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

[ramana]

My chini takeaway from the above is that while the chinis encouraged NK as a counter to the russkies and the Americans, the transfer of nuclear technology in exchange for missiles was purely a paki enterprise. The chinis knew about it but chose to ignore it. But now, as they say, sow the wind, reap the whirlwind. The chinis will have to pay.

Does not compute as the recent nuke test had an mB of 5.7 to 6.3. This is way beyond Pak proven capability.
OTH it is well within China demonstrated capability.

So all nuke and missiles to NK are from China.

The NYT article is duping the US as they want to claim China is not the bad guy..

[anupmisra]

My chini takeaway from the above is that while the chinis encouraged NK as a counter to the russkies and the Americans, the transfer of nuclear technology in exchange for missiles was purely a paki enterprise. The chinis knew about it but chose to ignore it. But now, as they say, sow the wind, reap the whirlwind. The chinis will have to pay.

Does not compute as the recent nuke test had an mB of 5.7 to 6.3. This is way beyond Pak proven capability.
OTH it is well within China demonstrated capability. So all nuke and missiles to NK are from China. The NYT article is duping the US as they want to claim China is not the bad guy..

Pakis sired the NK nuclear program. However, al-photo.shoppe khan had this to say:

North Korea’s technology much better than Pakistan’s: Dr Qadeer

North Korea’s nuclear technology is much better than Pakistan’s, nuclear scientist Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan said on Monday, but ruled out any assistance from Islamabad to Pyongyang in this regard.

North Korea was self-reliant in the nuclear field because of its highly qualified group of scientists.

Now, how does he know unless he has access to inside information? Is the flow of nuclear technology now from NK to Pakhanistan? Is NK getting its missile technology from the land of the pure?

https://www.dawn.com/news/1355690/north ... -dr-qadeer

[Kashi]

Does not compute as the recent nuke test had an mB of 5.7 to 6.3. This is way beyond Pak proven capability.
OTH it is well within China demonstrated capability.
So all nuke and missiles to NK are from China.

You mean to say Cheenis seemingly transferred differing grades of nukes to Pakistan and to NoKo? Bottom of the barrel stuff for the less reliable and duplicitous Pakis and slightly better stuff for ideologically and culturally closer Korean brethren?

This seems much like the Cheeni maal exported to the West and Europe and Asian Tigers and the Cheeni maal exported elsewhere..

[pankajs]

Hear come our dear MK Bhadrakumar to show India it place. Previously he had assured us that India would get its behind whipped on Dokalam.

http://www.atimes.com/indian-posturing- ... omic-feel/
Indian posturing, post-Doklam, has a tragi-comic feel

In retrospect, China showed that on issues of territorial sovereignty, there is no question of a compromise. But something may also have changed fundamentally in its attitude toward India. Harsh things have been said, betraying displeasure and anger, and a breakdown in trust and confidence.

A bumpy road lies ahead. Simply put, India is unable to come to terms with China’s rise, and the latter senses that it must now be on guard. Conceivably, Chinese diplomacy in the South Asian region may shift to adversarial mode. With tacit Chinese support, countries such as Nepal, Sri Lanka or the Maldives may be in a better position to withstand India’s overbearing presence.

<snip>

The dismal picture that has emerged over the past week is of the Indian officials responsible for that fateful decision counting trees and trying to convince domestic opinion that India “won” and China “lost”. The great danger is that their core constituency of ultra-nationalists will – to take the sports analogy further – now expect them to raise the bar.

Many other gems. Seems our dear friend has a severe case of indigestion.

[pankajs]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china ... SKCN1BF0Z6
Senior Chinese military officer questioned over suspected graft: sources

BEIJING (Reuters) - A senior military officer who sits on China’s powerful Central Military Commission, which is headed by President Xi Jinping, is being questioned on suspicion of corruption, three sources familiar with the situation said.

Fang Fenghui had been chief of the Joint Staff Department of the People’s Liberation Army until he was replaced late last month, with no official word on what had happened to him, whether he had taken up another post, or had retired.

“Fang Fenghui was questioned regarding economic problems,” a source with ties to the leadership told Reuters. “Economic problems” is often used as a euphemism for corruption in China.

[UlanBatori]

How can we lend any credence to types like Abdul Xerox Khan? He is now mouthing off per orders from his masters. Oh, yeah, NoKo has these brilliant scientists and the worldbeating high-speed computation and precision machining, to go from short-range missile to IRBM to ICBM, and 6 levels of nuke testing up to MT level, flawlessly, right the first time. All by themselves.

China is getting worried because for the first time since Tricky D1ck Nixon, da man in the WHOTUS is not predictable and well-house-trained. He may have learned from the sdre yindoos how to play the Chinese communist game: be in their faces, demand that they back down, or else massive force ready.

I think the next step if there is one before the all-out jhapad, will be an ultimatum asking China to force a verifiable CRE of NoKo missiles and nukes. 24-hour deadline to agree. Made in the UN. B-52s wheels-up off the runways of Strategic Air Command at H minus 14, headed for Korea from US bases. DEFCON 4 declared.
And by then the 3 subs will have been sunk.

China will be humiliated before the whole world, but have to crawl.

If Trump has any spine, Xi is heading for Kruschevdom and he knows it, which is why the khulji.

Ironically he is likely to end his days breaking rocks to build the same types of roads that he tried to build in Doklam. Maybe One Small Contribution to build OBOR through the Gobi.

[pankajs]

This one is for our dear MK Bhadrakumar. This is not based on any premises or surmises or anal-fart or on some unnamed "China expert from New Delhi". This is from his real daddy.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomac ... und-forces
General seen as Xi Jinping’s keen supporter named new chief of Chinese army’s ground forces

“The recent conflict in Doklam has proved that we need to rethink how to rebuild the ground force,” said Yue, referring to a border stand-off between China and India that ended on Monday. “Our capabilities are greater that India’s but we misjudged the situation there – we weren’t decisive enough.”

This Yue guy quoted above is introduced in the same article as "Yue Gang, a military commentator and retired PLA colonel."

[shiv]

Pakistan went the Uranium way early. NoKo went the Pu route from the outset. AFAIK

[Pulikeshi]

Two questions on the Doklam now non-issue and BRCIS shindig:

1. What if this had to do with removing Li Zuocheng and replacing him with Han Weiguo? That is a way to game the internal dynamics of the pawns -- other than Li that had to be replaced -- in Eleven Gin Pegs "Unshakable Papaya" aka PLA?
   Mucho Cheena action is bookoo internal idiocy! Just like BRI is really a way to keep the export engine running that keeps labor away from revolution...
2. How much of all this including the BRCSI shindig is about creating "new international institutions" before India's acendence in about 5yrs?
   India probably should and has gamed how much to accede now and how much to bargain for later when it gets stronger in terms of capabilities... or has it?

Seems to me we may be missing some analysis here on BRF.... Also, India's game is now outed this may give Cheena room to invest in reshaping its West. The challenge for India is its force modernization and Military manufacturing muscle will need real push, not the lip service paid thus far...
Push back welcome as always

[Pratyush]

Will India allow for new institutions that don't take into account our needs considering UN SC already is one such body. Secondly for the PRC led world order to get going, the current US led order has to completely collapse. That is still some time away.

Intrestingly during lunch time discussions in my office, people were off the opinion that BRICS was just a talking shop. In the absence of real economic and political synergies.

[yensoy]

India's way of handling China has just solved the biggest policy puzzle for world powers - Pranab Dhal Samanta, Economic Times

This is a lesson and solution that few apart from India have the ba!!s to execute. Japan, Vietnam and US are in that group which can have a stare-down with China, and that's about it. The others will do Pooh Bear's bidding - Philippines being at the top of the list of supplication, Aus/Canada being wimps, EU being too dependent economically on China, and rest of SE Asia being sellouts (Singapore is the only one that has some spine, because they know their own people). SoKo will pack up if cornered. Russia will not get entangled at all - after all one goon won't mess with another's "territory". I'm not even including sellouts like Pakis.

[sum]

This one is for our dear MK Bhadrakumar. This is not based on any premises or surmises or anal-fart or on some unnamed "China expert from New Delhi". This is from his real daddy.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomac ... und-forces
General seen as Xi Jinping’s keen supporter named new chief of Chinese army’s ground forces

“The recent conflict in Doklam has proved that we need to rethink how to rebuild the ground force,” said Yue, referring to a border stand-off between China and India that ended on Monday. “Our capabilities are greater that India’s but we misjudged the situation there – we weren’t decisive enough.”

This Yue guy quoted above is introduced in the same article as "Yue Gang, a military commentator and retired PLA colonel."

If there was ever a stalwart befitting the term Manchurian candidate, it must be MKB.

Cant imagine the damage he would have caused when he was in service. I just picture Kim Philby whenever i hear his name

[yensoy]

Honestly, the more I read about China and NoKo, the more I am convinced that the Emperor has no clothes, i.e. China doesn't have the ba!!s to take on NoKo. It's not about Chinese interests anymore, it's about their capability and willingness to shed blood. This should be a lesson to us.

[TKiran]

There are plenty of indications coming (pouring) that India lost to Han in Doka Lam military stand-off.

It was a military maneuvre which gave India huge advantage, which was sold out for a few smiles of Han emporor at BRICS summit.

One such indication is what our army chief is saying

Han are going to fix the gaps and Fortify Lhasa. They have become aggressive already.

[Prasad]

Sounds a lot like NPA speak but look at the level of engg help China has given to NoKo
https://www.wsj.com/articles/behind-nor ... 1504711605

[sum]

China is teaching South Indian languages such as Tamil and Malayalam to wireless radio operators of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA

China is teaching South Indian languages such as Tamil and Malayalam to wireless radio operators of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The move is to understand intercepts of communication signals of the Indian armed forces deployed along the 3,500 km Line of Actual Control and the international border.

The PLA’s emphasis is more on the spoken aspects of these two South Indian languages, which help facilitate faster communication by the Indian Army. “No coding or decoding of cipher is required with the script and pronunciation of South Indian languages being extremely difficult for any person to comprehend without a working knowledge of these languages,” officials privy to the inputs said.

The Pakistani experience, according to sources, has taught China to learn to understand Tamil, Malayalam and a few other South Indian languages. “During the 1971 India-Pakistan war, our radio operators passed messages and commands on open channels in Tamil, which was Greek to the Pakistani forces. The Pakistanis were foxed by our Tamil and Malayalam-speaking radio operators,” said an official.

“China does not want to repeat the mistake by its all weather friend Pakistan during the 1971 war,” said an intelligent official.

PLA operatives’ understanding of South Indian languages will additionally help Beijing in gathering intelligence from Tamil-dominated pockets in Northeastern Sri Lanka, where the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) had a considerable sway till 2009 before being decimated by the forces of the island nation. China has a deal with Sri Lanka for majority control of Hambantota port in its southeast.

Indian forces such as the Indo-Tibetan Border Police, which guards the Indo-China border, is also training its new troops in Mandarin, the language of mainland China.

Changing Frequency Chinese wireless radio operators are learning Tamil and Malayalam to understand intercepts of the Indian Army
.....
During the 1971 Indo-Pakistan war, Indian radio operators passed messages and commands on open channels in Tamil, which was Greek to the Pakistani forces

[JE Menon]

Oddly, we haven't heard much commentary about Doklam from Beijing's sweeter than honey, higher than mountains, stronger than steel, slicker than lube iron-bar brother across the Karakoram.

[Pulikeshi]

Will India allow for new institutions that don't take into account our needs considering UN SC already is one such body. Secondly for the PRC led world order to get going, the current US led order has to completely collapse. That is still some time away.

Intrestingly during lunch time discussions in my office, people were off the opinion that BRICS was just a talking shop. In the absence of real economic and political synergies.

Several assumptions here that may be too premature - India cares about several institutional approaches - currently there is a lot of coordination with China on a Rating Agency for example. The NSG, UNSC bogey reminds us that there are two camps ~ those that want to reform the world of yesterday perhaps from the inside and those that want to create new institutions. May need longer than a lunch and several drinks for that...

Other assumption that is questionable is that for one order to go take off, another must completely collapse - There is no evidence that this is how power transferred from Britain to the US for example, facts are quite the contrary. India is already cooperating with Cheena on AIIB and NDB. If one were to accuse BRICS as a talk shop then perhaps even UN and other yester era bogeys are all talk shops onlee no?

[g.sarkar]

Hear come our dear MK Bhadrakumar to show India it place. Previously he had assured us that India would get its behind whipped on Dokalam.

http://www.atimes.com/indian-posturing- ... omic-feel/


The dismal picture that has emerged over the past week is of the Indian officials responsible for that fateful decision counting trees and trying to convince domestic opinion that India “won” and China “lost”. The great danger is that their core constituency of ultra-nationalists will – to take the sports analogy further – now expect them to raise the bar.
Many other gems. Seems our dear friend has a severe case of indigestion.

No Sir, no indigestion. He is an honest man. He has eaten China's salt and sold his soul. Ab karza utar raha hai. If you take hafta from the Godfather, I mean lizard, one day he will ask you to return his favors.
Gautam

[Yagnasri]

There are plenty of indications coming (pouring) that India lost to Han in Doka Lam military stand-off.

It was a military maneuvre which gave India huge advantage, which was sold out for a few smiles of Han emporor at BRICS summit.

One such indication is what our army chief is saying

Han are going to fix the gaps and Fortify Lhasa. They have become aggressive already.

Did our Army Cheif said that we lost in this stand off or something like that? I have read it.

Can you please provide links for the indications you said that were pouring? MSM in India is nowhere NM's friend and I am quite sure Indian MSM would have carried lot of reports and opinions if what you said is correct.

[morem]

There are plenty of indications coming (pouring) that India lost to Han in Doka Lam military stand-off.

It was a military maneuvre which gave India huge advantage, which was sold out for a few smiles of Han emporor at BRICS summit.

One such indication is what our army chief is saying

Han are going to fix the gaps and Fortify Lhasa. They have become aggressive already.

Did our Army Cheif said that we lost in this stand off or something like that? I have read it.

Can you please provide links for the indications you said that were pouring? MSM in India is nowhere NM's friend and I am quite sure Indian MSM would have carried lot of reports and opinions if what you said is correct.

Sir , why waste bandwidth and mental peace responding to such shoot and scoot operators.

[Yagnasri]

True. My mistake.

[Philip]

Let's be the "devil's advocate" for MKB's analysis.Did we win,did we lose or was it a draw and do unltra-nationalists want the GOI to "raise the bar"?

Facts and Chronology:
1.Chinese forces pushed into Bhutanese territory to begin extening a road in Doklam which when completed would have v.serious mil. consequences for India,giving China the ability to mount arty/rocket attacks,etc., on the Siliguri corridor,the only narrow land link between Indiaa nd the whole of the N-East.

2.India responded to an SOS from Bhutan with whom we have a def. and security agreement,India in the role of protector of Bhutanese sovereignty.
India troops rushed to the scene and prevented Chinese troops from further intrusion.Argy-bargy broke out between the two opposing forces.

3.India refused the arrogant and abusive Chinese demands to retreat,leave the scene first and were threatened with a Chinese military response,another "lesson" like '62,etc.,etc.

4.India instead suggested a mutual simultaneous withdrawal of troops from the disputed area which China rejected scornfully,conducting well-publicised military drills in Tibet.China made great show of upping the mil. ante in Tibet,troops movements,etc.

5.India responded by repeating its insistence on simultaneous withdrawal and diplomatic talks to resolve the impasse.India too without too much fanfare built up its mil. posture all along the Indo-Tibetan border to forestall any Chinese mischief in other regions like Ladakh. In India there was also much media speculation whether PM Modi would attend the BRICS summit in China (the host) in view of China;'s belligerence.

6.The NoKo crisis almost simultaneously erupted with NoKo and the US indulging in verbal warfare,the chances of a major mil. clash v.strong and the US blamed China for not reining in its bum-chum NoKo.China tus faced two simultaneous crises which could erupt into major mil. clashes.

7.India sent its NSI to Beijing to meet the Chinese leadership and XI Gins himself.The exchange of words are too well known to repeat.
India also consulted close friends like Russia to put pressure upon the Chinese as the stand-off could damage irreparably the imminent BRICS summit.India refused to give in unilaterally.Faced with the prospect of a ruined BRICS summit,and great loss of face,China blinked and agreed to the withdrawal suggested by India .

8.After 72 days both sides withdrew their forces.China claimed that Indian troops withdrew first,but in reality within 24 hrs. both sides withdrew ....just a few hundred metres away!

Questions to be asked:

1.Did China finally get its road built?....No.
2.Did India withdraw its troops?..........No.
3.Did India withdraw its troops first as China has stated? China says so,India rejects it.The facts are that both sides withdrew their troop simultaneously within 24 hrs.
4.Has the "ultra-nationalist" brigade demanded "raising the bar" with China? Public knowledge is that the entire country wanted the Chinese to back-off and for India to remain firm and steadfast which we did.Did MKB want us to retreat down to the Ganges in salute of XI Gins and the "Yellow Peril"?

So in an objective analysis who "won",who "Lost"?
Well China certainly "lost" its objective of building its road in Bhutanese territory and it also lost some face in that it could not bring India under its heel like a vassal state.

India in fact lost nothing! No territory,no loss of face,in fact the calm and measured manner in which India defused the crisis ,throwing China a tiny bone to chew on.Mr.Modi attending the BRICS summit,showed great maturity of the GOI,its PM and those involved in the crisis. If diplomacy (supported by a "big stick") be the yardstick ,then India clearly won a victory of sorts. In fact a v.knowledgeable friend of mine in the capital in the know of things,said that our policy was to "speak softly and carry a big stick".

therefore,we can safely assume that MKB has lost his marbles. Not only has he got the bull by the horns,he has the cow too by the "Udder" end! He also seems to have sat on a rather pointed object,an India bayonet,causing him much pain.Dr.Philip advises him tp take this excellent Chinese herbal medicine.It comes very cheap. A large measure of Gin over Tibetan ice, No.XI brand!

MKB has shown himself to be a prime appeaser of China, a parasite upon our nation,a true rat,who should be awarded the Chinese "Chairman's medal-Turd class",packed into a bamboo cage and sent on a slow boat to China!

[TKiran]

Del

[TKiran]

True. My mistake.

Just now only I saw your message, I should not have responded to you. Sorry it was my mistake too.

[Philip]

In continuation,the Chinese "Doklam gambit" was a blessing in disguise for India. The venom that emanated from China,both official and orchestrated state media,was so poisonous,abusive and disrespectful,that even hardened politicos of the right were appalled by the Chinese barrage of insults and threats militaire. If there were those still slumbering in the MEA and MOD,Doklam was a Chinese bayonet up the proverbial backside. The realisation dawned upon the establishment that China had the most dangerous intentions for India in the short,med.,and ;long term,and that nothing other than a massive military and infrastructure build-up esp. in the Himalayas ,was the min. required to make China think several times before challenging India again on the ground.

From latest reports emanating from Bei-Gin,the Chinese military underestimated India's resolve and mil capability. They're now planning at full speed how they can overcome their weaknesses which they experienced at Doklam ,to overcome India at the next round.The "Gipper" ,Ronald Reagan said of the USSR,"trust but verify".With China one can never even trust !

[TKiran]

Many brfites have a different opinion but this time I have a view completely diametrically opposite view with theirs.
Their view is "India did the right thing by offering face saving formula to Han, as we have achieved what we wanted, thus it's a diplomatic victory for India".

My view is that "India ventured into a military stand-off, and it was dynamic. Diplomacy definitely has a role to play but it was limited to supporting the military stand-off. (We were doing everything right diplomatically that even the diligent Japanese were convinced of our Doklam stand-off). We should have held on to the stand-off, as the ball was in Han court. They chose to fight, even though the odds of them getting cut to size are higher. Now some political or diplomatic person gets a brilliant idea of giving a face saver to Han, where there was no need for such magnanimity."

Now coming back to the situation today, Han lapped on to something that naieve Indians have offered in a platter, got precious time and started salami slicing wherever they have advantage. Their current strategy is to make pakis fight Indians, they are creeping all over in PoK, fortifying Lhasa and making India fight the lowly pakis rather than Han. Rather I will accuse those who offered the "face saving formula" as directly responsible for NoKo provocation, as there was a definite plan by Han to show USA it's place in Indo China Sea and East China sea. As the pressure on western side is eased instantly.

The Han strategy is very well planned and choreographed to intimidate USA and Japan using NoKo. But there was a surprise for them on the western front and were clueless what to do.

Khair, one unintended consequence of this brilliant diplomatic victory by India is that Japanese will not trust Indian "Diplomacy".

[TKiran]

The "Gipper" ,Ronald Reagan said of the USSR,"trust but verify".With China one can never even trust !

Philip sir, one nitpick, when you trust, you don't verify. What is this "Trust but verify"?


It should be "never Trust, always verify"

[Philip]

The point the Gipper was making.Trust and verify are two sides of the same coin.Unfortunately,the Sovs/Russians didn't learn from Reagan.They never verified or put down on parchment that NATO would not extend its membership/boundaries by poaching ex-Warsaw Pact states!

I said this before,and say it again.Doklam caught us by complete surprise. We just about managed to save the situ.This was particularly trick becos the territory in Q is Bhutanese who have no dpl. relations with China.The Chins have been trying for ages to armtwist the Bhutanese to do so and cut India out of the equation.They well know the dpl. and mil. gains that would immediately follow. Being caught by surprise and quite unprepared for a long war,our ammo. stocks and shortages of spares, poor border infrastructure,etc., are too well known, India had to buy time. Therefore a defused crisis was necessary for us. Fortunately,the NoKo crisis erupted,gravely impinging upon China as any US war with NoKo would inevitably drag China into it,plus the ignominy of an Indian boycott of the BRICS summit would mean huge loss of face from China and demands by its other members as to why the issue couldn't be peacefully resolved through diplomacy,India's stand always.As Gen.Rawat has just said,e need to prepare for the worst,a Sino_Pak JV.

An arc of crisis has thus been created by the Chinese and Pakis stretching from the Arabian Sea,through Af-Pak and the Himalayan/Tibetan region through to the NEast . There is a corresponding maritime arc south of the mainland in the IOR too,stretching from Djibouti,Gwadar,the Maldives,Sri Lanka,to Burma and the Malacca Straits.Dealing with these two arcs requires a combination of diplomacy,military preparedness and economic aid/investment (to our smaller neighbours),and this prevent China's OBOR from making any real headway,unless India is aboard too as an equal partner.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... d-pakistan

India army chief: we must prepare for simultaneous war with China and Pakistan
General says Himalayan standoff could become larger conflict with China, which Pakistan would then use to its advantage

The flags of China and India are displayed at a conference room used for meetings between military commanders on the Indo-China border. India’s army chief the country should be ready in case of war. Photograph: Adnan Abidi/Reuters

Associated Press
Thursday 7 September 2017
India’s army chief said on Wednesday the country should be prepared for a potential two-front war given China is flexing its muscles and there is little hope for reconciliation with Pakistan.

General Bipin Rawat referred to a recent 10-week standoff with the Chinese army in the Himalayas that ended last week. He said the situation could gradually snowball into a larger conflict on India’s northern border. Rawat said Pakistan on the western front could take advantage of such a situation.

Xi Jinping says a dark shadow looms over the world after years of peace
Read more
The Press Trust of India news agency quoted Rawat’s remarks at a seminar organised by the Center for Land Warfare Studies, a thinktank in New Delhi.

India fought a war with China in 1962 and three wars with Pakistan, two of them over control of Kashmir, since securing independence from Britain in 1947. All three countries are nuclear powers.

Rawat said credible deterrence did not take away the threat of war. “Nuclear weapons are weapons of deterrence. Yes, they are. But to say that they can deter war or they will not allow nations to go to war, in our context that may also not be true,” the news agency quoted him as saying.

India last week agreed to pull troops from the disputed Doklam plateau high in the Himalayas (? Get your facts right Guardian!), where Chinese troops had started building a road. The 10-week standoff was the two nations’ most protracted in decades, and added to their longstanding strategic rivalry.

Warfare lies within the realm of reality.
Bipin Rawat, Indian general
“We have to be prepared. In our context, therefore, warfare lies within the realm of reality,” Rawat said.

His comments came a day after India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, and China’s president, Xi Jinping, agreed on a “forward-looking” approach to Sino-India ties, putting behind the Doklam standoff.

Xi and Modi met on the sidelines of a summit of the Brics emerging economies in the south-eastern Chinese port city of Xiamen. The Brics nations are Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.

[SSridhar]

The "Gipper" ,Ronald Reagan said of the USSR,"trust but verify".With China one can never even trust !

Philip sir, one nitpick, when you trust, you don't verify. What is this "Trust but verify"?


It should be "never Trust, always verify"

TK, I agree that with China we can never trust.

But, Regan's 'Trust but Verify' had a different context where certain actions had to be taken by the USA too and time was needed to let the USSR do likewise but then verification had to be done eventually to assure that indeed the USSR had done as accepted. The verification worked both ways. The period of interregnum between agreeing to certain actions and the verification ultimately was the 'period of trust'.

I am pretty sure that we would also end up with similar situations in our dealing with China in years to come.

[SSridhar]

I said this before,and say it again.Doklam caught us by complete surprise. We just about managed to save the situ.

Philip, I am not too sure about this.

The Chinese side claimed that on two separate occasions, weeks before the actual incident started on June 16, they had sent intimation to IA about their road-building activity.

If that were true, then there is another possibility. It may be that the IA decided to appear nonchalant and let the decrepit conscripts of the PLA walk into a trap so that its behinds could be whacked and ineffectiveness shown up.

[pankajs]

2 points on "trust but verify"

1. For any movement someone will move first even if by one second or one hour or a day or a month. Any movement that occurs within a day can be considered *simultaneous* or *near simultaneous" for those who want to split hairs. Anyone remember the word *expeditious* in MEA statement?
2. Instead of being a one step process it can be multiple step process with each step small and verifiable by the other side and the movement in lock step.

It isn't such a big deal and can be broken down to as granular level as desired based on trust or rather the lack of trust. In Doklam our forces had to move about 100 meters to be back on Indian territory and be able to verify the Chinese withdrawal while still be in a position to rush back in case of Chinese non-compliance without any change of facts on the ground.

[pankajs]

I said this before,and say it again.Doklam caught us by complete surprise. We just about managed to save the situ.

Philip, I am not too sure about this.

The Chinese side claimed that on two separate occasions, weeks before the actual incident started on June 16, they had sent intimation to IA about their road-building activity.

If that were true, then there is another possibility. It may be that the IA decided to appear nonchalant and let the decrepit conscripts of the PLA walk into a trap so that its behinds could be whacked and ineffectiveness shown up.

Entirely possible. If you look at the sequence of BRI followed by Doklam followed by BRICS followed by Peoples Congress it seems to be scripted perfectly to play the game on China that normally it plays on India. Perhaps a return of favor for one past incident.

Looks like the Chinese provided the opportunity at Doklam and the constraints of BRICS and Peoples congress. GOI grabbed the opportunity to send the message that is wanted to send all along.

[JE Menon]

>>>There are plenty of indications coming (pouring) that India lost to Han in Doka Lam military stand-off.

TKiran, I have been unable to locate any except two where it suggests, not says, India lost in this face-off. Could you link to these plenty of indications that are pouring in?

[anupmisra]

China is teaching South Indian languages such as Tamil and Malayalam to wireless radio operators of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA

During the 1971 Indo-Pakistan war, Indian radio operators passed messages and commands on open channels in Tamil, which was Greek to the Pakistani forces

During the attack on k'rachi by IN missile boats (Operation Trident), Indian radio operators communicated in Russian to confuse the pakis. India celebrates its Navy Day annually on 4 December to mark this operation.

[Schmidt]

China is teaching South Indian languages such as Tamil and Malayalam to wireless radio operators of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA

China is teaching South Indian languages such as Tamil and Malayalam to wireless radio operators of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The move is to understand intercepts of communication signals of the Indian armed forces deployed along the 3,500 km Line of Actual Control and the international border.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Radio Peking has always had a Tamil language service

I used to catch it on SW radio when I was a school kid

Dunno about Malayalam and Kannada

[Dumal]

It looks like the good General's arrows hit their marks perfectly! http://www.rediff.com/news/report/thats ... 170907.htm

Also interesting to see China's new-found enthusiasm for panchsheel! What is our position on that? Does it make sense in today's environment?

China on Thursday reacted sharply to army chief General Bipin Rawat's assertion that Beijing was testing India's limits, saying the remarks were contrary to the views expressed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping during their meeting in Xiamen this week.

Rawat, while speaking at a seminar organised by the Centre for Land Warfare Studies in New Delhi, had said India should be prepared for a two-front war, insisting that China had started 'flexing its muscles', while there seems to be no scope for reconciliation with Pakistan whose military and polity saw an adversary in India.

Reacting to the comments, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang told a briefing that, "We have noted the statement by relevant people in India, also we noticed some Indian press remarked that the reports are shocking."

Referring to the remarks expressed by Xi and Modi during their first meeting following the end of a 73-day standoff between the militaries of the two countries at Doklam, Geng also questioned whether Rawat was authorised to speak and if his comments represented the Indian government's position.

"As reported by Indian press...we don't know whether he was authorised to speak those words or it was just his spontaneous words or whether his words represented the position of the Indian government," Geng said.

Noting that China and India are important neighbours and are two large countries, Geng said sound and steady development of ties serves the fundamental interests of both the countries.

This is what the international community wishes to see, he said.

"Just two days ago, President Xi Jinping pointed to Prime Minister Narendra Modi that the two countries are each other's development opportunities, not threats," Geng said.

"We hope India could view China's development in a correct and rational way. We need to show to the world that peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation is the only right choice for the two countries," Geng quoted Xi as telling Modi during their meeting on the sidelines of the BRICS -- Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa -- Summit.

"We should respect each other, seek common ground and shelve differences, preserve peace and tranquillity of the border area," Xi had said.

Prime Minister Modi had also said that the Indian side is willing to work with China to maintain steady development of bilateral ties, Geng said.

"We should not treat each other as rivals. We should make cooperation the mainstream and the two sides should work together to maintain peace and tranquillity in the border areas," Geng said.

"Hope that this military official would see clearly this trend and contribute to development of China and India relations and see something more in that regard," he said in response to Rawat's remarks.

Rawat, in his remarks, had said, "As far as northern adversary is concerned, the flexing of muscle has started. The salami slicing, taking over territory in a very gradual manner, testing our limits of threshold is something we have to be wary about and remain prepared for situations emerging which could gradually emerge into conflict."

China, India should make sure differences do not go out of control: Wang

Meanwhile, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said that China and India should shed their mindset of regarding each other as rivals or threats and make sure that their differences do not go out of control.

In his first comments on India-China ties after this week's meeting between Modi and Xi, Wang said bilateral relations were 'affected and undermined' during the past few months 'for clear reasons'.

Without mentioning the 73-day standoff between the militaries of the two countries at Doklam, Wang said, 'going forward, the two sides need to work together to follow-up on the consensus reached by the two leaders and make sure bilateral relations stay on track'.

Speaking to the media after his talks with Nepalese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Krishna Bahadur Mahara, Wang said the Sino-India relationship 'should not be derailed'.

'Both the countries should seek harmonious relations and win-win cooperation which is the natural choice and the right choice' for both, Wang said.

"There should be no confrontation. We need to build strategic mutual trust and the two sides need to work to really look at each other as cooperative partners rather than be driven by an old-fashioned mindset and regard each other as rivals or threats," he said.

Both the countries should also 'make sure that differences do not go out of control', Wang said.

"Both sides need to remain committed to the five principles of peaceful coexistence and work together to properly handle disputes and also work together to maintain tranquillity in the border areas," he said.

[TKiran]

Del

[anupmisra]

Gobar Slimes on the mend?

#Doklam crisis is not true portrayal of Sino-India relations. China is not India's potential enemy: Editor-in-Chief Hu Xijin #HuSays

https://twitter.com/globaltimesnews/sta ... 7619088384

https://twitter.com/globaltimesnews/sta ... 7619088384

[TKiran]

Del