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

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 16 Jul 2017 09:26

g.sarkar wrote:
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

Actually this is India's advantage. The hans have much more to lose now. They are no warriors not anymore. They are traders. A full fledged war today will definitely favour India. Most probably sections in PLA know this.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 16 Jul 2017 09:27

Ramana,

You had mentioned the idea that Xi was driving the conversion from a Communist to a Nationalist China.

I think it is slightly more complicated. Mao was an imperialist with overtly exceptionalist proclivities... his China would define its role on the world stage in terms of the CCP's unique worldview and nothing else. It could define the rules by which it played, simply through its sheer size and willingness to defy the worldviews of either the Western or the Soviet camps. In sharp contrast to the exceptionalism of Mao (a form of revisionist Nationalism, though cloaked in red garb) Deng Xiaoping set China on the path to becoming a thriving economy through leveraging what was then the globalist order in its embryonic form.

The pendulum swung back and forth afterwards as different successors came to the fore. Jiang Zemin, the key architect of the policy of building up nuclear rogue states like NoKo and Pakistan as proxies via proliferation, was more Maovadi. Others like Hu Jintao were more Dengvadi. Yet none of these leaders had as much direct control of all three axes of the Chinese setup (the Party, the State Council, and the Military) to the extent that Mao used to. Until Xi Jinping.

To my mind Xi is like Napoleon III consolidating power as head of the Second French Empire after the interlude of the Orleans restoration. A man of strong political capability domestically, but more ambition than vision internationally.

Of course Napoleon III's grand ambitions ran headlong into a brick wall when he encountered a rival that would never again allow France to achieve pre-eminence on the European continent: the rising Germany of Otto von Bismarck. The Franco Prussian war furnished a bloody nose that is still in some sense bleeding, and marked the overall decline of France into the second rank of global power until this day.

I think Napoleon Xi has met his Bismarck in Modi. The conflict he wants to provoke is the one that will, directly and indirectly, circumscribe the Chinese footprint in Asia for centuries to come. "G2" as a notion will meet its end in the eastern Himalayas.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 16 Jul 2017 09:36

Guddu wrote:@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.

Chin moved into the area, India reacted and stopped this, thereby initiating hostilities. Chin can withdraw, and consequently tell the world that they are just paper tigers and suffer at all future conflicts, or it can use force and take risk of a military loss. India can stay or withdraw after being militarily defeated like in 1962. Or both sides can continue the status quo indefinitely and let things cool down. I do not see too many other alternatives.
Gautam
PS "Actually this is India's advantage. The hans have much more to lose now. They are no warriors not anymore. They are traders. A full fledged war today will definitely favour India. Most probably sections in PLA know this."
Hindus do not fight, 1 pak soldier is worth 10 Indian soldiers. Jews have never fought and went into the gas chambers without protest. Germans have become traders. French surrendered to the Germans without a fight in WWII. These are not correct thinking IMHO. One should not underestimate any one. Irrespective of this, I hope the Indian army is pouring in soldiers in the Dhokla area. October is the month.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jul 2017 09:58

Guddu wrote:@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.

There is only one viewpoint IMO
1. China initiated hostilities by building a road in Bhutanese territory.
2. Bhutan is an Indian protectorate and it is our dharma to defend Bhutan
3. We simply stopped Chinese aggression.

DrRatnadip · Post by **DrRatnadip** » 16 Jul 2017 10:00

Beijing won't have formal talks with India; stand-off may continue till winter: Chinese expert

BEIJING: Beijing will not agree to formal talks with New Delhi until Indian troops withdraw from the position they are holding at the Doklam plateau on the Sikkim border, a prominent Chinese expert told TOI in an exclusive interview on Saturday.
The border stalemate may continue until the harsh winter sets in the area, he said.
China is trying to send a signal that National Security Adviser Ajit Doval is unlikely to persuade Beijing to begin negotiations without a troop withdrawal from the Indian side during his visit to Beijing later this month.

http://m.timesofindia.com/india/beijing ... 610373.cms

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Jul 2017 10:02

g.sarkar wrote:
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

There is a reason I coined the term SLIME. Self Loathing India Media.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 16 Jul 2017 10:04

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 16 Jul 2017 10:06

Guddu wrote:@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.

Odds of India initiating hostilities - 0%.

Odds of Chinda doing so: > 30%. Also odds are high that China will escalate to Kashmir should hostilities break out. Odds of India targeting Tibet and / or CPEC once that happens: 100%.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Jul 2017 10:09

shiv wrote:
Guddu wrote:@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.
There is only one viewpoint IMO
1. China initiated hostilities by building a road in Bhutanese territory.
2. Bhutan is an Indian protectorate and it is our dharma to defend Bhutan
3. We simply stopped Chinese aggression.

+108*786

Only true position for Indians.
In 1962 civilian leadership interfered and panicked leading to the debacle. All troubled started from then. Doklam plateau stand off will take thr wind out of the Chinese dragon gas bag.Vande Mataram

Need to rebut that Ninan fool.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Jul 2017 10:11

Neela wrote:

Chinese Ambassador was assessing chances of regime change in India. I would keep.an eye on all those he met mentioned in Coomi Kapoor column.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 16 Jul 2017 10:11

shiv wrote: Finally - a personal note - in the last BRF+DFI meet I had during Aero India - deejay told us a very funny story where a group of Air Force and army personnel went hunting for the wreckage of an aircraft at the border. They wandered into Chinese territory - a fact that was known to the accompanying army men but not to the Vayusena explorers until much later. But what ultimately chased them off was a bear if I recall correctly.

Im not here as often I used to about a year ago. When will the next meet be? I am most motivated to join it. I am based out of Bangalore. And yes, where will I get to know information / discussion about face to face physical (no, not that physical!) meetings happen?

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 16 Jul 2017 10:12

ramana wrote:
Neela wrote:

Chinese Ambassador was assessing chances of regime change in India. I would keep.an eye on all those he met mentioned in Coomi Kapoor column.

Ramanaji
This is tantamount to a coup. Public must be informed of the Chinese traitorous strategy

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 16 Jul 2017 10:15

To folks like Shiv Ramana RD SS etc and others,
why are we not giving importance to ideology like communism.
This is the gorilla hiding in plain sight.

we considered the dynasties of china over centuries talked about expansionist zeals etc etc.

But all were within landlocked island of Chinese influence-- nothing beyond that sphere.

economically china was one of the strongest economies for centuries along with china.

India influenced widely across asia from west to east and greeks etc etc.

what about china except nearby areas.
Heck even UB ancestors

went upto turkey and established their skills.

The imprint of china and east asia is unmistakably Indian dharma etc. with confusican thought etc.

China never attacked India except once over Himalayas into Nepal in around 600AD-- not very well known.

If it was expansion zeal why China never entered India when lot of movements occurred in India(weakened) leading to Islamic invasions and later Christian ones led by European powers.
Actually China overtook India as leading economic power during this period.

------------------------------------------
My impression is communism changed the Chinese leadership into expansionist zeal going into various regions, making enemies of its neighbours by its attitude.

communism is like "my way or highway" ideology. No middle ground as in Indian dharma.
(recall USSR and many others). They export ideologies all over etc.

In fact if Chinese communism falls apart it will be India,s friend or at least be neutral ( will take time to remove communist dirt)

JMTs.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 16 Jul 2017 10:18

ramana wrote:
Neela wrote:

Chinese Ambassador was assessing chances of regime change in India. I would keep.an eye on all those he met mentioned in Coomi Kapoor column.

curious all the Indian folks are mentioned are sickulars and anti NaMo.
why did not the ambassador met BJP leaders etc say CMs of various states

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jul 2017 10:19

Despite his AAP sympathy proclivities, Lt Gen Panag speaks the language of strength and gives a very clear view of reality as held by India and as perceived by China

https://www.newslaundry.com/2017/07/08/ ... kim-bhutan

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Jul 2017 10:21

Chetak, Akshay

Have you guys gone through MHOW?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jul 2017 10:22

Iyersan wrote: Ramanaji
This is tantamount to a coup. Public must be informed of the Chinese traitorous strategy

This would be a coup only in China. In India we give Z class security to even separatists and will pull along perfectly well.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 16 Jul 2017 10:24

Looks like China is going to use the weather as an excuse to withdraw. If this were to happen, will we maintain a presence during winter, or would we too be forced to withdraw.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jul 2017 10:30

We are there all year round controlling DoKa La and Batang La

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Jul 2017 10:34

Iyersan MAD knows. If a chota muh like us can figure it out they can too as they have the reports.

But need to give long rope. Only 0.5 of the three legged stool is in their hands.
Judiciary, most executive and Rajya Sabha are not.
Add the rascals in.media.

See that moron Ninan article.

Big fear of the 2.5 is President Kovind.

All crisis tempo is to reduce the margin.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 16 Jul 2017 10:48

Are we doing anything to influence the stability of the Chinese leadership in a positive way? I have a strong feeling that what we are seeing now is a power-play at the top in China. Xi seems to know the truth, but not all the truth. He is not being told, and those who tell him are not being told.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Jul 2017 11:13

His problem no?
Who gives rat behind whether it's Eleven or Thirteen?
Same hot air since Mao.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 16 Jul 2017 11:34

ramana wrote:Chetak, Akshay

Have you guys gone through MHOW?

not me, saar.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 16 Jul 2017 11:38

ramana wrote:
Neela wrote:

Chinese Ambassador was assessing chances of regime change in India. I would keep.an eye on all those he met mentioned in Coomi Kapoor column.

darjeeling district magistrate??

are the hans hell bent on stoking the nepali separatism?? Is this why darjeeling is burning now??

must admit that I did not see shiv shankar menon playing the role of brutus or more correctly, judas.

This is why the MEA tends to sink any initiative of the GoI.

this is also why Modi has wisely bypassed the whole dumb gravy train riding MEA lot, leaving the naxal pasand lootyens lot upset.

this ministry has had people like kr narayanan, mani shankar aiyar and a whole host of India loathing kattarpanthi commies who were nothing more than parasites on the body politic

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 16 Jul 2017 11:48

hanumadu wrote:
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.

True. I had argued earlier in this thread that all members in the CPC are not on the same page - many fear being purged by Eleven. Similarly, the army might resent Eleven trying to take control. His opponents may be trying to create a situation where Eleven is publicly embarrassed by having to pull back.

Most Chinese soldiers are conscripts, so apart from a very short tenure in the service, political lectures eat up a lot of their training time.
This was the biggest problem in the Soviet army, which the Russians have since corrected.
There is no experienced NCO/ JCO cadre, who also have terrain experience - unlike IA.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 16 Jul 2017 11:56

Some of you are thinking with your heart instead of your head. What's the value of "face" really? China stands to lose face, sure, but India stands to lose a strategic plateau that can may be used to cut off a large portion of Indian territory. One is a nebulous concept, another is a quite genuine threat.

This is why I believe China is more likely to back down. Deterrence as we all know is about capability + intent. China didn't achieve its objectives in the Korean War because it was more capable than the U.S., it did so because its intention of defending NK at all cost was heard loud and clear. Similarly for the '79 Sino-Vietnamese war. Vietnamese determination was clear, they were willing to clear out the north of the country and fight China tooth-and-nails around Hanoi, and China backed down despite being able to muster a far greater force. Doklam plateau is of much greater importance to India than it is to China, this fact I'm sure the Chinese leaders understand full well. The China-Bhutan disputes were always just a cloak for the China-India dispute, it seems now that all that's changed is the cloak was pulled.

I don't pay much attention to rhetorics or emotions, I like to pay attention to facts on the ground. The facts that maintained peace there for decades hasn't changed much. China wants Doklam, India wants it more and refuses to let China have it. That Bhutan may no longer be acting as a buffer does raise the risk of conflict, but the fundamentals remain the same as before here, and is not really any different from other China-India border disputes.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 16 Jul 2017 12:07

chetak wrote:.

this ministry has had people like kr narayanan, mani shankar aiyar and a whole host of India loathing kattarpanthi commies who were nothing more than parasites on the body politic

You must mean MK Narayanan (Scum Mohan Singh's NSA during 26/11).

KR Narayanan was President of India 1997-2002.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 16 Jul 2017 12:18

Deans wrote:
hanumadu wrote:
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.
True. I had argued earlier in this thread that all members in the CPC are not on the same page - many fear being purged by Eleven. Similarly, the army might resent Eleven trying to take control. His opponents may be trying to create a situation where Eleven is publicly embarrassed by having to pull back.

Most Chinese soldiers are conscripts, so apart from a very short tenure in the service, political lectures eat up a lot of their training time.
This was the biggest problem in the Soviet army, which the Russians have since corrected.
There is no experienced NCO/ JCO cadre, who also have terrain experience - unlike IA.

I'm not sure the PLA ever used conscripts, at least not for a few decades. It's true though that the Chinese society is not very martial, historically soldiers were never afforded high social status.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 16 Jul 2017 12:24

Rudradev wrote:
chetak wrote:.

this ministry has had people like kr narayanan, mani shankar aiyar and a whole host of India loathing kattarpanthi commies who were nothing more than parasites on the body politic

You must mean MK Narayanan (Scum Mohan Singh's NSA during 26/11).

KR Narayanan was President of India 1997-2002.

I meant KR Narayanan

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Jul 2017 12:43

DavidD wrote:
Deans wrote:
True. I had argued earlier in this thread that all members in the CPC are not on the same page - many fear being purged by Eleven. Similarly, the army might resent Eleven trying to take control. His opponents may be trying to create a situation where Eleven is publicly embarrassed by having to pull back.

Most Chinese soldiers are conscripts, so apart from a very short tenure in the service, political lectures eat up a lot of their training time.
This was the biggest problem in the Soviet army, which the Russians have since corrected.
There is no experienced NCO/ JCO cadre, who also have terrain experience - unlike IA.
I'm not sure the PLA ever used conscripts, at least not for a few decades. It's true though that the Chinese society is not very martial, historically soldiers were never afforded high social status.

Yes, SYRE. I would say even less martial than us SDREs since we crushed the supposedly "martial" pakis who termed us SDREs three times.

I hope you are wrong in that we allow the PRC to simply "back down." If I were Modi I would order the IA to kick arse regardless.

That is what I hope. But you are probably correct, Cheen will back down not because they want it less but because India owns every military advantage along the border.

And Indians, SDREs that we are, will allow you unmartial rice-eating chinis to leave without a fight. Thereby, cementing our own reputation as rice-eating non-warriors.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 16 Jul 2017 12:43

On the Coomi kapoor piece folks are getting unduly exited. IF GOI does NOT know of the movements of the Chinese ambassador within India the it needs to be removed.

So I am thinking that this is a Chinese power pay and the GOI is fully aware of that. None of those who he has met can side with them. Even a hint will give the BJP the opportunity to cry sellout. So we must rest assured on that count.

So what could be the motive? I can think of two things. Chinese, as usual are using the model they understand based on their own experience within China and dictators and failed states outside. E.g. they think by sucking up to Mamta banoji they will have Bengal ~~people~~ on their side. Simply the wrong assumption.

But they are good at psyops and they understand the anxieties such show will have in the Indian public mind. Proof is very much evident on this forum where folks are supposed to know better than mango aadmi.

We should focus on the Bhutan angle and forget the rest.

Added later: Changed a lot of auto corrects.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 16 Jul 2017 12:44

DavidD wrote: Doklam plateau is of much greater importance to India than it is to China, this fact I'm sure the Chinese leaders understand full well.

Perhaps.

But looking at things from India's standpoint, the Chinese don't seem to have much of a handle on reality to be honest. I mean they plan to invest $50 Bn on disputed territory which is claimed by India ! What does that tell you about the strategic capabilities of the 'inscrutable' Chinese ??

chola · Post by **chola** » 16 Jul 2017 12:45

Fook it. We need to go war.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 16 Jul 2017 13:00

About the wire piece by some STOBDAN

I read about half of it and found at least two glaring inconsistencies. The author makes a point that seems to favor the Chinese position and then goes to contradict it trying to prove some other point.

Seems to have been written with the sole objective to argue against Indian position. If one looks back at all farts published on the site with regards to the Indo-chinese standoff the tilt is obvious.

I wouldn't be surprised if the wire is funded by the Chinese/Bakis directly or in-directly. After all a so called *independent voice* needs a lot of funds to survive without having any viable business model.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 16 Jul 2017 13:05

chola wrote:
DavidD wrote:
I'm not sure the PLA ever used conscripts, at least not for a few decades. It's true though that the Chinese society is not very martial, historically soldiers were never afforded high social status.
Yes, SYRE. I would say even less martial than us SDREs since we crushed the supposedly "martial" pakis who termed us SDREs three times.

I hope you are wrong in that we allow the PRC to simply "back down." If I were Modi I would order the IA to kick arse regardless.

That is what I hope. But you are probably correct, Cheen will back down not because they want it less but because India owns every military advantage along the border.

And Indians, SDREs that we are, will allow you unmartial rice-eating chinis to leave without a fight. Thereby, cementing our own reputation as rice-eating non-warriors.

You sound almost like you admire the martial qualities of Pakistanis. Do you think it's coincidence that two of the least martial cultures in the world are the only ones who've managed to remain great for most of human history? Where are the Romans? The Spartans? How are the Mongols doing these days?

Both civilizations have certainly experienced plenty of suffering due to their lack of "martialness", like British and Moghul conquests of India, or Mongolian and Manchurian conquests of China. But look at now, the British are back to the confines of their puny island, the Mongolians are back to being rabble of herders, the Muslims are now all Indians, as are the Manchurians Chinese. The SxREs know how to survive.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 16 Jul 2017 13:30

Let me state the current position on these three points.
1. Most supplies for the landlocked Bhutan is from India and most of the exports are to India.
2. India-Butan border is without disputes, demarcated and peaceful and thus worry free for Bhutan.
3. Bhutan and India have agreed to take each others sensitivities into account and not allow their territory to be used against the other. From memory so may not be exact words but you get the gist.

Suppose Bhutan wants to cut a deal with China *behind* India's back. Now in light of the 3 points listed above.
1. Will such a move fetch peace for Bhutan?
2. Will it solve their boundary problem?
3. Will it improve Bhutans position?

The answer to all of the above is a big NO. it will just replace the current problem with another FAR bigger problem with India.
1. While Bhutan can diversify its trade in the long run and at a cost, in the short run an *issue* with India will cause a lot of suffering and certainly no peace.
2. What prevents the Indo-Bhutanese border from suddenly becoming disputed? For arguments sake, lets assume India claims a wide swathe of Bhutanese territory to preserve its cushion wrt the chicken's neck. Will Bhutan then call in the Chinese to help oust India? And will such a move bring peace to Bhutan or will it make it the military battleground for Indian and Chinese forces?
3. If India decides to move on Bhutan with or without the involvement of the Chinese will it improve Bhutans position wrt now?

While Bhutanese can decide for themselves any move that ignores India's concerns or imperils it's security will doubly impact Bhutan in a negative way. Any move away from status quo will only bring conflict to Bhutan.

Are the Bhutanese such duffers that they think putting India's security at risk will not invite a response? The farts that purport to speak on behalf of the Bhutanese are actually speaking on behalf of the Chinese.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jul 2017 13:45

DavidD wrote:Where are the Romans?

I'll tell you where the Romans are:

Sonia Gandhi 10, Janpath,New Delhi - 110 011Tels. (011) 23014161, 23012656

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 16 Jul 2017 14:11

DavidD, My understanding is that there is conscription for college students. This started as an experiment some 15 years ago but today there are
around 150,000+ college students inducted into the PLA each year. The intent was to provide the PLA with a cadre of technically competent people.
It is this group that has inadequate combat training, because whatever little training time there is is divided between political lectures and combat training.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 16 Jul 2017 14:31

Rudradev wrote: "G2" as a notion will meet its end in the eastern Himalayas.

G2 is Chinese imagination burnished by the American business lobby who is in it to make a quick buck. While there is no denying Chinese and Americans would love for this to come to pass, the wheels of time and demographics have come to give them a proverbial kick in their teeth.

Bismarck was no Modi but then neither is Modi moulding himself on Bismarck. Xi thinks he might be Napolean. But does China have the war fighting capabilities? Having latest reverse engineered gadgets accompanied by bluster that defines Chinese, has not yet found themselves facing an adversary who wont back down. Its all well and good that they are showing off their 1st AC carrier. But without any operational experience, can they really achieve what Indian AC CBG can most demostrably do - Block Mallacca straits. Xi even got rid off Sun Zhengcai yesterday who was Bo Xilai replacement at Chongquing. How long can he continue doing this until there is a backlash? I expect longer than we can imagine. But then it might not be as long as we would assume. The parallels between this era and the era defined by Prince Anne's War are stark. The only problem as I see it, the allies in the Chinese camp are failed, almost failing dictatorships where internal turmoil is likely to cause the end of the hostilities than any clear winner emerges in the field of war.

Clausewitz said 'Professional Military knows the distinctions between policy, strategy, and military operations'.

Nehru did not listen to the army, Modi does and probably will. We do not know about Xi. Bade saar posted a video earlier about Chinese vetrans staging protest. So did our vetrans on OROP. But while Indian issue was solved amicably, is Chinese problem solved?

https://www.clausewitz.com/mobile/HPtrinity.htm

The passions that are to be kindled in war must already be inherent in the people; the scope, which the play of courage and talent will enjoy in the realm of probability and chance, depends on the particular character of the commander and the army; but the political aims are the business of government alone.

This would be also the hope for the Anglo-Saxon block to have a war in this region.

More people live in this ellipse than the rest of the world.

I do not think Chinese want war but if the war comes I am sure we will be ready.

DrRatnadip · Post by **DrRatnadip** » 16 Jul 2017 15:18

http://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2017/ ... 17125.html

Tibetan student self-immolates in India

A Tibetan student has self-immolated in India after shouting "freedom", police said on Saturday, injuring himself critically.
Tenzin Choeying set himself on fire on Friday at the Central University for Tibetan Studies in Varanasi in Uttar Pradesh state.

Self-immolation has regularly been used as a protest against China's actions in Tibet.