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

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 04 Aug 2017 02:55

Rudradev wrote:If I were Xi right now I would order a full scale invasion... of Bhutan. Tanks rolling into Thimphu, evicting the feudalistic oppressive regime who are running-dogs of Indian imperialists, liberating the people and gifting them with a People's Leader.

Also showing India as powerless to actually defend Bhutan when big push comes to big shove (as opposed to a tiny uninhabited plateau which India only wants to grab for its own sake anyway).

New People's Leader of Bhutan will then tear up all treaties with India and order Indian forces out of Bhutanese territory.

Stakes raised. India humiliated without PLA attacking India directly at a point where IA holds operational advantage. Doklam in Chinese hands entirely.

Howzat?

Rudradevji,
That is a very plausible scenario, but then if you were Eleven, then you would also think about your pet baby of ohbore/CPEC which is going to launch your country into the league of NeoCol(neo colonists) for quite some time buys you forced loyalty of several nations. What Brits did with small princely states, china is trying with large nation states. They will get tributes from these nations (you only reminded me of this trait of theirs). Is that worth losing in place of some piece of land of bhutan.
Heres' my speculation
1. We will see some action, that is very likely. Chinese will not get out of this situation without showing some muscle. If they do they will be forever tagged as inflatable dragon
2. MAD co. could be planning to use this as negotiating chip for multiple areas like NSG, J&K, Masood, and border negotiations
3. They will do a paki '65 use their propaganda machine to say that they inflicted casulaties, stopped indian/western aggression and what not. Their frinds in clinton news network oops chinese news network oh ..cable news network will come handy

Atmavik · Post by **Atmavik** » 04 Aug 2017 03:09

UlanBatori wrote: WikiPurana: Galbraith reasoned that using IAF/USAF would lead to such a horrible massacre that it would create generations of hate. Not worth it, so they just watched the Chinese stumble back up the Himalayas.

this line might have been lifted straight out of those three kingdoms dramas

Shanmukh · Post by **Shanmukh** » 04 Aug 2017 03:10

A question for the Gurus. Let us agree, for argument's sake, that China has painted itself into a corner and cannot withdraw without any loss of face. Let us also assume that we won't offer China any face saving mechanism. Can the Chinese, without launching their armies against us, find some other means of face saving? Can they institute sanctions against India (counterproductive, probably, for them, but useful for the moment as a face saver) & try to get away without launching war against us? What other means have the Chinese got of `punishing us'? I am trying to do a general analysis of non-combat options that China has against us.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 04 Aug 2017 03:15

What would happen if there is another report of a standoff? Everyone will assume that is China thieving again. For instance, in occupied Aksai Hind. I think it is time to send an armored division along the northern boundary road of Aksai Hind (shiv recommends using the river bed). With helicopter (pretty tough I know) and fighter support. The trouble with China's crying Wolf! Wolf! is that no one will believe them.

The thing about places like Aksai Hind is that occuping 2 posts on a road means the whole area is colored differently on the map. No human sets foot on the vast majority of the land.

This is all about Aksai Chin. India has served notice since 2014 that it will reclaim territories it deems its own. It rescinded any idea of de facto Chinese control of pasture lands etc in Ladakh. It establishes the precedent that Aksai Chin is fair game. Let the CCP post 10 divisions across Pangong Pso. That should be good for Chinese morale.

At least that is the yak among the Yaks.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 03:28

I have been trying to understand the ACTUAL history of 1962 (as opposed to the self-flagellation and the propaganda). The Indian govt actions of the time do not make any sense as they are reported. For instance the failure to bring IAF to at least strafe the passes where the PLA was pouring in - or pouring out. That makes absolutely no sense because even in 1948 the IAF was quite active. Stories of weapon-loaded Spitfires being operated from Leh by Indian daredevils (from what I was told as a kid, this involved simply falling off the edge and picking up the needed airspeed in glide before climb-out). Mission deemed impossible by the gora experts of IAF.

So WHY was the IAF not used? Answer has to be that until the very end the govt held out hope that the war was all a misunderstanding, and did not want to aggravate the bloodshed. The propaganda from PRC matched that - pictures of Chinese dancers entertaining Indian POWs, Indian POWs and Chinese medics smiling at each other... The reality as I have heard it is horribly, horribly different. Nearly 1900 soldiers unaccounted for. Some POWs reported slaving in Chinese gulags long after the war. Some large units were encircled and cut off before they had any chance, and then ordered to surrender rather than fight their way out. For units that had fought the Japanese in Burma and Malaya, this was indeed strange.

Today's Indian doctrine is very different, thanks to Pakis. No chivalry BS, it is down to the Patton/Rumsfeld doctrines.

The purpose of going to war is to KILL the enemy

But I maintain that the PLA suffered absolutely massive losses, far far beyond the 722 dead that they admit.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 04 Aug 2017 03:34

But I maintain that the PLA suffered absolutely massive losses, far far beyond the 722 dead that they admit.

Didnt they admit losing close to 1000 in rezang la?

Atmavik · Post by **Atmavik** » 04 Aug 2017 03:58

ArjunPandit wrote:
But I maintain that the PLA suffered absolutely massive losses, far far beyond the 722 dead that they admit.
Didnt they admit losing close to 1000 in rezang la?

yes. here is an interview with two heroes from rezang la

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwSqPuPimVc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgBfl9lHS9k

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 05:00

That's the point. Their claim is 722 total, which is total chinese quality of truthfulness.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 05:31

Oh man! I watched that. 18,000 feet in late November snowfall, both arms with bullet holes, bleeding, and all he was thinking of was how to get the pin out of the grenade with his shoe so he could kill more of the enemy, after every single bullet was spent and he had disabled the LMG. Defeat indeed!! NOW do you see why there are so few stories on the Chinese side of any actual victories or heroism? They suffered 80% losses, so the treacherous commies killed off their own survivors to keep the story from getting out!

WHY are these stories buried in YouTube instead of being blared over every Indian TV set? Where are the rest of the accounts of what really happened? EVERY Indian post fought to the end similarly, and every hill and knoll cost the Chinese hugely in deaths.

People waste their time arguing with idiots over DNA or fossilized poo, when the real crime is the reporting of the 1962 war.

Just as I thought: Indian soldiers fought to the last bullet, and the Chinese died in the hundreds and thousands attacking uphill at 18000 feet. THAT is the real story.

So let's recap: Chinese losses 10 to 100 times Indian losses in men. True, some Indian forces were ordered to surrender when surrounded by overwhelming odds: why waste good men? The Chinese came through Tawang, but then ran back the same way.
As the Havaldar says:

It took us only 25 minutes to go downhill 4 kms, but it took 4 hours to climb back up.

Gravity is no different for Chinese than it is for Indians. The retreat from Tezpur through Tawang in late November/December must have cost the Chinese thousands of lives.

At the end, China was left holding 14500 sq. miles, mostly in Aksai Chin. India got 32000 sq. miles in Arunachal/NEFA. Where is the defeat? Mao & Co managed to keep India from liberating Tibet, true.

Liu · Post by **Liu** » 04 Aug 2017 05:36

chola wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:chola should be rechristened as chol_warrior..
a compliment to you chola for your never ending belief of our victory.
No, I am a realist. I believe in making money over fighting. But I also believe in numbers and in opportunity.

Read the literature out there.

We own OVERWHELMING advantages in manpower and aircraft along the border.

And what the chinis are doing here today is handing us an opportunity. A SYRE P5 with a convenient glass jaw that is broadcasting to the world he wants to fight? And who isn't even re-enforcing his outnumbered forces in Tibet because he arrogantly thinks we are too Gandhi to actually punch him in the face?

How many of these opportunities can we get? This is our Russo-Japanese or Spanish-American War. A defining war to make a great military power for generations.

Let's roll!

india has no advantages along the border,except manpowers .

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 05:50

But-but-but... India always has Chinese leaders' stupidity to count on! How many will be sent to their deaths this time I wonder.

WHY do Chinese soldiers even take orders from such overfed fat-faced morons?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Aug 2017 05:53

Till date i see no credible tactical paper war plans in brf,
Just reams of endless talk suitable for a pack of retired oldies in a madras tea shop or jayanagar coffee house

Disappointing . 90% of threads could be deleted with no loss

Plans are needed to inflict 100 500 1000 5000 10000 kia on pla depending on situation and then blandly calling for talks. Thats the only way of messaging Xi ji will appreciate

And someone needs to use the stick to get our media aligned or else shut their yapping for a while

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 05:56

Those accounts should be in every Indian textbook: Out of bullets, bayonets ineffective against the hugely-wrapped bellies of the Chinese, the Wrestler Sarang bangs the heads of the Chinese together, bangs them against rocks, until he is killed.

BTW, I had heard plenty of these accounts back in those days, but not managed to put faces and names to them. It's true: on several of those hills and passes, one Indian soldier with an LMG managed to take out like 200 Chinese, then with bullets spent, injured by grenade blasts, he would charge with a bayonet as his last act. Which brings me to the other point I was trying to convey to cholaji: The front was strung out over 1500 miles. If the Chinese could concentrate 5000 men (of whom 2000 died) to try to take just one airfield at 18000 feet in snow, what WAS their total starting number? I think 400,000 was an underestimate.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 06:10

I think a drive straight into Aksai Hind, cut the Tibet-Xinjiang road/railroad, early airstrikes to take out the airfields, and another drive to cut the Brahmaputra river infra. I don't care about bodycounts of Chinese KIA, just to drive the han bullies out east of 100-deg. Longitude for all time. Let them choke in their poisoned cities, not pollute the sacred air of Northern Dharmasala.

salaam · Post by **salaam** » 04 Aug 2017 06:11

Liu wrote:
chola wrote:
No, I am a realist. I believe in making money over fighting. But I also believe in numbers and in opportunity.

Read the literature out there.

We own OVERWHELMING advantages in manpower and aircraft along the border.

And what the chinis are doing here today is handing us an opportunity. A SYRE P5 with a convenient glass jaw that is broadcasting to the world he wants to fight? And who isn't even re-enforcing his outnumbered forces in Tibet because he arrogantly thinks we are too Gandhi to actually punch him in the face?

How many of these opportunities can we get? This is our Russo-Japanese or Spanish-American War. A defining war to make a great military power for generations.

Let's roll!
india has no advantages along the border,except manpowers .

And PRC has no advantage except hot air 50 centers like you.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 06:22

Singhaji:
First priority is to deflate the BS that the Chinese "won" in 1962. They just kept putting their cannon fodder through the meat-grinder until Indian troops ran out of bullets, and the Chinese dead bodies rolled like an avalanche down the slopes to Tezpur taking a few live ones with them. This is what they call a "victory"!!

Now that we have debunked that, let's see - what was that threat again?

WITHDRAW OR WE IDIOTS WILL THROW OUR SOLDIERS INTO THE MEAT_GRINDER AGAIN!!

By the time this round is over, Comrade Liu here will need a stapled visa to visit LiangSham. If they give those to Han tourists from the Eastern Urban Ruins.

niran · Post by **niran** » 04 Aug 2017 06:46

AdityaM wrote:How did China manage the Indian threat over the last few weeks?

Apart from making aggressive noises meant to intimidate an otherwise traditionally timid opponent (India) by psyops, they went and conducted war firing exercises, massive display of missiles & hitec war equipment, and test fired a ballistic missile.

What did india do apart from not budging an inch?
No counter drills, no missile test. An Agni test now would have been a firm message. But none attempted.
Naval exercise was pre-planned so not really part of the counter response signaling by India.

A bit surprised that India did not do any militarily manoeuvres or missile tests.

those so called "Live Fire Drill" are conducted every 2 years in Tibet he last was 3 months before Dhoklam, a bully tries ti intmidate you with a video clip and what you do
option A. look him in the eye and order "eff off"
option B. start dhoti shiber and return exercise
India wisely correctly chose option A

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Aug 2017 06:53

anjan wrote:
Edit: I knew men in my father's battalion who fell in Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankans built a memorial to honor those men. You talk of feeling like every lost man was your brother. Do we have a memorial in India? Did we as a country feel like we had enough land to give to write their names in a piece of stone so they may be remembered? Talk is cheap.

This complaint is a moving of goalpost from the first one about poor leadership and men dying. I do not want to get into a discussion but since you ask, there is at least one memorial that specifically records the names of the martyrs of Op Pawan in Sri Lanka. I tried to make a commemorative video but it is long and dull - it is difficult to do justice to a memorial. It has got fewer hits than one LCA or China video in a day. Does that reflect me, or you or Indians in general? The name Operation Pawan actually appears briefly in the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9R-ivRja1Q

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 06:53

Live fire drill suggests that you don't trust your soldiers to issue live ammunition normally. Figures. Like Barney Fife in The Mayberry Show in Yoo Ess.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Aug 2017 07:03

Singha wrote:
Disappointing . 90% of threads ~~could~~ should be deleted

..there corrected. Huge difference between talk and action no?

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 07:24

Just spare the ones calling for boycott of chinese goods please. And the links to the YouTube videos (and the logical arguments) of how the death rate of Chinese to Indians in 1962 was 100:1.

Also, general pooch to adminullahs: In the distant past, ppl used to get really mad when lazy ppl copied entire posts. These days a whole page of posts in a thread has only 3 or 4 because too many lazy ppl just keep copying entire posts.

Threaten ppl who do that with conversion to Is***.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 04 Aug 2017 07:59

Trial balloon

Two options on Doklam standoff: Let Bhutan troops replace India’s, wait until November
The option of a prolonged standoff is based on the premise, sources said, that the Chinese would not like to escalate the situation to a military conflict.
Written by Sushant Singh | New Delhi | Updated: August 4, 2017 5:19 am
Sources have told The Indian Express that India wants to resolve the crisis peacefully but is very clear about not letting the Chinese construct a motorable road to Jampheri. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... r-4781524/

As the standoff between Indian and Chinese troops at Doklam at the trijunction with Bhutan continues, the government is working hard on two diplomatic options to resolve the crisis. The first option involves Bhutan, wherein its soldiers replace Indian troops in the standoff, leading to a mutual disengagement by China and Bhutan. The second option is of prolonging the standoff until November, till after the National Congress of the Communist Party of China, when de-escalation can take place through quiet diplomacy.
Sources have told The Indian Express that India wants to resolve the crisis peacefully but is very clear about not letting the Chinese construct a motorable road to Jampheri. Consultations by the government ever since National Security Advisor Ajit Doval returned from Beijing last week have included experts, including a former Indian envoy to China.
The first option under serious consideration involves replacing Indian troops on Dolam plateau with soldiers of the Royal Bhutan Army, which is then followed by mutual withdrawal by the Chinese and Bhutanese troops. By addressing the Chinese complaint of Indian troops on Bhutanese soil, this option gives Beijing a face-saver to withdraw its troops while meeting New Delhi’s aim of preventing Chinese road construction.
The drawback in this option, sources said, is “coordination issues” with Bhutan which New Delhi will have to overcome deftly. These issues pertain not only to logistics of simultaneous Indian and Bhutanese troop movement, but also Chinese acceptance of the proposal. Although New Delhi is confident of Bhutanese support at this point, there is fear that this could provide Thimphu the impetus to eventually start engaging with Beijing directly, and have diplomatic ties with China. Bhutan currently does not have diplomatic ties with any of the five permanent member (P-5) countries of the UN Security Council.
The fears about Bhutan are also driven by the 2013 experience when Thimphu tried to craft a “balanced” foreign policy, which translates into diplomatic ties with China. The then NSA, Shivshankar Menon, and Foreign Secretary, Sujatha Singh, had to fly to Thimphu to dissuade Bhutan from pursuing that course. While this option is being considered, the second option of prolonging the standoff till November currently finds greater favour within the government. As winter sets in, the weather in the area deteriorates by November, making any military action, or even road construction, difficult.
More importantly, the National Congress of the Communist Party of China will be over by November which will then allow Chinese President Xi Jinping to bring down the rhetoric needed for political support in the Congress. This would then create an environment where mutual de-escalation can take place and a way out can be found through diplomatic engagement by both sides.
The option of a prolonged standoff is based on the premise, sources said, that the Chinese would not like to escalate the situation to a military conflict. New Delhi has already demonstrated its will by stopping the Chinese road construction and has shown great diplomatic maturity by not publicly responding to provocative Chinese statements over the past five weeks. This means that the status quo can continue till November when a solution is arrived at. It is a course of action seen as most likely by many foreign embassies, including some of the P-5 countries.

Atmavik · Post by **Atmavik** » 04 Aug 2017 08:03

Vande Mataram | Story Of Major Shaitan Singh | September 4, 2106

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmywNzXu34M

every Indian history book in all regional languages should have a chapter on the Battle of Rezang La

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 04 Aug 2017 08:04

Bhutanese troops replacing our troops will be a clear win for the PRC.They will later armtwist the Bhutanese and shut India out.What we enjoy now we must never give up.

Iyersan · Post by **Iyersan** » 04 Aug 2017 08:09

Guddu wrote:Trial balloon

Two options on Doklam standoff: Let Bhutan troops replace India’s, wait until November
The option of a prolonged standoff is based on the premise, sources said, that the Chinese would not like to escalate the situation to a military conflict.
Written by Sushant Singh | New Delhi | Updated: August 4, 2017 5:19 am
Sources have told The Indian Express that India wants to resolve the crisis peacefully but is very clear about not letting the Chinese construct a motorable road to Jampheri. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... r-4781524/

As the standoff between Indian and Chinese troops at Doklam at the trijunction with Bhutan continues, the government is working hard on two diplomatic options to resolve the crisis. The first option involves Bhutan, wherein its soldiers replace Indian troops in the standoff, leading to a mutual disengagement by China and Bhutan. The second option is of prolonging the standoff until November, till after the National Congress of the Communist Party of China, when de-escalation can take place through quiet diplomacy.
Sources have told The Indian Express that India wants to resolve the crisis peacefully but is very clear about not letting the Chinese construct a motorable road to Jampheri. Consultations by the government ever since National Security Advisor Ajit Doval returned from Beijing last week have included experts, including a former Indian envoy to China.
The first option under serious consideration involves replacing Indian troops on Dolam plateau with soldiers of the Royal Bhutan Army, which is then followed by mutual withdrawal by the Chinese and Bhutanese troops. By addressing the Chinese complaint of Indian troops on Bhutanese soil, this option gives Beijing a face-saver to withdraw its troops while meeting New Delhi’s aim of preventing Chinese road construction.
The drawback in this option, sources said, is “coordination issues” with Bhutan which New Delhi will have to overcome deftly. These issues pertain not only to logistics of simultaneous Indian and Bhutanese troop movement, but also Chinese acceptance of the proposal. Although New Delhi is confident of Bhutanese support at this point, there is fear that this could provide Thimphu the impetus to eventually start engaging with Beijing directly, and have diplomatic ties with China. Bhutan currently does not have diplomatic ties with any of the five permanent member (P-5) countries of the UN Security Council.
The fears about Bhutan are also driven by the 2013 experience when Thimphu tried to craft a “balanced” foreign policy, which translates into diplomatic ties with China. The then NSA, Shivshankar Menon, and Foreign Secretary, Sujatha Singh, had to fly to Thimphu to dissuade Bhutan from pursuing that course. While this option is being considered, the second option of prolonging the standoff till November currently finds greater favour within the government. As winter sets in, the weather in the area deteriorates by November, making any military action, or even road construction, difficult.
More importantly, the National Congress of the Communist Party of China will be over by November which will then allow Chinese President Xi Jinping to bring down the rhetoric needed for political support in the Congress. This would then create an environment where mutual de-escalation can take place and a way out can be found through diplomatic engagement by both sides.
The option of a prolonged standoff is based on the premise, sources said, that the Chinese would not like to escalate the situation to a military conflict. New Delhi has already demonstrated its will by stopping the Chinese road construction and has shown great diplomatic maturity by not publicly responding to provocative Chinese statements over the past five weeks. This means that the status quo can continue till November when a solution is arrived at. It is a course of action seen as most likely by many foreign embassies, including some of the P-5 countries.

I for one definitely would not prefer option 1. It's akin to buckling to Chinese pressure.
Option 2: is the only logical one. But of course unless china raises the escalation to conflict.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 04 Aug 2017 08:15

ldev wrote:When Japan invaded China in 1937 the two opposing sides in the Civil War came together to fight the external enemy, Japan.

Not really. Mao cleverly held back much of his forces in reserve and the "Nationalists" did the bulk of fighting against the Japanese. Mao himself remarked that had it not been for Japanese invasion, probably the Communists would never have seized power in China.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 04 Aug 2017 08:17

^ Option 2 all the way. Waiting till Nov also makes sense in that there is persistent speculation and risk that PLA might mount a 'localized' (and hence muddy-able or even winnable, they may think) conflict in the Sept-October timeframe. Bhutanese troops wouldn't be in any position to pushback against such a scenario.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 04 Aug 2017 08:32

sanjaykumar wrote:This is all about Aksai Chin. India has served notice since 2014 that it will reclaim territories it deems its own. It rescinded any idea of de facto Chinese control of pasture lands etc in Ladakh.

I am not sure I understand, could you clarify this part?

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 04 Aug 2017 08:36

India has no option but take this action in Bhutan. If India had remained a silent spectator, the Chinese would have taken the next steps in POK. So India has drawn a redline and challenged China. This may be the last of the OBOR in this area.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 04 Aug 2017 08:37

http://www.oneindia.com/india/doklam-st ... 14520.html
Doklam standoff: China cools off, begins winding down of troops
Written By: Vicky Nanjappa Published: Friday, August 4, 2017, 6:32 [IST]
China has started winding down its forces and also lowering the ante at Doklam, highly placed sources said. India continues to maintain that it would not relent on its demand for a simultaneous withdrawal.
While on one hand there was a winding down of forces, China on the other continued to raise its rhetoric while warning India of 'serious consequences.' Read | Doklam can be resolved through bilateral talks, says EAM Sushma Swaraj The crossing of the boundary line by Indian troops into the territory of China using the pretext of security concern for a third party (Bhutan) is illegal. The troops should be withdrawn immediately, otherwise there will be serious consequences," reports said while quoting Liu Jinsong, China's deputy chief of mission. He continued to maintain that India had reduced its troops from 400 to 40. This was however strongly denied by India which stated that the troops remained intact and the number was at around 350. On Thursday Minister for External Affairs, Sushma Swaraj told the Rajya Sabha that India is not the aggressor in the Doklam standoff. It was China which triggered the crisis by violating a written understanding between the two sides in December 2012, she also said.
......

Trial baloons?
Gautam

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 08:40

I don't see the difficulty. The trouble arose because a bully pushed aside Bhutanese traffic police at gunpoint. Indian troops came in, and the bully backs down and now the Bhutanese traffic police should come in and enforce what they wanted anyway. Maybe cane the behinds of the bully with the Indians keeping watch.

The road construction stops, period.

Indian troops get out the EZ chairs and hookahs and binoculars, sit on top of the ridge and enjoy the spectacle over a steaming mug of chai while the PeeAllSee's Finest slog in the slush below. India has never wanted the Doklam Plateau for India, perfectly happy to have Bhutan traffic polis writ run there.

BTW, no motorable road towards India, that's that.

As for reducing troops to 40, I don't see why they are

. OK, if it takes only TWO Indian soldiers to stop 400 Chinese from building an illegal road, what's wrong with that? Stopping the road construction was the objective, and that is met.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Aug 2017 08:43

Aksai Hind is a part and parcel of North Dharmasala

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Aug 2017 08:45

Here is the press reporters' meet where the brave Han mard in the Chinese embassy issued the 'threats'. . .

Q: The Chinese MFA statement claimed that India had been notified about the contentious road construction activity before it began…when was this notified and at what level?

A: The road construction activities are not new developments. Actually they took place many years ago. As for the case in point, we notified the Indian side about our road activities on May 18, one month before the incident (troop stand-off) and then notified them for the second time on June 8. It is within China’s right to do so, but in a measure to improve confidence building we notified India. Without any response to our notification, the Indian side sent armed troops to obstruct us, and this is very shocking for us. This represents a disregard, and the trampling of the goodwill of the Chinese side.

Q: What is the level of troops in the disputed area at present, and how do you respond to the Indian government response that there has been no decline in troop levels?

A: Right now, I can tell you that there are 48 Indian military guards in our territory of Donglang (Doklam). I have seen reports that “government sources” claim there are still about 400 troops in this area, but our figures are correct, and it is open for double-checking. But the number of troops is not important: 400 or 40, they represent troops that are trespassing in another country’s territory, and every day they are there is another day of violating China’s national sovereignty.

Q: India says it is there at Bhutan’s request, and in response to its obligation to protect Bhutan’s national interests.

A: India is trying to draw Bhutan into its dispute with China, and to use Bhutan as a pretext for its ends. Bhutan has only two neighbours and both India and China need to respect its independence and its right to a foreign policy. In fact, India has embarrassed Bhutan by sending its troops into its disputed area with China. We say to India: do not intervene with your fingers in other country’s affairs, and withdraw your legs, that have stretched out too long.

Q: Bhutan’s statement clearly says China is in direct violation of its agreements, it doesn’t even mention India. So doesn’t the Bhutanese statement embarrass China, actually?

A: From the Bhutanese statement nothing reflects that the Bhutanese side invited or knew before hand that India would send troops. Even if we accept a difference of view between China and Bhutan, we have many mechanisms to resolve them bilaterally. Bhutan is not a protectorate of India and India is not a sovereign of Bhutan…. The Bhutanese side has said they knew nothing about the Indian troops movement…The crossing of the boundary line by Indian troops into the territory of China using the pretext of security concerns for a 3rd party (Bhutan) is illegal. The troops should be withdrawn immediately; otherwise there will be serious consequences.

Q: What are these consequences you speak of? And will this standoff affect the BRICS summit in early September and the proposed meeting between PM Modi and President Xi Jinping?

A: Let me answer the second part first. The procedures of the BRICS summit are jointly made by all five countries. We welcome India’s role in the summit, and they have made very good arrangements already. This standoff is a bilateral issue, so it should be kept separate. It is still too early to speak of the bilateral meetings, and it remains for diplomatic channels to discuss this….By crossing into Chinese territory and staying there, India cannot alter the nature of the tri-junction point. The Chinese side has made no mention of any military options at present. At the 90 year ceremony for the PLA President Xi said China has many options to guarantee peace, but the military option is the fundamental guarantor of sovereignty.

Q: India has referred to the 2012 agreement where India and China agreed that any tri-junction post must be agreed to by all three countries. Why is China silent on that, and is there any chance of a trilateral dialogue on this?

A: The 2012 agreement was an internal consensus (between Indian and Chinese special representatives). However, the only legal document is the 1890 convention between British government and the Chinese government at the time on Sikkim and Tibet boundaries. So the answer to your question is yes, in order to demarcate the line and tri-junction will take all three parties. But current actions show that India has denied its commitment to 1890 by previous governments and reversed other commitments made previously. Under such circumstances, how can we discuss a trilateral format for discussing the issue?

niran · Post by **niran** » 04 Aug 2017 08:49

UlanBatori wrote:I don't see the difficulty.
BTW, no motorable road towards India, that's that.

Saal, it is cheeni plopanganda, alound the time cheen began telefying Inads with jootoobe clips cheen media wele pubrishing alticres pocraiming Indians accepting defeat begging fol folgivness.

the reality is both side are present as usual, only change cheeni solders every morning jog near border(Bhutanese claimed) chanting "HuGooKi HakaNoodleKoodKood" or something similar and back to their tents. no deescalation weesclation

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 08:54

Cheen media can sit on their thumbs for all I care, reality is: No road. No bullying Bhutan. Next time Bhutan polis say STOP, u STOP, or we come STOP u again.

manju · Post by **manju** » 04 Aug 2017 09:02

Shiv, that war memorial in Bengaluru-- I was there with my kids this May. I had not planned but chance upon this place. It is right across Nehru Planetorium.

This memorial park has a nice musical fountain and as we where waiting I started exploring the place and saw the memorial, tanks, missiles, etc. Glad I chanced upon it!

https://www.google.co.in/maps/place/Nat ... 77.5904847

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 04 Aug 2017 09:03

Bringing down PRC's trade sulplus with Des is part of managing the cheeni threat - whether driven bottom up by a popular boycott movement or top-down by govt action.

In the past few weeks itself, Modi sarkar has quietly clamped down on quite a few big ticket imports from cheen, blocked sale of strategic industries (like pharma generic) to cheeni state flonts etc. Here's one more in the list.

Anti-dumping authority recommends import duty on solar and wind energy equipment from China (ET)

More, faster, please.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 04 Aug 2017 09:09

g.sarkar wrote:
http://www.oneindia.com/india/doklam-st ... 14520.html
Doklam standoff: China cools off, begins winding down of troops
Written By: Vicky Nanjappa Published: Friday, August 4, 2017, 6:32 [IST]
China has started winding down its forces and also lowering the ante at Doklam, highly placed sources said. India continues to maintain that it would not relent on its demand for a simultaneous withdrawal.
While on one hand there was a winding down of forces, China on the other continued to raise its rhetoric while warning India of 'serious consequences.' Read | Doklam can be resolved through bilateral talks, says EAM Sushma Swaraj The crossing of the boundary line by Indian troops into the territory of China using the pretext of security concern for a third party (Bhutan) is illegal. The troops should be withdrawn immediately, otherwise there will be serious consequences," reports said while quoting Liu Jinsong, China's deputy chief of mission. He continued to maintain that India had reduced its troops from 400 to 40. This was however strongly denied by India which stated that the troops remained intact and the number was at around 350. On Thursday Minister for External Affairs, Sushma Swaraj told the Rajya Sabha that India is not the aggressor in the Doklam standoff. It was China which triggered the crisis by violating a written understanding between the two sides in December 2012, she also said.
......
Trial baloons?
Gautam

I think this is a different type of trial balloon, where the cheeni are seeing if India will give them a face saver, by remaining silent when they missrepresent the 400 to 40 figure. Looks like GOI is not interested in any face savers before She Gin Peg has his communist party meeting. Letting the Bhutanese patrol replace the Indians is also a face saver to the Chinese, India might do that if China lets up on some other aspect Mazoor Azhar, NSG etc. This line of thinking is based on a recent video of Sushma Swaraj, where she made a comment, that we (India) is not discussing just Doklam issue, but the entirety of issues with China.

At this point the Chinese and India's neighbors have gotten the message that India will stand up to China and more can be extracted from the Chinese by giving them a face saver in exchange for a suitable reward. As Rahm Emmanuel said "never let a crisis go waste".

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 04 Aug 2017 09:28

The only way Tibet can be a genuinely independent buffer between China and India is to be a protectorate of India, a la Bhutan. Only.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 04 Aug 2017 09:30

The difference is EZ to explain. Only 40 Indian troops where Cheen can see them. Other 360 are, well,,, on their way elsewhere.