India-China News and Discussion

[svinayak]

I can swear that that was not there a few weeks ago.

Besides, Assam has it in Devanagari, and Arunachal P in Chinese!!

This is the start of the Cold war with China now

[shynee]

Sino-Indian water divide —Brahma Chellaney

[svinayak]

Sino-Indian water divide —Brahma Chellaney

view: Sino-Indian water divide —Brahma Chellaney

China’s hydro-engineering projects and plans are a reminder that Tibet is at the heart of the India-China divide. Tibet ceased to be a political buffer when China annexed it nearly six decades ago. But Tibet can still become a political bridge between China and India

As China and India gain economic heft, they are drawing ever more international attention at the time of an ongoing global shift of power to Asia. Their underlying strategic dissonance and rivalry, however, usually attracts less notice.

As its power grows, China seems determined to choke off Asian competitors, a tendency reflected in its hardening stance toward India. This includes aggressive patrolling of the disputed Himalayan frontier by the People’s Liberation Army, many violations of the line of control separating the two giants, new assertiveness concerning India’s northeastern Arunachal Pradesh state — which China claims as its own — and vituperative attacks on India in the state-controlled Chinese media.

The issues that divide India and China, however, extend beyond territorial disputes. Water is becoming a key security issue in Sino-Indian relations and a potential source of enduring discord.

China and India already are water-stressed economies. The spread of irrigated farming and water-intensive industries, together with the demands of a rising middle class, have led to a severe struggle for more water. Indeed, both countries have entered an era of perennial water scarcity, which before long is likely to equal, in terms of per capita availability, the water shortages found in the Middle East.

Rapid economic growth could slow in the face of acute scarcity if demand for water continues to grow at its current frantic pace, turning China and India — both food-exporting countries — into major importers, a development that would accentuate the global food crisis.

Even though India has more arable land than China — 160.5 million hectares compared to 137.1 million hectares — Tibet is the source of most major Indian rivers. The Tibetan plateau’s vast glaciers, huge underground springs and high altitude make Tibet the world’s largest freshwater repository after the polar icecaps. Indeed, all of Asia’s major rivers, except the Ganges, originate in the Tibetan plateau. Even the Ganges’ two main tributaries flow in from Tibet.

But China is now pursuing major inter-basin and inter-river water transfer projects on the Tibetan plateau, which threatens to diminish international-river flows into India and other co-riparian states. Before such hydro-engineering projects sow the seeds of water conflict, China ought to build institutionalised, cooperative river-basin arrangements with downstream states.

Upstream dams, barrages, canals, and irrigation systems can help fashion water into a political weapon that can be wielded overtly in a war, or subtly in peacetime to signal dissatisfaction with a co-riparian state. Even denial of hydrological data in a critically important season can amount to the use of water as a political tool. Flash floods in recent years in two Indian frontier states — Himachal Pradesh and Arunachal Pradesh — served as an ugly reminder of China’s lack of information-sharing on its upstream projects. Such leverage could in turn prompt a downstream state to build up its military capacity to help counterbalance this disadvantage.

In fact, China has been damming most international rivers flowing out of Tibet, whose fragile ecosystem is already threatened by global warming. The only rivers on which no hydro-engineering works have been undertaken so far are the Indus, whose basin falls mostly in India and Pakistan, and the Salween, which flows into Burma and Thailand. Local authorities in Yunnan province, however, are considering damming the Salween in the quake-prone upstream region.

India’s government has been pressing China for transparency, greater hydrological data-sharing, and a commitment not to redirect the natural flow of any river or diminish cross-border water flows. But even a joint expert-level mechanism — set up in 2007 merely for “interaction and cooperation” on hydrological data — has proven of little value.

The most dangerous idea China is contemplating is the northward rerouting of the Brahmaputra River, known as Yarlung Tsangpo to Tibetans, but which China has renamed Yaluzangbu. It is the world’s highest river, and also one of the fastest-flowing. Diversion of the Brahmaputra’s water to the parched Yellow River is an idea that China does not discuss in public, because the project implies environmental devastation of India’s northeastern plains and eastern Bangladesh, and would thus be akin to a declaration of water war on India and Bangladesh.

Nevertheless, an officially blessed book published in 2005, Tibet’s Waters Will Save China, openly championed the northward rerouting of the Brahmaputra. Moreover, the Chinese desire to divert the Brahmaputra by employing “peaceful nuclear explosions” to build an underground tunnel through the Himalayas found expression in the international negotiations in Geneva in the mid-1990s on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). China sought unsuccessfully to exempt PNEs from the CTBT, a pact still not in force. In 2005 India after this chinese move must have started negotiating with US on nuclear agreement.

The issue now is not whether China will reroute the Brahmaputra, but when. Once authorities complete their feasibility studies and the diversion scheme begins, the project will be presented as a fait accompli. China already has identified the bend where the Brahmaputra forms the world’s longest and deepest canyon — just before entering India — as the diversion point.

China’s ambitions to channel Tibetan waters northward have been whetted by two factors: the completion of the Three Gorges Dam, which, despite the project’s glaring environmental pitfalls, China trumpets as the greatest engineering feat since the construction of the Great Wall; and the power of President Hu Jintao, whose background fuses two key elements — water and Tibet. Hu, a hydrologist by training, owes his swift rise in the Communist Party hierarchy to the brutal martial-law crackdown he carried out in Tibet in 1989.

China’s hydro-engineering projects and plans are a reminder that Tibet is at the heart of the India-China divide. Tibet ceased to be a political buffer when China annexed it nearly six decades ago. But Tibet can still become a political bridge between China and India. For that to happen, water has to become a source of cooperation, not conflict. — DT-PS

Brahma Chellaney is Professor of Strategic Studies at the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi

[vera_k]

So anybody has any idea how we can change this? I have tried to raise this with journalists I know. But journos these days have no appreciation of history. Historical claims have been made on our territory on flimsier grounds.

Anyway, if I huffing and puffing for nothing please do tell me so

Post a question on Google's support forums : http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/maps

[svinayak]

[csharma]

India believes China will focus on Arunachal after taiwan is sorted out.

Following story shows India's official thinking on China.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/nsc-m ... m/497332/2

NSC meet discusses China, agrees India needs to keep an eye in long term



After virtually agreeing there was no need to “demonise” Beijing as a potential threat, the National Security Council meeting last Saturday emphasised the need to watch China carefully in the context of its recent actions vis-a-vis New Delhi in the Nuclear Suppliers Group on the Indo-US nuclear deal, ADB funds for Arunachal Pradesh and UN action to designate Pakistani Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) founder Masood Azhar a terrorist.



Chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the NSC discussed China for nearly three hours — a broad consensus emerged that Beijing was not a short-term threat to India but its actions needed to be watched from the long-term perspective. The NSC emphasised that India needed to grow at 7-8 per cent in the next decade to become a global economic powerhouse and match up to the challenge posed by Beijing.



The Ministry of External Affairs updated the meeting on China’s behind-the-door action against India while seeking NSG waiver for the 123 Agreement, the impediments it put against India over an ADB loan for development in Arunachal Pradesh and the hurdles it put up in the UN declaring Masood Azhar a global terrorist.



This indicated that Beijing saw New Delhi as a competitor for the high table and would use every opportunity to put India down. Newly appointed Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao spoke at length on China and National Security Advisor M K Narayanan summarized at the end of the meeting.



The essence of the discussion indicated that China would concentrate on Arunachal Pradesh — or South Tibet as it calls it — after it sorted out the Taiwan issue. The meeting noted that progress on upgradation of infrastructure on the Indian side was slow with environment hurdles in building roads in Arunachal Pradesh.



The chiefs of the Armed Forces briefed the meeting on India’s defence preparedness and indicated the need to overcome delays in weapons acquisition. The Army chief made it clear that artillery modernisation was long delayed since the 155 mm Bofors howitzers had been bought way back in 1986. The Air Force talked about the need to increase and modernise the two-decade-old air defence radar network. The Navy spoke on delay in acquisition of the aircraft carrier Gorshkov.



But the Home Ministry made it clear that there was no need to paint China as a threat and demonise it in the public eye. The need was to grow economically so that the country could stand up to any challenge in the near future.



While decisions on issues discussed at the NSC will be taken in a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security, the apex body was told that out of the $40-billion bilateral trade, China was exporting nearly $32 billion of finished goods to India while the latter was only exporting raw material. The finished goods, basic amenities included, could hit cottage and small scale industries, resulting in large scale unemployment.

[rohiths]

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/t72-t ... s/494964/1

Official Chinese Military Website
http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/

[Prem]

view: Sino-Indian water divide —Brahma Chellaney

China’s hydro-engineering projects and plans are a reminder that Tibet is at the heart of the India-China divide. Tibet ceased to be a political buffer when China annexed it nearly six decades ago. But Tibet can still become a political bridge between China and India

The most dangerous idea China is contemplating is the northward rerouting of the Brahmaputra River, known as Yarlung Tsangpo to Tibetans, but which China has renamed Yaluzangbu. It is the world’s highest river, and also one of the fastest-flowing. Diversion of the Brahmaputra’s water to the parched Yellow River is an idea that China does not discuss in public, because the project implies environmental devastation of India’s northeastern plains and eastern Bangladesh, and would thus be akin to a declaration of water war on India and Bangladesh.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2009_pg3_3

[tejas]

Unfortunately, the term Indian leader is an oxymoron. If Nehru had offered to open up a second front against the Chicoms in Tibet in 1950 with US assistance ( the first being in Korea) do you think they would have said no? Diverting the Brahmaputra is essentially an act of war against India. With our pathetic defense spending vis a vis PRC can we actually threaten them with conventional war and be taken seriously?

The mocking editorials recently emerging from our northern blothers following increased troop movement to Arunachal Pradesh suggests not. I actually usually avoid reading articles on this subject because of the depression they cause me. We need massive upgrades in our force posture all along the border of Chinese occupied Tibet. I only hope the GOI realizes how serious the situation is. With defense spending at 2.5% of GDP and an economy substantially smaller than China's, I do not have the same confidence in our chances against China that most jingoes on this forum seem to have. I pray I'm wrong.

[Gerard]

Diversion of the Brahmaputra’s water to the parched Yellow River is an idea that China does not discuss in public, because the project implies environmental devastation of India’s northeastern plains and eastern Bangladesh, and would thus be akin to a declaration of water war on India and Bangladesh.

As has been pointed out here, the Brahmaputra’s drainage basin does not lie entirely in Occupied Tibet. The Chinese cannot turn off the tap since most of the water does not originate in Occupied Tibet.

62.2% of the basin lies in India. 9% in Nepal, 6.6 in Bangladesh, 2.4% in Bhutan, 19% in Occupied Tibet.

[svinayak]

As has been pointed out here, the Brahmaputra’s drainage basin does not lie entirely in Occupied Tibet. The Chinese cannot turn off the tap since most of the water does not originate in Occupied Tibet.

62.2% of the basin lies in India. 9% in Nepal, 6.6 in Bangladesh, 2.4% in Bhutan, 19% in Occupied Tibet.

How much is in Aruanchal Pradesh?
That should explain Chinese Policy towards Southern Tibet.

[Gerard]

4.2%

[svinayak]

4.2%

Where is the rest inside India?

[Gerard]

Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Sikkim.

[Gerard]

Hmm... you may have something there regarding Arunachal Pradesh. Wasn't the Asian Development Bank loan that the Chinese tried to block for a watershed management project?

The Central Water Commission gives different figures. Perhaps the above percentages include the Ganges and Meghna sub basins as well. Wikipedia gives different figures as well. Perhaps SSridhar can clarify this.

For just the Brahmaputra sub-basin, the CWC figures indicate 33.5% lying in India with Arunachal Pradesh having 14% of the total or 42% of India's share of the sub-basin.

http://cwc.gov.in/regional/shillong/welcome.html

[Skratu]

Its possibility is discussed here in Iskander Rehman's blog:
http://indiangeopolitics.blogspot.com/ ... an_03.html

What do you guys think?

[csharma]

From India's point of view, it is meaningless to talk of whether there will be war or not. India has to prepare for war with China. One important motivation for China to fight a limited war, apart from Arunachal land grab would be to emerge as the undisputed power in Asia. Last time there was war, it took India decades to recover, they might be expecting something similar this time around.

India has to be ready for such an attack and look for strategies to gain the decisive edge. A defeat of China will lead to a severe loss of prestige for them and will establish India as an Asian power of consequence.

The Indian Express article on NSC meeting on China shows that India is aware of Chinese moves and we should expect it to take steps to counter them. The speech by AP governor (ex army chief) in Singapore was indeed heartening and showed India's resolve with respect to Arunachal.

It is wrong to say that somehow making peace with Pakistan helps India focus on China. In any conflict with China, one can expect Pakistan to jump in to take advantage of the situation and show solidarity with their Chinese allies. Any other assumption would be naive.

[archan]

Interpol probes fake drugs with 'Made in India' label

I was recently talking to a sales rep of a company that makes instruments for analyzing pharmaceutical products. He gave an example. A large pharma company was concerned that their drug was being counterfeited by the Chinese. They brought samples to this sales rep's company to analyze. They wanted to know how many sources of "excipients" (the materials that form most of the drug and act as supporting powders for the actual drug, which is usually less than 5% in a pill) were there in China. They were expecting there would be 3-4 sources that make these cheap fake materials and every fake drug maker probably buys from them. It turned out that they found there were 14 different sources of fake excipients only from within China. That is the level of ethics in this nation.

[Prem]

Diversion of the Brahmaputra’s water to the parched Yellow River is an idea that China does not discuss in public, because the project implies environmental devastation of India’s northeastern plains and eastern Bangladesh, and would thus be akin to a declaration of water war on India and Bangladesh.

As has been pointed out here, the Brahmaputra’s drainage basin does not lie entirely in Occupied Tibet. The Chinese cannot turn off the tap since most of the water does not originate in Occupied Tibet.

62.2% of the basin lies in India. 9% in Nepal, 6.6 in Bangladesh, 2.4% in Bhutan, 19% in Occupied Tibet.

Gerard Sir,
Go and buy ton of laddoos , this Paki news of Chinese controlling water got me down for a while .

Dont forget to send the bill to Dr Shiv or Acharya san.

[tripathi]

We need massive upgrades in our force posture all along the border of Chinese occupied Tibet.

only thing we need is a leadership with steel resolve like that of sardar patel.we dont need any gandhi,nehrus.wats the use of massive force when ur leadership dont ve guts to use it or press the nuke button.

[tripathi]

Its possibility is discussed here in Iskander Rehman's blog:
http://indiangeopolitics.blogspot.com/ ... an_03.html

What do you guys think?

from above blog:

Manmohan Singh’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh last year was a surprisingly low key affair; the Prime Minister not even daring to visit the Tawang Monastery for fear of provoking Chinese ire.

[Dhiman]

... They were expecting there would be 3-4 sources that make these cheap fake materials and every fake drug maker probably buys from them. It turned out that they found there were 14 different sources of fake excipients only from within China. That is the level of ethics in this nation.

Chinese don't recognize, or understand, or subscribe to the same notion of ethics that the rest of the world may understand or subscribe to. As a result of which Chinese companies see nothing wrong in copying, mislabeling, and exploiting brands of global companies such as Nike, Sony, or even Bajaj three wheelers, etc. Chinese students despite being extremely hardworking still see nothing wrong in extensively copying from each other. Also, China in general does not give any weight to intellectual property (i.e if you discover something new, they will copy it and exploit your discovery without giving you any credit or payment). Being "well connected" (as opposed to merits) is a culturally ok means of gaining jobs and business deals (at the very least in India there is a stigma attached to such things). In China, if you are not connected or not employing well connected people as a foreign company, you wouldn't get anywhere.

What the Chinese understand culturally is things such as "power", "respect", "saving face", and "loosing face." For a Chinese, the greatest achievement is to have absolute power and be absolutely respected. The means used to get that power and respect is irrelevant from a Chinese cultural point of view.

At an individual level "Loosing face" or being insulted is as bad as physically loosing a war on battlefield, so often your Chinese friends will talk to you in subtle ways (and you would have to do the same if you want to continue keeping them as friends) so that neither you nor him gets to a point where a "loss of face" would occur.

The best way to contain China is to constantly make them think and remind them that any hanky-panky thing that they try south of the Himalayas would lead to some "loss of face". If they copy you, you know they "respect" you (at least in that particular area).

As far as friendship goes, it goes both ways. The Chinese would have to understand Indian cultural values as much as the Indians would have to understand Chinese cultural values.

[Nihat]

The "loss of face" aspect you mentioned may well be the deterrent to China as of today too , to initiate a short border war with the objective of limited land grab is not an insurmountable task for the PLA in today's time. The international repercussions however of being the unprovoked aggressor would cause significant damage to Chinese claims of a "peaceful rise".

The recent article in China's state daily about Indian troops is a blatant attempt to show India in a bad light and being seen as provoking China , expect more such articles to follow aiming to justify future Chinky aggression.

[ramana]

The "loss of face" aspect you mentioned may well be the deterrent to China as of today too , to initiate a short border war with the objective of limited land grab is not an insurmountable task for the PLA in today's time. The international repercussions however of being the unprovoked aggressor would cause significant damage to Chinese claims of a "peaceful rise".

The recent article in China's state daily about Indian troops is a blatant attempt to show India in a bad light and being seen as provoking China , expect more such articles to follow aiming to justify future Chinky aggression.

Nihat can you help keep track of these as a indicator?

Thanks, ramana

[NRao]

How much is in Aruanchal Pradesh?
That should explain Chinese Policy towards Southern Tibet.

The "Southern Tibet" concept predates Indian independence. Older than Mao's ascendancy.

[Gerard]

this Paki news of Chinese controlling water got me down for a while

It is easy to fall for these alarmist reports that don't take into consideration the entire drainage basin.

The Nile river for example has its source in Uganda. Yet you can't dam the streams in Uganda and expect lower Egypt to dry up. Same with the Brahmaputra.

The Chinese plans would impact on the amount of waters flowing downstream however and the rights of the lower riparian states (especially Bangladesh) have to be taken into account when any diversions are being considered.

[Chinmayanand]

Chinese make beeline for hacking schools

[Chinmayanand]

Crouching dragon

[NRao]

Crouching dragon

The 2006 Chinese White Paper on defence had clearly articulated a perspective roadmap to superpower status in three clear stages:

* First Stage (By 2010): Create a modern force capable of defeating a moderate-sized adversary — namely Taiwan, India or Vietnam. This stage now seems complete a year ahead of schedule. The recent Chinese show of military muscle seems designed to highlight the actualisation of this capability.

* Second Stage (By 2020): Catch up with second-tier world powers like Russia, Europe and Japan.

* Third Stage (By 2050): Become a full-fledged superpower on par with the United States.

Jago sone wallo.

This, hopefully, should wake up Babudom.

[svinayak]

The "Southern Tibet" concept predates Indian independence. Older than Mao's ascendancy.

It could be true but we have to look at Tibet from Bharatiya historical terms.

One of my other Chini friend was commenting on how China is modernizing behind the scene and very rapidly.


Deng Xiaoping’s phase of ‘Hide your capabilities and bide your time’ is now over. China is aggressively showcasing its military capabilities and its willingness to use them.

Few of us desi were talking to this HK Chini friend and we told him that India is going to lunch a Nuclear Submarine soon. He was taking in the news. THen I asked him a simple question - where would he think Indian govt will deploy this Indian nuke submarine. With just a second deley he replied - BEIJING. He was extremely aware of the perfidy of the PRC govt.


We have some more on xinjiang



http://timesonline.typepad.com/timesarc ... jiang.html

July 07, 2009
Peter Fleming's 1935 journey into Xinjiang


News was received in London at the weekend that Mr Peter Fleming, who has been travelling on a mission for The Times in Manchuria, Mongolia, the interior of China, Northern Tibet and Sinkiang, has arrived safely at Kashgar

In spring, 1935, the explorer and writer Peter Fleming, brother of James Bond author, Ian, had gone missing somewhere in Central Asia, and his reappearance was noted with some relief in this July report.

Fleming was on a seven-month, 3,500 mile journey from Beijing to India, ostensibly in his role as an explorer, but in fact to report back to The Times on what was happening in the remote and inaccessible territory of Xinjiang, or Chinese Turkestan.

Two years earlier the Chinese governor of Xinjiang (Sinkiang to The Times then) had been all but overthrown by a rebellion of the Turkic people, of whom the Uighurs now form the largest group. The regime was rescued by Russian intervention, and although Xinjiang was officially part of China, by the time Fleming arrived there it was under the control of the Soviets, "unblushingly trespassing in Chinese territory".
Emerging from a long and hazardous trek across mountain and desert, Fleming's little camel caravan walked into a full-scale Great Game drama, which he described subsequently in a series of articles in The Times, and a book, News from Tartary. The pictures on this post were also taken by him - a soldier of the rebel Chinese Muslim army aiming a British SMLE No3 rifle, above, and Fleming's camel train, below.

In a leading article introducing his series of reports, The Times said:

Peter Fleming lifts the veil which in recent years has hidden, or at best obscured, the politics of that remote Moslem dependency of China, the province of Sinkiang

You can read Fleming's reports below. I'm afraid that in the 1930s The Times used to start extended pieces such as these in the right-hand column - they were called turnover articles - and unless you''re a subscriber to the Archive you'll need to click on the "read plain text" link below the article viewer in order to get the whole thing.

If it is untrue to say that at least four Powers are watching with the keenest interest current developments in the Chinese province of Sinkiang, or Eastern Turkestan, it is only untrue because developments in Sinkiang are practically impossible to watch - Rivalries in Sinkiang, Part One

The Russians have a monopoly of the very valuable trade in unborn lamb-skins - Rivalries in Sinkiang, Part Two

I cannot conceal my suspicion that Russia does not really know what she is up to in Chinese Central Asia - Rivalries in Sinkiang, Part Three

[ramana]

And Peter Fleming was part of Viceroy Study Group?

[tejas]

So India is grouped in the same military bracket as Taiwan and Vietnam? The contempt our elder Chinese blothers have for India is readily apparent in their 1979 invasion of Vietnam during then foreign minister AB Vajpayee's visit or their multimegaton TN test in the early 90's during President Venkataraman's visit.

Nothing would make me happier than to make the CCP lose face or to hurt the feerings of the Chinese people.

(OT: there is no such word in the English language as loosing, its losing).

P.S. I say this because in the ~12 years I've been visiting this forum, I have never seen this word more misspelled than here in the last year or so.

[RayC]

(OT: their is no such word in the English language as loosing, its losing).

Absolutely right.

As there is no word 'habbit' (as is in 'rabbit') and instead it is 'habit'.

[RayC]

Deng Xiaoping’s phase of ‘Hide your capabilities and bide your time’ is now over. China is aggressively showcasing its military capabilities and its willingness to use them.

Chinese War Zone Campaign Doctrine

[NRao]

Prachanda says India, US planned to attack China through Nepal

There you go. The cat is out of the bag.

[RajeshA]

Prachanda is just a sold-out git!

[NRao]

I think India should make his statement happen - in some small form at least.

[RayC]

Prachanda says India, US planned to attack China through Nepal

There you go. The cat is out of the bag.

Good that this odd fish is not at the helm of affairs.

He does not understand warfare or even global realities.

How silly can a person be!

[pgbhat]

x-posting from PRC economics thread
Over 26,000 Indian business visas issued in China

New Delhi: India has issued over 26,000 business visas in China so far in 2009, parliament was told Thursday.
Minister of State for External Affairs Preneet Kaur said India had issued 26,014 visas till June 2009.
Last year, India had issued the largest number of business visas to Chinese nationals at 58,658, witnessing an increase of 21 percent from the previous year, the minister told the Rajya Sabha.
In fact, from 15,979 visas issued in 2004, there has been a 267 percent increase of business visas to Chinese nationals.

[Liu]

Prachanda says India, US planned to attack China through Nepal

There you go. The cat is out of the bag.

well, attack china across Himalays?

if invaders were to survive the highland effect and pneumatorexis,CHinese police would be happy to send them to labour camp.