreover, these steps will do little to address broader concerns about the nature of Chinese statecraft as China rises. Beijing's approach to the South China Sea has always been characterised by a pattern of "talk and take," as then Philippine defence secretary Orlando Mercado first put it two decades ago.
But since 2013 we have seen much more taking than talking.
China has worked through its client, Cambodia, to block tougher language by Asean on the situation, and it refuses to countenance a legally binding Code of Conduct in the South China Sea. Beijing's increasingly aggressive behaviour, disregard for international law, and refusal to negotiate in good faith portend more serious problems in the future.
As I have argued in a recent Lowy Institute Analysis, "Going it Alone" (available in English and Indonesian), it is time for Indonesia to define its interests in the South China Sea more broadly than in the past, by seeking not only to defend Indonesian territorial integrity in the short term, but also to lead the region in shaping Chinese behaviour in the long-term.
Indonesia need not abandon its non-claimant status or honest broker role to do so, but it does need to take a much stronger stand in support of international law.
Jokowi and Foreign Minister Retno LP Marsudi could start by clearly and repeatedly articulating an expectation that China will adhere to the arbitral tribunal's award in Philippines versus China, and end its use of the "nine-dash line" to outline China's claims.
Doing so would give cover to other countries in the region to take a similar stand on behalf of international law, and - given critical mass over a sustained period - could lead China to reconsider its position.
Indonesians might reasonably ask why this duty should fall to them. After all, Indonesia is not a claimant like Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines; and the US has been active in challenging Chinese expansion and militarisation of the South China Sea.
They might also worry that doing so would lead to the perception that Indonesia was taking sides in a dispute between China and the US. Indonesia could lie low and allow those on the front lines, like the Philippines and Vietnam, and great powers like the US, to take the lead on these issues.
But while taking a stand now could lead to tension with Beijing in the short term, it will lead to a more stable, peaceful region in the future.
Moreover, would it not contravene the spirit of a bebas aktif (independent and active) foreign policy to leave smaller, developing nations to the mercy of the great powers, or to leave the great powers to settle these issues themselves?
And would it not contravene the spirit of a bebas aktif foreign policy to allow Chinese anger to exercise a veto over Indonesian action?
Indonesia should maintain non-alignment between the great powers by rowing between two reefs, as founding father Mohammad Hatta said, but it must also be prepared to adjust its course if one of the great powers constructs an artificial reef ahead of it.
Indonesia is the only country in the region with the requisite moral authority and capacity for leadership on these issues. In the long-term, only principled and persistent Indonesian diplomacy can prompt the changes in Chinese behavior that will secure Indonesian territorial integrity and regional stability.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Dalai Lama Arunachal visit: 'Answer blows with blows if India plays dirty,' says Chinese media - Shailaja Neelakantan, ToI
China is again using the media it runs as a proxy to issue threats - its latest ones are calls to Beijing to answer India's "blows with blows" and to interfere in "India's turbulent northern state (which) borders China".
That China's upset with the Dalai Lama visiting the border state of Arunachal Pradesh was made patently clear over the last week. That it's livid was made even clearer in two editorials today in state-run media, China Daily and Global Times.
"If New Delhi chooses to play dirty, however, Beijing should not hesitate to answer blows with blows," said a China Daily edit, about the Dalai Lama's visit.
The Global Times edit threatened Beijing's interference in Kashmir, without naming the border state.
"With a GDP several times higher than that of India, military capabilities that can reach the Indian Ocean and having good relations with India's peripheral nations, coupled with the fact that India's turbulent northern state borders China, if China engages in a geopolitical game with India, will Beijing lose to New Delhi?" the edit threatened. To simplify the confusing language, what it meant was it could interfere in Kashmir and other border states if it so wished.
It appears what has irked Beijing the most are Union minister Kiren Rijiju's comments and the fact that he accompanied the Dalai Lama to Arunachal.
"China should not object to the Dalai Lama's visit and interfere in India's internal affairs," Rijiju said yesterday.
China Daily today conveyed Beijing's enormous displeasure over that comment.
"Rijiju might think himself cute in borrowing a line from Beijing's diplomatic representations, but he has ignored the fundamental distinction here: Like Taiwan and any other part of China, Tibet is a part of Chinese territory no matter whether New Delhi agrees or not," China Daily's edit said.
For more proof Beijing is irked with Rijiju, here's the Global Times, a paper run by China's Communist Party, today:
"The Dalai Lama has been to the disputed region before, but what makes this trip different is that he is received and accompanied by India's Junior Home Minister Kiren Rijiju," Global Times said.
To Rijiju's assertion that southern Tibet is "an inseparable part of India", China Daily reached back into history to British colonial times.
Southern Tibet, it said, "was stolen from China by his country's former colonial master taking advantage of China's internal strife."
Yesterday, China's foreign ministry accused India of "losing its dignity" by "playing around with" the Dalai Lama.
In one of the edits today, the state-run media implied that the monk's visit is being used as a tit-for-tat against Beijing, which refused to support India's membership to the Nuclear Suppliers Group, and didn't censure Pakistan-based terrorist Masood Azhar.
"The Dalai's visit to Arunachal Pradesh this time is seen as New Delhi using the monk as a diplomatic tool to put pressure on China. But this is a clumsy and rude move. The Dalai is a highly politicized symbol in China's diplomacy," Global Times said.
-
asgkhan
- BRFite
- Posts: 1834
- Joined: 16 Apr 2009 17:19
- Location: Helping BRF research how to seduce somali women
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Good move by AP CM stating AP borders Tibet and not China. Time to raise a issue in UN on illegal chinese occupation and genocide of Tibetans, by commie Chinese.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
How the Chinese curry favour with corrupt bureaucrats in India Sri Lanka and elsewhere .. this is just a tip of the ice berg
https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/unlocki ... ead78f096c
The old cliche goes that there's no substitute for a mother's love. But for Chinese intelligence officers, her access to classified information comes close. On March 29, the U.S. Department of Justice announced the arrest of Candace Claiborne, an office management specialist (or administrative assistant) with the State Department, for failing to disclose thousands of dollars in gifts and payments from Chinese officials. The criminal complaint against Claiborne notes that she was in communication with two suspected operatives with the Shanghai State Security Bureau, a regional office that reports to the Chinese Civilian intelligence service the Ministry of State Security (MSS) in Beijing. It also cites an instance in May 2011, during Claiborne's third tour in China, when a suspected Chinese intelligence officer contacted her to request internal U.S. government analysis of a recent U.S.-China strategic economic dialogue. A month earlier, Claiborne received a $2,480 payment. (It isn't clear whether she provided the document, which probably explains why she hasn't been charged with espionage.)
Some of the gifts that Claiborne accepted, which included thousands of dollars in cash and items such as an iPhone and MacBook computer, were for her personal use. Many of them, however, went to a person identified in the complaint against her as "Co-conspirator A." The media initially ran with stories that the figure was a man deployed by Chinese intelligence to steal Claiborne's heart — and any privileged information she had access to — in a so-called "honey-trap" operation. After all, female administrators are frequent targets of these kinds of schemes, which typically dispatch attractive men (known as "ravens") to romance them. But the details of the complaint make clear that Co-conspirator A is, in fact, Claiborne's adult son, who returned to live with his mother in China in 2012 after finishing college in Maryland. Among the items he received through his mother's Chinese contacts are tuition at a fashion school in Shanghai, spending money, a furnished apartment, international vacations for him and his friends, a sewing machine, and herbal medicines.
The incident offers insight into what we have dubbed "MOMINT" — or mom intelligence. And though Claiborne is not facing espionage charges, her case provides some useful lessons about the business of spying.
Hold the ICE
It's a hard truth to break to my friends in U.S. intelligence agencies, but the people who wind up spying against their governments usually volunteer for the job. Most of the CIA's and FBI's invaluable sources are not the product of painstaking grooming; they're walk-ins who wanted to work for the Americans. The same goes for Americans who flip for foreign intelligence agencies — Claiborne among them, apparently. The FBI complaint outlines how she first contacted one of the Shanghai State Security Bureau intelligence officials (called "Co-Conspirator B") in June 2007 looking for help finding her son a job as an English teacher in Shanghai. Co-conspirator B reportedly replied that he remembered Claiborne well and that he would check with his friends to see what assistance they could offer. The next day, he emailed Claiborne's son about a job teaching English at a school in Shanghai. The three continued talking throughout 2007 and 2008 about Claiborne's son's job prospects.
The KGB, the Soviet secret police and intelligence agency, developed MICE, a now-famous acronym for its four-pronged approach to recruiting: money, ideology, compromise and ego. For Americans working with foreign intelligence agencies, however, it's clear that cash is king. In this respect, Claiborne is no different from American double agents such as Aldrich Ames, Robert Hanssen and Philip Agee. Claiborne, like these notorious figures, was in financial trouble. Despite her efforts to set him up with a job, Claiborne's son preferred to keep relying on his mother's financial support. The arrangement strained Claiborne's modest salary and left her burdened with heavy debt, including tax payments owed to the District of Columbia. And compared with many other parents in her situation, Claiborne had an unusual advantage. She realized she could use her position with the State Department and her connections in Chinese intelligence to get the help she needed for her and her son through MOMINT.
Caught on the Little Hook
Unlike Ames, Hanssen and Agee, though, Claiborne appears never to have fully committed to spying. An analysis of the criminal complaint reveals that she was merely stringing her Chinese contacts along, accepting money and gifts in exchange for classified information that she promised — but by all appearances, never delivered. Even so, the conversations with her son documented in the complaint demonstrate that she knew she was playing a dangerous game.
A common tactic that intelligence officers use in the recruiting process is known as the "little hook." In this process, a handler asks a prospective spy for a seemingly innocuous document and then pays him or her for it, all the while recording the transaction. The exchange not only proves the recruit's mettle, but it also gives the handler blackmail material to use to get the newly minted agent to give up more and more sensitive information. So though Claiborne's dealings with Chinese intelligence started with money, they quickly put her in a compromised position.
The complaint documents several occasions in which she apparently tried to distance herself from her contacts in the Shanghai State Security Bureau. Shortly after her first exchange with Co-conspirator B in 2007, for instance, she discussed the possibility of leaving the State Department. But instead she stayed on, and even bid on a post in Beijing, perhaps an indication that the MSS had already established influence over her actions. In the years that followed, Claiborne repeatedly tried to ignore requests for contact from the Chinese intelligence officers, refused to travel to meet them and told her son not to tell them where she was working. Her son, meanwhile, kept asking for more favors and financial assistance from the officers, who were only too willing to oblige. Claiborne's son kept digging the hooks of Chinese intelligence deeper and deeper into his mother until she felt trapped. At one point, she wrote to him to express her frustration that his actions kept getting her "dragged into this" time and again.
This sense of entrapment eventually led Claiborne to welcome an undercover FBI agent posing as a Chinese intelligence officer into her home in Washington to talk. MOMINT may have provided Claiborne with quick cash in a time of need, but she wound up paying the price.
A Long and Changing Game
Beyond the lessons it offers on intelligence recruiting in general, the case also offers some interesting points on Chinese intelligence specifically. For one thing, Claiborne's experience with the MSS illustrates the agency's patience in their human intelligence operations. Compared with American agents, who are typically quick to move from the little hook to gleaning more sensitive intelligence, the Chinese officers were willing to invest years developing their source. For another, that Claiborne is not ethnically Chinese is unusual. The conventional wisdom for years was that intelligence agencies in China specialized in targeting and recruiting ethnic Chinese sources. And, in fact, they still focus largely on ethnic Chinese recruits — but not exclusively. A recent Newsweek article by Jeff Stein noted that the CIA has adapted its thinking about Chinese espionage ever since the MSS recruited a Caucasian American, Glenn Shriver, in 2010 while he was studying in China. After bringing Shriver under its wing, the Chinese intelligence agency then sent him home to infiltrate the CIA.
Finally, the details included in the complaint suggest that Claiborne's Chinese handlers were careless in covering their tracks. Investigators have uncovered a sizable quantity of emails, texts and other communications between them, though the Chinese intelligence officers seemed to prefer physical handoffs and in-person meetings to electronic contact when conveying sensitive information. Old-school spying techniques still have their place, even in the age of cyberespionage. And from the looks of it, Claiborne wasn't terribly tech savvy, either. She tried to obscure her ties to the Chinese officers by deleting emails in response to State Department and FBI interviews — a tactic more likely to raise suspicions than to eliminate evidence. The instructions she gave her son not to tell the MSS where she was were similarly naive, considering that she sent them from a MacBook or iPhone that the intelligence agency had furnished her, doubtless complete with keyloggers and other malware.
Claiborne wasn't a professional spy, nor was she practicing good espionage tradecraft. Nevertheless, she managed to get away with her activities for a decade before she was discovered. Based on her experience, one can't help but wonder how many other "Mama Haris" are still out there operating for foreign intelligence services.
( Reference and copied with permission from stratfor)
https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/unlocki ... ead78f096c
The old cliche goes that there's no substitute for a mother's love. But for Chinese intelligence officers, her access to classified information comes close. On March 29, the U.S. Department of Justice announced the arrest of Candace Claiborne, an office management specialist (or administrative assistant) with the State Department, for failing to disclose thousands of dollars in gifts and payments from Chinese officials. The criminal complaint against Claiborne notes that she was in communication with two suspected operatives with the Shanghai State Security Bureau, a regional office that reports to the Chinese Civilian intelligence service the Ministry of State Security (MSS) in Beijing. It also cites an instance in May 2011, during Claiborne's third tour in China, when a suspected Chinese intelligence officer contacted her to request internal U.S. government analysis of a recent U.S.-China strategic economic dialogue. A month earlier, Claiborne received a $2,480 payment. (It isn't clear whether she provided the document, which probably explains why she hasn't been charged with espionage.)
Some of the gifts that Claiborne accepted, which included thousands of dollars in cash and items such as an iPhone and MacBook computer, were for her personal use. Many of them, however, went to a person identified in the complaint against her as "Co-conspirator A." The media initially ran with stories that the figure was a man deployed by Chinese intelligence to steal Claiborne's heart — and any privileged information she had access to — in a so-called "honey-trap" operation. After all, female administrators are frequent targets of these kinds of schemes, which typically dispatch attractive men (known as "ravens") to romance them. But the details of the complaint make clear that Co-conspirator A is, in fact, Claiborne's adult son, who returned to live with his mother in China in 2012 after finishing college in Maryland. Among the items he received through his mother's Chinese contacts are tuition at a fashion school in Shanghai, spending money, a furnished apartment, international vacations for him and his friends, a sewing machine, and herbal medicines.
The incident offers insight into what we have dubbed "MOMINT" — or mom intelligence. And though Claiborne is not facing espionage charges, her case provides some useful lessons about the business of spying.
Hold the ICE
It's a hard truth to break to my friends in U.S. intelligence agencies, but the people who wind up spying against their governments usually volunteer for the job. Most of the CIA's and FBI's invaluable sources are not the product of painstaking grooming; they're walk-ins who wanted to work for the Americans. The same goes for Americans who flip for foreign intelligence agencies — Claiborne among them, apparently. The FBI complaint outlines how she first contacted one of the Shanghai State Security Bureau intelligence officials (called "Co-Conspirator B") in June 2007 looking for help finding her son a job as an English teacher in Shanghai. Co-conspirator B reportedly replied that he remembered Claiborne well and that he would check with his friends to see what assistance they could offer. The next day, he emailed Claiborne's son about a job teaching English at a school in Shanghai. The three continued talking throughout 2007 and 2008 about Claiborne's son's job prospects.
The KGB, the Soviet secret police and intelligence agency, developed MICE, a now-famous acronym for its four-pronged approach to recruiting: money, ideology, compromise and ego. For Americans working with foreign intelligence agencies, however, it's clear that cash is king. In this respect, Claiborne is no different from American double agents such as Aldrich Ames, Robert Hanssen and Philip Agee. Claiborne, like these notorious figures, was in financial trouble. Despite her efforts to set him up with a job, Claiborne's son preferred to keep relying on his mother's financial support. The arrangement strained Claiborne's modest salary and left her burdened with heavy debt, including tax payments owed to the District of Columbia. And compared with many other parents in her situation, Claiborne had an unusual advantage. She realized she could use her position with the State Department and her connections in Chinese intelligence to get the help she needed for her and her son through MOMINT.
Caught on the Little Hook
Unlike Ames, Hanssen and Agee, though, Claiborne appears never to have fully committed to spying. An analysis of the criminal complaint reveals that she was merely stringing her Chinese contacts along, accepting money and gifts in exchange for classified information that she promised — but by all appearances, never delivered. Even so, the conversations with her son documented in the complaint demonstrate that she knew she was playing a dangerous game.
A common tactic that intelligence officers use in the recruiting process is known as the "little hook." In this process, a handler asks a prospective spy for a seemingly innocuous document and then pays him or her for it, all the while recording the transaction. The exchange not only proves the recruit's mettle, but it also gives the handler blackmail material to use to get the newly minted agent to give up more and more sensitive information. So though Claiborne's dealings with Chinese intelligence started with money, they quickly put her in a compromised position.
The complaint documents several occasions in which she apparently tried to distance herself from her contacts in the Shanghai State Security Bureau. Shortly after her first exchange with Co-conspirator B in 2007, for instance, she discussed the possibility of leaving the State Department. But instead she stayed on, and even bid on a post in Beijing, perhaps an indication that the MSS had already established influence over her actions. In the years that followed, Claiborne repeatedly tried to ignore requests for contact from the Chinese intelligence officers, refused to travel to meet them and told her son not to tell them where she was working. Her son, meanwhile, kept asking for more favors and financial assistance from the officers, who were only too willing to oblige. Claiborne's son kept digging the hooks of Chinese intelligence deeper and deeper into his mother until she felt trapped. At one point, she wrote to him to express her frustration that his actions kept getting her "dragged into this" time and again.
This sense of entrapment eventually led Claiborne to welcome an undercover FBI agent posing as a Chinese intelligence officer into her home in Washington to talk. MOMINT may have provided Claiborne with quick cash in a time of need, but she wound up paying the price.
A Long and Changing Game
Beyond the lessons it offers on intelligence recruiting in general, the case also offers some interesting points on Chinese intelligence specifically. For one thing, Claiborne's experience with the MSS illustrates the agency's patience in their human intelligence operations. Compared with American agents, who are typically quick to move from the little hook to gleaning more sensitive intelligence, the Chinese officers were willing to invest years developing their source. For another, that Claiborne is not ethnically Chinese is unusual. The conventional wisdom for years was that intelligence agencies in China specialized in targeting and recruiting ethnic Chinese sources. And, in fact, they still focus largely on ethnic Chinese recruits — but not exclusively. A recent Newsweek article by Jeff Stein noted that the CIA has adapted its thinking about Chinese espionage ever since the MSS recruited a Caucasian American, Glenn Shriver, in 2010 while he was studying in China. After bringing Shriver under its wing, the Chinese intelligence agency then sent him home to infiltrate the CIA.
Finally, the details included in the complaint suggest that Claiborne's Chinese handlers were careless in covering their tracks. Investigators have uncovered a sizable quantity of emails, texts and other communications between them, though the Chinese intelligence officers seemed to prefer physical handoffs and in-person meetings to electronic contact when conveying sensitive information. Old-school spying techniques still have their place, even in the age of cyberespionage. And from the looks of it, Claiborne wasn't terribly tech savvy, either. She tried to obscure her ties to the Chinese officers by deleting emails in response to State Department and FBI interviews — a tactic more likely to raise suspicions than to eliminate evidence. The instructions she gave her son not to tell the MSS where she was were similarly naive, considering that she sent them from a MacBook or iPhone that the intelligence agency had furnished her, doubtless complete with keyloggers and other malware.
Claiborne wasn't a professional spy, nor was she practicing good espionage tradecraft. Nevertheless, she managed to get away with her activities for a decade before she was discovered. Based on her experience, one can't help but wonder how many other "Mama Haris" are still out there operating for foreign intelligence services.
( Reference and copied with permission from stratfor)