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

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 07 Jul 2017 19:40

http://www.news18.com/news/india/india- ... 53883.html

Here is a timeline:

Early June: China demolishes two old bunkers of Indian Army at the tri-junction

Intervening night of June 4-5: Chinese road-construction unit stopped by India at the Dokalam plateau

June 16: PLA attempts to construct a road in Doka La area

June 20: Bhutan’s ambassador lodges protest against Chinese intervention

June 23: China stops first batch of Kailash Mansarovar pilgrims, cites damage to roads from rains in Tibet region

June 27: Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi stands by the border delineation of 1895

June 28: Army chief Bipin Rawat visits Sikkim to take a stock of the situation at the tri-junction

June 29: China shows Doklam as part of its territory in a map

June 29: China tests a 35-tonne military tank near the Nathu La border

July 2: China cancels a state-sponsored trip of Indian journalists to Tibet

July 3: China accuses India of ‘betrayal’ on border issue

July 6: China Calls Off Xi-Modi G20 Meet, Says 'Atmosphere Not Right'

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 07 Jul 2017 19:43

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... -territory

The current standoff began on 16 June when a column of Chinese troops accompanied by construction vehicles and road-building equipment began moving south into what Bhutan considers its territory.

Bhutan, a small Himalayan kingdom with close military and economic ties to India, requested assistance from Delhi, which sent forces to resist the Chinese advance.

To avoid escalation, frontline troops in the area do not generally carry weapons, and the Chinese and Indian troops reportedly clashed by “jostling”: bumping chests, without punching or kicking, in order to force the other side backwards.

DrRatnadip · Post by **DrRatnadip** » 07 Jul 2017 19:47

http://m.timesofindia.com/world/china/a ... 492035.cms

At BRICS meeting, Xi Jinping calls for 'peaceful settlement' of regional disputes

HAMBURG: Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday urged the BRICS countries to push for "peaceful settlement" of regional disputes, amid a stand-off between India and China in Sikkim and Beijing's growing assertiveness in the disputed South and East China seas.
Xi made the remarks at an informal leaders' meeting of the BRICS, which groups Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, ahead of a Group of 20 summit in the German port city of Hamburg, China's state-run Xinhua news agency reported.

DrRatnadip · Post by **DrRatnadip** » 07 Jul 2017 20:01

http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_66 ... 5968.shtml

Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson is draggin sikkim issue everywhere..He leaves no chance to state that we have transgressed in chini zamin..

Q: Do you have any update on President Xi Jinping’s schedule at the G20 Summit regarding his bilateral meetings? Will he meet with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi? When will the informal BRICS leaders’ meeting take place?

A: We will release the information on President Xi Jinping’s schedule of bilateral meetings on the sidelines of the G20 Summit in a timely manner once we have it.
I have no information at hand about whether the leaders of China and India will meet during the G20 Summit. I need to point out that these days the Indian troops illegally crossed the Sikkim section of the China-India boundary into China’s territory and obstructed China’s normal activities in the Doklam area. This move has infringed upon China’s territorial sovereignty and undermined the political basis and overall atmosphere of bilateral relations. We demand that the Indian side respect the provisions in the boundary convention and China’s territorial sovereignty, immediately pull the troops that have crossed the boundary back to its own side, and uphold peace and tranquility of the border areas. It is the precondition for any meaningful dialogue between the two sides.

As far as I know, the informal BRICS leaders’ meeting will be held on July 7 local time.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 07 Jul 2017 20:26

rohitvats wrote:India needs to HOLD to present position - physically on ground and diplomatically. By simply holding its ground, inside Bhutan, India sends very strong signals:

Good Post, Rohit!

To add, the present Govt has handled the situation quite well, following Theodore Roosevelt's philosophy of "speak softly, and carry a big stick."

Roosevelt described his style of foreign policy as "the exercise of intelligent forethought and of decisive action sufficiently far in advance of any likely crisis."

Firstly, there have been NO loose comments from anyone in GoI. Infact, silence is the best course of action because it keeps enemies guessing. Nehru screwed it up with foolish speeches. It is China who has been forced to eat their words, "environment not conducive for meeting."

Secondly, the Army has been given a free hand unlike the 1962 political interference on operational matters. We're deploying as per strategic and tactical advantages.

Thirdly, IAF and IN are also deploying as a tri-service effort, unlike 1962 or 1965.

Fourthly, as per those analyzing the situation, China wants to desperately get whatever it can before Indian Mountain Strike Corps are fully operational with Attack Choppers, Heavy Lift Helicopters, BrahMos & M777.

The best Indian response is what Mr. Modi is doing right now, keeping mouth shut while ensuring military does its job professionally.

These are the results when the military is allowed to do its job professionally

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 465267.cms

92 terrorists were killed till July 2 this year, against 79 in the corresponding period of 2016

As against 371 infiltration cases recorded in 2016, 124 were recorded till May-end this year

While 72 and 67 terrorists were eliminated in J&K in 2012 and 2013 respectively, the numbers picked up during NDA's tenure, touching 110 in 2014, 108 in 2015 and 150 in 2016. "Terrorists killed till July 2 this year are only slightly less than killings through 2014 and 2015," a senior home ministry official said, attributing the successes to seamless coordination between the Army, central forces, state government and intelligence agencies.

"The forces have been given a free hand to track and intercept the terrorists holed up in the valley, before launching intelligence-based operations with due mapping of the target and how to neutralise terrorists with minimum collateral damage," said a senior home ministry functionary

Lastly, I see a lot of Dhoti Shivering in this forum. Unless it sarcasm, I would like to remind such Dhoti Shiverers that Lt. General Sagat Singh, heading just a Corps, fought and won a three front war all by himself - 1966 Mizo insurgency backed by China & Pakistan, 1967 Cho La against China, 1971 against Pakistan.

Training, competency & professionalism are more important than weapons and numbers.

chola · Post by **chola** » 07 Jul 2017 20:33

Letting the lizard climb down without a fight and at least a bloody nose means missing an opportunity to enhance our position and put a stop to their current strategy of encrouchment during peace time.

CPEC will continue to happen. OBOR will continue to happen.

We need to go to war and kick arses. We have overwhelming advantages right now. Who knows wgat will happen in the future?

We need to fight irregardless of what Cheen does.

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 07 Jul 2017 20:41

War is not happening.
At best the Chinese might start a localised skirmish and declare unilateral ceasefire for their hnd purposes.

We need to be prepped to inflict maximum casualties to the Chinese IF the shooting starts.which I think we are in a position to deliver.

If it does or doesn't, India only has to gain from this episode by standing up to China.
The Chinese have already lost the propagandu battle.

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 07 Jul 2017 21:11

Iyersan wrote:
Bade wrote:Just because Xi is smiling and shaking hands with Modi, does not mean he is not sharpening the knife. This handshake is the biggest feint, and we have even nationalists here falling for it.
Just like Mao did to Nehru. Modi is far superior btw

Nobody is that naive.

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 07 Jul 2017 21:28

Deans wrote:
sudhan wrote:Isn't this meet already a loss of face for the Chinese??

I hope NaMo gave 11 with one of his 'bone-crusher' handshakes, to put some sense in him and his minions..
Huge loss of face for the Chinese, since it was they who announced the cancellation of the meeting and said atmosphere was not
conducive...

He He Atmospel was nat conductive but we decided to talk to keep legional halmoney

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 07 Jul 2017 22:28

Airtel services disrupted in NCR area.Do they use Chinese equipments?

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 07 Jul 2017 22:34

https://mobile.twitter.com/ananthkrishn ... 77/video/1
Ananth Krishnan @ananthkrishnan

Long video on India's military capabilities being shown in Beijing subway this evening

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 07 Jul 2017 22:39

Clamouring for war is a bit unseemly. Like we've said many times here that there is a small window before we get our armed forces kitted out to well and truly kick dragon a$$ if need be without a sweat. Until then it will be a struggle, on paper. With a hardnose wont-back-down type leadership, we can stymie any adventurism by them in that period. We've done well so far shutting up after the initial statement and sticking to our guns.

Do we try to land the first punch to 'teach them a lesson' or is a de-escalation by them after however long enough of a punch by itself? How can we use that, if it were to happen, to push them further back? Rid our reticence in talking about Tibet. Talk about TIbet, loud and wide and go after them from behind their frontlines. We have a huge tibetan population. Put them to use. Make them jittery about their hold on Tibet. Spread unrest in PoJK. There are already many protests there with locals against the uniformed jihadis using it as a base for terrorists to enter india and inviting indian retaliation. Shake the OBOR nonsense' base. Much to do.

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 07 Jul 2017 22:44

Chinese mention India as former British colony while convincingly forgetting about most humiliating defeat they suffered at the hand of Brits and french.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Opium_War

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 07 Jul 2017 22:47

rsingh wrote:Chinese mention India as former British colony while convincingly forgetting about most humiliating defeat they suffered at the hand of Brits and french.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Opium_War

You forgot Japanese and Mongols..

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 07 Jul 2017 22:58

Iyersan wrote:https://mobile.twitter.com/ananthkrishn ... 77/video/1
Ananth Krishnan @ananthkrishnan Long video on India's military capabilities being shown in Beijing subway this evening

Anti-Japanism used to be the flavour of the day earlier. Past weeks we seem to have taken that exalted place.

Look at the folks who buckled under Chinese influence - South Korea, Australia, Philippines to name a few. This is what they expect - we should back down and suck up to them. SoKo is beholden to the Chinese market, same with Australia. Philippines is run by a nut, and the population is too lazy to support a functioning military (as opposed to the kind that backstopped Marcos). Taiwan oscillates between nationalists and Beijing proxies.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 07 Jul 2017 23:12

Iyersan wrote:http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1055412.shtml

India uses Bhutan to secure New Delhi's interest
Source:Global Times Published: 2017/7/7 18:45:27

3. So India had to permit Bhutan to directly deal with China on the border issue. That was how the Border Talks began between Bhutan and China from the 1980s. Since then 24 rounds of Talks have taken place in most cordial manner. And much progress have been achieved. India was always kept in the loop by Bhutan.

6. The fact that China is willing to negotiate with Bhutan on the international boundary of the two nations is I believe a giant step forward for Bhutanese sovereignty. I am grateful to China for this sovereign courtesy. I am even more grateful to India for all the economic assistance and freedom of trade and transit that enabled Bhutan to develop thus far. But I do love Bhutan ever more.

8. For Bhutan, Doklam holds no extra strategic significance than any other part of the Kingdom. But for both India and China, this Tri- junction is considered most vital. Unfortunately for India, the international boundary between Sikkim India and Tibet China at the Doklam Tri-Junction was decided long time back. So as vital as whole of Doklam Plateau is for Indian military strategic interest, there is not much that India can do through her State of Sikkim. The Sikkim door which India possessed is closed.

9. India, therefore, is pushing Bhutan to claim as much as possible the part of Doklam Plateau in the Sino- Bhutan Border Talks. India knows that she has the clout to use Bhutanese territory to serve her strategic interest. So what India herself had forfeited in negotiation with China, she now wants Bhutan to re-claim. This places Bhutan in a very difficult position. Every inch of Bhutanese land is sacred. To claim land for our own is justifiable. But to demand disputed land from China for Indian strategic purposes could endanger Bhutan. In demanding more, Bhutan loses the moral ground to even claim what is rightfully hers.

9. Bhutan is placed in a near impossible position. China will never surrender the strategic position that she had already gained at Doklam Plateau during negotiation on international boundary with India ( State of Sikkim ). And India is insisting upon Bhutan to wrest from China larger portion of Doklam Plateau that India could not get whilst negotiating with China on Sikkim-Tibet international boundary.

11. India is worried about the security of her so called chicken neck of the Siliguri corridor and thereby, the Eastern Frontier States. Maybe that was the reason of takeover of Sikkim. In the same manner, China is worried about the future security of her narrow Chumbi Valley stretch and thereby the whole of Tibet. China seems to considers Doklam Plateau as vital to her as Sikkim is to India. I feel we have to face the reality. China may not wait forever for Bhutan to get Indian clearance. Chinese security concerns would out weigh any ties including with Bhutan.

12. Presently the international boundary in eastern Bhutan has not been demarcated even with India . The sticking point is that Arunachal Pradesh （South Tibet) is on the other side. And China claims part of Arunachal. So later, like Doklam, there is bound to be similar Tri- Juction situation. And there, too, China would not be compromising her national security for friendship with Bhutan. So considering all aspects, it may be also in India's interest to let Bhutan sign the Sino-Bhutan Border Agreement. The gesture could contribute towards reaching reasonable agreement towards drawing the Sino- India Arunachal border demarcation. Confidence building is a must in negotiation.

13. China will not budge in Sino - Bhutan Border negotiation where Bhutan is deemed to act as a proxy for Indian strategic interests. At times during Sino - Bhutan Border Talks, China may have been suspicious of India directing the negotiations from Bhutan side. And this time with India openly declaring that she had interfered on behalf of Bhutan at Doklam confirms that all along Bhutan has been actually acting as a proxy for Indian Doklam interest. This will harden Chinese resolve.

Conclusion:

Royal Bhutan Army outposts at the Sino- Bhutan border are there to carry out their defence tasks. Our officers and soldiers are not posted there to warm the chilly mountain air with their breath. They do not run to Indian Army to seek help to execute their own national defence task. Numerous Sino- Bhutan incidents have taken place in the past. And in all those incidents, the Royal Bhutan Army, the Chief of Operations or the Supreme Commander has never sought help of Indian Army to face Chinese troops at the Sino- Bhutan Border.

For general readers. I have one point of clarification. It is true that within Bhutan, there are Indian military presences as declared by India. And yes, Bhutanese Army is trained by India and even funded by India. But all this is not for defence of Bhutan. It is for the security of India. In the defence strategy plan of India against China, India counts on Bhutan's ability to secure her international borders with China. So Indian military is in Bhutan for defence of India. And likewise Indian Army's recent action at Doklam Plateau has nothing to do with Bhutanese national interest or with Bhutanese Security Force at Doklam.

The demarche issued on 20th June by Bhutan Embassy in New Delhi to Chinese Embassy is a normal happening. Both China and Bhutan follow this diplomatic procedure to air any misgivings or clear any misunderstandings at the borders. The soldiers of China and Bhutan do not engage in unruly jostling or play kapadi kind of pushing and catching game at the Sino- Bhutan border. It must also be noted that the Bhutanese Government referred to road being built in "disputed area". Not " inside undisputed " Bhutanese territory. It said " maintain status quo" which is different from allegation of encroachment into Bhutanese Security Force manned Bhutanese territory.

The Press Release by Bhutanese Foreign Ministry on 29th June is out of norm. A kind of political " cry Wolf ". Bhutan usually acts quietly with dignity. Who was Bhutan appealing to in the Press Release with all the history ? If it was China whom we were addressing then there was no need of history as they are party to all the history. This unusual propaganda type of Press Release may have been issued at Indian request to consolidate their weak stand in the international arena. Unfortunately, in so doing, the Bhutanese Government may have further complicated a complex issue.

LOT of false information. Trying to build China position and propaganda tool for Chinese position

China has already taken Tibet and expressed interest in many areas including near Bhutan area such as AP

India has agreement with China for consultation on TRI JUNCTION AREAS SUCH A Dokalam plateau
So where is the question of trying to change the situation for India advantage

Two relevant points in the longish statement confirm India's tough stand:
•India is deeply concerned at the recent Chinese actions and has conveyed to the Chinese government that such construction would represent a significant change of status quo with serious security implications for India.
•In this context, the Indian side has underlined that the two governments had in 2012 reached agreement that the tri-junction boundary points between India, China and third countries will be finalised in consultation with the concerned countries. Any attempt, therefore, to unilaterally determine tri-junction points is in violation of this understanding.

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 07 Jul 2017 23:59

If It Comes To War, China Will Be Loser And India The Winner

In Armed Conflict With India, Why China Would Be Bigger Loser
Samir Saran

The ongoing standoff at Doklam Plateau is less a boundary incident involving India, China and Bhutan and more a coming together of geopolitical faultlines in Asia that were long set on a collision course. China's wanton aggression, and India's refusal to be intimidated by it, stem from the different realities they live in. China believes it is destined to lead Asia, and indeed the world, by a process in which other actors are but bit players. India is strongly convinced of its destiny as a great power and an indispensable player in any conversation to re-engineer global regimes.

Its border transgressions are aimed at changing facts on the ground, and allowing for new terms of settlement. For China to engage in a game of chicken, however, would be counterproductive.

In case of an armed conflict, the bigger loser will be China. The very basis of its "Peaceful Rise" would be questioned and an aspiring world power would be recast as a neighbourhood bully, bogged down for the medium term in petty, regional quarrels with smaller countries. For India, a stalemate with a larger nuclear power will do it no harm and will change the terms of engagement with China dramatically. India is too big to be bulied !

Through the Doklam standoff, China has conveyed three messages. The first is that China seeks to utilize its economic and political clout to emerge as the sole continental power and only arbiter of peace in the region. Multipolarity is good for the world, not for Asia. When India refused to pay tribute in the court of Emperor Xi Jinping, through debt, bondage...

The second message from Beijing is that short-term stability in Asia does not matter to China, because it does not eye Asian markets for its growth. Through road and rail infrastructure along the Eurasian landmass and sea routes across the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean, China hopes to gain access to an eighteen trillion dollar European market.

And finally, Beijing has signalled that Pax Sinica is not just an economic configuration, but also a military and political undertaking. Its aggressive posture in the South China Sea, disregard for Indian sovereignty in Jammu and Kashmir, divide and rule policy in the ASEAN region, and strategic investments in overseas ports such as Gwadar and Djibouti are all indicative of its intention to establish a Sino-centric economic and security architecture, through force if necessary.

Given these stark messages from the eastern front, what can New Delhi do?

The options are limited. The first is to acquiesce to Chinese hegemony over Asia. In the past, India's foreign policy has attempted to co-opt China into a larger Asian project, from Nehru's insistence on China's position on the United Nations Security Council to facilitating its entry into the World Trade Organisation.

The second option for India is to set credible red lines for China by escalating the cost for its aggressive maneuvers around India's periphery and to increase the cost of "land acquisition" for the Chinese.

Pakistan's approach vis-à-vis India may prove to be enlightening in this respect. Its development of Tactical Nuclear Weapons (TNW) to offset India's superior conventional abilities and a wide range of asymmetric warfare techniques have ensured that India is disproportionately engaged in regional affairs.

China is attempting, vainly, to draw India into a conflict that it believes will prematurely invest it with the label of "first among equals" in Asia. Ironically, Beijing has failed to acknowledge that India does not have to behave like a 10 trillion dollar economy when it is not one - skirmishes, like the one at Doklam Plateau, can be swiftly and aggressively countered by India with little or no loss to its reputation.

chola · Post by **chola** » 08 Jul 2017 00:03

Prasad wrote:Clamouring for war is a bit unseemly. Like we've said many times here that there is a small window before we get our armed forces kitted out to well and truly kick dragon a$$ if need be without a sweat.

Until then it will be a struggle, on paper. With a hardnose wont-back-down type leadership, we can stymie any adventurism by them in that period. We've done well so far shutting up after the initial statement and sticking to our guns.

Actually, on paper we have greater advantages now than any time in the future. They have 24 fighters in Tibet onlee! Who knows what we might see from them in the future? What if OBOR and CPEC works out and they end up with the logistics to move men and material into Pakiland? That would negate our current advantages over them with being stuck in un-oxygenated altitudes.

As far as kitting out, just look at the amount of warship and aircraft projects they have versus us. I don't see us out"kitting" them. I do see us outfighting them with our current advantages. But every year that goes by, those advantages are in danger of decreasing.

Do we try to land the first punch to 'teach them a lesson' or is a de-escalation by them after however long enough of a punch by itself? How can we use that, if it were to happen, to push them further back?

Hit them, don't care if we have to punch first to get the war started. Time to shed the non-violent resistent tag anyways.

Take back everything we lost in 1962 and all necessary defensive positions in Tibet to protect those gains. Prepare for them to come in defensive positions. It takes advantages of 8 to 1 to dislodge a defender from mountainous high ground.

Slaughter a few legiments of their single child little empelors and they will give up and go back to business. For us, it will instantly vault us to the top of the heap in Asia, irregardless of what happens with OBOR.

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 08 Jul 2017 00:10

China hid many facts on Doklam issue while making its border claims: Expert

BEIJING: China has hidden the fact that the government of Tibet did not sign the very document, the Sikkim-Tibet treaty of 1890, which Beijing is showing to support its claim over the disputed Doklam plateau.

The ongoing border stand-off was triggered after Chinese troops started building a road in Doklam, which is also claimed by Bhutan, on June 16.

Leave aside 1890, China did not agree to a treaty on the Bhutan-Tibet and Sikkim-Tibet borders until as late as 1960. This was another fact that China did not mention when it went about using the 1980 document as the basis of its claim over Doklam, analysts said.

"The Tibetan Government refused to acknowledge the 1890 Convention because they were not informed or made a party to it," Claude Arpi, historian, and Tibetologist told TOI.

Tibetan and British troops had clashed a couple of years before, and this could be the reason why the Tibetan government did not acknowledge the treaty, Arpi said.

China is pretending that there was no need to get the treaty approved by the Tibetan government because the central government had sent its representative to sign it along with British officials.

But this is not true because the Chinese government did not have control over Tibet, and was merely represented by a resident in 1890.

In fact, the British government sent the Younghusband expedition into Tibet in 1904 because of the Tibetan government's refusal to accept the treaty, he said.

China has remained silent about the fact that the disputed area remained unresolved until 1960, and continues to be a bone of contention between Beijing and Bhutan.

"In 1960, during the Official's Negotiations, China refused to discuss the Bhutan-Tibet border and the Sikkim-Tibet border," Arpi said.

Chinese foreign ministry has produced partial excerpts from a letter by former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru to show that the Indian government had accepted the 1890 treaty covering areas that include Doklam.

But the Chinese foreign ministry hid the fact that the tri-junction between India, Bhutan and China had not been resolved during Nehru's time. India is worried that Chinese road building is too close to the tri-junction, and would harm future efforts to resolve this part of the border.

"Nehru acknowledged the 1890 treaty only as far as the Northern border of Sikkim is concerned.

The tri-junction has never been agreed upon," Arpi said, adding, "The proof is that it (the issue) was discussed (between India and China) in 2012".

The tri-junction issue was also discussed by special representatives of the two countries, who agreed that there should be no change of status quo on the trijunction until a final solution is found.

Cheers

raghava · Post by **raghava** » 08 Jul 2017 00:12

svinayak wrote:
Iyersan wrote:http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1055412.shtml

India uses Bhutan to secure New Delhi's interest
Source:Global Times Published: 2017/7/7 18:45:27
.
.
.

.

The guy who writes this blog is a tzuthiya... please don't pay any importance to him. He has been subtly anti anti India since at least 2013. Its quite evident if you read his past posts. This is just chini propagandu...

http://wangchasangey.blogspot.in/

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 08 Jul 2017 00:15

chola wrote:Actually, on paper we have greater advantages now than any time in the future. They have 24 fighters in Tibet onlee! Who knows what we might see from them in the future? What if OBOR and CPEC works out and they end up with the logistics to move men and material into Pakiland? That would negate our current advantages over them with being stuck in un-oxygenated altitudes.

I think you are clueless. If you hit them in core Tibet you just raised the threshold. They will strike back anywhere. All your wonderful calculus about them having only 24 fighters in Tibet will be meaningless because the war will come to your doorstep. The world will not support you, and no amount of Mallaca straits blockade is going to affect the Chinese - they have a huge strategic petroleum reserve, and other overland/Pacific options they can avail of to secure oil.

We have an awesome and credible defensive position against the Chinese, as well as goodwill/support from countries with complex relationships with the Chinese. This escalation is not happening at a time of our choosing, it is a time of their choosing. Us holding on to our position already sends a clear and strong message.

BTW, level of vitriol in globaltimes may drop over the next few days due to G20 or just plain depletion of thoughts among the editors (no matter how banal). Let's not take it as a sign of imminent peace. Alertness is required till the bulldozers and other road construction equipment are dispatched back; and a road is possibly built from the Bhutan side to Doklam. Once we have marked territory, then it is fait accompli - the only language they understand.

raghava · Post by **raghava** » 08 Jul 2017 00:18

oh and by the way, some additional info, -
my friend's uncle's sister's husband is a paanwallah in Kathmandu. He told me that 300~ Indian pilgrims are stuck in that city since July 2nd waiting to be allowed access to Mansarovar...

Not one has started their pilgrimage yet.

chola · Post by **chola** » 08 Jul 2017 00:36

yensoy wrote:
chola wrote:Actually, on paper we have greater advantages now than any time in the future. They have 24 fighters in Tibet onlee! Who knows what we might see from them in the future? What if OBOR and CPEC works out and they end up with the logistics to move men and material into Pakiland? That would negate our current advantages over them with being stuck in un-oxygenated altitudes.
I think you are clueless. If you hit them in core Tibet you just raised the threshold. They will strike back anywhere.
All your wonderful calculus about them having only 24 fighters in Tibet will be meaningless because the war will come to your doorstep.

No, YOU are clueless.

1) recovering Aksai Chin, the fringes around Tawang and a dozen other places left over from 1962 is not going after the core of Tibet. It is taking back what is ours and the positions needed to defend them,

2) where the hell else can they strike back? We only have ONE border with Cheen and it is along the Himilayas,

3) They could strike at us by sea but this is what WE WANT them to do that because if we're able open up a naval war in the IOR we can block trade to the largest trade economy on earth.

Without going to war, we are basically in a waiting game over the failure or success of OBOR.

And yes, it is our choice. Not theirs. Going to war and not leaving our future to chance is a choice.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Jul 2017 00:50

Peregrine wrote:China hid many facts on Doklam issue while making its border claims: Expert

Chameleons.

Not a dragon or a lizard.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 08 Jul 2017 01:13

guys, for the uninitiated, can someone write a page or two on armed conflicts, possibilities, how many men and machine we can field vs Chinese, what limitation the environment poses and how either party can mitigate is.
To my very untrained eyes, it looks like, there are many narrow battlegrounds in the Himalayas (how many?). At least 95% (is it?) of the border is not conducive for war. Given it's nature, someone who can amass a large army at a narrower front can achieve a breakthrough but it would be hard to hold territory deep on enemy side, if the enemy is willing to fight. (More so true on Indian side then Chines, except in JK, if Chinese make a breakthrough, with TSP and locals can hold off the territory, but coming that deep in India will need half their army. An army that is trying to defend may need far lesser manpower than army trying to attack. Large scale armor/artillery/heli ops are rules out though localized war may see them. Air force wise, Chinese have a disadvantage, there fighters start at higher altitude that translate into lower payload and there are limited airfields (is it true?). Naval war will be stretch for any party to go and fight on the other's backyard.

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 08 Jul 2017 01:32

In addition to the above, can the possibility of a Chinese attack from Nepal be addressed? If possible or not and ensuing challenges for us and them ?

brvarsh · Post by **brvarsh** » 08 Jul 2017 03:24

fanne wrote:guys, for the uninitiated, can someone write a page or two on armed conflicts, possibilities, how many men and machine we can field vs Chinese, what limitation the environment poses and how either party can mitigate is.

And you want such finer details on a public forum under the pretense of uninitiated? If our Army chief says we are ready for two and half war then he wouldn't be saying just to boost the moral of the nation and his Men but also because such finer details are on his table. Let us just skip such details or curiosities. Would you not concur?

khan · Post by **khan** » 08 Jul 2017 03:49

Iyersan wrote:Commentary: Immediate withdrawal is only wise move for India
Source: Xinhua| 2017-07-07 16:05:32|Editor: Zhang Dongmiao
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017- ... 425742.htm
BEIJING, July 7 (Xinhua) -- After a three-week stand-off with China on Chinese territory, India should immediately pull back its trespassing troops.

The face-off was caused by Indian border guards who crossed the border at the Sikkim section into Chinese territory and obstructed routine road construction in the Doklam area of China's Tibet Autonomous Region.

In contrast to previous confrontations, the current border dispute is at a long-demarcated section of the China-India border, where no incidents had occurred over the past years.

India has tried to justify its incursion in the name of protecting Bhutan, arguing that Doklam is Bhutanese territory.

However, according to the Convention between Great Britain and China Relating to Sikkim and Tibet (1890), Doklam undoubtedly belongs to China. The agreement was inherited by India after its independence and has been repeatedly confirmed in writing by successive governments of the former British colony.

Documents between the Chinese and Indian governments show former Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru confirmed several times, on behalf of the Indian government, that the Sikkim-Tibet border was defined by the 1890 convention.

It is a basic principle of international law that binding treaties must be executed in good faith.

India's sudden disregard of the 1890 convention runs counter to the ongoing position of the Indian government. It has breached the basic norms of the UN Charter and international laws and will pose a significant threat to bilateral relations.

By creating disputes in Doklam, India seeks to obstruct border negotiations between China and Bhutan, and follow its own ulterior motives in the area.

The claim can not hold water. Doklam has long been under the effective jurisdiction of China. Both Bhutan and China have a basic consensus on the functional conditions and demarcation of their border region.

Moreover, India has no right to interfere in China-Bhutan boundary issues, nor is it entitled to make territorial claims on behalf of Bhutan.

India's current actions have not only encroached on China's territorial sovereignty, but also impaired the independence of Bhutan, one of the world's smallest countries, which is closely allied with India.

India has also argued that Chinese construction would represent a "significant change of status quo with serious security implications for India" in a statement by its Ministry of External Affairs. That argument is unconvincing.

Chinese construction is being conducted within its own territory. It is India that has broken the status quo by trespassing onto Chinese soil. It is not acceptable to any sovereign country that India has crossed a demarcated border into another country on the grounds of its "security concerns."

Indian troops should immediately withdraw to the Indian side of the border as a precondition for any meaningful dialogue between the two countries.

It is clear that if the "Chinese Dragon" and the "Indian Elephant" co-exist harmoniously and achieve peaceful, cooperative development, it will benefit not only their combined 2.7 billion people, but also those living beyond their borders.

Otherwise, a spiral of bilateral rivalry would definitely result in a slow down in their growth

It's good to see the Chinese media act like the Pakistani media.

Things are definitely headed in the right direction.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 08 Jul 2017 04:55

Hope Malabar exercises not directed against third nation: China - PTI

China on Friday guardedly reacted to Malabar exercises+ between the navies of India, the US and Japan, saying it has "no objection" to normal cooperation and hoped that it was not directed against any third country. {'China has no objection' - imperial arrogance}

"As we have said before, we have no objection to normal bilateral relationship and cooperation among relevant countries," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang told media briefing here today.

India's INS Vikramaditya along with US aircraft carrier Nimitiz and Japan's helicopter carrier Izumo were due to take part in the exercises involving frontline ships and aircraft+ , stated to be biggest involving the three countries.

"We hope that this kind of relationship and cooperation will not be directed against third country and that it will be conducive to the regional peace and security," Geng said.

Chinese official media in the past alleged that the exercises were aimed at China.

SriKumar · Post by **SriKumar** » 08 Jul 2017 04:55

nam wrote:Having said everything, I welcome this bullying by the Chinese. Nothing like Pakis and Chinese war/threats to wake up Indian public & politicians and progress Indian defence,

Pakistan. Thank you for Kargil. Thank you for forcing us to ask Israel for supplies and in turn laying the foundation of a technology oasis.
Chinese, thank for 62. We have a large formidable army because of 62.

Please continue threatening and waging war.

Am hoping a war will not happen but this post deserves to be repeated. Total satya vachan.

I hope the darned MOD babus and everyone one else in the bureaucracy, and public at large, come to realize what it means when they delay programs for reasons good or bad reasons- (corruption/bribery, politics, stewardship of finances etc. etc.). The price for all the delay will be paid by the people who are at the border, or preparing to go there.

BSR Murthy · Post by **BSR Murthy** » 08 Jul 2017 05:10

ramana wrote:Ok folks enough data gathering. Lets move to next stage of BR Think Tank 2.0
What should India do?

1) De-Escalate: #MediaMujahids want this
2) Hold: Pragmatists want this
3) Escalate : Hawks want this

India should do exactly what it is doing now! Hold the ground, don't talk much and show steely resolve. How India has handled the Chinese so far is in itself a big testament to the strength of the leadership. Victory at Doka La after all may not need firing any shots, but, showing some testicular material. Be a reluctant warrior, but, crush the enemy when war is brought onto you. I don't want to be a warmonger, but, standing up to China and undoing 1962 are a good way to cleanse our collective psyche and especially of the defeatist dhoti shivering types. Overthinking, too much wargaming and careless generosity got us to where we are today - with us, missing every opportunity to cut the snake to size, letting the dragon flourish and abandoning our duty as protectors of the Dharmic lands.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 08 Jul 2017 05:14

SSridhar wrote:Hope Malabar exercises not directed against third nation: China - PTI
]China on Friday guardedly reacted to Malabar exercises+ between the navies of India, the US and Japan, saying it has "no objection" to normal cooperation and hoped that it was not directed against any third country. [.

"We hope that this kind of relationship and cooperation will not be directed against third country and that it will be conducive to the regional peace and security," Geng said.

.

Chinese can't count apparently. The joint exercise between India, US, and Japan is directed against a FOURTH country, not a third one!

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 08 Jul 2017 07:33

What is the analysis of XI and NaMo meet in Hamburg?
Can the gurus shed light

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 08 Jul 2017 07:41

http://www.newsweek.com/china-pakistan- ... sia-633058
CHINA AND PAKISTAN MILITARY TESTS FLANK INDIA, BOOST TENSIONS IN ASIA

China and Pakistan this week each demonstrated their military might at a time of heightened tensions with neighboring India.

The Chinese and Pakistani governments have close military and economic ties, and both are involved in border disputes with India: The contested Kashmir region has been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan for decades, and claims over land on the Sino-Indian border have led to confrontation in recent weeks.

China’s decision to carry out live-fire military drills near its border region of Tibet nearly coincided with Pakistan’s test launch of a nuclear-capable missile this week.

“We have repeatedly said the Indian troops...illegally crossed the delimited Sikkim section of the China-India boundary mutually recognized by the two sides,” a spokesman for China’s foreign ministry, Geng Shuang, said Thursday during a routine press briefing.

“That is essentially different from the previous border frictions and stand-offs between the two border troops in undefined areas,” Shuang said. “India’s trespass into China’s territory has changed the status quo which can only be recovered when the Indian side

Shuang’s comments referred to an incident last month when China said Indian soldiers crossed the international boundary between the Indian state of Sikkim and the Chinese region of Tibet, sparking a verbal dispute. India has since accused China of compromising the security of nearby Bhutan, an ally of India’s, by constructing roads close to the border region shared by the three nations. China has dismissed these claims and has, in turn, accused India of militarizing its side of the border, Reuters reported.

Amid the heightened tensions, The Global Times, a nationalist outlet aligned with China’s ruling Communist Party, urged Beijing to "reconsider its stance" over its recognition of Sikkim as an Indian state, which China only recognized in 2003, The Hindustan Times reported. Indian concerns were exacerbated by China’s recent live-fire drills in the mountainous border region. The exercises were reportedly intended to test the high-altitude capabilities of its new Type 96B tank and assess “battlefield environment analysis, combat operations command, combat coordination and other real combat and live-fire shooting training,” according to a report published by China’s state-run Xinhua News Agency and translated by the Times of India.

While India deals with military tension on its far eastern border, it was called out by name by its northern rival, Pakistan, which has been independent from India since 1947 and since that time has fought four wars with its longtime foe. One of the most contentious disputes is over the territory of Kashmir, which lies on Pakistan and India’s mutual border and has been the source of a number of violent and even fatal incidents over the decades.

Escalations between Pakistan and India risk far-reaching consequences, because both countries possess nuclear weapons and neither is a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Earlier this week, one of Pakistan’s top generals flaunted his country’s defense capabilities by testing an advanced version of its surface-to-surface, nuclear-capable NASR missile and dismissing India’s so-called Cold Start doctrine of preventing a Pakistani nuclear attack through conventional preemptive strikes

“NASR has put cold water on Cold Start,” Pakistani Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Javed Bajwa told troops with the Army Strategic Force, according to a press release issued Wednesday. It added that Pakistan did not seek war but only to protect against “a highly militarized and increasingly belligerent neighbor.”

Both China and Pakistan have called for peace in the region and displayed aversion to instigating a wider regional conflict. Since 2013, the two countries have embarked on creating the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a multibillion-dollar project designed to improve trade infrastructure between the nations. The project corresponds with China’s greater Belt and Road Initiative, which seeks to reestablish and expand historic land and sea trading routes through Asia to the Middle East, Europe and Africa.

China’s decision to include Pakistan as a hub for this initiative has the potential to make the South Asian country a global economic leader, according to experts cited in The Express Tribune, a Pakistani outlet affiliated with The New York Times.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 08 Jul 2017 08:41

Go to 27°31'14.21" N 88°58'20.01" E on Google Earth.

This is the Chinese garrison that controls the southern Chumbi Valley, that is the approach to the Chicken's Neck. It was built in 2012. The Sikkim aspect of the funnel shaped valley is essentially impassable, any threat to the Chicken Neck has to come along the P204 road which is dominated by the Bhutanese topography, about 3 - 4 thousand feet above this garrison. Dhoka La is about 5 to 10 km from this garrison on a heading NE.

Thus by controlling this higher ground, India has sanitised the approach to Chicken Neck. In fact this garrison is being held hostage by India, there is no egress but through permission of Indian artillery.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 08 Jul 2017 09:06

chola wrote: No, YOU are clueless.
1) recovering Aksai Chin, the fringes around Tawang and a dozen other places left over from 1962 is not going after the core of Tibet. It is taking back what is ours and the positions needed to defend them,
2) where the hell else can they strike back? We only have ONE border with Cheen and it is along the Himilayas,
3) They could strike at us by sea but this is what WE WANT them to do that because if we're able open up a naval war in the IOR we can block trade to the largest trade economy on earth.
Without going to war, we are basically in a waiting game over the failure or success of OBOR.
And yes, it is our choice. Not theirs. Going to war and not leaving our future to chance is a choice.

This is the line of thinking that handed the Pakis the defeat after Op Gibraltar. When you make an offensive strike against the enemy, they can hit you back where they please and have no reason to keep the fight localized.

OBOR is a non-issue here. OBOR will fade away with Eleven. Growing economic & military might is the key, however they will be stuck in the middle income trap so we will catch up with them (or at least narrow the gap) in the next 10-20 years.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 08 Jul 2017 09:13

sanjaykumar wrote:Go to 27°31'14.21" N 88°58'20.01" E on Google Earth.

This is the Chinese garrison that controls the southern Chumbi Valley, that is the approach to the Chicken's Neck. It was built in 2012. The Sikkim aspect of the funnel shaped valley is essentially impassable, any threat to the Chicken Neck has to come along the P204 road which is dominated by the Bhutanese topography, about 3 - 4 thousand feet above this garrison. Dhoka La is about 5 to 10 km from this garrison on a heading NE.

Thus by controlling this higher ground, India has sanitised the approach to Chicken Neck. In fact this garrison is being held hostage by India, there is no egress but through permission of Indian artillery.

The Chinese had no business to build the bridge at 27.581000 89.033616 and the road leading upwards to the fortification at 27.562056 89.080093. This is Bhutanese territory. Any idea when this happened?

DrRatnadip · Post by **DrRatnadip** » 08 Jul 2017 09:20

http://m.timesofindia.com/india/at-g20- ... 497679.cms

At G20 summit, PM Narendra Modi slams Pakistan in strong message on terror, tries to rally nations

PM has not lost his focus enemy no 1..That means We are not affected a bit by chini dlagan..

chola · Post by **chola** » 08 Jul 2017 09:35

yensoy wrote:
chola wrote: No, YOU are clueless.
1) recovering Aksai Chin, the fringes around Tawang and a dozen other places left over from 1962 is not going after the core of Tibet. It is taking back what is ours and the positions needed to defend them,
2) where the hell else can they strike back? We only have ONE border with Cheen and it is along the Himilayas,
3) They could strike at us by sea but this is what WE WANT them to do that because if we're able open up a naval war in the IOR we can block trade to the largest trade economy on earth.
Without going to war, we are basically in a waiting game over the failure or success of OBOR.
And yes, it is our choice. Not theirs. Going to war and not leaving our future to chance is a choice.
This is the line of thinking that handed the Pakis the defeat after Op Gibraltar. When you make an offensive strike against the enemy, they can hit you back where they please and have no reason to keep the fight localized.

Again, there is nowhere else but the border they can hit. And they have to travel through the rarified air of Tibet to get to the border. They have only 24 fighters not by choice. It was imposed on them by geography and geo-politics. We hold overwhelming advantages in men and material.

OBOR is a non-issue here. OBOR will fade away with Eleven. Growing economic & military might is the key, however they will be stuck in the middle income trap so we will catch up with them (or at least narrow the gap) in the next 10-20 years.

Bullshit. You are depending on hope again. There is no chance that OBOR goes away with Eleven. Once projects like those go into gear they are nearly impossible to stop. And no, we won't catch or narrow the gap in the next 10-20 years.

Last year, we grew around 7 percent with $2T economy, the chinis grew at 6.7 with a 11T economy.

Let's round down the PRC figure to 6% for easy accounting and to prove a point:

7% of $2T is $140 Billion, 6% of $11T is $660 Billion. They are adding 5 times more to their economy than we do every year. Even if they collapse to 2% growth, they will still add twice as much to their base than we will. This is the stark reality of our race with Cheen.

We will not be making up ground any time soon. And on top of that they have a printing press that creates credit beyond anything we can imagine. It is why something like OBOR could even be imagined in the first place.

Simply hoping their projects will fail or their economy suddenly collapsing is not a strategy.

War in our theater is where we hold overwhelming advantages. Conversely, waiting things out and allowing them peace to build and build and build both infrastructure and military equipment gives them overwhelming advantages.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 08 Jul 2017 09:47

I composited wikimapia and google maps in the trijunction area. The Chinese seem to be in possession of a pretty large chunk of Bhutanese territory, moving the tri-junction Southwards by quite a distance. I think as the Indian releases indicated, this is the area of contention, not the disputed area to the north with no access from India.

Admin, can you let me add an image attachment?