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

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 1480
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

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

Postby yensoy » 07 Aug 2017 11:31

Paul wrote:For those who were saying bringing BD into the equation is an overkill, read the gist of this article. If it is not slyly anti India, I have an elephant here for you to buy.

http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/ ... angladesh/

Government officials of Bangladesh however said the BBIN agreement may end up being a connecting route between Bangladesh and India, as Bhutan and Nepal has already expressed reluctance to be a part of this endeavour.


Corrected: Government officials of Bangladesh however said the BBIN agreement may end up being a connecting route between BangladeshIndia and India, as Bhutan and Nepal has already expressed reluctance to be a part of this endeavour.

As I said before, our only interest in BBIN and other multilaterally blessed roads leading to Burma and beyond is to get overland access to NE states via Bangladesh.

ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1390
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

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

Postby ashish raval » 07 Aug 2017 11:53

Government officials of Bangladesh however said the BBIN agreement may end up being a connecting route between Bangladesh and India, as Bhutan and Nepal has already expressed reluctance to be a part of this endeavour.


We should start with whoever joins the agreement with a plan that others can join in in future. Planning something which allows others to join at a future date is the key here.

Economic and security benefits of India should out weigh those of others.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23743
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 07 Aug 2017 12:10

China’s RCEP push veils grand plan - Arun S, The Hindu
Community social media platform ‘LocalCircles’ recently did a survey on the Indian consumer’s perception about items imported from China. The results gave a peek into the minds of Indian consumers. It showed 52% of participants were of the opinion that for the same product, the quality of a ‘Made in India’ version was superior to the one from China. However, 83% said they buy Chinese products as those items were the cheapest. On the issue of addressing ‘quality concerns’ about imported Chinese items, 98% said there should be better screening of such products before they enter the Indian market — including ensuring that only those imports meeting the Indian (BIS) standards are allowed.

The poll assumes significance as it comes amid ongoing negotiations for a mega-regional Free Trade Agreement (FTA) among 16 Asia-Pacific nations, including China and India. Known as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the proposed FTA, aims to boost goods trade by eliminating most tariff and non-tariff barriers — a move that is expected to provide the region’s consumers greater choice of quality products at affordable rates. It also seeks to liberalise investment norms and do away with services trade restrictions.

The RCEP is billed as an FTA between the 10-member ASEAN bloc and its six FTA partners — India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. When inked, it would become the world’s biggest free trade pact. This is because the 16 nations account for a total GDP (Purchasing Power Parity, or PPP basis) of about $50 trillion (or about 40% of the global GDP) and house close to 3.5 billion people (about half the world’s population). India (GDP-PPP worth $9.5 trillion and population of 1.3 billion) and China (GDP-PPP of $23.2 trillion and population of 1.4 billion) together comprise the RCEP’s biggest component in terms of market size.

The RCEP ‘guiding principles and objectives’ state that the “negotiations on trade in goods, trade in services, investment and other areas will be conducted in parallel to ensure a comprehensive and balanced outcome.” However, it is learnt that China, using its influence as the global leader in goods exports, has been deploying quiet diplomacy to ensure consistent focus on attempts to obtain commitments on elimination of tariffs on most traded goods.

China is keen on an agreement on a ‘high level’ of tariff liberalisation — eliminating duties on as much as 92% of traded products. However, India’s offer is to do away with duties on only 80% of the lines and that too, with a longer phase-out period for Chinese imports (ie, about 20 years, against 15 for other RCEP nations).


Duty impact on India

A highly ambitious level of tariff elimination without enough flexibility would affect India the most on the goods side. This is because in the RCEP group (except Myanmar, Cambodia and Lao PDR), India has the highest average ‘Most Favoured Nation (MFN) tariff’ level at 13.5%. MFN tariff, as per the WTO, refers to normal, non-discriminatory tariff charged on imports — excluding preferential tariffs under FTAs and other schemes or tariffs charged inside quotas.

A March 2017 discussion paper on RCEP by the think tank RIS also said, “India is the only participant that has a high level of merchandise trade deficit … Its trade deficit with RCEP countries is also more than half its global trade deficit.” The paper, by V.S. Seshadri, also showed that India’s trade deficit with China “is over three times its exports to China (in 2014), a situation not matched by any other RCEP member except Cambodia…” It further said, “considering India’s vulnerabilities and large bilateral trade deficits, India will need substantial flexibilities to deal with China… A longer phase out period with backloading of concessions, particularly on sensitive products, will be essential.”

On the sidelines of the recently held RCEP talks in Hyderabad, representatives from the Indian industry laid out their apprehensions before the industry bodies of other RCEP nations and the trade negotiators. Their main worry was that the proposed FTA, owing to the possibility of elimination of duties across most sectors, could lead to a surge in inflow of low-priced goods, mainly from China. This, India Inc. feared, would result in their share in the domestic market contracting, and consequent downsizing/closure of operations, as well as job losses. This could lead to lower incomes and reduced consumer spending.

Also, since India already has separate FTAs with the 10-member ASEAN bloc, Japan and Korea, India Inc. feels that on account of the RCEP, India may not gain much on the goods side with existing FTA partners. India is also negotiating separate FTAs with Australia and New Zealand. However, be it through a separate FTA or via RCEP, India’s gains on the goods segment from Australia and New Zealand will be limited as MFN tariff levels of those two countries are already low. China is the only RCEP country with which India neither has an FTA, nor is in talks for one. Therefore, Indian industry sees RCEP as an indirect FTA with China, especially since, given sensitivities involved, there could be a hue and cry if the India opts for a direct FTA with that country.

Trade deficit woes

Ajit Ranade, chief economist, Aditya Birla Group, said even without a bilateral FTA, India was already affected by China’s overhang of excess capacity in sectors including metals, chemicals and textiles. Goods imports from China have been far outpacing India’s shipments to that country (India’s exports are mainly troubled by China’s non-tariff barriers). This has led to goods trade deficit with China widening from just $1.1 billion in 2003-04 to a whopping $52.7 billion in 2015-16, though easing slightly to $51.1 billion in 2016-17. Mr. Ranade said India’s FTA strategy has to be guided by the ‘Make In India’ initiative that aims to boost domestic manufacturing and job creation within India.

In return for greater market access in goods, India, with its large pool of skilled workers and professionals, might be trying to use the RCEP to gain on the services side, by securing commitments from the other nations to mutually ease norms on movement of such people across borders for short-term work.

However, the RCEP is just one element of China’s grander plans for global dominance. In February, its foreign minister Wang Yi said, “We hope to … speed up the RCEP negotiation process and strive for an early agreement, so as to contribute to realising the greater common goal of building the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP).” The FTAAP spans 21 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation countries, including the U.S. and China, but does not cover India (though it has sought to be an APEC member). With the U.S. withdrawing from the Trans Pacific Partnership — a mega-regional FTA not involving India and China — that similarly aimed to help establish the FTAAP, the path is clear for China to push ahead with this strategic initiative to its advantage through the RCEP.

In May, Chinese Commerce Minister Zhong Shan said the RCEP “highly echoes the Silk Road spirit.” The Silk Road Economic Belt (on land) and the Maritime Silk Road (via the ocean) comprise China’s Belt and Road Initiative, that India had opposed on strategic grounds.

Joshua P. Meltzer of the think-tank Brookings said in an article that the impact of the BRI — to which China has committed $1.4 trillion — “on regional trade integration should also be seen in light of trade agreements such as the RCEP.”

Once completed, RCEP will also provide preferential access to each country’s markets. BRI could help China address some of its excess capacity in industries such as steel and cement, since infrastructure projects supported by the initiative would boost external demand for Chinese exports. The initiative could provide a means for Chinese industries with excess capacity to export equipment that is currently idle.” It is pertinent for India to note this larger picture even as it sees the RCEP as “a beacon of hope for free trade” and a pact offering “a positive and forward-looking alternative in the face of growing protectionism across the world.”

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

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

Postby AdityaM » 07 Aug 2017 13:33

The ASEAN countries didn't allow Doklam to be the opportunity to grow a spine. They capitulated to the Chinese.

What will be the point in inviting the ASEAN for 26 Jan, if their hearts beat with Chinese stents.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-scores ... 54194.html

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5403
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

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

Postby niran » 07 Aug 2017 13:46

AdityaM wrote:The ASEAN countries didn't allow Doklam to be the opportunity to grow a spine. They capitulated to the Chinese.

What will be the point in inviting the ASEAN for 26 Jan, if their hearts beat with Chinese stents.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-scores ... 54194.html

need to get out of
this/they/ them will come to our aide syndrome

it is India's fight

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9949
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

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

Postby sum » 07 Aug 2017 13:48

^^ Impressive diplomatic/economic muscling skills by China indeed

So guess India is the only one in Asia-town which can stand up to the Chinese while rest will just cower in the shadows and watch the drama.

Have 0% doubt that if this present Govt wasnt in power and it was a UPA one, even we would have capitulated

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5403
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

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

Postby niran » 07 Aug 2017 13:53

sum wrote:^^ Impressive diplomatic/economic muscling skills by China indeed

So guess India is the only one in Asia-town which can stand up to the Chinese while rest will just cower in the shadows and watch the drama.

just as folks standby and watch two powerful fight they will cheer align with the winner. Vietnam is the one having beat Cheen USA France and their ilk blue black, so they standup and oppose cheen openly, but you can do only this much, beside this was in Manila the only openly Cheen ASEAN friend

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12115
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

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

Postby pankajs » 07 Aug 2017 14:07

One gent suggested that we cut official ties with China and close their embassy in India because of Doka La impasse. Now lets take that logic to its *extreme* to test its soundness.

Nepal is tilting China way. Lets cut diplomatic relation with Nepal. What about Sri Lanka? How about Maldives? Would Bangladesh be next? Pretty soon we will be *isolated* in our own neighborhood.

What about ASEAN countries? Next look at the Gelf. After that we should ask the same questions wrt Europe followed by Americas. Posing the question "Are you with us or with China?" we will soon find ourselves *isolated* worldwide.

The fastest way loose support is to ask *small and very weak* countries to choose between a *stronger* China and a *weaker* India. NEVER pose that question unless it is ABSOLUTELY CRISIS situation because guess who they will choose to back? China of course! except for countries in our immediate neighborhood.

yensoy
BRFite
Posts: 1480
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

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

Postby yensoy » 07 Aug 2017 14:23

sum wrote:^^ Impressive diplomatic/economic muscling skills by China indeed


Not really. ASEAN works on consensus and can't make a statement unless everyone is on board. China has managed to buy out Cambodia and Laos, and Myanmar is deep in Chinese sphere of influence. Philippines is halfway there, depending on which side of the bed Duterte wakes up. Thailand is a big beneficiary of Chinese tourist dollars and consumer spending (fisheries & fruit products). That leaves only Vietnam and to a lesser extent Indonesia and Malaysia in the opposite camp. Singapore has perfected the art of playing to both sides, and Brunei doesn't matter. Not sure if I left out anyone...

rajpa
BRFite
Posts: 302
Joined: 04 Aug 2004 09:35
Location: Chennai

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

Postby rajpa » 07 Aug 2017 14:25

nam wrote:Asked this question earlier. Can we defend a offensive by pla in to northern Bhutan?

China might force Bhutan to ask India to leave Dolam for returning Northern regions.

As we are in dolam on Bhutan' behalf... So they could publicly ask us to leave.


This is very much a possibility. The chinese can think up of a scheme where they are punishing the bhutanese for cooperating with Indians and in turn get the Bhutanese to plead with the Indians. They could pick up a different location in Bhutan for the same. However they stand the risk of being internationally exposed as bullies. Be that as it may, the ass kicking they have got in Doklam will never be wiped out.

Also, wonder why the Chinese haven't taken it to the UNSC yet? :D

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 07 Aug 2017 14:50

nam wrote:Asked this question earlier. Can we defend a offensive by pla in to northern Bhutan?

China might force Bhutan to ask India to leave Dolam for returning Northern regions.

As we are in dolam on Bhutan' behalf... So they could publicly ask us to leave.

Look at the terrain on Google earth. Where would they launch an attack from? One northern "disputed" area the Chinese have already occupied. That aside where else?

Of course they could bombard Bhutan with all those mijjiles that were about to land on us 2 weeks ago as per BRF scenarios. But what would that get them?

g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2048
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

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

Postby g.sarkar » 07 Aug 2017 15:25

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/g3a04f ... tells.html
Home » Politics » PolicyLast Published: Sun, Aug 06 2017. 08 41 PM IST
Special envoys have no role on Doklam standoff, China tells India
China’s stand comes in the backdrop of a meeting in Beijing between India NSA Ajit Doval and his Chinese counterpart, state councillor Yang Jiechi
Elizabeth Roche
New Delhi: China has told India that the special envoys of the two countries on border issues have no role to play in resolving the Doklam standoff, two people familiar with the developments said.
This, according to Beijing, is because it considers the border at Sikkim to be settled by an 1890 pact signed between Britain, India’s then colonial ruler, and China. China’s stance is said to have been conveyed to India recently, the first person familiar with the development said, requesting anonymity. New Delhi, however, has not accepted Beijing’s contention as it views the status of Sikkim as settled—that is, as part of India. But New Delhi views the Sikkim boundary as yet to be demarcated between China and India. This means discussions on this segment of the boundary falls within the remit of talks on all the disputed parts of the India-China frontier between the special representatives, the second person said, also asking not to be named. Tensions between the neighbours have been high since 16 June, with Bhutan objecting to an attempt by Chinese troops to build a road on the Doklam plateau. Indian troops stationed in Bhutan under a special security arrangement then intervened to keep Chinese troops at bay, triggering the face-off.
The Chinese position comes in the backdrop of a meeting in Beijing between India’s special representative on border talks, national security adviser Ajit Doval, and his Chinese counterpart, state councillor Yang Jiechi. Doval met Jiechi while on a visit to Beijing for a meeting of the national security advisors of Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa group of emerging economies on 26-27 July.
A PTI report from Beijing said that China’s Yang conveyed Beijing’s firm stand to Doval that India must take “concrete actions” by immediately pulling back troops from the Doklam plateau with “no strings attached” to resolve the standoff.
According to Srikanth Kondapalli, a professor of Chinese Studies at the Delhi-based Jawaharlal Nehru University, China’s move to convey to New Delhi that the special representatives have no role to discuss the Doklam standoff is aimed at buttressing its demand that India move back its troops from the plateau before Beijing agrees to any talks with India on the subject.
“Whenever we had problems in this area (Sikkim) in the past, it has been discussed in the context of the border dispute,” Kondapalli said. “China’s move is aimed at not providing any scope for discussion before India fulfils its demand of pulling back its troops from Doklam. This is untenable from India’s point of view,” he said.“This also seems to be aimed at provoking India but India is unlikely to respond beyond what it has already said, which is that its troops are in Bhutan in response to its commitment to security to Bhutan and that India’s security is also affected by the Chinese presence in Doklam,” Kondapalli said. Last week, in a statement to Parliament, foreign minister Sushma Swaraj said that points along the boundary that fall at the tri-junction of India, China and third countries—in this case Bhutan—would be settled in consultation among all three countries. This was as per an understanding reached by the special representatives between India and China in 2012, Swaraj said in her statement.
.....

Gautam

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3822
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 07 Aug 2017 16:03

AdityaM wrote:
chola wrote:They have at most counts around 50K troops in Tibet. This is not because they don't want to put more there but because they can't.
We outnumber the PLA by upwards of 20 to one across the length and breadth of the border.
At Doka La, there are 30 to 40 pampered chini border guard to 400 IA regulars. This at the point of focus where they are making all this noise.


Why would the IA devote 400 regulars to face 40 lowly guards? Why not use the Armed police constabulary instead.
Doesn't the IA know that the Chinese can't put more men on ground.
Which is funny since many people on BRF know much better than the army it seems.

For years I have heard of so called china experts saying that we do not have good intelligence capabilities to find out what's happening there.

And suddenly for last 2 months brfites are taking the battle into Tibet, since the poor Chinese capabilities is not a secret here on this board.

When the Chinese say that they have the capabilities for rapid deployment, are they completely bluffing?

I hope what Chola says is true; but is their policy also to hold/dominate the ground which requires massive troop presence? Or is their strategy for massive punitive strikes by leveraging their heavy missile numbers.
What is their strategy?

Parts of Tibet bordering India up to 100-200 km are perhaps not of as much existential importance to Chinese, as much as parts of India within 100-200 on range are to India itself.



Look at Cheen's position in the SCS and across from Taiwan, Korea and Japan. Massive amounts of forces to intimidate their neighbors. Daily stories and pictures of aircraft and ship incursions of EZs.

During the month long Doka La standoff: we had J-10s buzzing USN/USAF planes, J-11s and H-6s off Japan, H-6s off Taiwan, heavy build up of men and material on N. Korean border.

Why wouldn't they do that along our borders if they could? We have nothing but weeks of jawboning. Not a single pass from a PLAAF aircraft.

They simply can't because of logistics on the Tibetan Plateau.

Just because they have 40 border guards doesn't we have to match. For what? To be fair? Do the US stand down its navy and air force to be fair to any of the tinpots (Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan) it beats up on a regular basis who might not have a navy or air force?

You always face off with as much as an advantage as you put up within space and time.

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

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

Postby AdityaM » 07 Aug 2017 16:05

What is a strategic depth?

Pakistan treated Afghanistan as its SD.
Afgh could be the SD of Pakistan against Soviets since it acted like a buffer.
Afgh could be the SD of Pakistan against India since it could place terror camps & missile batteries & claim deniability.
In either case loss or destruction of Afghanistan was ok to Pak as long it's core area was safe.

So what is China's strategic depth?
Isn't Tibet the SD for china. On brf we are only talking of taking war to Tibet.
If that ever happens, Chinese core areas will survive unscathed.
India's challenge is to take war to the core areas, something I don't think we are capable or prepared to do.

g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2048
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

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

Postby g.sarkar » 07 Aug 2017 16:56

https://thewire.in/165228/china-india-b ... r-dispute/
Doklam Stand-Off Means the Current Process of Settling the China Border Has Run Its Course
BY MANOJ JOSHI ON 07/08/2017
Just how the Doklam crisis plays out is still a matter of speculation. Nearly two months into the stand-off, the Chinese verbal bombardment has not abated. The Bhutanese and Indian responses have remained low key after their respective press releases of June 29 and 30.
One important consequence of the stand-off is already evident – the parallel processes of negotiating China’s border with India and Bhutan seems to have reached a logical dead-end. The three countries now urgently need to come up with a new format if they wish to continue their conversation. Such talks are not merely technical discussions on the border, but since they are handled at a senior level, they are also a means of managing the relationship in depth and over a wide range of areas.
Since the Border Peace and Tranquillity Agreement of 1993, India’s relations with China had been stable and even predictable. The two countries managed their border issues well and have created layers of confidence building measures that aided the process.
Yet, in fact, they did not manage to actually settle their border dispute.
.....
There is also a larger view of the friction between a rising China and a rising India.
From the 1970s, India has seen the manner in which Beijing has sought to limit India to South Asia by using Pakistan. Now, a much richer and militarily more powerful China is pushing into not only South Asia but also the Indian Ocean Region in an unprecedented fashion. It is not that Bhutan will become a new platform for Chinese forays into South Asia like Pakistan, but that it will neutralise an important South Asian friend of India and add to Beijing self-worth as a regional power without compare. As it is, in Nepal and Sri Lanka, India must now compete directly with China for influence.
In response, New Delhi is intensifying cooperation with the US and Japan. India’s actions are still constrained by its self image as an independent player in the international system. It, therefore, does not have a military alliance with the US and will therefore not be privileged to receive US assistance in the event of a conflict with China. In a recent article, historian John Garver suggested that Beijing may be seeing India as “the weakest link in the chain of ‘anti-China containment’ being built” in Asia.
India’s military modernisation is delayed by a decade and a half, and there is nothing to suggest that it is doing anything about it.
That China has become more assertive since 2008-2009 is well known, but Modi’s India also sets a value by adopting an assertive stance in the South Asian and Indian Ocean region. And, unlike the smaller countries of the region, India does have the capacity to deal with China on its own terms. And almost everyone is agreed that in the coming decade, this capacity will only increase. As the more powerful party, China is the one that needs to figure out how it must deal with India because whether India becomes more powerful, or, for that matter flounders, it can still cause a lot of trouble for Beijing.
.....

Gautam

rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3328
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

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

Postby rsingh » 07 Aug 2017 17:22

If we look the 2 month stand-off from Chinese pov, they managed to get 2 months to prepare for war (limited or otherwise) and enough time to put (and activate) their assets in IOR , Tibet and infect in India as well. They are just doing a drill fine-tune the things for major showdown in future. On Political front not much. Commies are down and Maoist thugs are unable to much damage. That explains low number of Chinese making drama at Dhokla etc. They know that Indians are not going to fire first shot. They are just provoking us and are carefully monitoring the reactions. we can call their bluff by conducting small operation in and tacking few pandas and transferring them to Bhopal jail. It will provoke them to show the cards (apart from usual shouting game). This will not bring war but there will be a new equilibrium between PLA and IA. It will be a game changer.
Disclaimer: I am a alm chail gen onree. But everything is doable and makes sense.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5149
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

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

Postby Karthik S » 07 Aug 2017 17:30

AdityaM wrote:What is a strategic depth?

Pakistan treated Afghanistan as its SD.
Afgh could be the SD of Pakistan against Soviets since it acted like a buffer.
Afgh could be the SD of Pakistan against India since it could place terror camps & missile batteries & claim deniability.
In either case loss or destruction of Afghanistan was ok to Pak as long it's core area was safe.

So what is China's strategic depth?
Isn't Tibet the SD for china. On brf we are only talking of taking war to Tibet.
If that ever happens, Chinese core areas will survive unscathed.
India's challenge is to take war to the core areas, something I don't think we are capable or prepared to do.


Afghanistan is not part of Pakistan, therefore Pakis were ok with losing Afghanistan. You really think Pakis will be ok if same were to happen to Baluchistan? Similarly, Tibet is part of China (how they acquired it is immaterial), part of their country. Not same analogy IMO.

prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2797
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

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

Postby prahaar » 07 Aug 2017 17:47

There is a likelihood of PA or their buddies occupying some heights in winter and replacing them with Chinese troops at an appropriate time. This will allow China to enter officially in POK, militarily.

Furthermore, we take China as an exception. US has been talking about military action against NK for ages, nothing has come, what is the reason for China to followup every word with action? If those threats can be used when a more "inclusive" government comes in India, both will declare it as a win-win. Their on the record statements keep the door open for action at the time and location of their choosing.

Shanmukh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Shanmukh » 07 Aug 2017 17:51

@chola,
You have been arguing for war. What are the war goals (physical ones, not psychological)? What is the actual change on the ground you want before ceasefire in - say - two weeks? What pieces of land do you want to take from them & what are you willing to lose, if any?

rajpa
BRFite
Posts: 302
Joined: 04 Aug 2004 09:35
Location: Chennai

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

Postby rajpa » 07 Aug 2017 18:21

Can someone make memes on the Chinese statements so far? This could be on the lines of Chemical Ali of Iraq fame.

Without further ado, we present quotable quotes from Comical Li:

1. "It is easier to shake a mountain. It is hard to shake PLA."
2. “The troops should be withdrawn immediately; otherwise, there will be serious consequences.”
3. “Military option is the fundamental guarantor of sovereignty.”
4. “Even one Indian soldier violating Chinese sovereignty is too many,” he continued. “We cannot bear that for another hour, another day.”
5. "Our willingness and resolve to defend our sovereignty," Senior Colonel Comical Li thundered, "is indomitable."
6. "We want to give peace a chance and allow India to recognize the grave consequences."
7. “The China-Bhutan boundary issue is one between China and Bhutan. It has nothing to do with India.” Comical Li observed.
8. “Goodwill has its principles and restraint has its bottom line.” - Wise sayings of Confucious, Comical Li's great grand middle uncle.
9. “The defence ministry’s statement pointed out that China has shown tolerance. But that doesn’t come without principles.” Wang Dehua, second cousin of Comical Li.

Others feel free to add.

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

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

Postby AdityaM » 07 Aug 2017 18:29

How to manage threat of Chinese copy paste?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... isit#img-1

rajpa
BRFite
Posts: 302
Joined: 04 Aug 2004 09:35
Location: Chennai

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

Postby rajpa » 07 Aug 2017 18:30

Image

Image
How about this guy for Comical Li?

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5403
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

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

Postby niran » 07 Aug 2017 18:55

yensoy wrote:
sum wrote:^^ Impressive diplomatic/economic muscling skills by China indeed


Not really. ASEAN works on consensus and can't make a statement unless everyone is on board. China has managed to buy out Cambodia and Laos, and Myanmar is deep in Chinese sphere of influence. Philippines is halfway there, depending on which side of the bed Duterte wakes up. Thailand is a big beneficiary of Chinese tourist dollars and consumer spending (fisheries & fruit products). That leaves only Vietnam and to a lesser extent Indonesia and Malaysia in the opposite camp. Singapore has perfected the art of playing to both sides, and Brunei doesn't matter. Not sure if I left out anyone...

which countries except Vietnam will mater? non,cheen is wooing ASEAN becuase of Malacca Strait, through malacca strait passes cheen fuel if data are to be believed almost 80%. Japan and South Korea are other countries worried about Malacca strait, the strait can be block as easily as shutting off a tap with 2 warships in the strait. Japan have 3 of its Frigates in the strait permanently albeit to ward off sea pirates, since late 2014 IN has 2 ships in the strait to ward off those evil sea pirates of course, these 2 countries ships keep pirates at bay and ensure Indo ASEAN brotherhood compliance.

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5403
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

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

Postby niran » 07 Aug 2017 19:00

Next are Ruski and Rski muna countries in the steppes, once again IAF Sukhoi is stationed in one airbase there, they can easily bomb those pipelines on their way back to India if shooting war starts. India need only to hold out in defensive position for a month and dlagon would be fuel starved.

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 923
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

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

Postby TKiran » 07 Aug 2017 19:19

^^^^what about PLAN blocking gulf from Gwadar?

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5403
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

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

Postby niran » 07 Aug 2017 19:23

TKiran wrote:^^^^what about PLAN blocking gulf from Gwadar?

and PLAN will fly to Gwader, eh! they will need to sail ships no can fly, IN have 3-4 frigates permanently patrolling the region taking care of sea pirates of course(damn! who would have thought sea pirates coming in handy) so PLAN cannot sail to Gwader if IN sneezes at them
pukes don't have wherewithal to block themselves if that is what you mean

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12791
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby UlanBatori » 07 Aug 2017 19:30

IMO, the Gurkha agitation in Darjeeling is very much linked to the Doklam Road. The plan to cut off the Northeast is clearly very high priority in the little reptilean brains, as evident from the barking.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12791
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby UlanBatori » 07 Aug 2017 19:37

shiv:
Fundamentally the lumbering turboprop should do better than these high-speed jet fighters at negotiating tight valleys. They can always go into post-stall maneuvers... They have a low ishtalling ishpeed, so they can turn tighter corners. Su-27 might do better but I doubt that a Kiran-derivative would. Concern about mijjiles is real.

What I would like to see is a pilotless mass-produced HS-748 or IL-76 with "Air China" painted on the side with nice big red stars, but modified to have an LMG sticking out of every window, and a tail ramp that can be opened to dump out some goodies. Send them on soosai missions through the narrow valleys, like torpedo bombers going at warships in WW2. Not high probability of survival, but even if they crash they will probably fall on the intended targets. One of these things going round and coming into a valley from the Tibet side, could finish a whole tank column and the luxury SUVs accompanying it inside a couple of minutes.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 07 Aug 2017 19:42

UlanBatori wrote:IMO, the Gurkha agitation in Darjeeling is very much linked to the Doklam Road. The plan to cut off the Northeast is clearly very high priority in the little reptilean brains, as evident from the barking.

Er the agitation may be :oops: linked to BJP and Mamata begum

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3822
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 07 Aug 2017 19:47

Shanmukh wrote:@chola,
You have been arguing for war. What are the war goals (physical ones, not psychological)? What is the actual change on the ground you want before ceasefire in - say - two weeks? What pieces of land do you want to take from them & what are you willing to lose, if any?



Wrote on this many times before (from a few weeks ago):

Give Cheen a crushing military defeat along the border and, ideally, create suffocating chaos for the chini economy by cutting off its trade routes in the IOR.

Because Cheen is a rational trading power with non-military culture, a short war is possible especially if we overwhelm them in the theaters of our choice and give them no incentive to pursue further hostilies by limiting territorial gains to what we lost in 1962 and bit more in defensible positions. It won't go long term or total war if we don't get victory disease and attempt to detach Tibet as a whole. They'll settle down to making money again once we magnanimously release our chokehold on the IOR and trade flows again.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 07 Aug 2017 19:47

TKiran wrote:^^^^what about PLAN blocking gulf from Gwadar?

With what? And who will they block? Insurance and shipping rates will go up. Chinese oil won't flow. China exports won't go

Check the massive flotilla sitting in Gadhawater
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gwada ... 62.3213153

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 07 Aug 2017 19:49

rajpa wrote:Can someone make memes on the Chinese statements so far? This could be on the lines of Chemical Ali of Iraq fame.

Without further ado, we present quotable quotes from Comical Li:

1. "It is easier to shake a mountain. It is hard to shake PLA."
2. “The troops should be withdrawn immediately; otherwise, there will be serious consequences.”
3. “Military option is the fundamental guarantor of sovereignty.”
4. “Even one Indian soldier violating Chinese sovereignty is too many,” he continued. “We cannot bear that for another hour, another day.”
5. "Our willingness and resolve to defend our sovereignty," Senior Colonel Comical Li thundered, "is indomitable."
6. "We want to give peace a chance and allow India to recognize the grave consequences."
7. “The China-Bhutan boundary issue is one between China and Bhutan. It has nothing to do with India.” Comical Li observed.
8. “Goodwill has its principles and restraint has its bottom line.” - Wise sayings of Confucious, Comical Li's great grand middle uncle.
9. “The defence ministry’s statement pointed out that China has shown tolerance. But that doesn’t come without principles.” Wang Dehua, second cousin of Comical Li.

Others feel free to add.

Here's a related post that I am cross posting from the shiver thread

Even for ASEAN nations that seem to be keeling over in front of Chinese might (as per reports) there will be some limits as to how far the Chinese can go.

Taiwan is an interesting story. Red China, it is asserted, can take over Taiwan any moment. The Taiwanese too know that they cannot hold out against a Chinese assault for very long. So why doesn't China take Taiwan over. let me make the excuses for you
  • Oh you don't know the Chinese. They are full of guile. They will wait for an international crisis where the US is busy and grab Taiwan
  • The Chinese - boy on boy - they have infinite patience. they will wait decades or centuries, but they will get what they want (duh-what?)
  • The Chinese live their strategy like their board game dingallawonga (or whatever)
Fact is China is not going to take over Taiwan anytime soon.

What about bullying other countries about resources. OK China is bullying and they are being bullied. How long is that going to continue. A nation has a degree of self pride that the Chinese must assuage and give them something in return. If not there will be a blowback at some time. Japan, Korea and Vietnam are not total pushovers. Maybe the Philippines is. North Korea is one country that has been pushed so far that neither the US nor China can do anything much without profound geopolitical consequences (I won't go beyond this general term)

If ASEAN nations are, as alleged by someone "not taking advantage" of the Doklam standoff it only means they have not been pushed as far by China as we fondly like to think they have.

The idea that "Myanmar: is under the Chinese sphere of influence as is Sri Lanka ignores the fact that China can do jackshit to help these countries if India decides to apply pressure on them. Let me rephrase that. It's not that China cannot do anything. They can - but no point in dismissing eveyrone else including India as complete pushovers

There is a tendency to magnify China in relation ot ourselves and other countries - and a Church Hymn that I had to sing as a schoolboy rings in my mind

o magnify The Lo-ord -er China with me
With me exalt His name er China's name


The European and Americans do not want to get into a war on the scale they had from 1914 to 1945. The Japanese too won't want that. The Chinese could miscalculate - having only gone into small wars and won a stupid brownie versus India. If the Chinese miscalculate their patience and skill at the bolyygillywong board game won;t help them. Even North Korea is no pushover. Let alone India. They can boast as much as they want.

I had a few fistfights in school and I will always recall a friend (now in Amreeka) who was always on my side who said "It's OK if they bash me up, but I'll make sure I'll hit them so hard they will never forget. I will at least break a jaw". The Chinese, after a period of provoking India ceaselessly are asking for it. This is a time to get ready to fight them and not talk peace.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 07 Aug 2017 19:52

UlanBatori wrote:shiv:
Fundamentally the lumbering turboprop should do better than these high-speed jet fighters at negotiating tight valleys. They can always go into post-stall maneuvers... They have a low ishtalling ishpeed, so they can turn tighter corners. Su-27 might do better but I doubt that a Kiran-derivative would. Concern about mijjiles is real.

What I would like to see is a pilotless mass-produced HS-748 or IL-76 with "Air China" painted on the side with nice big red stars, but modified to have an LMG sticking out of every window, and a tail ramp that can be opened to dump out some goodies. Send them on soosai missions through the narrow valleys, like torpedo bombers going at warships in WW2. Not high probability of survival, but even if they crash they will probably fall on the intended targets. One of these things going round and coming into a valley from the Tibet side, could finish a whole tank column and the luxury SUVs accompanying it inside a couple of minutes.

:D I'm sure we can do the 748s..

TKiran
BRFite
Posts: 923
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 00:22

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

Postby TKiran » 07 Aug 2017 20:02

shiv wrote:
TKiran wrote:^^^^what about PLAN blocking gulf from Gwadar?

With what? And who will they block? Insurance and shipping rates will go up. Chinese oil won't flow. China exports won't go

Check the massive flotilla sitting in Gadhawater
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gwada ... 62.3213153

It looks like Kottivakkam beach in 1970's. Where's flotilla?

OT
I am rolling on the floor and the looks on my wife's face is like "what happened to this fella....he was alright bout a five minutes ago....."

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5149
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

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

Postby Karthik S » 07 Aug 2017 20:23

shiv wrote:
TKiran wrote:^^^^what about PLAN blocking gulf from Gwadar?

With what? And who will they block? Insurance and shipping rates will go up. Chinese oil won't flow. China exports won't go

Check the massive flotilla sitting in Gadhawater
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gwada ... 62.3213153


There is a masjid close to the base, wonder who will be under threat because of that.

rajpa
BRFite
Posts: 302
Joined: 04 Aug 2004 09:35
Location: Chennai

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

Postby rajpa » 07 Aug 2017 20:31

shiv wrote:
rajpa wrote:Can someone make memes on the Chinese statements so far?

Others feel free to add.

Here's a related post that I am cross posting from the


Good points Doc. The Chinese are taking this whole threatening business to extremely funny levels. Bark and no bite indeed.

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

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

Postby Marten » 07 Aug 2017 20:34

So what happens now? They just look for bad weather and fire in arty just before the window closes, and claim victory!?! They're looking more and more than locked up bullies who can only bark. I would personally like this situation to continue because it makes them look more like a toothless tiger. A real conflict of any type or size would still mean they are willing to shed blood.


ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1657
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby ldev » 07 Aug 2017 20:54

Image

How much trade passes through the South China Sea

Read the article in full to gauge the impact of a closure of the Malacca Straits as well as the impact of hostilities in the South China Sea on Chinese trade and Chinese oil imports. And then think about what the Indian Navy needs to do to achieve those objectives? Can it? Will it?

rajpa
BRFite
Posts: 302
Joined: 04 Aug 2004 09:35
Location: Chennai

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

Postby rajpa » 07 Aug 2017 20:59

The statements from China seem very stereotypical and one track minded.. symptoms of yes men and group think and what ho in the Cumnudist Party.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests