http://wemedia.ifeng.com/20879259/wemedia.shtmlIyersan wrote:^^^^ Source
Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
TIME TO FREE TIBETIyersan wrote:http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... QpL5I.html
After India's “incursion” into Donglang, China can interfere in J&K, says Chinese media
If the Pakistani government requests, a third country's army can enter the area disputed by India and Pakistan, including India-controlled Kashmir, says article in Global Times.
India has exposed itself to China’s interference in Jammu & Kashmir by sending Indian troops to disrupt Chinese soldiers from building a road in the Donglang region, the state media said on Sunday.
If Pakistan requests, “a third country” can dispatch soldiers to the Valley, said an article in the nationalist tabloid Global Times, adding that Indian soldiers “invaded” China’s Donglang (or Doklam) to serve India’s interests, not Bhutan’s.
“Even if India were requested to defend Bhutan's territory, this could only be limited to its established territory, not the disputed area. Otherwise, under India's logic, if the Pakistani government requests, a third country's army can enter the area disputed by India and Pakistan, including India-controlled Kashmir,” said the article written by Long Xingchun, director of the Centre for Indian Studies at China West Normal University.
Indian and Chinese border troops are locked in a standoff in the Donglang region, near the Sikkim border, which is controlled by China but is also claimed by Bhutan.
Interestingly, China has repeatedly said that Donglang is part of its territory since “ancient times”; it’s for the first time that a Chinese academic said it is actually “disputed”.
“Indian troops invaded China's Doklam area in the name of helping Bhutan, but in fact the invasion was intended to help India by making use of Bhutan,” Long wrote. “India controls Bhutan's defence and diplomacy, seriously violating Bhutan's sovereignty and national interests. Indians have migrated in large numbers to Nepal and Bhutan, interfering with Nepal's internal affairs. The first challenge for Nepal and Bhutan is to avoid becoming a state of India, like Sikkim,” the article added.
Long wrote about India’s “hegemonic diplomacy” in south Asia and claimed New Delhi’s policies have violated international laws and norms.
“For a long time, India has been talking about international equality and non-interference in the internal affairs of others, but it has pursued hegemonic diplomacy in South Asia, seriously violating the UN Charter and undermining the basic norms of international relations,” he wrote.
“Through mass immigration to Sikkim, ultimately leading to control of the Sikkim parliament, India annexed Sikkim as one of its states,” the article said.
Referring to the Siliguri Corridor that connects mainland India to the states in the northeast, the article said it was New Delhi’s concerns about the geographical connection that triggered the standoff.
“This incursion reflects that India fears China can quickly separate mainland India from northeast India through military means, dividing India into two pieces. In this case, northeast India might take the opportunity to become independent,” the article said.
It added: “India has interpreted China's infrastructure construction in Tibet as having a geopolitical intention against India. India itself is unable to do the same for its northeastern part, so it is trying to stop China's road construction.”
-
ArjunPandit
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4067
- Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
^^Iyersan, let's start with PoK first. That solves three problems for us
1. Infiltration into J&K
2. Chokes the CPEC
3. Gives us access to Afghanistan part
1. Infiltration into J&K
2. Chokes the CPEC
3. Gives us access to Afghanistan part
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
The chinese have build cpec in pok, gave stapled visa for j&k . What more is there to interfere?
They want to deploy troops on LOC and "participate" in the cross border firing? Well that would be awesome.
That makes our life more easier.
They want to deploy troops on LOC and "participate" in the cross border firing? Well that would be awesome.
That makes our life more easier.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
The five places we need to keep an eye out for: Barahoti, Chumur, Depsang Plains, Chaglagam and Yangste (Tawang)
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
https://thewire.in/155766/current-stand ... kar-menon/
Current Stand-Off an Attempt by China to Change the Status Quo at Tri-Junction: Shivshankar Menon
Current Stand-Off an Attempt by China to Change the Status Quo at Tri-Junction: Shivshankar Menon
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
^^^^
oh wow. Never new that.
oh wow. Never new that.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
rsingh wrote:^^^^
oh wow. Never new that.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
For all the flak received for a dedicated RM,
Shri Jaitley has handled the dual situations of GST roll out and this Chinese nonsense with aplomb.
Credit where it's due.
Shri Jaitley has handled the dual situations of GST roll out and this Chinese nonsense with aplomb.
Credit where it's due.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
watch nirupama rao to get similar gyan too.rsingh wrote:^^^^
oh wow. Never new that.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
http://www.tribuneindia.com/mobi/news/s ... 33789.html
India ready, theoretically: ‘Threats’ to Siliguri Corridor war-gamed
By Lt Gen KJ Singh (Retd)
Posted at: Jul 9, 2017, 1:01 AM
Last updated: Jul 9, 2017, 1:01 AM (IST)
Geography in terms of boundaries throws up myriad challenges, classified as cartographic anxieties. If not managed well, these magnify into strategic vulnerabilities. Siliguri Corridor, a tenuous link with eight North-East states and gateway for more than 50 million north-easterners, is indeed one such vulnerability.
This 200-km stretch with width varying from 17 to 60 km is aptly referred to as Chicken’s Neck and measures approximately 12,203 sq km. The narrowest 4 km strip towards western edge, Tetulia corridor is wedged between Nepal and Bangladesh. The eastern part of the Corridor is wider and borders Bhutan and Bangladesh. The Chumbi valley tapering into Dolam/Dokalam plateau is barely 100 km away. Mapping the corridor is a challenge as its limits are a matter of interpretation, exemplified in Wikipedia assertion on narrowest point being 27 km, which is closer to average width.
The corridor has major airbases: Bagdogra and Hashimara and an upcoming Army aviation base at Shaugaon. A large number of Army and CAPF installations are located in this narrow stretch. In keeping with ‘one border, one force’ policy, the responsibility of borders is divided between the Army and ITBP for China; SSB for Nepal and Bhutan and Bangladesh with BSF. Multiplicity of forces and agencies requires an effective and tailor-made coordination mechanism. Most of the border except for Bangladesh is unfenced and porous with treacherous riverine stretches. Tea, timber and tourism are the main drivers of economic activity, controlled from Siliguri.
Notorious for criminal activities, Kaliachak in Malda is hub of counterfeit trafficking, narco-terrorism and bomb making. Uncontrolled migration from Bangladesh has complicated demographics and Islamist radical groups and madrasas have proliferated with tacit support of government agencies. Adding to the complexity are non-indigenous Meitei and Bodo settlements, which provide shelter to cadres, in addition to ULFA and KLO utilising it for transit.
Simmering Gorkhaland problem coupled with Kamatapur insurgency have made this region a potential target for hybrid warfare. The obvious question is: have we allowed it to become an Achilles Heel in our geo-strategic calculus?
Terrestrial communication from mainland to the North-East are based on double line broad gauge rail link complemented by two National highways along with vital hydrocarbon pipelines passing through this stretch. Risk mitigation dictates focused investment in strategic storage for critical commodities and alternative connectivities such as Sittwe-Kaladan and transit corridor through Bangladesh as sustenance on aerial bridge has limited potential.
Humphrey Hawksley’s ‘Dragon Fire’ and ‘Assassin’s Mace’ by Brig Bob Butalia outline a scenario of Dragon using Chumbi valley through Doklam and Jaldhaka to cut off the corridor. This scenario with connected forms of threats like airborne raids have been war-gamed many times with devil given more than its due, but in every such exercise, Dragon is not only stymied but stage is set for quid-pro-quo options.
Siliguri Corridor with low hills, jungles and broken ground dotted with numerous rivers provides multiple formidable defence lines. While we certainly don’t want a war, yet for such an eventuality, our troops including mechanised forces are not only earmarked but have regularly rehearsed. In Eastern theatre, we are likely to engage in three separate sub-theatre battles in respective Corps Zones, where primary defensive architecture with inbuilt reserves is already in place.
(The author retired as Western Army Commander and commanded Siliguri Corps. He had an extended tenure in Nagaland as PSO)
India ready, theoretically: ‘Threats’ to Siliguri Corridor war-gamed
By Lt Gen KJ Singh (Retd)
Posted at: Jul 9, 2017, 1:01 AM
Last updated: Jul 9, 2017, 1:01 AM (IST)
Geography in terms of boundaries throws up myriad challenges, classified as cartographic anxieties. If not managed well, these magnify into strategic vulnerabilities. Siliguri Corridor, a tenuous link with eight North-East states and gateway for more than 50 million north-easterners, is indeed one such vulnerability.
This 200-km stretch with width varying from 17 to 60 km is aptly referred to as Chicken’s Neck and measures approximately 12,203 sq km. The narrowest 4 km strip towards western edge, Tetulia corridor is wedged between Nepal and Bangladesh. The eastern part of the Corridor is wider and borders Bhutan and Bangladesh. The Chumbi valley tapering into Dolam/Dokalam plateau is barely 100 km away. Mapping the corridor is a challenge as its limits are a matter of interpretation, exemplified in Wikipedia assertion on narrowest point being 27 km, which is closer to average width.
The corridor has major airbases: Bagdogra and Hashimara and an upcoming Army aviation base at Shaugaon. A large number of Army and CAPF installations are located in this narrow stretch. In keeping with ‘one border, one force’ policy, the responsibility of borders is divided between the Army and ITBP for China; SSB for Nepal and Bhutan and Bangladesh with BSF. Multiplicity of forces and agencies requires an effective and tailor-made coordination mechanism. Most of the border except for Bangladesh is unfenced and porous with treacherous riverine stretches. Tea, timber and tourism are the main drivers of economic activity, controlled from Siliguri.
Notorious for criminal activities, Kaliachak in Malda is hub of counterfeit trafficking, narco-terrorism and bomb making. Uncontrolled migration from Bangladesh has complicated demographics and Islamist radical groups and madrasas have proliferated with tacit support of government agencies. Adding to the complexity are non-indigenous Meitei and Bodo settlements, which provide shelter to cadres, in addition to ULFA and KLO utilising it for transit.
Simmering Gorkhaland problem coupled with Kamatapur insurgency have made this region a potential target for hybrid warfare. The obvious question is: have we allowed it to become an Achilles Heel in our geo-strategic calculus?
Terrestrial communication from mainland to the North-East are based on double line broad gauge rail link complemented by two National highways along with vital hydrocarbon pipelines passing through this stretch. Risk mitigation dictates focused investment in strategic storage for critical commodities and alternative connectivities such as Sittwe-Kaladan and transit corridor through Bangladesh as sustenance on aerial bridge has limited potential.
Humphrey Hawksley’s ‘Dragon Fire’ and ‘Assassin’s Mace’ by Brig Bob Butalia outline a scenario of Dragon using Chumbi valley through Doklam and Jaldhaka to cut off the corridor. This scenario with connected forms of threats like airborne raids have been war-gamed many times with devil given more than its due, but in every such exercise, Dragon is not only stymied but stage is set for quid-pro-quo options.
Siliguri Corridor with low hills, jungles and broken ground dotted with numerous rivers provides multiple formidable defence lines. While we certainly don’t want a war, yet for such an eventuality, our troops including mechanised forces are not only earmarked but have regularly rehearsed. In Eastern theatre, we are likely to engage in three separate sub-theatre battles in respective Corps Zones, where primary defensive architecture with inbuilt reserves is already in place.
(The author retired as Western Army Commander and commanded Siliguri Corps. He had an extended tenure in Nagaland as PSO)
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
'Third country's' Army could enter Kashmir on behalf of Pakistan, says Chinese media
http://m.abplive.in/india-news/dokalam- ... dia-549719
http://m.abplive.in/india-news/dokalam- ... dia-549719
-
sanjaykumar
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6613
- Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
rsingh wrote:wow. One wonder if those rights are provided at home. Chinese enjoy more freedom in India then they do in China."The Chinese government attaches great importance to the safety and lawful rights of its citizens," Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang had said last week.
BTW DL was in Ladakh.
Touche
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
They have already entered Kashmir on Pak's behalf, as part of the illegal CPEC project's security force.Iyersan wrote:'Third country's' Army could enter Kashmir on behalf of Pakistan, says Chinese media
http://m.abplive.in/india-news/dokalam- ... dia-549719
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Will there actually be a 2.5 front war as Gen Bipin Rawat suggested??
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
0.5 courtesy mishandling of Darjeeling and Bashirhat
1 through LoC in pak other 2 LaC
1 through LoC in pak other 2 LaC
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
In regards to J&K interference:
1) chinese have been doing that since 1960s
2) chinese occupied Kashmir that still needs to be returned
3) by chinese checker logic, Jai Shri Dalai Lama can also request Indian gov't to interfere as third party in Tibet
4) same can be done by pretty much all chinese neighbors. chinese seem to forget that they have been kicked around forever by small contry like Japan. It was India that had stopped Japanese army in Burma.
chinese really need to stop misinterpreting Indian largesses in 1962 and Indian care for human lives which zao and his followers do not have any regards for. A country with no regards for human values and planet does not really have any footing to talk about ethical and moral. There should be constant aggressions and slapping given to warlord empires like this. It is a Dharmic duty and just thing to do.
1) chinese have been doing that since 1960s
2) chinese occupied Kashmir that still needs to be returned
3) by chinese checker logic, Jai Shri Dalai Lama can also request Indian gov't to interfere as third party in Tibet
4) same can be done by pretty much all chinese neighbors. chinese seem to forget that they have been kicked around forever by small contry like Japan. It was India that had stopped Japanese army in Burma.
chinese really need to stop misinterpreting Indian largesses in 1962 and Indian care for human lives which zao and his followers do not have any regards for. A country with no regards for human values and planet does not really have any footing to talk about ethical and moral. There should be constant aggressions and slapping given to warlord empires like this. It is a Dharmic duty and just thing to do.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1055619.shtml
New Delhi provokes border row, ignoring history
New Delhi provokes border row, ignoring history
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Chinese people in India should exercise caution: embassy
By Yang Sheng Source:Global Times Published: 2017/7/9 23:33:39
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1055658.shtml
India would be unwise to get involved in two conflicts at once: expert
China's embassy in New Delhi has asked Chinese people in India to "strengthen self-protection" in a travel notice it released amid a fermenting military standoff on the border.
The tension between China and India caused by Indian troops' trespass in Chinese territory in Doklam has not shown signs of easing. Indian troops crossed the border, entering Chinese territory in Doklam on June 26, and are yet to retreat to their own side.
The Chinese embassy on Friday released a notice on its website, urging "all Chinese citizens in India and those who are going to visit India to pay close attention to the local security situation and strengthen self-protection."
"Reduce unnecessary travel to India, and leave travel information with family members, colleagues and friends. Keep a low profile, and respect the local laws and law-enforcement personnel," the notice reads.
"Although there hasn't been nationalistic behavior among the Indian public against Chinese citizens so far, Indian government law-enforcement of Chinese companies may become stricter," said Lin Minwang, a professor at the Center for South Asian Studies of Fudan University.
The current tension makes India an unsuitable destination for Chinese to travel or do business in, which is why the Chinese embassy in India warns that the situation has already had an impact on normal exchanges between the two countries, Hu Zhiyong, a research fellow at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times.
However, China has denied that it curbed cultural exchanges between scholars of the two countries.
The Hindu reported that the India Foundation, a think tank associated with the ruling party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), claimed that China had denied visas to its academic delegation.
The report was refuted by the Chinese embassy. Counselor Xie Liyan of the Chinese Embassy in India said on Saturday that "As far as I know, all seven members of the India Foundation delegation that were scheduled to visit China got their visas on time. No visa application was denied."
In fact, their visas were issued quicker than usual, Professor Zhang Jiadong, director of the Center for South Asian Studies of Fudan University, which invited the India Foundation researchers, told the Global Times.
There is no problem with visa issuance for Indian scholars, especially with the help of both the Chinese embassy and India's ministry of external affairs, Zhang said. "We don't understand why the India Foundation and Indian media spread such a rumor."
Two conflicts
Aside from the border spat with China, India is embroiled with Pakistan over an exchange of fire at the Kashmir border.
Both India and Pakistan accused each other of initiating the incident on Saturday that caused civilian deaths on both sides of their controlled border in Kashmir, the Xinhua News Agency reported.
"The violence occurred as hundreds of militants and political activists took to the streets in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir to commemorate the death of Burhan Wani (a Pakistani military commander)," The Hindustan Times reported.
However, Pakistan announced that it was India who attacked Pakistani civilians first and then the Pakistani military fired back.
The Pakistan army said earlier that at least two civilians were killed from Indian shooting along the Line of Control dividing Kashmir. Director General of the South Asian Desk at the Pakistani foreign ministry Mohammad Faisal summoned Indian Deputy High Commissioner J.P. Singh and condemned the cease-fire violation by Indian forces in Chirikot and Satwal Sectors on Saturday, the Pakistani foreign ministry said in a statement, Xinhua reported.
Lin said that there are frequent conflicts and military scuffles between the areas of Kashmir controlled by the two sides. China has nothing to do with the situation in Kashmir, but it would be unwise for India to engage in two conflicts at the same time, he said.
THEY ARE WORKING IN TANDEM OPENING 2 FRONT. SOUND THE BATTLE DRUMS!!! Har har Mahadev
By Yang Sheng Source:Global Times Published: 2017/7/9 23:33:39
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1055658.shtml
India would be unwise to get involved in two conflicts at once: expert
China's embassy in New Delhi has asked Chinese people in India to "strengthen self-protection" in a travel notice it released amid a fermenting military standoff on the border.
The tension between China and India caused by Indian troops' trespass in Chinese territory in Doklam has not shown signs of easing. Indian troops crossed the border, entering Chinese territory in Doklam on June 26, and are yet to retreat to their own side.
The Chinese embassy on Friday released a notice on its website, urging "all Chinese citizens in India and those who are going to visit India to pay close attention to the local security situation and strengthen self-protection."
"Reduce unnecessary travel to India, and leave travel information with family members, colleagues and friends. Keep a low profile, and respect the local laws and law-enforcement personnel," the notice reads.
"Although there hasn't been nationalistic behavior among the Indian public against Chinese citizens so far, Indian government law-enforcement of Chinese companies may become stricter," said Lin Minwang, a professor at the Center for South Asian Studies of Fudan University.
The current tension makes India an unsuitable destination for Chinese to travel or do business in, which is why the Chinese embassy in India warns that the situation has already had an impact on normal exchanges between the two countries, Hu Zhiyong, a research fellow at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times.
However, China has denied that it curbed cultural exchanges between scholars of the two countries.
The Hindu reported that the India Foundation, a think tank associated with the ruling party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), claimed that China had denied visas to its academic delegation.
The report was refuted by the Chinese embassy. Counselor Xie Liyan of the Chinese Embassy in India said on Saturday that "As far as I know, all seven members of the India Foundation delegation that were scheduled to visit China got their visas on time. No visa application was denied."
In fact, their visas were issued quicker than usual, Professor Zhang Jiadong, director of the Center for South Asian Studies of Fudan University, which invited the India Foundation researchers, told the Global Times.
There is no problem with visa issuance for Indian scholars, especially with the help of both the Chinese embassy and India's ministry of external affairs, Zhang said. "We don't understand why the India Foundation and Indian media spread such a rumor."
Two conflicts
Aside from the border spat with China, India is embroiled with Pakistan over an exchange of fire at the Kashmir border.
Both India and Pakistan accused each other of initiating the incident on Saturday that caused civilian deaths on both sides of their controlled border in Kashmir, the Xinhua News Agency reported.
"The violence occurred as hundreds of militants and political activists took to the streets in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir to commemorate the death of Burhan Wani (a Pakistani military commander)," The Hindustan Times reported.
However, Pakistan announced that it was India who attacked Pakistani civilians first and then the Pakistani military fired back.
The Pakistan army said earlier that at least two civilians were killed from Indian shooting along the Line of Control dividing Kashmir. Director General of the South Asian Desk at the Pakistani foreign ministry Mohammad Faisal summoned Indian Deputy High Commissioner J.P. Singh and condemned the cease-fire violation by Indian forces in Chirikot and Satwal Sectors on Saturday, the Pakistani foreign ministry said in a statement, Xinhua reported.
Lin said that there are frequent conflicts and military scuffles between the areas of Kashmir controlled by the two sides. China has nothing to do with the situation in Kashmir, but it would be unwise for India to engage in two conflicts at the same time, he said.
THEY ARE WORKING IN TANDEM OPENING 2 FRONT. SOUND THE BATTLE DRUMS!!! Har har Mahadev
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
India breaks international law over unwarranted fears
By Long Xingchun Source:Global Times Published: 2017/7/9 20:08:39
On June 26, the spokesmen of China's foreign affairs and defense ministries said that China has taken corresponding measures in response to Indian frontier officers illegally crossing the Sino-Indian border in the Sikkim sector, thwarting the normal activity of China's frontier forces in the Doklam area. Some Indian media hyped up the incident, saying that the Chinese army invaded Indian territory. The Indian government did not release any relevant information then.
On June 30, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs issued a statement about the standoff, which did not say that the Chinese army intruded Indian territory, as alleged by Indian media. The statement also admitted the Indian personnel approached the Chinese construction party at the Doklam area.
However, the statement referred to Doklam as "Bhutanese territory" by citing the Foreign Ministry of Bhutan and alleged that Indian military's incursion into this area was at the request of the Bhutanese government to stop China from changing the status quo.
Indian troops invaded China's Doklam area in the name of helping Bhutan, but in fact the invasion was intended to help India by making use of Bhutan.
For a long time, India has been talking about international equality and non-interference in the internal affairs of others, but it has pursued hegemonic diplomacy in South Asia, seriously violating the UN Charter and undermining the basic norms of international relations. Through mass immigration to Sikkim, ultimately leading to control of the Sikkim parliament, India annexed Sikkim as one of its states.
India controls Bhutan's defense and diplomacy, seriously violating Bhutan's sovereignty and national interests. Indians have migrated in large numbers to Nepal and Bhutan, interfering with Nepal's internal affairs. The first challenge for Nepal and Bhutan is to avoid becoming a state of India, like Sikkim.
Western countries are attempting to use India to contain China, indulging India's hegemony in South Asia. For example, when India blockaded Nepal in 2015, Western governments and media kept silent, ignoring India's hegemony over the small countries of South Asia.
Even if India were requested to defend Bhutan's territory, this could only be limited to its established territory, not the disputed area. Otherwise, under India's logic, if the Pakistani government requests, a third country's army can enter the area disputed by India and Pakistan, including India-controlled Kashmir.
Though the statement of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs evaded the issue, Indian experts, scholars and the media openly pointed out the Indian army's real motive of this action: to prevent China's construction in the Doklam area and possible future military deployment, which could block the road from mainland India to the "chicken neck" of northeast India. Northeast Indian people don't identify closely with India, and there are several armed organizations striving for northeastern states' independence from India.
This incursion reflects that India fears China can quickly separate mainland India from northeast India through military means, dividing India into two pieces. In this case, northeast India might take the opportunity to become independent. India has interpreted China's infrastructure construction in Tibet as having a geopolitical intention against India. India itself is unable to do the same for its northeastern part, so it is trying to stop China's road construction.
India's incursion, based on its own strategic judgment, is a clear violation of international law. Indian Defense Minister Arun Jaitley claimed that India was "not the 1962 India anymore." However, China's situation in 1962 was even more dire. At present, though the US and other Western countries have the intention to contain China through supporting India, they have a wide range of common interests with China. Therefore, Western countries cannot unconditionally stand on the side of India about India's incursion into China's territory. As for the territorial dispute between China and Bhutan, it should be resolved by both sides and India must respect Bhutan's sovereignty.
China can show the region and the international community or even the UN Security Council its evidence to illustrate China's position. It highlights China's sincerity and effort to maintain peace as a responsible big power. It will never resort to force till it is the last choice.
The author is a research fellow at The Charhar Institute and director of the Center for Indian Studies at China West Normal University. [email protected]
By Long Xingchun Source:Global Times Published: 2017/7/9 20:08:39
On June 26, the spokesmen of China's foreign affairs and defense ministries said that China has taken corresponding measures in response to Indian frontier officers illegally crossing the Sino-Indian border in the Sikkim sector, thwarting the normal activity of China's frontier forces in the Doklam area. Some Indian media hyped up the incident, saying that the Chinese army invaded Indian territory. The Indian government did not release any relevant information then.
On June 30, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs issued a statement about the standoff, which did not say that the Chinese army intruded Indian territory, as alleged by Indian media. The statement also admitted the Indian personnel approached the Chinese construction party at the Doklam area.
However, the statement referred to Doklam as "Bhutanese territory" by citing the Foreign Ministry of Bhutan and alleged that Indian military's incursion into this area was at the request of the Bhutanese government to stop China from changing the status quo.
Indian troops invaded China's Doklam area in the name of helping Bhutan, but in fact the invasion was intended to help India by making use of Bhutan.
For a long time, India has been talking about international equality and non-interference in the internal affairs of others, but it has pursued hegemonic diplomacy in South Asia, seriously violating the UN Charter and undermining the basic norms of international relations. Through mass immigration to Sikkim, ultimately leading to control of the Sikkim parliament, India annexed Sikkim as one of its states.
India controls Bhutan's defense and diplomacy, seriously violating Bhutan's sovereignty and national interests. Indians have migrated in large numbers to Nepal and Bhutan, interfering with Nepal's internal affairs. The first challenge for Nepal and Bhutan is to avoid becoming a state of India, like Sikkim.
Western countries are attempting to use India to contain China, indulging India's hegemony in South Asia. For example, when India blockaded Nepal in 2015, Western governments and media kept silent, ignoring India's hegemony over the small countries of South Asia.
Even if India were requested to defend Bhutan's territory, this could only be limited to its established territory, not the disputed area. Otherwise, under India's logic, if the Pakistani government requests, a third country's army can enter the area disputed by India and Pakistan, including India-controlled Kashmir.
Though the statement of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs evaded the issue, Indian experts, scholars and the media openly pointed out the Indian army's real motive of this action: to prevent China's construction in the Doklam area and possible future military deployment, which could block the road from mainland India to the "chicken neck" of northeast India. Northeast Indian people don't identify closely with India, and there are several armed organizations striving for northeastern states' independence from India.
This incursion reflects that India fears China can quickly separate mainland India from northeast India through military means, dividing India into two pieces. In this case, northeast India might take the opportunity to become independent. India has interpreted China's infrastructure construction in Tibet as having a geopolitical intention against India. India itself is unable to do the same for its northeastern part, so it is trying to stop China's road construction.
India's incursion, based on its own strategic judgment, is a clear violation of international law. Indian Defense Minister Arun Jaitley claimed that India was "not the 1962 India anymore." However, China's situation in 1962 was even more dire. At present, though the US and other Western countries have the intention to contain China through supporting India, they have a wide range of common interests with China. Therefore, Western countries cannot unconditionally stand on the side of India about India's incursion into China's territory. As for the territorial dispute between China and Bhutan, it should be resolved by both sides and India must respect Bhutan's sovereignty.
China can show the region and the international community or even the UN Security Council its evidence to illustrate China's position. It highlights China's sincerity and effort to maintain peace as a responsible big power. It will never resort to force till it is the last choice.
The author is a research fellow at The Charhar Institute and director of the Center for Indian Studies at China West Normal University. [email protected]
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
New Delhi must resist using Dalai Lama card amid border spat
By Yu Ning Source:Global Times Published: 2017/7/9 21:58:39
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1055633.shtml
Amid a simmering face-off between Chinese and Indian troops in the Sikkim section of the Sino-Indian border, the "Tibetan national flag," a pro-independence symbol adopted by the Tibetan government-in-exile, was unfurled on the shores of Bangong Lake, known as Pangong Lake in India, in Ladakh, according to Indian media outlet The Wire. The lake sits astride India and China, with the Line of Actual Control passing through it. It's the first time the Tibetan exile administration in northern India has flown the flag at this location.
The timing of the flag-hoisting on Indian territory has sparked wide speculation over whether the Indian authorities instigated the political activity of Tibetan separatists to exert pressure on China. Although the involvement of New Delhi remains unclear, we hope they did not send any signal of approval.
The Tibetan government-in-exile is based in the Indian town of Dharamsala. New Delhi publicly promises not to allow any anti-China political activities by Tibetan exiles on Indian territory. But it has long used the Tibet question as a diplomatic card in dealing with Beijing.
When the Indian government attaches great importance to its relationship with China, it keeps a tight grip on anti-China political activities on its soil. However, when it is dissatisfied or has conflicts with Beijing, the Tibet card is played up. But India may overestimate the influence of Tibetan exiles.
With the rise of China and as Tibet becomes better off, Tibetan independence runs counter to the will of Tibetans. The space for Tibetan separatists has been largely squeezed as more Western countries have snubbed the Dalai Lama. The Tibet card is gradually losing its value.
If New Delhi is pulling the strings of the Tibetan exiles' political act of flag-hoisting, it will only have burned itself. Both border issues and the Tibet question concern China's core interests and China won't yield to provocations.
Given the ongoing border spat, the Indian government should act prudently to avoid escalating tensions. It has the responsibility to control Tibetan exiles and their anti-China activities on Indian soil.
New Delhi should think more about how to de-escalate the border face-off at this moment. China is India's biggest trading partner. For India, with a vast population living in poverty, peace and opportunities of development are of vital importance. New Delhi cannot afford to mess up the China-India bilateral relationship.
By Yu Ning Source:Global Times Published: 2017/7/9 21:58:39
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1055633.shtml
Amid a simmering face-off between Chinese and Indian troops in the Sikkim section of the Sino-Indian border, the "Tibetan national flag," a pro-independence symbol adopted by the Tibetan government-in-exile, was unfurled on the shores of Bangong Lake, known as Pangong Lake in India, in Ladakh, according to Indian media outlet The Wire. The lake sits astride India and China, with the Line of Actual Control passing through it. It's the first time the Tibetan exile administration in northern India has flown the flag at this location.
The timing of the flag-hoisting on Indian territory has sparked wide speculation over whether the Indian authorities instigated the political activity of Tibetan separatists to exert pressure on China. Although the involvement of New Delhi remains unclear, we hope they did not send any signal of approval.
The Tibetan government-in-exile is based in the Indian town of Dharamsala. New Delhi publicly promises not to allow any anti-China political activities by Tibetan exiles on Indian territory. But it has long used the Tibet question as a diplomatic card in dealing with Beijing.
When the Indian government attaches great importance to its relationship with China, it keeps a tight grip on anti-China political activities on its soil. However, when it is dissatisfied or has conflicts with Beijing, the Tibet card is played up. But India may overestimate the influence of Tibetan exiles.
With the rise of China and as Tibet becomes better off, Tibetan independence runs counter to the will of Tibetans. The space for Tibetan separatists has been largely squeezed as more Western countries have snubbed the Dalai Lama. The Tibet card is gradually losing its value.
If New Delhi is pulling the strings of the Tibetan exiles' political act of flag-hoisting, it will only have burned itself. Both border issues and the Tibet question concern China's core interests and China won't yield to provocations.
Given the ongoing border spat, the Indian government should act prudently to avoid escalating tensions. It has the responsibility to control Tibetan exiles and their anti-China activities on Indian soil.
New Delhi should think more about how to de-escalate the border face-off at this moment. China is India's biggest trading partner. For India, with a vast population living in poverty, peace and opportunities of development are of vital importance. New Delhi cannot afford to mess up the China-India bilateral relationship.
-
Varoon Shekhar
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2177
- Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
^^
The Chinese writers and spokesmen sound like pompous asses, not to mention liars.
The Chinese writers and spokesmen sound like pompous asses, not to mention liars.
-
Varoon Shekhar
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2177
- Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Stupid argument, utterly devoid of any historical, geo-political or situational context. For one, is Bhutan sending terrorists into China, not just into Tibet, but Beijing or Shanghai?Iyersan wrote:'Third country's' Army could enter Kashmir on behalf of Pakistan, says Chinese media
http://m.abplive.in/india-news/dokalam- ... dia-549719
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Maybe they should !
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
China West Normal University is a PLA affiliated university.Varoon Shekhar wrote:^^
The Chinese writers and spokesmen sound like pompous asses, not to mention liars.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Global Times should hire a couple of those Caucasian actors to portray western academics in a conference on this standoff.
-
ArjunPandit
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4067
- Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Sometime back they had threatened docking Liaoning in Karachi/Gwadar, didn't hear that again...i guess they realized how far it can go
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
chinese thugs may have new shiny toys and man power to bully half of the world but their PR mouthpieces are utter laughing stock. I guess thieves can reverse engineer engineering stuff but can't do reverse aping of sound logic or argument.
-
Chinmayanand
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2585
- Joined: 05 Oct 2008 16:01
- Location: Mansarovar
- Contact:
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
With one child policy , can China afford a lot many bodybags ?
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
I don't think there is much point considering such questions.Chinmayanand wrote:With one child policy , can China afford a lot many bodybags ?
Nobody of any country wants to lose a son in war, whether he is an only child or one of many. Yet our jawans... sons of many lakh Indian citizens... stand post every day. If given the order they will attack, defend, do whatever it takes to the point of laying down their lives. We as a society know this, and we honour the sacrifices of those families who have sent a son into harm's way for the nation's security.
Whatever countervailing effect the one child policy may have, I am sure it is more than balanced by the nationalism and patriotic sentiment of Chinese citizens for those amongst themselves who have pledged to make the ultimate sacrifice for their nation.
Consider India. Unlike PRC we are a free and open society where sentiments are not policed and protests are not stifled. During the early part of the Kargil conflict, IA was forced to engage in maneuvers that were very costly in lives. Yet, not one voice was raised in India (particularly amongst those whose sons were in the line of fire) against the supreme cause of defending the motherland.
In China, with no voting and no free expression, such voices even if they are raised will not matter. And indeed why do we assume some significant degree of protest will be raised? Their citizens too are highly jingoistic and will honour the sacrifices of PLA soldiers defending (what they believe is) Chinese sovereignty, no?
What I am concerned about if the balloon goes up is the resilience of our own suit boot civilian class when the inevitable cyber warfare targets them in earnest. Internet access, cell phone connectivity, retail and financial banking systems, transport/communication/energy distribution networks on which business and trade logistics depend to function, power grids and water supply systems, all will come under attack. The aspirational middle-class-plus Indian citizen will be affected directly in a way that most of them were not during Kargil.
Added to this, the presstitute MSM and SM-FakeNews mouthpieces of treasonous political interests will be in full flow, just as during the IC814 hijacking, trying to drown out patriotic sentiment and drum up a vast clamour of public resentment against "warmonger Modi who is living comfortably while Aam Admi suffers" etc.
I am not dhoti shivering about this... in the end, I am confident that the patriotism of the Indian citizenry will overcome all such noxious efforts. But instead of worrying about China and its one child policy, let us prepare for the reality that these internal challenges will have to be faced and dealt with on our own side.
-
sanjaykumar
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6613
- Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
With the rise of China and as Tibet becomes better off, Tibetan independence runs counter to the will of Tibetans. The space for Tibetan separatists has been largely squeezed as more Western countries have snubbed the Dalai Lama. The Tibet card is gradually losing its value.
Well then, no need for editorials is there (he asks rhetorically)?
Well then, no need for editorials is there (he asks rhetorically)?
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
This is probably OT, but what is the potential for the Indian state creating a one nation two systems political structure as an offer for Nepal and Bhutan ? They both get the deal Nepal gets, i.e. unlimited right to residence and work in India (but not the reverse, i.e. Indians have unlimited freedom to visit but not reside and do business), and they retain all political independence except that India conducts all aspects of foreign policy and defense. Might be a hard sell to Nepal with their current polity, but may be feasible with Bhutan. It'll essentially end the security concerns in the northeast, pushing India to the Chinese border everywhere there.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
The question is, when its all said and done, how will the Party defend losing 500K little princes - in a remote area where they are at a strategic disadvantage?Rudradev wrote:I don't think there is much point considering such questions.Chinmayanand wrote:With one child policy , can China afford a lot many bodybags ?
Nobody of any country wants to lose a son in war, whether he is an only child or one of many. Yet our jawans... sons of many lakh Indian citizens... stand post every day. If given the order they will attack, defend, do whatever it takes to the point of laying down their lives. We as a society know this, and we honour the sacrifices of those families who have sent a son into harm's way for the nation's security.
Whatever countervailing effect the one child policy may have, I am sure it is more than balanced by the nationalism and patriotic sentiment of Chinese citizens for those amongst themselves who have pledged to make the ultimate sacrifice for their nation.
Consider India. Unlike PRC we are a free and open society where sentiments are not policed and protests are not stifled. During the early part of the Kargil conflict, IA was forced to engage in maneuvers that were very costly in lives. Yet, not one voice was raised in India (particularly amongst those whose sons were in the line of fire) against the supreme cause of defending the motherland.
In China, with no voting and no free expression, such voices even if they are raised will not matter. And indeed why do we assume some significant degree of protest will be raised? Their citizens too are highly jingoistic and will honour the sacrifices of PLA soldiers defending (what they believe is) Chinese sovereignty, no?
What I am concerned about if the balloon goes up is the resilience of our own suit boot civilian class when the inevitable cyber warfare targets them in earnest. Internet access, cell phone connectivity, retail and financial banking systems, transport/communication/energy distribution networks on which business and trade logistics depend to function, power grids and water supply systems, all will come under attack. The aspirational middle-class-plus Indian citizen will be affected directly in a way that most of them were not during Kargil.
Added to this, the presstitute MSM and SM-FakeNews mouthpieces of treasonous political interests will be in full flow, just as during the IC814 hijacking, trying to drown out patriotic sentiment and drum up a vast clamour of public resentment against "warmonger Modi who is living comfortably while Aam Admi suffers" etc.
I am not dhoti shivering about this... in the end, I am confident that the patriotism of the Indian citizenry will overcome all such noxious efforts. But instead of worrying about China and its one child policy, let us prepare for the reality that these internal challenges will have to be faced and dealt with on our own side.
Does this make any sense for them? While, you are right that debate in China is stifled, it also makes them hyper-sensitive about making mistakes. We can assume that whatever they do will be the product of a rational decision making process.
If they really are at a strategic disadvantage (as does appear to be the case) and they are behaving like rational actors, I don't see them starting something.
But, if they do - I look forward to it. Nothing like fertilizing good Indian soil with the blood of a few hundred thousand slaughtered little princes - and if we are lucky, we free Tibet.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Tibet is not home turf for the average Han, though at what threshold (28k?) they will question is an open point
Its ok to create buffers, Tibet and SCS, around the mainland however can they defend them at the same motivational levels than somebody with no buffer and is in 'do-or-die' state
Its ok to create buffers, Tibet and SCS, around the mainland however can they defend them at the same motivational levels than somebody with no buffer and is in 'do-or-die' state
Last edited by vasu raya on 10 Jul 2017 01:13, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Thank you!!Iyersan wrote:http://www.tribuneindia.com/mobi/news/s ... 33789.html
India ready, theoretically: ‘Threats’ to Siliguri Corridor war-gamed
By Lt Gen KJ Singh (Retd)
(The author retired as Western Army Commander and commanded Siliguri Corps. He had an extended tenure in Nagaland as PSO)
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Khan,
I am wary of any assumptions derived from a perceived sociological weakness applied as a broad-brush characterization of the enemy. Particularly to the extent that we might start drawing conclusions about their national resolve and strategic behaviour based on it.
1965 Paki aphorisms about "one strong blow will crumble the banias' will to fight" and "1 TFTA Paki = 10 SDRE yindoos" come to mind.
The Chinese lost 80 million in the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. Despite the fondest hopes of the "democracy exporting" globalists of the West, this has not proved a burden to the Party in cultivating a national will to exert Chinese dominance in aggressive defiance of the "free world". Why do we think a One Child Policy will be any more of a burden?
Underestimating the Chinese will to fight for what they perceive as their own land, however remote or barren (so was Kargil to many Indians) would be a mistake.
Factors based on the hard realities of logistics, terrain, etc. are a whole different argument.
I am wary of any assumptions derived from a perceived sociological weakness applied as a broad-brush characterization of the enemy. Particularly to the extent that we might start drawing conclusions about their national resolve and strategic behaviour based on it.
1965 Paki aphorisms about "one strong blow will crumble the banias' will to fight" and "1 TFTA Paki = 10 SDRE yindoos" come to mind.
The Chinese lost 80 million in the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. Despite the fondest hopes of the "democracy exporting" globalists of the West, this has not proved a burden to the Party in cultivating a national will to exert Chinese dominance in aggressive defiance of the "free world". Why do we think a One Child Policy will be any more of a burden?
Underestimating the Chinese will to fight for what they perceive as their own land, however remote or barren (so was Kargil to many Indians) would be a mistake.
Factors based on the hard realities of logistics, terrain, etc. are a whole different argument.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
I hope IA can hire Chinese speakers to create audio tapes to blare out of their positions 24/7 . The tapes should ask why the soldiers are there, thousands of kms from Han heartland, in the middle of freezing mountains ? Why are they separated from their loved ones and sweethearts , letting party princelings have free access to their women safe in Shanghai, Beijing and elsewhere ? Don't they realize that their sex ratio is 1.2:1 ? The party wants them dead so they can fix the gender imbalances.
Play that nonstop and it'll do wonders for PLA border sentry morale.
Play that nonstop and it'll do wonders for PLA border sentry morale.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
I have heard that the PLA troops deployed in Tibet are mostly ethnic Tibetans (for reasons of acclimatization etc.) What a bonanza of psy-war opportunities that would provide us, if true.
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
The Han also want to fight alongside the Jihadis across the LoC in PoK 
-
sanjaykumar
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6613
- Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51
Re: Managing Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)
Suraj wrote:I hope IA can hire Chinese speakers to create audio tapes to blare out of their positions 24/7 . The tapes should ask why the soldiers are there, thousands of kms from Han heartland, in the middle of freezing mountains ? Why are they separated from their loved ones and sweethearts , letting party princelings have free access to their women safe in Shanghai, Beijing and elsewhere ? Don't they realize that their sex ratio is 1.2:1 ? The party wants them dead so they can fix the gender imbalances.
Play that nonstop and it'll do wonders for PLA border sentry morale.
Haqeeqat