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

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 15 Jul 2017 23:19

Bade wrote:The ugly truth is that to a fight a war, the strength of the economy does not scale linearly forever in your favor and China knows this. At lower levels like in the 1962 era, it mattered perhaps more though both countries were at similar levels then. Now for the last decade or so both have reached a saturation point, where adding more wealth or strength does not bring immediate end to wars with a short victory to one side unless limited to one local theatre, like say Sikkim tri-junction. So that is deterrence in itself, unless a local flashpoint erupts and then a local peace need to be found either with a decisive victory or a truce called.

So China cannot escalate the tri-junction flashpoint to a more widespread war, the only thing left for it to do is use their proxies in Pakistan to make trouble for India in J&K. There is some benefit for them in doing so clearly, but it needs to be done not as explicitly as they are trying to do which makes them look like idiots.

Mehbooba openly implicating China. With GOI tacit approval. If evidence exists of Chinese involvement why is it that we are not internationalizing it??

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 15 Jul 2017 23:20

Xi has put PRC in India's Bakistan dilemma. Panga he has taken will now have it;s own momentum and may swallow Xi's own political future. Hope PM Modi set BRICS summit up for failure. Every small or big opportunity for China to assert political, military , economic leadership must be countered by all Countries Xi has managed to antagonize.

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 15 Jul 2017 23:27

TIFWIW.
According to this video there is massive unemployment among retired soldiers. Don't they get pension? Only 60 dollars per month according to the video. Also the soldiers undergo training in communist party propaganda in addition to military training and they should spend 30 percent of their time for the communist party propaganda. Some fighting unit it will be.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 15 Jul 2017 23:29

rsingh wrote:There was a poster (RishiRishi IIRC) who told that BR is accessible in China. Is it possible to make a China specific thread for Chinese. Secondly is there any way of breaking great bullshit wall that blocks free flow of information. Hold on free and true information is biggest weapon China has.

It's not accessible in China, at least not the last time I went back in 2014. I tried from various locales in Beijing and Wuxi, all blocked.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 15 Jul 2017 23:31

Bade wrote: So China cannot escalate the tri-junction flashpoint to a more widespread war, the only thing left for it to do is use their proxies in Pakistan to make trouble for India in J&K. There is some benefit for them in doing so clearly, but it needs to be done not as explicitly as they are trying to do which makes them look like idiots.

Pakistan has become an unmitigated disaster. It has already done whatever it could and it has not worked to shift the balance away from India. To help China, the best Pakistan can do is terrorist attacks such as the bombings in Mumbai or flare ups in Kashmir. But these attacks, while devastating to the civilian population, have no effect on the military equation. China can also revive the assistance it gave to the insurgents in the NE, but this will not yield any short term gains in the current dispute.
Gautam

schinnas · Post by **schinnas** » 15 Jul 2017 23:50

China haa already revived its support for North East militants. It is believed that even ULFA leader is under Chinese influence.

I mentioned sometime earlier that they have overplayed their cards. There is nothing for India to hold back because Chinese are doing everything they can against India without open war.

- Arming Pakistan to the hilt including pricing sensitive drone, air force, missile and nuke technologies and fabricated weapons.

- Support for Kashmir terrorists in international forums and bailing out Pakistan in UNSC everytime.

- Blocking India in every International forum, whether it is UNSC, ASEAN or NSG.

- Aggressive encircling of india and trying to turn our neighbors against Indian interests in Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh (less successfully).

- Clandestinely supporting Paki fake currency rackets in India and all sorts of economic subterfuge including exporting counterfeit drugs with Made in India tags to hurt Indian economy.

- Supporting North East rebels with arms, strategy and counselling

The only card they didn't play was Kashmir and Sikkim, even though they have no legal standing in either case.

India on the other hand has several cards it has barely used. Each of these cards have varying degree of uaage. We don't need to go to a full extent such as recognising Taiwan as a separate country. We can by deftly working with partner nations with similar interests, can turn on the screws on each of these cards in parallel..fully away from any sort of publicity.

We are totally in a position to say, bring it on uncle eleven. We will make some humble pie for you to eat and serve crow for desert to your loudmouth spokespersons.

All this depends upon our leadership coordinating the efforts with various partners and executing on certain aspects in close coordination with partners. Its time to let loose our creativity. Against the collective night of the intelligence agencies of all of China's enemies, cheena doesn't have a chance in hell.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 16 Jul 2017 00:00

On Sikkim they played in '62, '67 and '86 and lost, so they settled the borders except the tri-junction. It should have been settled then for that junction point too.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 16 Jul 2017 00:49

http://www.firstpost.com/politics/cpm-s ... 10673.html
CPM says Doka La is Bhutan's standoff with China, urges India to not interfere in dispute
New Delhi: The CPM stressed on the need for a fresh round of dialogue between India and China covering all strategic issues concerning the two countries to ease tension, following the standoff in Doka La area.
The CPM said "extraneous" factors must not be allowed to interfere in the quest for better bilateral ties. It alleged that differences between India and China have "aggravated" after the Modi government came to power and blamed the Centre's strategic alliance with the US for the "divergence".
.....

Gautam

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 16 Jul 2017 01:34

^^^^ Anyone taking this stance should be charged with treason. They can say whatever else they want but questioning our interest in guarding Bhutan is out of line.

schinnas · Post by **schinnas** » 16 Jul 2017 01:45

It is treason, but nothing better was expected of CPM. But its time to make an example of such traitors. NIA should start investigation of Chinese funding of CPM...take in a few functionaries. They may be released after questioning , but the message would be heard loud and clear and there would be a penalty in terms of public support as well for these CPM creeps.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 16 Jul 2017 01:47

^^^ what is intriguing about the CPM official stand (if true) on this issue is that among their foot soldiers at least ( a few I had conversations with) do not share this camaraderie with China, as they see China in the same light at the US. These are not people in power but long term local leaders. In any case, they carry little weight in national level politics to give their views any currency in strategic affairs.

malushahi · Post by **malushahi** » 16 Jul 2017 02:47

why can't bhutan cede the entire doklam tract to india (considering the shaksgam precedent where one of the countries disputing a piece of land unilaterally ceded it to a third country)?

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 16 Jul 2017 02:58

In this "tri"-partite dispute, what does the third party, Bhutan, think? From this article, it seems like Bhutan and China are ready to settle their dispute, at India's detriment, which prompted the the Indian incursion into Bhutanese/Chinese territory.

https://thewire.in/156180/bhutan-doklam-border-china/

In the Tri-Junction Entanglement, What Does Bhutan Want?
BY P. STOBDAN ON 11/07/2017 • 1 COMMENT
SHARE THIS:
WhatsAppPrintMore
People in Bhutan seem to think it is time to resolve the dispute with China once and for all, without pandering to Indian interests.

As the India-China standoff persists, the key question is where Bhutan actually stands. India’s claim that Bhutan is fully with India on the issue seems questionable. The official statement issued by the Bhutanese government on June 29 does not make the country’s position explicit.

The 1949 Friendship Treaty (updated in 2007) guides the contemporary Indo-Bhutan relationship and aims to ensure India’s non-interference in Bhutan’s internal affairs. Article 2 of the 1949 version, however, entrusted India with the power to guide Bhutan’s foreign policy. But Article 2 of the 2007 version freed Bhutan from seeking India’s guidance on foreign policy and obtaining permission over arms imports, among other things. The article now only says that India and Bhutan “shall cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests. Neither government shall allow the use of its territory for activities harmful to the national security and interest of the other.”

Even before the revised treaty, Bhutan’s UN membership in 1971 had fundamentally impaired the sacredness of the old Article 2. Bhutan is an independent country. It raised its diplomatic representation in New Delhi to the full ambassadorial level in 1971.

Notwithstanding all the geopolitical pulls and pressures, Bhutan has steadfastly stood behind India as its most reliable ally. But the impression among the Bhutanese now is that India has been coming in the way of Bhutan reaffirming its status as an independent state, especially in the foreign policy arena.

People in Bhutan think that India has for too long prevented their country from normalising diplomatic ties and negotiating a border settlement with China. India, on its part, fears that any boundary deal will not only impact Indian security but also impinge on its own negotiating position with China on the boundary issue. From Bhutan’s perspective, India’s position is adversely impacting its ties with China. This is the main issue that is leading to complexities and confusion, including the standoff at Doklam.

However, it appears that this is not the first time the Chinese have intervened and built roads not only in disputed territory, but also inside Bhutan.

Also read: The Bhutan Stand-Off Is an Opportunity, Not a Threat

Bhutan’s shares a 470-km-long border with China and according to some reports, over 25% of this border remained disputed for decades. China wanted Bhutan to cede a 269-square-km area in west Bhutan, including Dramana, Shakhatoe and Sinchulung, in exchange for which it had offered to give Bhutan a 495-square-km area in Pasamlung and Jakarlung.

In the Doklam plateau in the west, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is known to have made frequent intrusions since the mid-1960s. Talks with China began in 1972, but since 1984, negotiations became bilateral without India’s participation. The two countries managed to sign an Agreement on Maintenance of Peace and Tranquillity in the Bhutan-China Border Areas in 1998. Thus far, 24 rounds of discussion have taken place under the agreement. The last round was held in August 2016 in Beijing between Chinese vice foreign minister Liu Zhenmin and Bhutanese foreign minister Lyonpo Damcho Dorji. However, the Chinese have recently claimed that Bhutan and China have a basic consensus on the functional conditions and demarcation of their border region.

At the heart of the issue is the lingering suspicion in India about the possibility of Bhutan ceding the Doklam plateau – located on the strategic tri-junction of Bhutan, the Chumbi Valley in China and the state of Sikkim in India. The area is extremely critical to India’s security as it overlooks the Siliguri corridor. China, on the other hand, has held a tough position on Doklam and has been upgrading infrastructure networks, including roads in nearby areas, on the lines that it has built in Aksai Chin.

Bhutan’s slowly-changing stance

Until recently, as per the treaty obligation, Bhutan has kept India’s interest in mind and evaded a settlement with China. The general approach has been that the country could neither bargain nor impose its will on the matter, and therefore would go along with India and China’s mutual understanding.

Through this conflict, Bhutan has appeared to want to settle the Doklam issue once and for all, and thereafter maintain friendly and equidistant ties with both India and China.

We must note that Bhutanese position has been changing in a subtle way, especially the manner in which their boundary negotiation with China was proceeding without the knowledge of India. According to Govinda Rizal, a Bhutan watcher, soon after the Druk king had stepped down in 2007, the interim government produced a map without Kulakangri (Bhutan’s tallest peak), indicating that it had unofficially ceded the region to China. Rizal contended that during 2008-2013, Bhutan neither accepted the swap nor tried to regain the ‘cartographically ceded‘ land.

Nevertheless, Rizal said the two had agreed to the border demarcations in Pasamlung and Jakarlung. The settlement in the north was to pave the way to determine the course of action to settle the western border in Doklam. It seems that agreement on a political compromise had been reached during the 19th round of boundary talks held in January 2010. Perhaps this was also the outcome of the meeting between the then Bhutanese Prime Minister Jigme Thinley and the then Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao in June 2012 in Rio de Janeiro.

The agreement also perhaps included the decision to establish diplomatic ties. The Chinese claimed that China and Bhutan gained remarkable headway on the boundary issue during the 20th round of talks held in Thimphu on August 10, 2012.

According to some reports, China has already seized over 8,000 square km of Bhutanese land. Credit: Reuters/Damir Sagolj
According to Rizal, China had offered Thinley a financial deal for the border settlement. However, some news reports suggested that China had already seized over 8,000 square km and Bhutan’s total area has reduced to 38,390 square km from 46,500 square km since 2010. In fact, many suspected this was the reason for India’s disappointment, which resulted in it supporting (or even instigating) the defeat of Thinley and his party in the 2013 general elections in Bhutan and thus put a spoke in the wheel of the settlement.

Several Bhutanese analysts have argued that neither Bhutan nor India has a strong historical argument to lay claim over Doklam, Sinchulumpa, Dramana and Shakhatoe vis-à-vis China. Bhutan’s claims, they contend, are based on an “imaginary line drawn on paper by some British surveyors – like those of the McMahon Lines – without actual verification on the ground,” wrote Yeshey Dorji, a well-known commentator.
1
Popular perception, then, is that Bhutan has no military capability and strategic considerations to hold on to Doklam, Jakarlung and the Pasamlung areas. Moreover, China has not even considered disputes in the Jakarlung and Pasamlung areas. But Doklam is different; as Dorji said, “Make no mistake – this issue of the Doklam Plateau is very, very scary! Is there something that the Indians and the Chinese know about this track of desolate and frigid wilderness that we Bhutanese don’t?”

Bhutanese perceptions are getting visibly louder on social media and the growing aspirations of the people suggest that Bhutan’s ability to withstand pressures from both China and India has become paramount.

An Indian view that offended Bhutan

The aversion – if not dislocation – among the Indian security establishment on the matter, which was noted by Dorji, was also brought out in an article, ‘Dealing with Doklam‘, by former Indian army lieutenant general Prakash Katoch. The 2013 article suggested, “The king of Bhutan may consider selling the Doklam Plateau to India so that this bone of contention is resolved permanently”. His recommendation strongly provoked Bhutanese commentators, who decided that this was simply ‘lunacy’ coming from the Indian think tank circuit. It is “insane for anyone to believe that a nation would sell her land …..that too at the heart of the dispute and even while China is sitting on that very piece of land,” a commentator wrote. “Why such an experienced and senior high ranking military officer would be driven to such insane thoughts of desperation?”

The prevailing sentiment in Bhutan is in favour of resolving the issue with China amicably without further delay, so that the country can have a peaceful boundary with its northern neighbour as it has with India. It has been clearly indicated that the Bhutanese are getting impatient on the boundary question. This is also a sign of their growing disenchantment with India’s non-reciprocity to their deep commitments for Indian security concerns. As the commentator quoted above wrote, “Do not force the chicken to fly the coop. It is bad foreign policy.” Many also conveyed in private their impatience for change, saying Bhutan made many sacrifices for India which were in fact detrimental to its own interests.

The Bhutanese have expressed the fear that a delayed resolution could lead to China toughening its position and reviving maximal territorial claims, that would result in Bhutan losing land as far as Kanglung to the east and Samdrup Jongkhar to the south. Chinese maps show the Arunachal Pradesh boundary, which China claims as its territory, extending up to Kanglung in east Bhutan. According to Rizal, Bhutan might lose another 4,500 square km or up to 10% of the country’s area if it fails to resolve disputes with China.

In June 2013, PLA troops made an intrusion through the Sektang region in the east and the Pang La region in the north, and built three posts inside Bhutanese territory. Rizal says, “Every year when India reports about the Chinese assertions, they provide impetus to push in more military men into Bhutan.”

Bhutanese authority generally remains mute and the media has neither the courage nor the concept to report incursions, he said. The only source of information for the world outside is through media in exile, like the Bhutan News Service.

What China is thinking

China has long desired an independent Bhutanese stand without Indian advocacy and interference on the boundary issue. Chinese academia often dubbed India’s interference as hegemony in South Asia. When Chinese vice foreign minister Liu visited Thimphu in August 2013, he talked about broadening relations. Chinese officials always indicated that for any steps to settle the boundary dispute once and for all, establishing diplomatic ties between the two countries is necessary. The Chinese have for years wanted to open an embassy in Thimphu. It had promised to upgrade the Bhutanese consulate in Hong Kong to an embassy, to promote increased tourist flows and exchange of visits, among other things.

Beijing finds itself in a strange position in not having diplomatic ties with neighbouring Bhutan, which has lately widened its foreign relations with 53 countries, including Japan, another adversary of China. However, since the change of government in Thimphu, no new country has been added to the list of states Bhutan has established diplomatic ties. The last country added was Oman, on March 15, 2013.

The key to Beijing’s strategy so far has been to dilute the Indian dominant position, seeking parity in the eyes of Bhutan. Towards this goal, Beijing worked first on its diplomacy by deciding to vote for Bhutan’s membership to the UN in 1971. Later, China managed to bring Bhutan to the negotiating table on the boundary issue and lately she may have perhaps influenced Thimphu to have Article 2 of 1949 Friendship Treaty with India removed altogether. Many Chinese analysts view Bhutan as already neutralised. Hordes of Bhutanese students are being offered scholarships in China. Many young Bhutanese frequently travel to Chinese cities for business and other reasons.

The view is that New Delhi pegged the boundary issue with the financial packages it offered to Bhutan so far. Despite a one-third cut in funds for Bhutan, the Himalayan kingdom still gets Rs 3,714.13 crore of the total 6,479.13 crore or 57% allotted for India’s foreign aid budget during FY 2017-18 disbursed by the Ministry of External Affairs.

It was widely suspected that Thimphu’s discreet deals with China led to this financial cut and the election interference by India in 2013.

Clearly, the next election in Bhutan in October 2018 will be fought on pro- versus anti-Indian slogans.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, like Nehru, had reportedly promised India’s continued security guarantee to Bhutan against any possible expansionist designs. Whether the Bhutanese still consider China as posing a real threat to them is the question, however..

P. Stobdan, a former Indian ambassador, is an expert on Himalayan affairs.

SriKumar · Post by **SriKumar** » 16 Jul 2017 03:00

chetak wrote:
Bade wrote:^^ They do not care about their own citizens well being in the pursuit of larger strategic goals. Even the USA cannot do all it wishes to do like them with no holds barred.

But the Chinese veiled threat to creating trouble in Kashmir via their media spokespeople is rather bewildering. It gives the perfect excuse for India to go after every two bit actor in J&K violence and no one will ask India why it went hammer and tongs. I am beginning to think the Chinese are rather dumb in reality and cannot even think straight.
xi paid back Modi's very generous hospitality in a truly uncultured and barbaric way when large numbers of chinese PLA troops transgressed deep into Indian territory right during the visit.

I still wonder why he did that, and the absolute stupidity, not to mention, uncouthness of the act. It is quite the anti-thesis of the behavior of an 'old civilization'. It is not something that will be forgotten. I personally think the war planning would have started from there (my speculation only)....along the lines of- if they can do that, they can do anything. WIth the naming of Falun Gong (which India had never commented on earlier), Modi has clearly indicated his position. There is no backing down now-India is in the for the haul-long or short.

This may/may not be relevant but a few months ago, the President of Phillipines made some noises about China drilling (?) in its vinicity and wanting them to go. Xi made some very blunt and direct statements asking if Philipines, wanted a war. And that was the end of the bluster from them. Perhaps he expected the same reaction from India.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 16 Jul 2017 03:02

JE Menon wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOyJZ4UGeD0

Karolina Goswami on India-China again, delivered in her inimitable way. Does not cut any corners. "Can we have brotherhood with a country where many people don't have brothers"?

She is quite an insightful person...2:18-4:22 is the must watch section.

sudarshan · Post by **sudarshan** » 16 Jul 2017 03:13

SriKumar wrote:
chetak wrote: xi paid back Modi's very generous hospitality in a truly uncultured and barbaric way when large numbers of chinese PLA troops transgressed deep into Indian territory right during the visit.
I still wonder why he did that, and the absolute stupidity, not to mention, uncouthness of the act. It is quite the anti-thesis of the behavior of an 'old civilization'. It is not something that will be forgotten. I personally think the war planning would have started from there (my speculation only)....along the lines of- if they can do that, they can do anything. WIth the naming of Falun Gong (which India had never commented on earlier), Modi has clearly indicated his position. There is no backing down now-India is in the for the haul-long or short.

When you understand their psyche, the reason will be obvious. It's their notion of "carrot and stick." They come to talk in honeyed words, but the only reason they come to talk is so that they can brandish the stick. IOW, they have already decided that you are a vassal state, and that they are doing you a favor by talking to you, but don't get too uppity, the stick is there and they can use it any time. Not only have they decided that you are a vassal state, they also have decided that *you acknowledge your vassal status,* and will be awed by the display of the stick.

This is why when India's then president Venkataraman was visiting China, they conducted a multi-megaton nuclear test, deliberately coinciding with the president's visit.

You are a vassal, existing because of our benevolence, we know that you know your vassal status, just because we come and talk nicely to you, don't imagine that you are anything other than a vassal - we come to talk because we want to, because we feel like being nice to you.

If that still doesn't make sense, think of how a sadistic bully would behave with his "pet" dog. He'll feed it a treat, then when the grateful dog is gobbling it up with wagging tail, the bully will whack the dog one - "see, this treat is not something you deserve, I'm giving it to you because I feel like being nice, but don't get any notions that you are my equal - you are dog and I am master."

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 16 Jul 2017 03:17

Borders are not agreed upon solely based on past history, but also current threat perceptions. So the fact that Doklam may have been technically even Tibetan territory is meaningless as it now does not exist as a country. What should get priority is Indian security concerns, which are even greater than Bhutan's views on where its boundaries are with China. The entire Chumbi valley needs to be disputed by India. In one of the interviews I recall someone (Gen. Kulkarni) saying that Panditji had even visited Yuthang the original name which is now called Yadong by the Chinese.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 16 Jul 2017 03:32

Bade wrote:^^^ what is intriguing about the CPM official stand (if true) on this issue is that among their foot soldiers at least ( a few I had conversations with) do not share this camaraderie with China, as they see China in the same light at the US. These are not people in power but long term local leaders. In any case, they carry little weight in national level politics to give their views any currency in strategic affairs.

It is the communist ideology to support the communist $hithead more than their own their country (read transcend). With WB seeing being so much violence, these traitors should be systematically meet some accidents of local violence only.
I dont think they have that many followers that will shed tears for long...

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 16 Jul 2017 04:13

I recommend the americanism Red China. It succinctly denotes something grotesque and unnatural, perhaps to be reflexively fought and be made extinct.

khan · Post by **khan** » 16 Jul 2017 04:37

DavidD wrote:In this "tri"-partite dispute, what does the third party, Bhutan, think? From this article, it seems like Bhutan and China are ready to settle their dispute, at India's detriment, which prompted the the Indian incursion into Bhutanese/Chinese territory.

https://thewire.in/156180/bhutan-doklam-border-china/

In the Tri-Junction Entanglement, What Does Bhutan Want?
BY P. STOBDAN ON 11/07/2017 • 1 COMMENT
SHARE THIS:
WhatsAppPrintMore
People in Bhutan seem to think it is time to resolve the dispute with China once and for all, without pandering to Indian interests.
...
But the impression among the Bhutanese now is that India has been coming in the way of Bhutan reaffirming its status as an independent state, especially in the foreign policy arena.
...
From Bhutan’s perspective, India’s position is adversely impacting its ties with China. This is the main issue that is leading to complexities and confusion, including the standoff at Doklam.
...
Several Bhutanese analysts have argued that neither Bhutan nor India has a strong historical argument to lay claim over Doklam, Sinchulumpa, Dramana and Shakhatoe vis-à-vis China. Bhutan’s claims, they contend, are based on an “imaginary line drawn on paper by some British surveyors – like those of the McMahon Lines – without actual verification on the ground,” wrote Yeshey Dorji, a well-known commentator.
...

I had hypothesized the same thing earlier:

khan wrote:
But it does raise one interesting point which helps explain why the Chinese are so apoplectic about the whole thing.

And the point is, what if India did this uninvited? What if there was some deal between China and Bhutan (or elements in the Bhutanese Government) and India just walked in and kicked China out - uninvited?

This might explain why the Chinese are so pissed. They might think they have some right to be there (beyond their BS territorial claims).

And Bhutan like a kid with its hand caught in the cookie jar - is quietly sitting in the corner hoping no-one notices that they violated the "Friendship treaty" with India.

ADDED LATER: This also explains Global Times exhortations for Bhutan to step out of India's shadow blah blah blah, India's studied silence and Bhutan's silence on the issue

This theory still makes the most sense to me and if this is true - means the Chinese overplayed their hands. If this is true, it means that the Chinese now have to demonstrate the muscle to preserve the backroom deal they made with Bhutan if if they cannot (as I strongly suspect), they look weak.

Bhutan will not confirm the deal because they rely on India for everything and China is not yet in a position to replace India as their patron (for Logistical reasons).

So, if this theory is true, China can either put up the muscle to preserve their deal or look weak in front of all their neighbors in Asia. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 16 Jul 2017 05:20

What country gives up its land willingly? Weren't there news reports Bhutan invited India to stop the chinese from advancing any further?

darshan · Post by **darshan** » 16 Jul 2017 05:54

Everyone knows that inviting chinese is same thing as inviting slavery. So only countries doing anything that stupid would be like dictatorships, few families controlling the country, brainwashed population like one supporting CPM or CPI, etc. Bhutan has not reached there yet like Nepal, BD, pakis, etc. If India continues to wait and gets no worthy successor to Modi, then Bhutan can get there. At least for the time being I do not see it there. However, to state the obvious, every generation is different and India can't continue to count on things to stay static. chinese are confident about having control of Indian politics and will be looking at Modi as not everyday problem to deal with. From the Indian perspective, it is just being between rock and hard place. Respond to chinese backstabbing and below belt punching while Modi is still in power or probably wait forever (which India does not have as islamic watch is also ticking with young population getting older). One thing is clear that only way for real tiger to win against paper tiger is on battle ground as winning on table through economic warfare, negotiations, etc. is futile. It is just unfortunate that chinese only understand the language of sword. One can't choose neighbors.

RCase · Post by **RCase** » 16 Jul 2017 05:58

hanumadu wrote:What country gives up its land willingly? Weren't there news reports Bhutan invited India to stop the chinese from advancing any further?

Bakistan via CPEC!

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 16 Jul 2017 06:01

That is a plausible argument to explain their anger. After all the roads took some time to build and India was quiet then. But when it came to inking the deal, and Bhutan having informed India of its intention things went awry for the Chinese.

This might also explain the confusion regarding the location of the actual place of dispute in the press during initial days. The reports which Rohit Vats blog linked to took me places, where I did read about Bhutanese being ready to cede Doklam plateau to the Chinese officially. This is the part where they have built roads to connect to Yathung/Yadong across a ridgeline in Bhutan. That road has been in existence for long as I recall.

The Chinese got smart sensing this agreement with Bhutan, and started moving troops into the area close to the Doka La pass nearer the tri-junction, which was not demarcated but Bhutanese territory. This is when India moved in troops to object to it. Maybe even the Bhutanese objected as they knew India would not agree with it.

The Chinese got greedy and wanted to grab all they could but it all got out. If they had just limited themselves to the Doklam plateau on the east side of the Chumbi valley, then perhaps India would have had to keep quiet following a settlement between China and Bhutan. But it is too late now for that due to their greed. Their salami slicing got bigger for their own good.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 16 Jul 2017 06:19

You fools! Don't you realize what it means if the Chinese remain? Don't you remember your history? The last time the Chinese came, they stayed a thousand years. The French are foreigners. They are weak. Colonialism is dying. The white man is finished in Asia. But if the Chinese stay now, they will never go. As for me, I prefer to sniff French shit for five years than to eat Chinese shit for the rest of my life.

- Ho Chi Minh, arguing against Vietnam changing to Chinese control from French rule post WW2

khan · Post by **khan** » 16 Jul 2017 06:32

Bade wrote:The Chinese got smart sensing this agreement with Bhutan, and started moving troops into the area close to the Doka La pass nearer the tri-junction, which was not demarcated but Bhutanese territory. This is when India moved in troops to object to it. Maybe even the Bhutanese objected as they knew India would not agree with it.

The Chinese got greedy and wanted to grab all they could but it all got out. If they had just limited themselves to the Doklam plateau on the east side of the Chumbi valley, then perhaps India would have had to keep quiet following a settlement between China and Bhutan. But it is too late now for that due to their greed. Their salami slicing got bigger for their own good.

I don't think there was any subtlety here.

I think China & Bhutan made a deal India didn't like and India strolled in.

Now to maintain their deal and more importantly - their prestige China need to put up or shut up and lose face.

And the part about not using each other's territory for the detriment of the other in the "friendship" treaty, gives India the Diplomatic cover to do this.

China needs to put up and escalate in an area where they are weak - or lose face with all their neighbors.

The above obviously holds if my original theory holds water.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jul 2017 06:39

Whodafuk is P.Stobdan?

How does he know how all Bhutanese feel.

Someone fire up Google earth and look at Doklam. In fact I might just make another video - but I am a little surprised at what I have seen so far.

You can imagine the tri-junction between India, Bhutan and Tibet as a cake with a cherry on top. The cherry is Dokla or Doklam. But the cherry is off center. If the cake is cut into exactly 3 pieces, the cherry falls at the apex (sharp tip) of the Bhutan slice of cake.

If you look closely at the plateau it looks like a large field - maybe 5-6 km in all directions sitting 4100 meters high. If you walk towards Tibet - you find the slope going down down down over wooded countryside into Tibet towards a river valley

If you walk towards Bhutan - you find the slope going down down down over wooded countryside into Bhutan towards a river valley

If you walk towards Sikkim - you find the slope going down down down into Sikkim towards a river valley

There are plenty of paths on the Indian side leading up to the border, but not across the border. Indian troops in the area have remained within the designated border. It is the Bhutan side that surprises me. I have found no paths yet to Dokala from Bhutan. Looks like they did not go there much.

It is only the Chinese who have done the bench-odd-giri of having a winding path crossing into Bhutan. Looking at 2015 pictures on GE you find plenty of Indian army infra on the Indian side. As of 2015 there were only paths on the China side entering Bhutan. No built up infrastructure. need to see 2017 images. I thought I saw 2017 images on Bing. Still could not make out much. But it is difficult to manipulate Bing - maybe because I use a non Microsoft system.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 16 Jul 2017 06:58

If one follows the river valley south to Bhutan from Yadong, it is headed straight to India across Bhutan. That is where the Chinese are headed.

It is time to ask Bhutan to give us two districts around the tri-junction point till the Doklam plateau ( on the east side of Chumbi valley) which is shown as disputed between China and Bhutan in google maps with red boundary markers. This area may not be strategic to India, unless India wants to take over the entire valley near sikkim borders. Bhutan could settle that with China and get back their northern areas ceded to China voluntarily

And India gets to keep the southern side of the tri-junction and valley to stop any further Chinese advance south...they have no business to be in Yadong at all, still.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jul 2017 07:05

May I once again try and move beyond clichés and extrapolate? We see a lot of references on BRF and in the media about "losing face". If X happens - China will lose face. So what happens if someone loses face?

A lot depends on whether that person can do anything about it or not. If a Paki father finds hos daughter dating a kafir he loses face. Some may swallow their pride and realize that honour killing is not possible in the country where they live. Others may score a self goal by doing an honour killing.

So it is possible to lose face, swallow one's pride and try not to attract attention to one's shame. If the Chinese want conflict to assuage their wounded pride they need to understand that they will get conflict and some single sons of Han parents are going to die on a high plateau 3000 km away. Or else they can swallow their pride...

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 16 Jul 2017 07:09

You fools! Don't you realize what it means if the Chinese remain? Don't you remember your history? The last time the Chinese came, they stayed a thousand years. The French are foreigners. They are weak. Colonialism is dying. The white man is finished in Asia. But if the Chinese stay now, they will never go. As for me, I prefer to sniff French shit for five years than to eat Chinese shit for the rest of my life.

Geopolitics encapsulated in the vulgarity of a general. Priceless.

tandav · Post by **tandav** » 16 Jul 2017 07:13

Tibet is fast becoming a disputed territory due to recent developments. In the interest of peace and India's historical role on Tibet since historically Indians had visa free access to all of Tibet and of course keeping in mind China's acceptance of being Tibet's spiritual vassal, a grand bargain can be made to convert Tibet into a India-China peace park after demilitarizing Tibet. The natural border of India and Tibet is not the high mountain ranges but as per international norms is typically a river valley. So 1) India and Tibet can formalize the Brahmaputra valley as the soft border and China and Tibet can perhaps consider the Yangste River valley as soft border.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 16 Jul 2017 07:16

As I said much earlier, if India does not take control of the valley to the south of the tri-junction point, it will become disastrous in the long run. The fight is for the valley from the Chinese point of view, the ridges are just temporary points to capture and claim rights further downstream later.

They have already come one extra ridge line south of Yadong that they need, to even secure that outpost.

khan · Post by **khan** » 16 Jul 2017 07:52

If China made a backroom deal with Bhutan, the main country China needs to "save face" with is Bhutan.

Obviously, everyone else in the world is watching and it China does back down, they might view it as a blueprint to resist Chinese imperalism.

If the speculated deal falls through, until something changes fundamentally in the India-China-Bhutan power equation, there is no reason any other deal made with China is worth anything more than toilet paper.

But I don't think China wants to shed any blood over Dhoklam, but H&D must be preserved - hence the "monkey trap".

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 16 Jul 2017 08:02

If Bhutan has tried to stab us in the back then should we not do the needful and remove the treacherous rulers from power. May be this is what China is fearing now . After things calm down on "Goklam" , India will adopt Bhutan as part of State family and PRC loss sealed till Nehru take rebirth. Xi xan consider this pay back for uncouth behavior by PLA when he was visiting India.

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 16 Jul 2017 08:32

Wiki on Bhutan

Government revenues total $407.1 million, though expenditures amount to $614 million. 25 percent of the budget expenditure, however, is financed by India's Ministry of External Affairs.

Bhutan's main export partner is India, accounting for 58.6 percent of its export goods. Hong Kong (30.1 percent) and Bangladesh (7.3 percent) are the other two top export partners.

Bhutan's largest export is hydroelectricity. As of 2015, it generates 5,000 MW of hydropower from Himalayan river valleys. The country has a potential to generate 30,000 MW of hydropower. Power is supplied to various states in India.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jul 2017 08:46

Bhutan exists as an independent state only because India respects that.

If you look closely at the border near Dokala and the plateau you find that the Indian Army has not been sitting with thumb in Musharraf. We have a robust presence in the area. But we have not wandered into Bhutan despite Bhutan having no defences. It is the Chinese who have wandered into Bhutan and caught with their pants down.

When someone looks down at you with contempt as the Chinese do at Indians - they only way forward is to get into a fight and give them a bloody nose.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 16 Jul 2017 08:59

The contempt is ersatz and carefully cultivated. They know the meaning of elections and a free press or a free judiciary. These are the ideas that will eventually contaminate and cause the dissolution of the empire.

There is no defence. The USSR went the same way. In 40 years the Soviets had led the way in several fields most famously space (The road to the stars is open- Korolev 1957). Yet the Soviets were not immune when the time came. In 70 years China has innovated nothing. What would make them believe they are not living on borrowed time.

SriKumar · Post by **SriKumar** » 16 Jul 2017 09:00

I am not so sure that Bhutan is doing something on the side with the Chinese. Their ambassador in India clearly gave a statement (The Hindu reported it) a few weeks ago that they had taken issue with the recent Chinese movements and had communicated their concerns to them. I doubt that Bhutanese ambassador would make such a statement from Indian soil if their interests/loyalties lie elsewhere.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... RBw6H.html

As far as India is concerned, IMHO it is India that really has no choice here. The only 'choice' is to confront/fight now or fight a bigger problem later. The last 10-20 years have shown what the Chinese do at the border, the moves are boring in their predictability- declare a territory disputed, a few years later build some roads in said disputed territory, bring/deploy troops and put military pressure to yield. And that movie has played enough times for people (in India or Bhutan but especially India) to know what's coming. If they dont deal with a smallish Chinese presence in Chumbi valley today, in 5 years, IA will be dealing with a brigade or worse right in the chicken neck area.

Recall that about 3-4 years ago, the Chinese started making noises about Arunachal being disputed- that Tawang was where an earlier Dalai Lama was born etc. etc. (Arunachalis not requiring a visa etc.) Until a few years ago, google had it as a solid line as the border and now it is dotted. Guess what will happen in a few years from now in that area.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 16 Jul 2017 09:17

http://www.rediff.com/news/column/china ... 170708.htm
China: 5. India: 1
July 08, 2017 12:54 IST
'The Chinese have taken to telling their Indian interlocutors to bear in mind the 5:1 disparity in the sizes of the two economies.'
'The message from Beijing, says T N Ninan, is clear: Acknowledge superior Chinese power, and behave accordingly.'
The principal international challenge for India in the coming years has to be coping with China's rise and growing assertiveness.
Beijing's reminder of this country's 1962 military debacle is an over-the-top response to a relatively minor Sikkim border stand-off, quite apart from it failing to recognise India's current military capabilities.
But if we are not tone deaf we should take note of the increasingly arrogant nature of China's public protests which matches the message in private conversations.
The Chinese have taken to telling their Indian interlocutors to bear in mind the 5:1 disparity in the sizes of the two economies.
The message is clear: India should acknowledge superior Chinese power, and behave accordingly.
India has refused so far to overtly acknowledge any power imbalance, or it would not have stayed away from the Belt and Road conference recently.
......

Using the same logic, China should never started the 1962 conflict as India-China were equal economically. It should not have come to North Korea's aid in 1950, as the USA was far ahead militarily or economically. I wish they would come up with better logic. But I do expect a number of Indian press to side with China's logic because: naach meri bulbul ke paisa milega-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6JlLpmncz8
Gautam

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 16 Jul 2017 09:23

@SriKumar +1000, we all know what needs to be done.
However, does anybody think that India will initiate hostilities ?. IMHO, odds of India initiating hostilities, 10 %, odds of cheeni initiating hostilities 40 %, 50 %chance of a diplomatic solution. What do others think on the likelihood of conflict and who will fire the first bullet.