Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (15-11-2017)

[brvarsh]

Prior to any Military conflict the only strategy that will work against China is if the rest of the World, or most of it, start buying "Made In India" products instead. The day Made in China will be rejected, the day China will begin to vacate every inch of land they have today occupied.

[SSridhar]

^ Agree. But, there are two issues. One, first we have to make them. Two, we have to practise that ourselves first. I live in India and I see our brick&mortar and online shops are flooded with Chinese products.

[SSridhar]

India-China ties see a ‘Xiamen reboot’ - Atul Aneja, The Hindu

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s telephone call to Chinese President Xi Jinping after his election for a second term was part of the ‘Xiamen process’ — a calibrated effort to rebuild ties that had been jolted last year by the Doklam military stand-off.

“It would be correct to call the energetic efforts to re-rail ties between India and China as the ‘Xiamen process’. After all it was at the sidelines of the Xiamen BRICS summit that Prime Minister Modi and President Xi decided to give a firm direction on re-building post-Doklam ties,” a highly placed source told The Hindu.

The source said a decision had been taken to congratulate Mr. Xi after he was elected for a second presidential term.

“Ultimately, it was the Prime Minister who decided to call President Xi on the phone to congratulate him personally.”

Sources said the call by Mr. Modi has set the tone for his meeting with Mr. Xi at Qingdao — the venue of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in June. No other “informal” meeting between the two leaders is planned so far ahead of the SCO conclave.

It is anticipated that the Qingdao meeting would further “change the narrative for the better”, and set the stage for a bilateral summit, possibly later in the year.

More high-level visits

The step-by-step rebuilding of the post-Doklam ties began soon after the Xiamen summit, with the back-to-back visits to India in December by the Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and of State Councillor and politburo member Yang Jiechi.

Several high-level visits are now in the pipeline. China’s Commerce Minister Zhong Shan is to participate in the India-China Joint Economic Group meeting that Commerce Minister Suresh Prabhu would host on Monday. It is likely that the larger fallout of the ongoing trade tensions between China and the U.S. would be part of the conversation.

Other high-level engagements between the two governments include a visit by External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj beginning April 23. A visit by Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman is also in the pipeline.

The India-China strategic economic dialogue would be held in Beijing on April 13-14, between the NITI Ayog and the China’s top planning body, the National Development and Reform Commission.

[SSridhar]

Overhauling state media for Xi’s ‘new era’ - Atul Aneja, The Hindu

The massive China Central Television Tower (in picture) — a 5,75,000-sq. m. structure — looms high over Beijing’s Central Business District. Its sharp lines, which some say resemble an oddly shaped pair of oversized pants, and glossy grey exterior, can make heads turn. The futuristic structure, designed by legendary Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas, is an emblem of China’s rapidly expanding state-media empire.

Not far from the tower is a horse-shoe high–rise. This is the headquarters of the People’s Daily , the official newspaper of the Communist Party of China (CPC).

There is no ambiguity about China’s ambition to cement its place in the global media universe. The CPC has for long concluded that a “soft landing” for China’s rise can emerge only if the party-state has in its quiver sufficient number of tools, which it can deploy to project the country’s considerable reserves of soft power.

The push to go big on media has only heightened as President Xi Jinping personally marshals the drive towards a “new era” of unprecedented prosperity and power in the decades to come. All restraints on his power have been seemingly removed. He is President for an indefinite tenure. He is also the general secretary of the CPC.

On the cusp of the “new era”, China has been redesigning its governing institutions at all levels — consolidating scattered pockets of power into strong centres, monitored and mentored by the CPC. The media, in turn, is part of China’s new drive towards centralisation, announced during the National People’s Congress’s recent annual session. Consequently, a decision has been taken to merge three separate organisations — China Central Television (CCTV), China Radio International (CRI), and China National Radio (CNR). The Voice of China (VOC) will be the name of the new titan.

It is not surprising that the name of the new behemoth echoes Voice of America (VOA) — the U.S.-funded outlet that emerged during the Second World War to project Washington’s rising soft power worldwide.

The VOC is expected to employ 14,000 personnel — 10,000 from CCTV, 2,100 from CNR, and 2,000 from CRI. A Xinhua readout says that the outlet will “promote the party’s theories, line, principles, and policies”.

Sharper direction

Besides, the status of China’s publicity department, belonging to the CPC, has been significantly enlarged. According to a Chinese media report, the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television (SAPPRFT) is being consolidated into the CPC’s Publicity Department. As China pedals into uncharted waters, it is likely that the tightly knit party will now give sharper direction to messaging, which it considers necessary to prepare the domestic audiences, to undertake tasks that fit into Mr. Xi’s “new era” design. It is also quite obvious that a new top-down model of media management has been fully adopted, giving little room for the inclusion of voices from below that can shape the national media narrative.

Xinhua has reported that that the long existing Mao-era United Front Work Department is being bestowed with additional powers and responsibilities. The department has been known for co-opting non-party members, as well as ethnic minority groups such as Tibetans and Uighurs into its fold. According to the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post , the department will now “oversee the country’s ethnic and religious issues as well as overseas Chinese affairs”.

[Philip]

I have always said that " winning the propaganda war is as important as winning the real war". Kargil for example where we did a good job.
If you look at old Paki papers of the '65 War, they scream from the front page about India being soundly defeated a total pack of lies.When the truth hit their sh*t, Ayub Khan himself was turfed out!

[shiv]

There is a huge difference between talking about the benefits of a propaganda war and doing what it takes to wage such a war. A propaganda war demands that negativity and incessant self-flagellation are avoided - apart from articles, PSed images and videos that show everything in a rosy light. Even we on this observe a 24x7x365 session of Moharram where we assert that India can get nothing right. What is the point talking about propaganda wars when we can't recognize and support positive spin when it is in front of our noses?

[deejay]

Rohit Vats delivers a slap on Coupta's face
http://www.opindia.com/2018/03/the-prin ... in-doklam/

For some in the English mainstream media, Doklam is a gift which keeps on giving. Various articles and analysis offered on the subject have ranged from few balanced pieces to many which have been sensationalist.

Latest in this series, comes an article from ‘The Print’ which claims that Chinese have found a new route to South Doklam.

read it with images and all at the link above

Rohit has been brilliant all through on this issue and in my opinion the most authoritative open source analyst today. Thanks Rohit. Wish you were posting here.

[Singha]

https://www.news18.com/news/world/pakis ... top_pos_10

pakistani traders upset their uighur wives and kids have been sent to reeducation camp

[pankajs]

There is a huge difference between talking about the benefits of a propaganda war and doing what it takes to wage such a war. A propaganda war demands that negativity and incessant self-flagellation are avoided - apart from articles, PSed images and videos that show everything in a rosy light. Even we on this observe a 24x7x365 session of Moharram where we assert that India can get nothing right. What is the point talking about propaganda wars when we can't recognize and support positive spin when it is in front of our noses?

Forget positive spin, forget positive, forget balanced inquiry there are folks on this forum who so psyched that knowingly or unknowingly they start doing propaganda for China.

Take the case where a member recently commented

Gautam Bambawale is smoking weed. Chinese do, they don't talk.

I had seen it a while back but decided not to point the obvious. I am only pointing this out as an example. What do forum members think on Chinese action on Taiwan? What has China been doing on Taiwan for the past 60+ year .. Doing or Talking? I leave it up to the members to draw their own conclusions.

Let folks first start by making it a habit of asking the basic questions whenever presented with some news/propaganda.

[pankajs]

Upfront .. I don't trust this guy. I can't exactly point out why but I get a feeling that he has been all over the place before but still fart is noteworthy.

If Indonesia were to share intelligence with India we will be able to get leg up on China anytime it try forward deploying in the IOR. Apart from Malacca, all other sea routes to Indian Ocean has to pass through Indonesian waters. Indonesia don't have to do much except inform us whenever they see a Warship/Submarine is passing through.

https://www.thequint.com/voices/opinion ... inst-china
How India Is Quietly Playing The Indonesia Card To Counter China

While the Narendra Modi government is sending positive feelers to China by sidelining the Dalai Lama, it is quietly taking its relations with Indonesia to a never-before level, with an eye on China. Among all ten ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations) members, no other country is going ahead in stepping up a truly strategic cooperation with India, the way Indonesia is.

[shiv]

Take the case where a member recently commented

Gautam Bambawale is smoking weed. Chinese do, they don't talk.

I noticed that comment - wrote but did not post a response because I think TKiran was being sarcastic and needling the people who speak that way..

[shiv]

https://www.news18.com/news/world/pakis ... top_pos_10

pakistani traders upset their uighur wives and kids have been sent to reeducation camp

Can't for the life of me understand why. They can always get other wives no? And have goats been taken away?

[Philip]

Yes we're playing all the cards- apart from shamefully welshing on the Dalai Lama and Tibetan diaspora , in the ludicrous hope of promises from the Chin fuhrer ( Mr.Modi will be backstabbed like Nehru if he believes in a civilised responsible China),and have lost every hand ( to China) played in the neighbourhood.
China will simply laugh behind the PM's back as to how easily they " turned" Sri Lanka, Nepal and the Maldives to becoming hostile towards India.Sirisena made his first foreign call to Delhi, but before you could even say "Ayubowan" , the Sinhala greeting, he had sealed the HT port deal with China!

India is trying to be "all things to all nations".In diplomacy this is an impossibility.There are certain principles which cannot be breached.In fact I would call it bazaar diplunacy, where we try to sell ourselves to everyone, ultimately in danger of losing respect from all.We cannot pretend friendship with China as the "appeasers" in the MEA postulate, so long as they continue to scinch territory on our borders and demand Ar.Pr.,Aksai Chin,et al., we cannot but must point out their chicanery in what they say and do." Trust but verify" said the Gipper.Sound advice.

[SSridhar]

Doklam: India will maintain territorial integrity, asserts defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman - ToI

Defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman today asserted that India was "ready for any unforeseen situation" in Doklam and will "maintain" its territorial integrity, reported ANI.

"We are alert and ready for any unforeseen situation in Doklam. We are constantly working on the modernisation of our forces. We will maintain our territorial integrity," ANI quoted the minister as saying in Dehradun.

Sitharaman's comments came a day after India's ambassador to China refuted reports that the Chinese military was stepping up infrastructure build-up in the Doklam area.

"No, I can tell you that in Doklam area, which we call close proximity or sometimes the face off site, the area where there was close confrontation or close proximity between Indian and Chinese military troops, there is no change taking place today," said Gautam Bambawale in an interview to the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post.

It was reported a few days ago that China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) was trying to circumvent Indian troop positions with a road axis in the Doklam area near the Sikkim-Bhutan-Tibet tri-junction.

Bambawale also once again emphasised that China should not change the status quo along the Indian border.

"In the sense that if the Chinese military is going to build a road, then they must tell us 'we are going to build a road'. If we do not agree to it then we can reply that, 'look, you're changing the status quo. Please don't do it. This is a very, very sensitive area," the envoy said.

He cautioned that "if anyone changes the status quo, it will lead to a situation like what happened in Doklam."

"The Chinese military changed the status quo in the Doklam area and therefore India reacted to it. Ours was a reaction to the change in the status quo by the Chinese military."

China is reportedly looking to take over Doklam or the Dolam Plateau to add strategic depth to its Chumbi Valley.

Sources said that PLA troops were "trying to work around or outflank" the Indian Doka La military outpost by constructing a new 1.3-km long road and "communication trenches" around 4-km away from the spot.

This axis is significant as it could allow them access toward the Jampheri Ridge in south Doklam, as the PLA had wanted before last year's stand-off between the two sides.

Earlier this month, Sitharaman had said that Indian and Chinese troops had "redeployed" themselves away from the face-off site in Doklam, and that China undertook construction of helipads, sentry posts and trenches for its army personnel there, reported PTI.

"Post disengagement from the face-off in 2017, troops of both sides have redeployed themselves away from their respective positions at the face-off site. The strength of both sides have been reduced," she said replying to a question on the issue in Lok Sabha.

"In order to maintain these troops during the winter, People's Liberation Army (PLA) has undertaken construction of some infrastructure, including sentry posts, trenches and helipads."

[shiv]

China will simply laugh behind the PM's back as to how easily they " turned" Sri Lanka, Nepal and the Maldives to becoming hostile towards India.

It's a matter of perspective. The commonly expressed Indian viewpoint is that China is maliciously (as easily) turning these nations against India.

I will briefly summarize the sequence of logic that I see being repeated ad nauseam.

1. China is deliberately turning these nations "against India" and have them on their side.
2. The Chinese claim that they are simply doing this to develop their relations with these nations, but the Chinese cannot be trusted because they are out to dominate the world. They say so and any claim that they are up to anything more innocent that that cannot be true.

The question that no one has answered is what will these piddly nations do to help China? What have they done so far? I still read articles saying that the Chinese will build naval bases in these countries. This scare is left hanging in the air with no further clarification. Where are the bases? There are no bases. The Chinese claim that they want port facilities so they can ensure safe passage for their oil. Heck even the roads to Gwadar are incomplete and now there is news that Gwadar is not secure enough for the Chinese and they want to build a base where there are no roads and presumably no Pakis nearby. It's not as if Hambantota and Gwadar are out of reach for India. I mean if all these small nations are now so so close to China then surely the Chinese can use the existing fantastic facilities in Colombo and Karachi.

Really? Call me dumb, but how do you ensure "security" for your cargo ships in the Indian ocean by pissing off the largest power there while building bases in piddly nations in places where those bases can be knocked out at short notice? This is where the arguments I hear turn really absurd. You have to turn the Chinaman into a 7 foot monster to say how we will simply be screwed to hammer in the argument that China is going to dominate the Indian ocean using a most ridiculously stupid gambit.

I will not go so far as to say that Indian strategic analysts have stopped thinking. The just have not started thinking yet. I only hope they start thinking in the near future because I can see no evidence of research or analysis. May I point out that if Indian diplomats and government are dumb - our "strategic analysts" including the Chellaneys and Karnads display the same variety of abject dumbness that can be described as a national trait.

[pankajs]

^^
I had been here a while back to post a link but got distracted and left. Your post reminded me of that article.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-n ... ng-1828258
India Says Not Worried Over China Bonhomie With Neighbours

"So, we have very strong relationships with all these countries and we are confident that this relationship will become even stronger and richer in the coming months and years. I don't think we are worried about what China is doing. Those countries are free to have relationships with any third country including China," Mr Bambawale said.

Here hear .. have no fear. Hope no one gets blood pressure hearing such gup shup from the Indian ambassador to Xina.

He played down the talk of India-China rivalry saying: "As far as India is concerned, India does not look upon China as a rival or a competitor. We look upon China as a partner in progress and development". {Where did I read/hear that before?}

<snip>

India has no concerns about China's rise. "In fact, India looks at China's rise as something which also gives us encouragement that India can also do at least some of the things that China has done, which is to develop economically and develop rapidly," he said.

<snip>

"Wherever our interests converge, we will work together like on climate change and environment protection. India and China work very closely together on many international issues like environmental protection and counter-terrorism. We will continue to work with anyone, where we find that there is a synergy. We will work with China definitely," Mr Bambawale said.{Now..now ...Where did I read/hear that before?}

Hope no one loses sleep reading what the ambassador is reported to have stated.

[kiranA]

My hunch is that all this currying up favor with China is result of the muddle headed handling of doklam fiasco by India which riled up China and forces India to curry up. Let me be clear I am not saying Indian army action was muddle headed but the populist reaction by both Gov and Army muddled it up. Let me repost with mild alteration what i already said before

My problem is it is very hard to rationalize India's stance.

It is clear China occupied Doklam and India has treaty obligation to Bhutan. And Bhutan has its own responsibility to defend it soverignity. but both dont do it. Neither Bhutan nor India drag china to UN for its occupation or raise heat on china.

If India defacto acknowledges Chinese control over Doklam than India transgression in to Doklam is certainly an affront to chinese sovereignity and is not justifiable for India.

So which is India stance ? It is very confusing. INdia needs to pick one clear stance. Ideally it needs to be first one. India needs to take china to cleaners for occupying Doklam in UN or every international platform available to India. If not then acknowledge it and use India's acknowledgement as leverage to get Chinese do our bidding in some area. Present reactive stance of India where it goes hyperbolic against china to play populist with Indian public and then goes the other way with China in private gets it all cons and none of the benefits..

[kiranA]

Also bambawale is saying here what I have been saying this thread before - there is no backyard or frontyard . That rhetoric badly costed India.

"Those countries are free to have relationships with any third country including China"

[shiv]

India has treaty obligation to Bhutan.

Provide proof of this. What is the obligation? This is sounding like one of our "analysts" who fail to research, analyse or quite the relevant documents. Or at least read the document that I have posted earlier and copy paste India's "treaty obligation to Bhutan"

[kiranA]

India has treaty obligation to Bhutan.

Provide proof of this. What is the obligation? This is sounding like one of our "analysts" who fail to research, analyse or quite the relevant documents. Or at least read the document that I have posted earlier and copy paste India's "treaty obligation to Bhutan"

The most explicit obligation has been provided by Indian PM on the floor of the house of Indian parliament
https://web.archive.org/web/20110826023 ... en/node/73

"Later, on 28 August 1959, Nehru stated in the Lok Sabha (Lower House of the Indian Parliament) that the defense of the territorial uprightness and frontiers of Bhutan was the responsibility of the Government of India. Thus, India committed itself towards ensuring the sovereignty of Bhutan, a Kingdom that is just about 50 years old"

in addition the official treaty clearly says bhutan will be guided by India on external affairs . That clearly implies India has power over external affairs therefore responsibility - no serious state will wiggle out that responsibility with some word play.

[Peregrine]

Protecting rights: China expresses regret at US challenge in WTO

BEIJING: China’s commerce ministry said on Saturday that China expressed regret at the United States for filing a challenge at the World Trade Organisation (WTO), adding that it has always respected WTO rules.

The office of the US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said on Friday that the trade representative had filed a request for consultations with China at the WTO to address “discriminatory technology licensing agreements”.

China has been consistent in highly valuing the protection of intellectual property, the ministry said in a statement on its website.

China has taken strong measures to protect the legal rights and interests of both domestic and foreign owners of intellectual property, the ministry added.

Cheers

[chanakyaa]

The above being Baki article, does not offer much details. Here is additional detail. Funny thing is that this is not something new. Tech transfer to China was done willing or unwillingly primarily by ignoring such issues.

U.S. accuses China of stealing patents in WTO complaint

[shiv]

The most explicit obligation has been provided by Indian PM on the floor of the house of Indian parliament
https://web.archive.org/web/20110826023 ... en/node/73

"Later, on 28 August 1959, Nehru stated in the Lok Sabha (Lower House of the Indian Parliament) that the defense of the territorial uprightness and frontiers of Bhutan was the responsibility of the Government of India. Thus, India committed itself towards ensuring the sovereignty of Bhutan, a Kingdom that is just about 50 years old"

in addition the official treaty clearly says bhutan will be guided by India on external affairs . That clearly implies India has power over external affairs therefore responsibility - no serious state will wiggle out that responsibility with some word play.

leaving out important parts and adding parts that do not exist is what you have done. Let me start with your statements above
1.

in addition the official treaty clearly says bhutan will be guided by India on external affairs .

Here is the text of the treaty: https://idsa.in/resources/documents/Ind ... reaty.2007

Please point out where it says that Bhutan will be guided by India on external affairs. I wil offer a public apology to you if you can do that. Or else I will point out that you are bluffing

Now for this one:

"Later, on 28 August 1959, Nehru stated in the Lok Sabha (Lower House of the Indian Parliament) that the defense of the territorial uprightness and frontiers of Bhutan was the responsibility of the Government of India. Thus, India committed itself towards ensuring the sovereignty of Bhutan, a Kingdom that is just about 50 years old"

Here is the complete text:
This is what Nehru said in Bhutan

Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru ruled out any pressure on Bhutan which might impair its independent status. Nehru said: “Some may think that since India is a great and powerful country and Bhutan a small one, the former might wish to exercise pressure on Bhutan. It is therefore, essential that I make it clear to you that our only wish is that you should remain an independent country, choosing your own way of life and taking the path of progress according to your will. At the same time we two should live with mutual goodwill. We are members of the same Himalayan family and should live as friendly neighbors helping each other. Freedom of both Bhutan and India should be safeguarded so that none from outside can do harm to it”.

And here is what Nehru told parliament 9 years before India even had diplomatic relations with Bhutan

Later, on 28 August 1959, Nehru stated in the Lok Sabha (Lower House of the Indian Parliament) that the defense of the territorial uprightness and frontiers of Bhutan was the responsibility of the Government of India. Thus, India committed itself towards ensuring the sovereignty of Bhutan, a Kingdom that is just about 50 years old.

Nehru was speaking with both sides of his tongue. He spoke nothing of defence of Bhutan while he was in Bhutan but spoke of the "defense of the territorial uprightness and frontiers of Bhutan " in parliament in 1959. The comment "Thus, India committed itself towards ensuring the sovereignty of Bhutan" is the interpretation of the author of the document you have linked. Nehru only suggested that India would not violate Bhutan's borders - a statement that India promptly ignored and violated in 2017 in Doklam by crossing over into the Doklam plateau. There is no written agreement between India and Bhutan that India will protect Bhutan's frontiers against all transgressions. The absence of a written document makes it impossible to make a credible claim that India has any commitment to the protection of Bhutan.

[shiv]

KiranA ji - here are the parliament proceedings for August 1959 with details of what Nehru said. Let us look at the entire set of exchanges in parliament. No one in parliament believed Nehru and there is NO TREATY to protect Bhutan. You are alone in trying to create a false picture that India has some treaty obligation to protect Bhutan.
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitst ... er%205.pdf

In the Parliament the issue of Chinese incursion into Indian territories had been raised
as early as March 1959. To draw the attention of the house about the reported violation of
border by Chinese forces, an adjournment motion was proposed to be introduced by Hem
Barua (PSP), A.B. Vajpayee (BJS) and Braj Raj Singh (Socialist) on March 30, 1959.
However, this proposal did not materialize. On the same day PSP leader Mohammed Imam
also raised the issue in the Parliament and asked the government to take necessary steps to
curb such attempts. Nehru however, was not convinced about the media reports and
questioned the validity of the fact. 490

Meanwhile, Chinese government published a map where several areas of India had
been shown as the parts of China. It created furore in Indian Parliament. On April 22, 1959
several Parliamentarians across the party line raised the issue of Chinese claim of Indian
Territory and wanted to know the government of India‟s measures to deal with the issue.
Prime Minister Nehru as usual downplayed the issue and informed the house that the Chinese
map was a older one and hence nothing to worry about it. He also informed that his
government was in touch with the Chinese authorities to rectify the map for further use. 491
Braj Raj Singh (Socialist) and D.C. Sharma (INC) highlighted the Chinese claim of Indian
territories and asked the government to be prepared to deal with any possible consequences.
Nehru, however, replied that the Chinese authorities had never claimed any area of Indian
territory and he had been in discussion with China to resolve the issue peacefully.

Looking at the gravity of Chinese hostility and consecutive border violation, A.B.
Vajpayee (BJS) moved an adjournment motion regarding “grave threat to India‟s security
and territorial integrity” on August 13, 1959. He argued that, China was planning to liberate
Ladakh, Sikkim and Bhutan and hence Indian government need to be prepared to counter any
future threat and protect India‟s national integrity. 493 Joining in the debate Braj Raj Singh
(Socialist) wanted to know the government of India‟s reaction to the reports of Chinese
planning for the formation of a Himalayan Federation extracting Ladakh, Tibet, Bhutan,
Sikkim and some parts of NEFA regions which might pose greater security threats for India.
However, Nehru downplayed the whole issue and informed the house that the government of
India had no such communication from China and India was fully capable to handle any
future threats from any corner of the world. Hem Barua was not satisfied with Nehru‟s
answer and further wanted to know about any Chinese communication challenging the
validity of the McMahon line. Nehru in reply said that, there was no such communication
from China regarding the validity of the line and informed the house that McMahon line had
been created through international treaty and even Chinese authority like En-lai had accepted
the line as the international border in the past.

Raising supplementary question, N.S. Goray (PSP) wanted to know more over the
media report of the construction of a strategic roadway by Chinese government across Gartok
and Yark of Tibetan region. In reply Nehru stated that the government of India came to know
that such road really existed and passed through the inaccessible remote corner of north
eastern region of Ladakh. 499 Congress leader Dr. Ram Subhag Singh put another
supplementary question about the Chinese claim of annexing Bhutan and Sikkim into the
motherland of China and government of India‟s stand against the claim. Nehru, in reply made
it clear that the government of India was responsible to protect the sovereignty and integrity
of the two Himalayan Kingdom and “any aggression against Bhutan and Sikkim would be
considered as aggression against India”. However, these assurances did not satisfy the
opposition leaders and the uproar continued to paralyze the business of the house.
My comment: Clearly no one in the Indian parliament believed Nehru when he made that
statement, but you KiranA ji are trying to pass that off as a treaty obligation

Later in parliament

Replying to the question of security of the Bhutan and the Sikkim, Nehru
clarified that, his government is stuck to the previous stand and that any attack to the border
of these two countries would be considered as the attack to the border of India. But as of now
India had no intention to send its army, unless the king of Bhutan asked for such
assistance.

Later there is this statement:

On the other hand India argued that, it was treaty bound to
protect Bhutan‟s boundary

I have found no such treaty between independent India and Bhutan. I am anxious to read the text of such a treaty. This seems to have been a sort of parliamentary and diplomatic bluff by a Nehru, talking about protecting Bhutan while failing to protect Indian borders and stonewalling all reports about what the Chinese were doing.

If we bluff ourselves about where our interests lie we are not going to be able to protect our interests. The India Bhutan treaty clearly states that Bhutan is sovereign territory, India has no treaty obligation to protect Bhutan. We may do it to protect our interests and not do it if our interests are not affected. I believe you too should stop bluffing yourself and to others that India has an agreement to protect Bhutan.

[Philip]

Bhutan needs to wise up fast and sign a treaty with India to automatically come to its aid in invaded by any external power.We are fortunate that Mr.Modi is PM.I shudder to think what may have happened if Snake-oil Singh and the Saint were in power! Bye-bye Bhutan to the Chinkos, just like Tibet.The King of Bhutan-in-exile and the Dalai Lama would've become neighbours perhaps!

The GOI should advise the Bhutanese monarch of the gravity of the situ, the Chin fuhrer taking advantage of the absence of a defencd treaty with India.

[chola]

All this talk about war is pointless unless we take the f-ing lumber to them.

Their power is in their market and their printing press.

War is an exception among nations and an EXTREME rarity between major powers. Economics is ongoing and relentless. Guess which side of the coin the chinis play. Hint, they haven’t fought a f-ing war in five decades.

So we either fight or simply wait and watch how the chini-amreeki trade war turns out. The chini car and silicon chips markets are currently 50 and 80 percent owned by foreigners. They block market access to either and everything changes.

If they win this “war” with the US, they end up with an even bigger market than before by eliminating the US and other westerners from their economy.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/a ... consumers/

Beijing warns of ‘people’s war’ against U.S.: Chinese consumers now global superpower

NATHAN VANDERKLIPPE
BEIJING
PUBLISHED 3 DAYS AGO

As China plots its response to a White House determined to extract blood on trade, Beijing’s leadership knows it cannot match U.S. military or economic might.

But Chinese decision makers also know they now oversee the world’s dominant marketplace. China’s retail sales are the highest on earth, worth US$7.5-trillion last year, 14-per-cent higher than those in the U.S.

China is No. 1 in cars, smartphones and any number of other items people buy for themselves. Chinese consumers, in other words, have already collectively become the world’s buying superpower.

[pankajs]

If printing press was the source of power Zimbabwe would be a soup-pawa by now and Xina would have no chance of displacing US for EVER given USD's dominant reserve currency status.

But we know Zimbabwe is junk because of its printing press and US is steadily but surely loosing power again inspite of its printing press. Printing press is NEVER a source of power but it can act as a booster shot once in a while.

[pankajs]

The Chinese adept at playing mind games and even "highly knowledgeable* folks are prone to being overawed by the smoke and mirror strategy. I decided to do a bit of digging. There are many kinds of data on the internet but lets stick to World Bank data for now.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.CON.PETC.ZS
Household final consumption expenditure, etc. (% of GDP) [Latest listed is of 2016]

China : 39%
US: 68.8%

Assuming [am too lazy to dig for the actual figure] the Chinese GDP ~ $12 Trillion and US GDP ~ $18 Trillion

Chinese Household Consumption: $4.68 Trillion
US Household Consumption: $12.38 Trillion

Once again the percentages are from 2016.While 2017 figures will be different but not much. I will leave it folks to decide who is the Global superpower when it comes to consumption.

[Chandragupta]

China will simply laugh behind the PM's back as to how easily they " turned" Sri Lanka, Nepal and the Maldives to becoming hostile towards India.

It's a matter of perspective. The commonly expressed Indian viewpoint is that China is maliciously (as easily) turning these nations against India.

I will briefly summarize the sequence of logic that I see being repeated ad nauseam.

1. China is deliberately turning these nations "against India" and have them on their side.
2. The Chinese claim that they are simply doing this to develop their relations with these nations, but the Chinese cannot be trusted because they are out to dominate the world. They say so and any claim that they are up to anything more innocent that that cannot be true.

The question that no one has answered is what will these piddly nations do to help China? What have they done so far? I still read articles saying that the Chinese will build naval bases in these countries. This scare is left hanging in the air with no further clarification. Where are the bases? There are no bases. The Chinese claim that they want port facilities so they can ensure safe passage for their oil. Heck even the roads to Gwadar are incomplete and now there is news that Gwadar is not secure enough for the Chinese and they want to build a base where there are no roads and presumably no Pakis nearby. It's not as if Hambantota and Gwadar are out of reach for India. I mean if all these small nations are now so so close to China then surely the Chinese can use the existing fantastic facilities in Colombo and Karachi.

Really? Call me dumb, but how do you ensure "security" for your cargo ships in the Indian ocean by pissing off the largest power there while building bases in piddly nations in places where those bases can be knocked out at short notice? This is where the arguments I hear turn really absurd. You have to turn the Chinaman into a 7 foot monster to say how we will simply be screwed to hammer in the argument that China is going to dominate the Indian ocean using a most ridiculously stupid gambit.

I will not go so far as to say that Indian strategic analysts have stopped thinking. The just have not started thinking yet. I only hope they start thinking in the near future because I can see no evidence of research or analysis. May I point out that if Indian diplomats and government are dumb - our "strategic analysts" including the Chellaneys and Karnads display the same variety of abject dumbness that can be described as a national trait.

Excellent post Shiv saar.

If we personify India-China & their behaviour. Then here it goes. Xi is going house to house in Narendra's neighbourhood, offering the neighbours fruits, gifts & money in order to befriend them. All the neighbours have to do is to put up a rickety chair & a shed outside their houses for Xi's boys to sit to keep watch at Xi's fruit cart that plies on the road infront of Narendra's house.

Why do they want to keep watch? Any sane individual will answer one of the following -

a. Xi is afraid that Narendra will rob his fruit cart & there will be nothing Xi will be able to do
b. Xi is afraid that Narendra will charge a hafta from his fruit cart & there will be nothing Xi will be able to do
c. Xi wants boys to watch over Narendra & what he's upto - why does Xi want to do that? Either he is fascinated by Narendra or he is afraid of Narendra, which one is more probable?

Tomorrow if Narendra is on a stroll and he sees these watchmen sheds constructed all over his neighbourhood with Xi's boys peeking at him, hiding. Do you think Narendra will be afraid or amused?

[pankajs]

https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/c ... ominal-gdp
China Private Consumption: % of GDP [CEIC - A Euromoney Institutional Investor company; This is not my field but I do recall hearing of Euro-money somewhere or the other]

China's Private Consumption accounted for 39.1 % of its Nominal GDP in Dec 2017, compared with a ratio of 39.4 % in the previous year. China's Private Consumption contribution to Nominal GDP ratio is updated yearly, available from Dec 1952 to Dec 2017, with an average share of 49.4 %. The data reached an all-time high of 71.3 % in Dec 1962 and a record low of 35.6 % in Dec 2010.

Seems the Private consumption as a % of GDP in 2017 has fallen when compared to 2016.

[chola]

If printing press was the source of power Zimbabwe would be a soup-pawa by now and Xina would have no chance of displacing US for EVER given USD's dominant reserve currency status.

But we know Zimbabwe is junk because of its printing press and US is steadily but surely loosing power again inspite of its printing press. Printing press is NEVER a source of power but it can act as a booster shot once in a while.

Zimbabwe doesn’t have a printing press. A printing press in this context means an ability to print ever more money without going into hyperinflation. Japan and the US as well as Cheen are those with printing presses.

If you don’t understand the concept then it is pointless to discuss. Our primary threat from Cheen is not its military but its industrial base and the printing press that allows it to provide financial muscle to employ that industrial base overseas. OBOR (and the earlier investment projects all over the turd world) can only come from a printing press.

BTW, I don’t see Cheen EVER passing the US as a global power — even when Cheen ends up with a bigger economy. The US has too many allies and a stronger Cheen will give the US even more allies and even more bases.

But I don’t see that stopping Cheen, they are a selfish race and I think they will leave the US as the main security provider globally as long as they can make money.

[pankajs]

Seems you need to get educated on the so called "Printing press".

OBOR does not come from any so called "printing press". It comes from the Chinese reserves and "leveraging" that reserve, you know how banking is done?

[TKiran]

All encroachments take place the same way, first a fruit vendor tries to place his cart in your neighborhood. If you ignore him, he will eventually occupy your neighbour's place and push the neighbour to sell his property at a dead cheap price, as the neighbour is weak, he will comply. Then the same fruit vendor will target you next. First he will offer you market price, because you have a superiority complex, you will not take the offer, now your neighbour (fruit vendor) will create nuisance around your place, you will go to police station, nothing happens, the same old story repeats, again and again and again. Finally you will loose your will to fight, your place is going to be occupied piece by piece Scarborough style. You may still have claim to your property on the paper, but it's the fruit vendor who enjoys your property.

Now it's your duty to make sure that the fruit vendor is sent away from your and your neighbourhood, every time the fruit vendor attempt such status quo. You need to evacuate the fruit vendor first time and every time, without giving excuses, such as, "it's my neighbour who is allowing the fruit vendor, what can I do?"

"I don't have any imperial hubris. after all the fruit vendor is harmless, ".

Some time back I posted a situation from Panchatantra from "KAKA-ULOOKEEYAM".

It's the Dharma of the king or prime minister of a country to see that the country is safe for eternity, for that a king has to constantly look outside and eliminate any threat to the country which is still a bud.

[pankajs]

I rather like the Chinese strategy on Taiwan of the last 60+ years. All talk and no walk.

[Philip]

How do you deal with this fiasco of ours,dropping the ball in SL when it was in our hand for decades?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... -sri-lanka

Our myopic and asinine MEA was asked several times to build the HT port,but refused.Result? We have the Chines eon our doorstep and with their nationals ointo SL ,seen everywhere,in a decade's time SL would've become a satellite Chinese state.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... -sri-lanka
The biggest game changer in 100 years’: Chinese money gushes into Sri Lanka
Beijing is spreading its influence across the region with huge investments – much to the worry of India and the west
Michael Safi in Hambantota and Amantha Perera

Mon 26 Mar 2018
Mattala Rakapaksa airport, built with Chinese loans, handles 50,000 passengers a year, a fraction of its capacity of 1 million. Photograph: Michael Safi
Little disturbs the serenity of Guan Yin, the bodhisattva of compassion, as her statue sits in contemplation at the centre of Mattala Rajapaksa international airport.

The last flight from the airport departed at 7.50am. The next is scheduled for 7.50am tomorrow. In the meantime check-in counters are empty, car rental desks deserted, and the only sign of life a handful of staff laughing around an information desk who disperse when a visitor arrives.

Built to handle one million passengers each year, Mattala Rajapaksa saw just over 50,000 people in 2017. Since it opened four years ago the gleaming facility in Hambantota district, on Sri Lanka’s south coast, has become known as the emptiest international airport in the world.

Mattala Rajapaksa airport in southern Sri Lanka is often called the emptiest international airport in the world. Photograph: Michael Safi
It is a symbol of the promise and peril of a fierce contest under way in south Asia. While most international attention has been focused on the South China Sea, on its western border China has been aggressively expanding its presence in the Maldives, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh – rattling the regional kingpin, India, and watched warily by the west.

China’s clout has few limits. Shouldn’t we be worried about its new Silk Road?
Tom Miller

“China’s penetration of south Asia is the biggest game changer in 100 years,” says Constantino Xavier, a fellow at the thinktank Carnegie India. “The Russians tried, the Americans tried. This is the first time since at least world war two you have a massive power contesting the Indian state.”

Chinese money has gushed into south Asia and especially Pakistan in the past decade, and billions more has been promised as part of the Belt and Road Initiative, Beijing’s ambitious bid to create a new Silk Road of trade routes around the world.

In the Maldives the Chinese government or state-owned enterprises have provided loans or investment for more than 20 projects, according to new analysis by thinktank Gateway House, with the largest three projects alone worth nearly 40% of the Maldivian GDP.

Nepal, which shares an open border with India, is hosting at least two dozen Chinese investments. Beijing’s interests in Bangladesh are estimated to be worth up to $35bn. But few regions in the neighbourhood have been transformed as dramatically as Hambantota, about five hours’ drive from the Sri Lankan capital, Colombo.

Surrounded by acres of paddy fields and banana trees, between fishing villages and food stalls, enormous pieces of modern infrastructure now line the Hambantota landscape. They are ghostly sites. More cows than cars ply a new expressway. A convention centre that hosted the Commonwealth heads of government meeting in 2013 now offers cheap rates to wedding parties. A newly built hospital has never admitted patients, instead providing accommodation to Chinese migrant workers.

World's biggest building project aims to make China great again
They were built in the fury of development that followed the end of the Sri Lankan civil war, fuelled by $8bn borrowed from China by the previous president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, who dreamed of turning his ancestral home into a tourism and business powerhouse.

“There was this sense that China would write us blank cheques,” says one Sri Lankan government economist, not authorised to speak publicly.

Hambantota is dotted with paddy fields and banana trees. Photograph: Martin Godwin for the Guardian
The rates on Chinese loans were often no better than those on international capital markets, he says. The difference was China asked fewer questions. “There was no rigour applied to, how are you going to make this work, what’s the business model here?

“It took a while for folks to realise we might be in trouble.”

‘An acute crisis’
Not every Hambantota project is deserted. In 2010 Sri Lanka agreed to pay a Chinese state-owned corporation $1.5bn to build a new port. Last December, struggling to make repayments, the government agreed to lease the port – and 15,000 acres surrounding it – to the same Chinese company for 99 years.

The lease has alarmed Indian and western policymakers who worry China has won a strategic foothold in the Indian Ocean. It has also angered locals, who fear Sri Lanka is caught in a debt trap and will be forced to lease even more assets in the future.

On 9 December a Chinese flag was raised over Hambantota port in place of Sri Lanka’s. It lasted seven days. “I went to the port administration office and told them I was willing to be shot to take down this flag,” says Bergama Gnana Thilaka, the chief priest at a Buddhist temple near the site.

Thilaka has led hundreds of monks in resistance to the lease of the port, which he likens to a colonial invasion. “When Sri Lanka was colonised by the British there were Buddhist monks who played a pivotal role against them,” he says.

The presence of Chinese workers in Hambantota has particularly galled opponents, on a backdrop of raging Buddhist nationalist sentiment on the island. Thilaka complains he knows of at least five marriages already between Chinese workers and local women.

“If they start coming here and have that much of an imprint, we will have a similar problem to what we’ve had with the upcountry Tamils,” he says. “There is no way to send these people back.”

Bergama Gnana Thilaka, the chief priest at a Buddhist temple in Hambantota and an opponent of leasing the area’s port to Chinese state-owned enterprises. Photograph: Michael Safi
Watching on, analysts and western diplomats warn Chinese money is increasingly translating into political sway.

“What has changed is the sheer amount of [Chinese] influence, and how they’re using this economic leverage for political and strategic purposes,” says Tanvi Madan, the director of the India project at the Brookings Institution in Washington DC.

Mohamad Nasheed, the exiled former Maldives president, calls China’s involvement in his country an “acute crisis”, accusing it of propping up the current ruler, Abdulla Yameen, so it can keep acquiring territory in the archipelago. “They have weaponised foreign direct investment,” he says.

Sri Lanka has banned the Chinese navy from Hambantota port for now, but faces decades of debt repayments to Beijing. “Any country that extends economic assistance, whether it’s China, India or the US, has a strategic interest in doing so,” says Dushni Weerakoon, the executive director at the Institute of Policy Studies in Colombo.

Even in developed democracies such as Australia, governments are trying to adjust to more aggressive Chinese intervention, says Xavier, the Carnegie India fellow. “You can imagine what they can do with $24bn in Bangladesh in 10 years’ time.”

Inevitably a more intense rivalry also increases the potential for military confrontation. India and China have fought wars over disputed borders in the past, but in 2017 for the first time they squared off on the soil of a third country, when Bhutan called Indian troops in to stop Chinese road-building in a disputed area.

India is doubling down on courting its neighbours, Xavier says, but also China’s other rivals. Once described as “estranged democracies”, the US and India now boast closer ties than ever, and along with Japan and Australia have revived a high-level forum known as the “Quad”, aimed at ensuring the Indian and Pacific Ocean regions remain “free and open”.

Neither India nor China is likely to ever completely dominate the region, Madan says. Instead, she predicts the small states will keep their powerful patrons guessing. “They will play one country against the other and try to maximise the benefits,” she says. “This is only going to become more complex, not less.”

[chola]

Seems you need to get educated on the so called "Printing press".

OBOR does not come from any so called "printing press". It comes from the Chinese reserves and "leveraging" that reserve.

How do you “leverage” that reserve? I wrote about it in this forum probably a decade ago so I know. But do you?

You cannot use the US dollar in the PRC. And Cheen has most of its reserves parked in US treasuries anyways. Almost every US dollar or Japanese yen going into the PRC comes right out.

So how do you think the money supply expands in China to such an extent that they can build whole cities in advance and then infrastructure for all of f-ing Eurasia?

They PRINT that money and the trick is to do it without hyperinflation. Cheen had an inflation of 1.9% last year. WE had an inflation rate in 2017 that was above 5%. They can print without going into uncontrolled inflation which is all you need to know about the “printing press” in this parlance. Again, Zimbabwe doesn’t have this and neither do we or the other 220 members of the non-gora/non-japani world.

[pankajs]

All you have to do is read up a bit more on how China leverages its reserves.

BTW, the statistics that you posted last was out of sync with World bank data. Better to provide link when making claims on the Chinese inflation but it is your choice.

[pankajs]

How do you deal with this fiasco of ours,dropping the ball in SL when it was in our hand for decades?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... -sri-lanka

Our myopic and asinine MEA was asked several times to build the HT port,but refused.Result? We have the Chines eon our doorstep and with their nationals ointo SL ,seen everywhere,in a decade's time SL would've become a satellite Chinese state.

Why worry? Didn't our Chinese Ambassador just say that all our neighbors are free to have their own relationships with China?

If it bothers you too much sleep it off.

[Chandragupta]

All encroachments take place the same way, first a fruit vendor tries to place his cart in your neighborhood. If you ignore him, he will eventually occupy your neighbour's place and push the neighbour to sell his property at a dead cheap price, as the neighbour is weak, he will comply. Then the same fruit vendor will target you next. First he will offer you market price, because you have a superiority complex, you will not take the offer, now your neighbour (fruit vendor) will create nuisance around your place, you will go to police station, nothing happens, the same old story repeats, again and again and again. Finally you will loose your will to fight, your place is going to be occupied piece by piece Scarborough style. You may still have claim to your property on the paper, but it's the fruit vendor who enjoys your property.

Now it's your duty to make sure that the fruit vendor is sent away from your and your neighbourhood, every time the fruit vendor attempt such status quo. You need to evacuate the fruit vendor first time and every time, without giving excuses, such as, "it's my neighbour who is allowing the fruit vendor, what can I do?"

"I don't have any imperial hubris. after all the fruit vendor is harmless, ".

Some time back I posted a situation from Panchatantra from "KAKA-ULOOKEEYAM".

It's the Dharma of the king or prime minister of a country to see that the country is safe for eternity, for that a king has to constantly look outside and eliminate any threat to the country which is still a bud.

I am in complete agreement. I just posted that made up story to say that this can go both ways - can be seen both ways. Fruit cart or not, the point that India needs military readiness to not only destroy the watch posts but also destroy the fruit cart - at will - remains above dispute. In other words, the game can be played in many ways, but we need to show up first!

[shiv]

If we personify India-China & their behaviour. Then here it goes. Xi is going house to house in Narendra's neighbourhood, offering the neighbours fruits, gifts & money in order to befriend them. All the neighbours have to do is to put up a rickety chair & a shed outside their houses for Xi's boys to sit to keep watch at Xi's fruit cart that plies on the road infront of Narendra's house.

Why do they want to keep watch? Any sane individual will answer one of the following -

a. Xi is afraid that Narendra will rob his fruit cart & there will be nothing Xi will be able to do
b. Xi is afraid that Narendra will charge a hafta from his fruit cart & there will be nothing Xi will be able to do
c. Xi wants boys to watch over Narendra & what he's upto - why does Xi want to do that? Either he is fascinated by Narendra or he is afraid of Narendra, which one is more probable?

Tomorrow if Narendra is on a stroll and he sees these watchmen sheds constructed all over his neighbourhood with Xi's boys peeking at him, hiding. Do you think Narendra will be afraid or amused?

I am always wary of making a discussion out of metaphors.

Let me state something (again) from a different perspective. For a laugh (say I'm drunk now and I'm smoking something powerful) imagine that the Chinese are really worried about their sea lanes stretching from Persian gulf to Malacca. On top of this assumption- assume that the Chinese are being honest in saying that their main intention is to protect their shipping lines.

To me the obvious question is - who is stopping their ships now? To my knowledge no one is doing that, so the risk is near zero in peacetime.

The other question that pops to mind is "What use are naval bases in Sri lanka, Maldives or Gwadar in case of war with India?" I can answer this question in two ways. One answer is that India will do nothing and simply allow the Chinese ships to sit in nearby bases, refuel and fight us. But I don't think the Chinese would be stupid enough to risk this - because all these Chinese bases would be toast in war. What I am saying is that the Chinese are not going to keep their sea lanes open by trying to brazen it out in a war with India by simply sitting in nearby bases. Their shipments will be shut down as well as the bases. Whether people believe this or not is immaterial - if the Chinese believe they are taking a big risk.

But before all that - The Chinese do not actually have any naval bases in any of these places as of now. they have built some port facilities. None of those ports is actually making a profit. Does that give the Chinese are leverage over those nations? yes. What are the Chinese going to do with that leverage? Build bases? But building bases in those nations is not going to help them. Making peace with India might help them but they know that they cannot do that without losing face and the Chinese leadership appearing weak inside their own country. I suggest that the Chinese are left holding a cleft stick as much as India.

I can extend this post by posting arguments as other have done saying "Oh the Chinese will nuke us" or 'Oh the Chinese will saturate us with their missile forces". These are the very arguments that are used to make the Chinese 7 feet tall

That is why I wrote:

You have to turn the Chinaman into a 7 foot monster to say how we will simply be screwed to hammer in the argument that China is going to dominate the Indian ocean using a most ridiculously stupid gambit.