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

nam · Post by **nam** » 08 Sep 2017 14:06

No one cares what the Chinese think. For a country that was threatening war couple of weeks back is now "hurt" by a obvious statement?

What did Gen Rawat say which is not obvious?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Sep 2017 14:15

pankajs wrote:Some in media are suggesting that Gen. Rawat is speaking out of turn and pushing the narrative and GOI. That does not seem to be right. He might have gone on his own the first time but then he would have been warned. The repeat pattern suggests that GOI is communicating its message through him. What Modi/MEA will not say is being said by Gen. Rawat.

And it seems the message is reaching the correct quarters in China with their foreign ministry responding.

Gen Rawat is doing what exactly he should be doing highlighting to the blind men of India, including those who keep smoking the peace pipe and braying appeasement! It is he who will be sending his men, whom he undoubtedly mentored & loves like his own children, into battle & his professional pride will not stand for these men to fight at a disadvantage! It is all very well for JLN era caterwauling about "last stands" and "ae mere watan ke logo" but we should expect our men to win & win decisively. IMHO Gen Rawats comments are a wake up call to those MEA and MOD mandarins who react to every such incident at Doklam by going back to sleep. Yes this Govt has taken huge steps forward in the past year and a half for defence, improving maintenance, giving financial powers to the Army officials, ordering war supplies.. but why did all this have to happen at the last moment? It should have happened earlier and faster. Even with regards to TSP, the lethargy in taking quick emergency restocking was inexcusable. The obvious answer is that the lack of a full time Def Min allowed the usual paper pushing at MOD, and delays piled up, till PMO intervened at the time of the LOC heatup with TSP post surgical strikes and the real issues were obvious. Infra near the border is still a mess.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 08 Sep 2017 14:19

pankajs wrote:https://scroll.in/article/849926/the-da ... t-the-tone
The Daily Fix: On both China and Pakistan, India cannot let army set the tone

Rawat’s remarks stirred a normally taciturn Chinese government into making a statement. China’s foreign minister said ties had been “damaged” but not “derailed” by Doklam, while his ministry noted that sections of the Indian press had found Rawat’s remarks shocking. This has become a pattern in recent months: India’s military leadership drowning out the civilian leadership with belligerence, taking control of the narrative when political sensitivity and moderation were needed the most.

Scroll is a leftist rag. Its remarks on India have the same supercilious tone as racists remarking on the pretentious heathens who dont worship as they do. Whatever scroll says, do the opposite.

If Gen Rawats comments push the case for some more urgent modernisation of the IA, more the better. As a military man, he is speaking the unvarnished truth to our bureaucratic nabobs in Delhi who are busy cancelling "single vendor deals" for critical ammunition and think infinite time is available for paper pushing (RFP, RFI, this, that) even before actual trials begin.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 08 Sep 2017 14:26

kiranA wrote:We failed and we lost.

Yes you did, my dear Chinese fellow.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 08 Sep 2017 14:37

shiv wrote:His slight paunch ......

Slight? He has a humongous pot belly and is positively bursting out of his suit. His cheeks are all puffed up, and he's a shaking lump of lard.

Look at him in this picture:

http://news.abs-cbn.com/business/07/18/ ... en-economy

Neck like a slug. Fingers like a slug. Take a close up of his face and look below his ears .... he's trying to look leaner, but he is one fat slob.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 08 Sep 2017 14:45

Karan M wrote:
pankajs wrote:https://scroll.in/article/849926/the-da ... t-the-tone
The Daily Fix: On both China and Pakistan, India cannot let army set the tone

Scroll is a leftist rag. Its remarks on India have the same supercilious tone as racists remarking on the pretentious heathens who dont worship as they do. Whatever scroll says, do the opposite.

If Gen Rawats comments push the case for some more urgent modernisation of the IA, more the better. As a military man, he is speaking the unvarnished truth to our bureaucratic nabobs in Delhi who are busy cancelling "single vendor deals" for critical ammunition and think infinite time is available for paper pushing (RFP, RFI, this, that) even before actual trials begin.

also, they are funded by the Omidyar, Media network.

Omidyar is as rotten as they come.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 08 Sep 2017 15:03

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/chin ... source=rss
China now backs Pakistan on terror, says 'some countries' should recognise efforts
Ananth Krishnan | Posted by Ankit Misra
Beijing, September 8, 2017 | UPDATED 11:08 IS
China on Friday expressed unequivocal support to Pakistan on the issue of fighting terrorism, saying Islamabad had "a clear conscience" and had made "great sacrifices".
Foreign Minister Wang Yi also said "some countries" needed to recognise this, in what could be a veiled comment aimed at both the United States, with President Donald Trump last month hitting out at the "safe havens" there, and India.
Wang's comment came following a meeting in Beijing with his Pakistani counterpart Khawaja Asif, and just four days after China had endorsed the declaration at the BRICS Summit in Xiamen which expressed concern for the first time on several Pakistan-based terror groups. Ahead of BRICS, China had said that it would not be appropriate to discuss Pakistan's counter-terrorism and the concerns of countries like India, at the September 3 Summit in Xiamen.

Gautam

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 08 Sep 2017 15:05

TKiran wrote:
JE Menon wrote:>>>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?
Yes sir, you have understood my point correctly, there are suggestions or indications only, which also has to be inferred, no Army Chief would say "we lost". When the army chief says something such as "we still face a possible two front war", my own inference is that, "Han have decided not to fight with lowly Indians, let's use lowly pakis"

That is what I am saying as a loss for IA, inspite of surprise maneuvre to checkmate PLA, the political system failed by giving a face saver, when Han didn't ask for one. May be I should have used the word FAILED, instead of LOST in the la'affaire Doka Lam. What to do only, I am a Telugu medium guy, not good at articulating in English.

Oh wait Han are learning Telugu, oh my gosh, I can't talk in Telugu also, they can decipher what I am talking easily......

Hmmm...OK. So all of above is your inference.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 08 Sep 2017 15:06

Are we looking for approval from the Chinese for our General? Did anyone ask anything when that PLA Colonel issued us threats during the crisis?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 08 Sep 2017 15:11

Academic Huang Jing and wife have left Singapore after being stripped of PR status: MHA - Straits Times

Academic Huang Jing, who had his permanent residency revoked for working as an "agent of influence" for a foreign government, has left Singapore with his wife.

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) confirmed their departure in a statement on Friday (Sept .

Dr Huang, 60, and his wife, Shirley Yang Xiuping, had their permanent residency cancelled last month, and are permanently banned from Singapore.

The MHA had identified Dr Huang, the former professor from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, as an "agent of influence" who sought to influence Singapore's foreign policy and public opinion here.

The couple appealed to the Home Affairs Minister, but it was rejected. They were then given a 14-day grace period - till Sept 6 - to leave the country.

The China-born couple are citizens of the United States. Dr Huang earlier told The Straits Times they would return to the US, where they have a house in the state of Virginia.

Dr Huang was director of the Centre on Asia and Globalisation and Lee Foundation Professor on US-China relations at the LKY School, and his views on China were regularly sought by organisations and the media.

The MHA said last month that Dr Huang "used his senior position in the LKY School to deliberately and covertly advance the agenda of a foreign country at Singapore's expense. He did this in collaboration with foreign intelligence agents".

"This amounts to subversion and foreign interference in Singapore's domestic politics. Huang's continued presence in Singapore, and that of his wife, are therefore undesirable."

The National University of Singapore, which the LKY School is a part of, has terminated Dr Huang's employment as he no longer had the necessary immigration permits to work in Singapore.

One hopes that the US now takes appropriate action against this 'agent of influence'. One can imagine how he would have influenced the US-China relationship in favour of the latter over the years.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 08 Sep 2017 16:35

^^^^^

Saars he is privy to the behind the scene discussion between India and China or perhaps he gets his news straight from CCP. Note his statement "the political system failed by giving a face saver, when Han didn't ask for one". There are no ifs or buts. Such confidence on the Chinese position can only be a result of sources likely Chinese sources.

Rest of us are ifs, buts, perhaps, likely, etc.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Sep 2017 18:58

eklavya wrote:
shiv wrote:His slight paunch ......
Slight? He has a humongous pot belly and is positively bursting out of his suit. His cheeks are all puffed up, and he's a shaking lump of lard.

Look at him in this picture:

http://news.abs-cbn.com/business/07/18/ ... en-economy

Neck like a slug. Fingers like a slug. Take a close up of his face and look below his ears .... he's trying to look leaner, but he is one fat slob.

His suits hide a lot..

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 08 Sep 2017 19:02

pankajs wrote:^^^^^

Saars he is privy to the behind the scene discussion between India and China or perhaps he gets his news straight from CCP. Note his statement "the political system failed by giving a face saver, when Han didn't ask for one". There are no ifs or buts. Such confidence on the Chinese position can only be a result of sources likely Chinese sources.

Rest of us are ifs, buts, perhaps, likely, etc.

Tried checking for the source Link for what you mentioned but I couldn't check. Can you pl pass on?

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 08 Sep 2017 19:05

SS - any idea on Huang Jing actually did / tried to do? I tried checking but only the same thing is being mentioned in all articles.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 08 Sep 2017 19:12

vijaykarthik wrote:
pankajs wrote:^^^^^

Saars he is privy to the behind the scene discussion between India and China or perhaps he gets his news straight from CCP. Note his statement "the political system failed by giving a face saver, when Han didn't ask for one". There are no ifs or buts. Such confidence on the Chinese position can only be a result of sources likely Chinese sources.

Rest of us are ifs, buts, perhaps, likely, etc.
Tried checking for the source Link for what you mentioned but I couldn't check. Can you pl pass on?

The blue highlighted part is TKiran's words from JEM's last post. It is the last post of the previous page. The rest is my comments/speculation on those words. There are no links/sources attached to my comments.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 08 Sep 2017 19:15

Ok, I got confused. I thought it was mentioned by Huang Jing. lol

TKiran · Post by **TKiran** » 08 Sep 2017 19:35

Pankajs sir, in Ramayana, when Bharata comes for asking Rama to come back, Rama refuses to come back, but he gives advice to Bharata on statecraft. Very important subject is DIPLOMACY, he advises Bharata on how to conduct diplomacy with vassal states, with powerful neighbors, what to say and what to infer. It's extremely exhaustive and detailed. If you get a chance, read Ramayana, you will understand better my point of view.

Also if you don't want to know too much, just listen to Mallapragada Srimannarayana Murthy's pravachanam on the same subject.

Better still, if you want to understand the statecraft, diplomacy and inferring what others say and giving signals of your intentions etc, read kishkindha kanda and sundara kanda, when the greatest diplomat Sri Anjaneya conducts dynamic diplomacy with Srilanka.

The easier way is to follow Sri Krishna when he desperately tried to avoid Kurukshetra yudhdham. Krishnam vande jagadgurum, he is the aadi guru.

That will solve the puzzle of how I infer or come to definitive conclusions based on circumstances.

If you still want easier way, Vishnu sharma explains all the above treatises using Animals in Panchatantra. Karataka and Damanaka (jackals) plan and execute a strategy to gain the confidence of Pingalaka (Lion), based on one clue that the lion king is not coming out of the den for long time. That's classic example of manipulation to achieve a goal (I call it as dynamic diplomacy). Manipulation is not good in personal or professional life, it's negative, but in statecraft, it's a very powerful and useful and must use principle.

May be you follow Machiavelli as a role model, but I am not aware much about his style of diplomacy.

morem · Post by **morem** » 08 Sep 2017 19:48

the same way you are trying to manipulate members in this forum

too bad everyone sees thru you bull***t

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 08 Sep 2017 20:40

Laugh of the day:

Rawat’s remarks stirred a normally taciturn Chinese government into making a statement.

As taciturn as "short squat and loud" Shrilleen

chola · Post by **chola** » 08 Sep 2017 21:04

Suraj wrote:More on Eleven's Platform Shoes - here's how the leaders stand in height:
Modi: 5'7
Eleven: 5'9
Putin: 5'7

Here's how Modi and Putin look standing together:

And here's how Eleven looks in 11" heels:

Is that TWO inches difference ??

Amazing the lengths to which Eleven goes to appear like a big boy. Despite standing in platform shoes, he looks awkward and uncomfortable as Modi maintains the dominant handshake position.

Platform shoes plus two inches of hair jell.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 08 Sep 2017 22:03

SSridhar wrote:Are we looking for approval from the Chinese for our General? Did anyone ask anything when that PLA Colonel issued us threats during the crisis?

Exactly. Someone needs to remind Yeh Kya Hua her past discourses. Dhoti and lungi shivering by many posters here.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 08 Sep 2017 22:11

Can't get over Eleven Gin Pegs's height. There is a scientific reasoning behind the phobia of being short.

There really is no fun being a shorty: Being smaller can lead to feelings of being unlikeable as well as fear and paranoia

The experience of being shorter increased reports of negative feelings, such as being incompetent, dislikeable or inferior.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... anoia.html

For instance, Eleven is 5' - 9" and Trump is 6' - 2" (difference of five inches). But note this photo when the two met. It is obvious Eleven Gin Pegs is wearing height enhancing shoes. Also, note his body posture which leans to the right but the neck and head lean to the left. His right arm seems longer than his left.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 08 Sep 2017 22:16

3" to 4" height increase without the tell tale signs from the outside.

QED: http://www.tallmenshoes.com/dressing.html

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 08 Sep 2017 22:23

By the way, did you know that Eleven's wife, Peng Liyuan, is a major general in the PLA?

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 08 Sep 2017 22:57

Actually he looks like he has a rod up his (never mind), stretching spine upwards by a solid 5 inches. Poor fellow probably has a stiff back from all his sitting and bowing and standing. Have a heart - see how they moved Melania Bibi to far right because with HER SuperModel shoes she's at least 6' 7"

Mrs. Eleven is the only person who looks her natural self and has a nice homely smile.

chola · Post by **chola** » 08 Sep 2017 23:20

UlanBatori wrote:Actually he looks like he has a rod up his (never mind), stretching spine upwards by a solid 5 inches. Poor fellow probably has a stiff back from all his sitting and bowing and standing. Have a heart - see how they moved Melania Bibi to far right because with HER SuperModel shoes she's at least 6' 7" Mrs. Eleven is the only person who looks her natural self and has a nice homely smile.

I would still bang Melania over Major General Peng given the choice though.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 08 Sep 2017 23:55

chola wrote:I would still bang Melania over Major General Peng given the choice though.

Here's Mrs. Eleven singing to the PLA troops in Tienanmen Square. The wonders of plastic surgery!

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 09 Sep 2017 00:11

Was she a morale and "entertainment" soldier?

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 09 Sep 2017 00:27

Yes, and she was allegedly among those tasked with cheering troops sent to shoot people up at Tiananmen.

Mihaylo · Post by **Mihaylo** » 09 Sep 2017 01:34

anupmisra wrote:Can't get over Eleven Gin Pegs's height. There is a scientific reasoning behind the phobia of being short.

There really is no fun being a shorty: Being smaller can lead to feelings of being unlikeable as well as fear and paranoia

The experience of being shorter increased reports of negative feelings, such as being incompetent, dislikeable or inferior.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... anoia.html

For instance, Eleven is 5' - 9" and Trump is 6' - 2" (difference of five inches). But note this photo when the two met. It is obvious Eleven Gin Pegs is wearing height enhancing shoes. Also, note his body posture which leans to the right but the neck and head lean to the left. His right arm seems longer than his left.

Maybe, the Chinese made platforms for his right foot didn't work.

-M

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Sep 2017 02:13

prasannasimha wrote:
pankajs wrote:Some in media are suggesting that Gen. Rawat is speaking out of turn and pushing the narrative and GOI. That does not seem to be right. He might have gone on his own the first time but then he would have been warned. The repeat pattern suggests that GOI is communicating its message through him. What Modi/MEA will not say is being said by Gen. Rawat.

And it seems the message is reaching the correct quarters in China with their foreign ministry responding.
Rawat has spoken as per GOI . It's like Santhanam's fizzle speech- designed to create confusion and obfuscation for the other side. Which senior scientist would have opened his mouth having kept quite for aeons and strategically timed (if you go by the timeline of events ) other than for a strategic intent ?

You are right, Santhanam sir was a patriot through and through. Not opening that can of worms, but he wanted Indian options to not be curtailed based on what he perceived was insufficient testing and hence he spoke up right when there was pressure on us for to sign the CTBT. India should be proud to have produced people of such calibre.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 09 Sep 2017 02:54

She is a Majorette Jarnail-e-lijard-fauj?

Wonder what she sang at Tian An Men:

Onward Marxist Tankers!

Or

When Jao Ni got crushed to a pulp, Hurrah Hurrah!

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 09 Sep 2017 03:20

Originally posted by Supratik ji in the "Steady Spread of SD" thread.

Source is Siddharth Varadarajan's website "The Liar dot In" but the author is respectable: the former diplomat Phunchok Stobdan.

Interesting data point: Xi Jinping has apparently been allowing, even encouraging, a soft revival of Buddhism within China since 2005. He obviously recognizes the Chinese peoples' need for some sort of spiritual belief system to fill the void left by the Cultural Revolution and the ideological bankruptcy of Communism.

The fact that he has chosen to tacitly back a Dharmic faith suggests that he is wary of the predatory ingress of Christianity (which invariably accompanies the type of Western soft power-projection that the Chinese consumer class is widely exposed to).

I don't think Xi's benign tolerance (perhaps nothing more) of Buddhism necessarily translates into any abatement of his malignant intent towards India, or the arrogant contempt with which Yinduo civilization is viewed by Chinese today. But PRC is bigger than Xi, and will outlast him. This space is probably worth watching for opportunities to further neuter and defang the Chinese threat down the road.

As China Pushes for a ‘Buddhist’ Globalisation, India Isn’t Making the Most of Its Legacy
https://thewire.in/133670/india-china-buddhist/

India’s worst fears are becoming a reality as China rapidly develops a plan for a ‘Buddhist globalisation’ with its financial, political and marketing clout.

Unsurprisingly, President Xi Jinping is not just asserting territorial claims in the South China Sea and expanding China’s connectivity project through the One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative, he is also working to make China the world leader in Buddhism. Xi has had this idea for some time now – he started building a partnership between China’s communist party and the religion when he was only 29 years old, serving as a bureaucrat in provinces. The story began when he encountered Shi Youming, a Buddhist monk who was restoring ruined temples of Zhengding County in Hebei Province.

Xi was probably also influenced by his father, Xi Zhongxun, who in 1980 had warned the party in his 11,000-word report ‘Document 19’ against banning religious activity, suggesting that this would alienate too many people. In fact, one of Xi’s father’s signature lines is said to have been, “If the people have faith, the nation has hope and the country has strength.”

The Chinese president has a strange history when it comes to religious freedom – he helped rebuild several famous temples, but ordered that 1, 500 crosses be pulled off the steeples of churches while he was chief of Zhejiang province between 2002 and 2007. It seems like Xi is biased against religions deemed ‘foreign’, like Christianity and Islam.

Using faith to legitimise political rule is not new. Many see Xi’s policy akin to Vladimir Putin’s spiritual feat of adopting orthodox Christianity, which is seen as giving him the moral legitimacy to be leader of the Slavic world. This is despite Article 14 of Russia’s constitution declaring the country “a secular state”.

China’s road to Buddhism

Nobody knows whether Xi is a practitioner himself, but he has firmly been putting Chinese Buddhism on the global stage since 2005. At the domestic level, it looks as though Xi is turning to religion not just to bolster his rule, but also to save the party from falling. He certainly sees Buddhism as useful for arresting the flagging moral values in China’s social fabric, and to prevent the angry middle class from crumbling under the weight of a deepening social crisis and economic downturn. Having felt the pains of an ageing society, the country had to abandon the Mao’s one-child policy. More importantly, Xi intends to imbibe moral ethics among party officials – deemed necessary to bring about further economic reforms.

Under Xi, Buddhism is already making a strong comeback. The spectre of economic progress and affluence seems to be steering people’s quest for spirituality. Millions of Chinese seeking their yin guo (karmic) connections with Buddha Amitabha is becoming the new trend. The yin guo seems to have found strong secular resonance; from students to businessmen, ordinary Chinese are beginning to link their existential happiness to the inter-dependent nature of karmic cycles.

According to a Chinese Master Jingzong, China’s intent to realise its economic and political destiny would pale compared to the urge amongst millions to accomplish their spiritual fortunes. He cannot visualise the future of China without Buddhism.

It looks as though China is reimagining the nation along the lines of the imperial Chinese state. With humanist Buddhist values diffusing into society, China is likely to see in the future what we witness in Thailand and other countries today. To be sure, this is having consequences for rest of Asia, where 97% of world’s Buddhist population live and where Buddhism its their core values.

The fear is that China will translate its economic weight into spiritual might. Chinese organisations are already on a Buddhist globalisation spree – building spiritual links with the people of other nations and regularly hosting the World Buddhist Forum, which that draws thousands of monks and scholars from across the world, and planning to build Lingshan City as the Vatican for Buddhism.

China controls the World Buddhist Sangha Council founded in Sri Lanka in 1966. In 2014, it hosted the World Fellowship of Buddhists meet. Across Theravada and Mahayana countries, the Chinese are helping repair, renovate and resurrect Buddhist institutions. Beijing lobbies for countries to hold major international events such as the UN Vesak Day – to be held in Sri Lanka this year.

Taking a cue from the imperial-era practice, China could be even using the powerful Tibetan cultural connectivity for expanding its influence across the Indian Himalayan belt, Mongolia and Russia. Chinese media recently revealed that China’s communist party officials have been funding the Dalai Lama and his activities.

Becoming a guardian of Buddhism is helping Xi successfully promote China as an acceptable world power with a soft image. Buddhist globalisation helps Beijing push its economic projects – religious diplomacy makes it easier for China to win economic and infrastructural projects in Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Nepal and elsewhere.

China’s latest initiative, the OBOR, is also nothing but the ‘political geography of Buddhism’. Nepal is proposing to link the OBOR with Buddha’s birthplace, Lumbini. Pakistan is reviving the ‘Gandhara trail’ to link the Lahore, Taxila and Peshawar networks. Taxila relics are being sent to Sri Lanka for a public exposition during the Vesak month. If Sri Lankan monks visit Taxila to celebrate purnima, top Bhutanese monks visit the Saidu Sharif monastery in Swat Valley (the birthplace of Guru Padmasambava).

Inspiration, not competition, for India

Surely, China edging in on its cultural space worries India. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was quick to gauge the importance of Buddhism after coming to power, and even put it at the centre of his diplomacy initiatives with key Asian countries. But two years down the line, his brilliant idea has seemingly been hijacked by those who are seeking to use Buddhism as a tool to counter China. Worse still, they likened Buddhism with Lamaism – perhaps due to a deficit in understanding – thus reducing the idea to playing the so-called ‘Tibet card’, ostensibly to offset China’s influence. The approach is doomed to end in failure, because Lamaism is a tool traditionally used only by rulers in the Chinese imperial court.

The ‘Lama card’ could not only restrict India’s ability to manoeuvre in the outside world, but also risks undermining its own Buddhist legacy, which rests on the eords Buddha, dharma and sangha, also known as tri-ranta (three jewels) that once spread to set the moral foundations of various Asian societies. In fact, these values still intersect with the social, political and economic contexts of many nations, as they spur the Asian quest for modernity, spirituality, democratic values and economic prosperity.

Though India wants to use its Buddhist’s legacy, it is ironic that India no longer has the fuel to spinning its own dharma wheel, let alone replenishing that of others. Here, it miserably lacks credible institutions; not a single Indian is rated amongst the world’s top Buddhist masters.

Seeking rivalry with China over Buddhism seems unnecessary. Instead, the efforts should be to reach out to the swelling number of dharma followers in China, as Modi did by reaching out to people using the Weibo microblogging site on Buddha Jayanti in 2015. We should be rejoicing at the cultural transformation in China and the positive impact this may have on India’s future ties with the country and with Asia at large.

Most immediately, India needs to take immediate steps to restore millennia-old tourist Buddhist heritage sites lying in ruins. They are directly linked to spiritual destinies of millions. By improving infrastructure and connectivity, India could tap into potential Asian pilgrims. This could provide lucrative employment to millions of our youth.

The idea of seeking counter-offensive measures to play the ‘Buddhist game’ vis-à-vis China seems misplaced. For India to seriously reaffirm its central role, it needs to embrace its own tradition of Buddha, dharma, sangha. It would be even worthwhile to envisage a pan-Indian Buddhist sangha with government patronage, if New Delhi is serious about anchoring global Buddhist affairs.

P. Stobdan is a former ambassador and a scholar of Asian affairs.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 09 Sep 2017 03:27

We also need to regard the above in terms of Buddhist nationalist movements that are becoming assertive in places like Myanmar and Thailand, largely as a reaction to Islamic (and more broadly, Abrahamic) depradations.

Current efforts by Myanmar and India to confront the Rohingya menace pit Myanmarese Buddhist nationalism alongside Dharmic nationalism in the fight against Islamic terrorism.

These undercurrents of cultural realignment are worth taking note of. We don't want a future CINO (Commie in Name Only) China becoming the spiritual lodestar to Buddhist nationalist movements all over Southeast Asia. India needs to up its game in this regard and reclaim primacy of influence in the Dharmic world, not only in SE Asia but potentially amongst sections of the Han Chinese population as well.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 09 Sep 2017 03:33

^^^^
communism destroyed a lot of traditions and culture of china. ot of monuments etc were destroyed by mao stupid march killing millions also.
post Mao, deng xiaoping did allow soft form of Buddhism to flourish. was little difficult due to heavy dose of communism then but over time other leaders followed the trend. Meanwhile Christianity also got a boost similarly as church found a opening during this period. however china communists are a little wary of it.
islam is a different political and religious animal due to its mongol history ingrained etc etc.

sort of welcome Buddhism push as it is definitely better than Abrahamic religion anyday.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 09 Sep 2017 03:38

Krisna ji, what Xi is doing far surpasses the passive approach of Deng Xiaoping. They are actively building up centers in China to emerge as the Vatican City or Mecca for modern-day Buddhism.

Right now the CPC's credibility, as well as their freedom of movement, in this regard are constrained by the weight of their Maoist history and doctrine. At this moment India has a chance to join the game of establishing international Dharmic leadership with a strong advantage in hand. Indeed, let alone Indian Subcontinent, SE Asia and Japan/Korea... the emerging trend of devotion to India-linked cultural icons like Buddha Amitabha among millions of Han Chinese provides us with an avenue of soft-power projection into China itself.

But as the decades of the Asian century wear on, and CPC finally abandons even its cosmetic connections to Communism, we will lose that opportunity and they will solidify their supremacy over international Buddhism.

We have to really, really "Look East" now. Not just keep repeating that as a pat little slogan (ironically phrased in the English Language). For too long, India and China have been looking at each other, and at their common neighbourhood, through the borrowed gaze of a Western lens. Whoever rejects that lens and supercedes it with a superior indigenous one will acquire first-mover advantage that the other may never catch up with.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 09 Sep 2017 03:46

I understand the Chinese also have a condom that adds the appearance of additional inches.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Sep 2017 07:42

2 am meeting led to new dawn in Sino-Indian ties - Diwakar, ToI

Late in the evening on August 27, Indian ambassador to China Vijay Gokhale was told the Chinese were keen to know how soon they could meet him.

Gokhale conveyed that he was in Hong Kong and could reach only past midnight even if he booked himself on the first Beijing-bound flight. He was urged to reach the Chinese capital as fast as he could, in a first clear indication that the quiet and dogged attempt to defuse the Doklam imbroglio may have borne fruit.

It was 2 in the morning when he sat down with Chinese foreign ministry officials to discuss details of the Doklam disengagement.

It took the two sides three hours to hammer out a mutually acceptable resolution and, potentially, lay the foundation for a new beginning between the giant neighbours.

For, the announcement by the two governments the next day not only defused the stand-off — the worst in decades — on the Himalayan plateau, but appeared to indicate a greater understanding between the two sides to put bilateral ties on a stronger footing where they avoid conflicts and focus on development.

Senior government sources said the de-escalation was facilitated by a larger agreement between the two principals — PM Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping — that the two sides approach and pursue their ties as a mutually beneficial opportunity; a vehicle to speed up development.

"Both leaders agreed the two sides have a lot to gain from a partnership which helps them grow faster, and that approaching the bilateral equations as a zero-sum game, where one's gains are invariably at the cost of the other, will be a folly. This is what helped the two sides to achieve the breakthrough and formed the basis for positive talks on the sidelines of the BRICS summit," a key government functionary, familiar with the details, said.

On Thursday, China's foreign minister Wang Yi articulated pretty much the same when he told reporters in Beijing that Xi and Modi, during their "successful" talks on the sidelines of the BRICS summit, had agreed to avoid border confrontation to ensure healthy and stable development.

In his first remarks after the agreement on Doklam, Yi said, "Sino-Indian relations are not derailed. Sino-Indian development represents the future of the world... win-win cooperation is an inevitable choice and the correct direction for Sino-Indian ties."

The convergence of views indeed appears remarkable considering that matters threatened to spiral out of control during the 73-day eyeball-to-eyeball stand-off and was achieved by the PM's belief that the two sides had nothing to gain from escalation.

Modi, while firm that he wouldn't allow borders to be redrawn by force, was keen not to let the dispute snowball into a full-scale confrontation. He went about the objective by enforcing message control and by designating the foreign ministry as the only agency authorised to speak.

The discipline sought to be enforced applied to BJP. The party as well as some Sangh Parivar-affiliated outfits were conspicuous by their silence during the stalemate, something remarkable given their prickly sensitivities and the torrent of provocative statements from China's official media.

The PM did not waver even amid signs of discomfort in BJP circles and taunts from rivals and commentators for "pusillanimity".

"Someone who didn't allow slights like visa denials to seek better diplomatic ties with the US, the UK and the European Union would not have allowed himself to be distracted by jeers," said a senior officer.

Modi also did not let Doklam affect normal business with China. At least half a dozen ministers visited Beijing during the showdown, and with the clear instruction to focus on the possibilities of cooperation. The tenacity worked, resulting in what top-level sources called "extremely positive response" from Xi when the two leaders met in Xiamen.

BJP has refrained from publicly celebrating the resolution of the crisis, but party members and officials, speaking privately, are all praise for the PM.

"Who would have thought that a man who comes across as aggressive and whose eligibility was questioned because of his chaiwala background would use strategic restraint to achieve results," a member of the Cabinet Committee on Security said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

The member listed a string of diplomatic achievements — from arranging gas at cheaper rates from Qatar and renegotiating double tax avoidance treaties with Mauritius and Singapore to broadening of strategic cooperation with the US and speeding up delivery of arms supplies from Russia.

Notwithstanding the hyperbole of 'new dawn' etc., the fact remains that Modi's strategy was superb. This is the resolute Indian action tempered with realism that is the hallmark of 'realpolitik', something which we have not practised (except once or twice) before. This government has been playing it consistently and we see results. However, China will not change course, indeed no country does so easily and much less China, and will continue to be our biggest threat in the larger scheme of things. There could be some tactical adjustments though by China as a result of learning from the Doka La episode, which we should not misconstrue as a change of Chinese strategy. That's a trap we should not fall into.

With China, we see the case of 'reverse Thucydides'.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 09 Sep 2017 07:47

TKiran wrote:Pankajs sir, in Ramayana, when Bharata comes for asking Rama to come back, Rama refuses to come back, but he gives advice to Bharata on statecraft. Very important subject is DIPLOMACY, he advises Bharata on how to conduct diplomacy with vassal states, with powerful neighbors, what to say and what to infer. It's extremely exhaustive and detailed. If you get a chance, read Ramayana, you will understand better my point of view.
<snip>
That will solve the puzzle of how I infer or come to definitive conclusions based on circumstances.
<snip>
May be you follow Machiavelli as a role model, but I am not aware much about his style of diplomacy.

From the official Chinese mouthpiece indirectly.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 598300.cms
Border row: No room for talks unless India withdraws troops

However, the commentary in Xinhua news agency seemed to reject India's overture, saying there was no room for talks until Indian troops vacated Doklam - a disputed territory between China and Bhutan.

"China has made it clear that there is no room for negotiations on this incident and India must withdraw its border-crossing troops from Doklam. For China, the border line is the bottom line," the commentary said.

China kept repeating the above till the end and yet there obviously was negotiation to reach what the Chinese call *understanding*. Per one report there was 13 rounds at least.

I don't know about you but I remember how in the middle of the standoff Chinese started talking about Indian scaling back down to 30 odd soldiers only. That lie persisted till the India called it out.

And yet you said "the political system failed by giving a face saver, when Han didn't ask for one". How did you know? The hans publicly stated that they will not negotiate and yet they did. They also tried to ~~lied~~ spin an Indian withdrawal before there was any movement. Of course it is convenient to forget such boring details when it does not support you views. Those pesky facts. Wouldn't it be great if we could just banish them.

The only way for your certainty is
1. If you were in the negotiations or
2. You had a source either on Indian side or the Chinese side.

But going by your confidence in the Hans, ignoring their recent record, it is easy to conclude that your source is on the Chinese side.

Rest of you talk about Ramayana, Machiavelli , etc are just to confuse the issue rather than providing a clear answer. That tactics does not work with me. Others on the forum too have come to the same conclusion but please continue. Don't let facts get in the way of your spin.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Sep 2017 08:11

TKiran wrote:Manipulation is not good in personal or professional life, it's negative, but in statecraft, it's a very powerful and useful and must use principle.

I think the Chinese were manipulated beautifully. The Chinese need to show a change in behaviour towards India. As I see it the racist contempt that the Chinese may have for India is not going to go away soon. They will continue to suck white ass and mock black/brown ass.

But these are all useless generalities. Specifically we need to make it hard for the Chinese to continue to do business with Pakistan. We need the Chinese to stop acting like stupid idiots when it comes to NSG.

The question is whether these things will change if we fight a short war with China. OK imagine we have a small conflict - maybe we kick Cheeni butt and occupy Yatung/Chumbi and Pangong. OK we win that round then what? Would the Chinese get so scared of us that they would stop meddling with Pakistan and stop doing irritating chootiyapanti like masood azhar and NSG? Or suppose we fight such a war/skirmish and lose should we expect the Chinese to feel sorry and benevolent and stop screwing us from Pakistan or with NSG.

Actually Doklam was a sideshow. Doklam was in addition to needling us with Pakistan, NSG, Masood Azhar etc. None of that is going to change no matter what we achieve or don't achieve in Doklam. It was one more way of the Chinese showing that they do not give a damn for Indian or Bhutanese sentiment. But this time it did not work. They were forced to step back and make statements like "We can always build the road later". Making them step back was simply a signal that they will be contested at the border.

It is complete ignorance to imagine that India has been silent. India has been acting like a man who wears his coat over his arms pretending that he has no arms and then squeezes a woman's bum from below the hem of the coat. Those think India is doing nothing are the people who think the man with hidden arms is innocent.

Long loong before Doklam India has been regularly opposing and stopping Chinese patrols on territory that both sides have agreed is unsettled. We have even discussed this on the forum but a lot of "Johnny-come-latelys" who never appeared earlier have suddenly appeared after Doklam don't seem to know this. One of my videos - made long before Doklam even mentions this.

Doklam just happened to be in Bhutan and took the Chinese off guard. That aside India openly spurned OBOR. India has openly objected to CPEC. And even after the Doklam thing started - we spent so much time reading loudmouth Chinese threats that most people failed to take note of articles being produced by retired Indian armed forces people warning China of what was going to happen both in Doklam and in the Indian ocean. And long long before the Pangong incident was an earlier incident where a Tibetan flag was raised. And when the Pangong incident occurred - India released a video showing Chinese troops being pushed back . But we are such dunderheads we did not understand the psy-ops value of the video and overanalysed it. And we forget - even after Doklam - India is not sitting with thumb in Musharraf. India is saying "We know this is not over. We are preparing for that" That is why the army chief warned of a 2 front war. If the Chinese had any intention of mocking Indians for thinking we had "won" in Doklam and they would surprise us again - those thoughts were crushed by the army chief's warning. Their reaction showed that they read and understood what was being said.

This is an ongoing thing. The Chinese started something in Doklam. They were stopped from carrying it through. In my language this is called KLPD. I may say "I will get back to the same position with her tomorrow" but I must say I am feeling pretty miserable and upset today. So near.Yet so far. Abhi bhi mera member dukh raha hai