India-China News and Discussion

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 28 Oct 2009 03:55

India sleeps on lessons of 1962- Vantage hill in China hands

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 28 Oct 2009 04:01

LOOK FOR THE METHOD - India is partly to blame for the dip in its relations with China - KP Nayar

...
It is perhaps not widely known in Delhi that at any given point, a political counsellor at the Chinese embassy on Shanti Path is constantly going through every item in the Indian press that is of interest to Beijing, line by line, even on weekends, putting individual commentators and analysts into ideological pigeon-holes. So when an Indian tells his Chinese interlocutor that India’s press is free, he accepts it without hesitation. But he does not accept that everyone who writes for the Indian press is free.

When the Olympic torch was travelling around the globe preparatory to the 2008 Beijing Olympics and was seized in Paris by a Frenchman, Beijing put on the internet a Google map of the exact location of the residence of the French citizen who vandalized the torch for the sake of Tibetans. If the Chinese can do this, would they not know the affiliations of those who mobilized an Indian media frenzy against China?

What is needed now, as the government tries to create a semblance of normalcy in Sino-Indian relations, is an acknowledgement that there is a method to what China is doing and that India needs to learn from this.
...

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 28 Oct 2009 04:03

Krishna_V wrote:http://www.deccanchronicle.com/national ... na-pak-838

Krishna, can you please add the title of the link that you are posting instead of just an url? The way to do it is to add it like this :

[ url= <actual url> ]Title of the link[ /url ]

This allows people reading the post to understand what the link is about.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 28 Oct 2009 04:15

Stunted triangle - C Rajamohan

The recent tension between Delhi and Beijing is not the only factor that is making the so-called strategic triangle — the grouping of Russia, India and China (RIC) whose foreign ministers met in Bangalore this week — increasingly irrelevant to the evolving great power relations. The uncomfortable truth is this: the faster the rise of China, the quicker the decline of RIC as a collective.
...
...
If Moscow and Delhi find it hard to understand that a rising China does not need either of them to increase its leverage with the United States, Japan is poised to give them a big knock on the head. Last week’s public spat in Tokyo between the visiting US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and the new government in Japan led by Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama on alliance management has shaken the world’s assumptions about the US-Japan partnership that has been the one constant feature of Asian international relations since the end of the Second World War.

Although Hatoyama says that the alliance with the United States will remain the corner-stone of Japan’s foreign policy, he has underlined the importance of greater ‘equality’ in the partnership. Hatoyama is asserting his new quest for equality by refusing to sign onto a critical bilateral agreement with the US on reorganising the deployment of American forces in Japan. Gates appealed to the new Japanese government not to reopen the negotiations and wrap up the agreement, a product of painful negotiations over a decade and a half. Hatoyama insisted, publicly, that the new government can’t be hustled into concurrence just because Gates was in town and President Barack Obama would arrive in Tokyo next month. It is not often that Japanese leaders differ with their American partners, and that too in public.
...
Being conservative, the Chinese Communist Party is not ready to celebrate its incredible foreign policy luck in Washington and Tokyo, both of whom seem eager to cut separate deals with Beijing after sixty years of an alliance that was considered rock-solid. As it expresses scepticism about Japan’s ability to pursue an independent foreign policy, Beijing would want to test how far Hatoyama is prepared to go.
...
...
...

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 28 Oct 2009 06:04

RaviBg wrote:India sleeps on lessons of 1962- Vantage hill in China hands

Is not the Hundred Hill lies on the other side(Chinese) of the McMahon line ? Somebody could confirm ?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 Oct 2009 07:42

Russia, India & China for concerted action on terrorism.

Sergei Lavrov (Russia) and Yang Jiechi (China) came out strongly in support of India in its fight against terrorism and called for the implementation and “strict observance” of all United Nations resolutions on the issue.

China's callt for fight against terrorism should be supported by its action. In the past, it had effectively blocked resolutions in the UNSC against Hafeez Saeed and LeT/JuD and is still doing so against Masood Azhar.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Oct 2009 08:23

Chinese position is only for posturing. Cannot be trusted. But then who in ND is even paying attention?

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 28 Oct 2009 08:50

IDSA seminar on Chinese perceptions of India. They evaluate the American perceptions of Susan Shirk ( former deputy assistant secretary of state) and John Garver who have written that India China rivalry is one sided. That is India considers China its rival but China does not consider India a threat.

Rajiv Sikri was the chair of the discussion.

Understanding Chinese Perceptions of India

http://www.idsa.in/event/UnderstandingC ... esi_310709

In first he analyses the validity of the arguments of two prominent scholars who are of the view that there exists an asymmetry of mutual perceptions between India and China. The author then identifies problems in their arguments. In the second section he goes on to show that the Sino-Indian rivalry is not quite one sided and asymmetrical as often claimed and believed to be. It is asymmetric only to the extent that India regards China as its “principal rival”, and China regards India as its “strategic rival”.

After demonstrating that there exist flaws in the arguments which point towards the existence of an asymmetrical relationship between the two countries, the author comes out with his own findings. The author is of the view that today China’s emerging perception of India is guided and influenced by four prominent themes. They are namely strategic implications of India’s economic growth, Indo–U.S and Indo–Japanese strategic partnerships, India’s Look East strategy and India’s growing military power.

Krishna_V · Post by **Krishna_V** » 28 Oct 2009 10:08

RaviBg wrote:
Krishna_V wrote:http://www.deccanchronicle.com/national ... na-pak-838
Krishna, can you please add the title of the link that you are posting instead of just an url? The way to do it is to add it like this :

[ url= <actual url> ]Title of the link[ /url ]

This allows people reading the post to understand what the link is about.

Edited as requested. Thanks Ravi

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Oct 2009 10:23

J Mohan Malik also wrote about PRC perceptions of India and vice versa.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Oct 2009 11:18

The PRC has announced that two Tibetan criminals responsible for mayhem during the anti-state riots were "despatched" in customary PRC style.This has drawn sharp criticism from some wetsern countries including Britain.As I mentioned in the earlier post,to save face,the PRC's propaganda machine will smear Tibetan's,especially those loyal to HH the DL as enemies of the poor defenceless Han Chinese.This has just begun.

Interestingly on the BBC's Hard Talk this morning,Richard Perle and Ambassador Burke were exchanging their different viewpoints on Obama's international nuclear disarmement plans,with neo-con Perle saying that it was impossible to achieve (total N-disarmament by 2030).The Pak,India ,China N-triangle was discussed and the fear of states like Pak,having their nukes ending up in terrorist hands.Burke was firmly of the view that the two superpowers,the US and Russia could start the process by reducing their arsenals (possessing 94% of the world's N-weapons),which could see a possible cap on the N-ambitions of the other N-powers.If there was no progress on this front,in anotherd ecade or two we could see about 20 N-weapon states emerging.

This was also a feature of the latest USNI proceedings magazine (Oct.issue),where the "two Normans",Polmar and Freidman wrote on the IN's new toy,the Arihant and its significance.One view expressed was that the N-sub without a credible TN warhead (Santy's doubts analysed) on its missiles,could not be considered a successful strategic asset as modern cities were not made of wood like Hiroshima and Nagasaki,which is why large TN warheads were developed and deployed by the two superpowers and major N-powers.The dilemma of India which definitely needed to test again to validate its TN designs (as it did not have access to the vast data that the US,Russia,China and others had which allowed them simulation capabilities while designing their weapons),without upsetting growing relations the US,etc.,was analysed.One view was that Pak actually had an advantage over India in this situation.We are at a signal disadvantage against China in strategic terms and the synergy of the Sino-Pak nuclear nexus has put us in an extremeley dangerous state of vulnerability.It appears therefore that to truly protect ourselves against attack from China,we mustconduct a series of N-tests to validate our TN warhead designs for use on various sized missiles before we embark upon joining any international N-weapons cap,cutback,FMCT or test ban treaty.

PS:I mis-spelt.After displaying his "shockings" to the Chinese at the ASEANM summit,sending them reeling backwards,MMS should be called in future the "Loin" of Punjab!!

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Oct 2009 12:11

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/h ... efault.stm

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Oct 2009 12:25

China's navy to protect nation's trade all around the world
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Securi ... 235764864/

By ANDREI CHANGOrder reprints
Related Stories
China's navy goes global to protect its import sea lanes
HONG KONG, Feb. 27 (UPI) -- In the future, wherever Chinese merchant ships go, that area may be taken as China's national interest frontier and the trace of the "Chinese Aegis" class DDG may appear. Moreover, this theory gives the People's Republic of China a more convincing rationale for building its own aircraft carriers.

Clearly, the conventional Western analysis that the People's Liberation Army navy is following a progressive defense path by trying to first secure the waters within the "first island chain" -- the stretch of islands running parallel to China's coast, including Japan's Ryukyu Islands, Taiwan and the northern Philippines -- and then proceeding to the "second island chain" -- bordered by Guam, northern Australia and Indonesia -- is out of date.

Which island chain includes the coastline of Somalia? China's concept of a national interest frontier is not just a theoretical discussion. It is founded on the actual demands of combat operations. The People's Liberation Army Daily carried another article on Dec. 2, 2008, titled "Abandoning the Doctrine of Peaceful Military Build-up and Preparing for Military Confrontation That May Break Out Anytime." This caught the attention of Western military observers.

The belligerent wording in this treatise, at a time when tensions in the Taiwan Strait have greatly eased, has confused and worried analysts. Why did the author openly advocate preparations for military conflict at such a moment? Conflict with whom?

"Unless China is in possession of a credible core capability to win a regional war in the information era, China will not have the fundamental ability to accomplish other military missions," the article warned. "For China, although the possibility of a large-scale foreign invasion can be excluded, the danger of involvement in a regional war, military conflict and the interference of a superior opponent has never decreased," it said.

From the perspective of Chinese military strategists, China no longer has any national interest frontier, because all corners of the planet have established ties with China through trade. Chinese merchant ships are already navigating the waters of the four great oceans and have reached all parts of the five continents. This is an advantage that the Soviet Union did not have in earlier years.

In Africa, China is already the continent's third-largest trading partner, after the United States and France. In 2006 China's trade with Africa broke the $50 billion mark. It is critically important that Africa's natural resources provide a lifeline to China's economy.

China has been providing large quantities of Chinese-made weapons and military equipment to many countries in Africa, as this writer has described in earlier articles published by United Press International. Many of these were traded for oil.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 28 Oct 2009 12:36

Acharya,

A good find.

Very interesting!

santoshriyer · Post by **santoshriyer** » 28 Oct 2009 13:28

NEW DELHI: Preparations are progressing for the visit of the Dalai Lama to Arunachal Pradesh with chief minister Dorjee Khandu expected to receive
the Tibetan spiritual leader on his arrival in the north-eastern state.

The spiritual leader will be a state guest during his visit to Arunachal Pradesh and all protocol, including a tight security cover, will be in place when he arrives. Apart from the chief minister, other important political leaders are also expected to be at hand.

With Prime Minister Manmohan Singh clarifying that he had taken up Chinese statements on Arunachal Pradesh in the context of the Dalai Lama's visit, there is some edginess over how Beijing will react while the leader is in the state for a week from November 8.

But while the PM said he was not aware of the Dalai Lama's travel plans, the state government is moving ahead with its preparations, said Arunachal leaders who are in the Capital to consult with the Congress leadership over government formation in the state. Given the high esteem in which the Tibetan leader is held, the chief minister will be at hand when the Dalai Lama arrives in the state.

Central Congress leaders point out that the leader is revered by Buddhists and the Tawang monastery has been linked with Lhasa. Till the early 50s, the chief abbot of Tawang was appointed by the Drepung monastery in Lhasa. The view is that there is unlikely to be a last-minute change of plans and speculation to this effect was not well-founded.

The problem for the Centre lay in the possibility of tensions with China rising in the wake of the Dalai Lama's visit. Any move to ask the Dalai Lama to now call off his visit is clearly not on the cards after the PM's remarks on his dinner table talk with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao at the East Asia summit.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 165669.cms

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Oct 2009 15:18

Excellent find.The fact is that China has made a play for its navy operating around the globe some time ago,when a Chinese company won the contract for operating the Panama Canal.This was not udnerstood until the Chinese launched their Africa gambit,funding he continent's many dictators and leaders with bilions,in exchange for sole rights to trillions of worth of minerals,metals and petro reserves.The safe transit of such 21st century loot,where China has become the true heir to the East India Co. via the world's seas,is of paramount importance to the consuming giant,which is why in recent times,the Chinese themselves sspeak of building carriers (6 say some) in the future and a massive naval fleet.The IN and the PLN will chalklenge each other not only in the IOR but in the world's oceans in the coming decades,which is why India's development and acquisition of nuclear subs and their technology must be the first priority of the armed forces.

santoshriyer · Post by **santoshriyer** » 28 Oct 2009 15:26

Wrong move in Sino-Indian chess

The Indo-US strategic tie-up has served as the key instigation in China’s hardening stance towards India

Brahma Chellaney Mint October 26, 2009

The India-China relationship has entered choppy waters due to a perceptible hardening in the Chinese stance. Anti-India rhetoric in the state-run Chinese media has intensified, even as China has stepped up military pressure along the disputed Himalayan frontier through frequent cross-border incursions. Beijing also has resurrected its long dormant claim to Arunachal Pradesh.

http://chellaney.spaces.live.com/blog/c ... 1123.entry
Hope this has not been posted before

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 28 Oct 2009 17:25

Would the chinese utterances on Arunachal in anyway have helped a particular party win a majority there?

Also, would kargil incursions have been an issue if kargil was itself shown to be disputed to the extent that - 'they have their perceptions and we have ours'
In other words, even if a kargil was to occur in Arunachal & elsewhere, isn't it very convenient for the Govt to say its a perception issue and hence not do anything about it?
A very convenient face saving exercise ?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 28 Oct 2009 18:21

Frozen Smiles, limp handshakes

Only recently, it reminded our neighbours that India had hegemonistic tendencies while extending its “peaceful” relationship with them, while claiming “harmonious rise” in a wary neighbourhood. The prime example of this is the manner in which China has godfathered Pakistan’s India-specific nuclear and missile capabilities.
China is our powerful neighbour and India and China are not in the same league. Pakistan refused to accept this reality in its relations with India and today finds itself adrift despite valiant US efforts to shore up its ally. It is best to accept the India-China reality and fashion our responses accordingly.
There is nothing to be gained either by becoming a hysterical tabloid nation when it comes to a bigger neighbour or a helpless flailing state when we have to deal with a smaller neighbour. We simply have to evolve a method of peaceful cohabitation; there is nothing to be gained by jingoism and everything to be lost by seeming to be weak and succumbing to pressure. It is quite likely that the Chinese leadership will glower at us from across the Himalayas; should that happen we should not blink — and it should not be that His Holiness suddenly develops a diplomatic illness! That would be most unfortunate because that would, in effect, give the Chinese a veto on our relations with His Holiness and decide who visits Tawang.
Thus, we need to be able to protect our interests more effectively, at and inside our borders, in our neighbourhood, the seas that surround us and in Asia. Therefore, massive infrastructure development is required in the Northeast which is people-friendly and not simply meant to cater to our strategic requirements. There has to be two-way socio-cultural assimilation of the region with the rest of India. Instead of buying loss-making companies abroad, we should be adopting regions for development. It is in our interest to develop friendlier relationships with countries on China’s periphery and strengthening relationships with the US and Japan is part of this policy. The armed forces — all three wings — need upgrading, with long-range strike aircrafts as well.
Diplomacy would need to be more nimble-footed and proactive rather than reactive. We have to look at 2050 and work accordingly. Short-term “band aid” solutions will not do. Until then it would be good to follow Sun Tzu’s advice: “The side that knows when to fight and when not will take the victory. There are roadways not to be travelled, walled cities not to be assaulted”.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 28 Oct 2009 18:44

http://blog.usni.org/?p=681

A port being built in southern Sri Lanka near the main shipping route across the Indian Ocean is part of a Chinese effort to project influence and protect vital trade lanes, according to a US military study, Asia Pulse reported.
The study lists the commercial-shipping container port at Hambantota being built by Chinese contractors as part of China’s so-called “string of pearls” strategy to gain political influence and be able to project power in the Indian Ocean region.
The report, “Joint Operating Environment 2008,” was produced by the Norfolk-based US Joint Forces Command.
You can find the referenced, unclassified, Joint Forces Command document, Joint Operating Environment 2008 (JOE2008) here. The analysis of China strategic intentions is well worth reading:
Yet, one of the fascinating aspects of China’s emergence over the past three decades has been its efforts to learn from the external world. This has not represented a blatant aping nor an effort to cherry pick ideas from history or Western theoretical writings on strategy and war, but rather a contentious, open debate to examine and draw lessons from West’s experience. Two historical case studies have resonated with the Chinese: the Soviet Union’s collapse and the rise of Germany in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These case studies, written in a series of books, were also made into documentary films and form one of the most popular shows on Chinese television.
In the case of the Soviets, the Chinese have drawn the lesson that they must not pursue military development at the expense of economic development – no traditional arms race. That is the path Deng laid out in the late 1970s and one which they have assiduously followed. Indeed, if one examines their emerging military capabilities in intelligence, submarines, cyber, and space, one sees an asymmetrical operational approach that is different from Western approaches, one consistent with the classical Chinese strategic thinkers.
***
In regard to a potential military competition with the United States, what is apparent in Chinese discussions is a deep respect for U.S. military power. There is a sense that in certain areas, such as submarines, space, and cyber warfare, China can compete on a near equal footing with America. One does not devote the significant national treasure required to build nuclear submarines for coastal defense. The emphasis on nuclear submarines and an increasingly global Navy in particular, underlines worries that the U.S. Navy possesses the ability to shut down China’s energy imports of oil – 80% of which go through the straits of Malacca. As one Chinese naval strategist expressed it: “the straits of Malacca are akin to breathing itself — to life itself.”
I’ve discussed the “String of Pearls” structure China is pursuing in previous posts on my own blog (see here, here; compare with India’s sea lane interests here, here and here).
The lengths to which China is willing to go to protect their strategic lifeline is a measure of their measure of its importance. Unspoken of in the Cargoasia piece is the lesson to be learned from the Japanese in WWII, who had their own “string of pearls” from the resource rich Malaysia/Indochina to protect for their needed oil and other supples. Japan sought to push out their defensive perimeter to better protect these sea lanes, their failure at Midway to destroy the U.S. carrier fleet spelled doom for their plans.
The vital sea lanes of China include much of the same waters Japan sought to control but extend even further to the Middle East and Africa. The success of the U.S. submarine fleet in interdicting the Japanese supply chain in Worl War II must weigh heavy in Chinese military thought.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Oct 2009 20:57

X-posted as it gives a good idea of the shipping trade traffic thru Indian Ocean.

raghunath wrote:A very nice representation of reachability of major cities from any place in the world. Incidentally, India scores as high as developed countries, while some place in tibet seems to be most unreachable place in the world.

Chinis are most vulnerable at Malacca straits

For more about road, rail and shipping routes of the world in the form of maps like above click here

If we could add the anti-Piracy chart for sake of completeness it would be good.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 29 Oct 2009 00:26

sheroo wrote:...........

username changed from tigersant to sheroo.
you can request a human sounding username of your choice if you want,
Rahul.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 29 Oct 2009 08:49

KS on the China issue once again. Essentially saying that major powers have a long term interest in India balancing China.

http://www.maritimeindia.org/pdfs/ks25Oct09.pdf

India and International balance of forces

Our own leaders in the past have been practioners of real politik and were not
encumbered with burdens of past memories. They explored and exploited the possibilities
of international opportunities to the best advantage of the country .

Skillful diplomacy calls for identification of opportunities in the changing alignment of forces to further our
national interest. India’s response to the initiative of US, Russia and France to change
the rules of the non-proliferation regime to accommodate India was an imaginative one -
though it evoked significant opposition domestically from those who found it difficult to
understand the changes taking place in the international politics and adjust themselves
accordingly.

While in India there is a correct appreciation that the US and
China have developed a mutuality of interests on ensuring that the US dollar does not get
weakened and there is mutual co-ordination between the countries to safeguard their
respective economic interests, it is wrongly extrapolated to conclude that the US has
moved closer to China than it was to India under President Bush.

This is the favorable factor that India should exploit in trying to deal with China. The
major powers have an interest in strengthening India. There is no point in reviving the
memories of the Cold War era and worrying whether the US is trustworthy. We have to
look at their current and future national interest calculations and calibrate our responses
astutely.

Umrao Das · Post by **Umrao Das** » 29 Oct 2009 10:01

You call incursionsas 'pinpricks'? It's Chinese acupuncture, silly! To numb you before a majore operation

Just Like That!

By Ajit Ninan

santoshriyer · Post by **santoshriyer** » 29 Oct 2009 10:04

Rahul M wrote:
sheroo wrote:...........
username changed from tigersant to sheroo.
you can request a human sounding username of your choice if you want,
Rahul.

Rahul ji

Can you please change my user name to santoshriyer

Santosh

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Oct 2009 11:44

The revelations that Burma is actively pursuing a clandestine nuclear weapons programme,courtesy NoKo and obviously with the blessings of India,putting its key facilities in tunnels and underground,indicates that China considers Burma as an equally key ally as Pak to encircle and strangle India in the IOR.Both Burma and Pak have land borders with China,where the infrastructure is being rapidly modernised and expanded to enable Chinese troops in the future access in a global crisis.China will thus be able to project power and protect its shipping fleet using both Pak and Burma as bases.Smaller countries like Lanka and B'Desh will be pressurised to allow logistic help, for the PLN.EXtra pressure will be exerted from Nepal and the PRC will also make full use of its African partnerships.India's work both diplomatic and military is cut out.

A complete reappraisal of India's relationship with China,which appears to be merrily rolling downhill,thanks to the intemperate behaviour of the Chinese,is the need of the hour and quick decision making to bolster up the armed forces the top priority.The global equation in future dealing with the Chinese challenge should be analysed and as the world's largest democracy-as opposed to China's dictatorship,a holistic approach and strategy is neccessary,that encompasses diplomatic,military,economic,cultural and religious aspects of the challenge.India must not forget that as the fountainhead of Buddhism,a vast swathe of ASEAN and Far eastern countries have a majority of Buddhists in their population (from Sri Lanka to the Far East).We should leverage our heritage and influence using every advantage that we have over China.

Akshut · Post by **Akshut** » 29 Oct 2009 15:51

raghunath wrote:
For more about road, rail and shipping routes of the world in the form of maps like above click here

From the same link.
Notice AP

The map is from New Scientist magazine issue of 2nd April 2009.
Is AP disputed land according to the UN(like Kashmir is)? Or, is it just the Chinese claim sprouting from their imagination?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Oct 2009 19:12

From Business Line-and the Hindu stable.Former HC to Pak. G.Parthasarathy on not buckling down to China.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/200 ... 200800.htm

A rising China flexes its muscle

India should not buckle under Chinese pressure, by reversing its decision on the Dalai Lama’s visit to Tawang. Firmness, together with restraint in rhetoric, and not appeasement, should be the basis for dealing with a growingly jingoistic China, says G. PARTHASARATHY.

The mouthpiece of China’s Communist Party, the People’s Daily claimed on October 14, 2009, that Indians have become “more narrow minded”. It accused India of “provocation” on border issues with China and asserted that as “nationalism sentiment” rises, Indians are turning to “hegemony” in relations with neighbours.

The People’s Daily called on India to give a “positive response” to China’s efforts to resolve the border issue. Pakistan was referred to as one of the countries suffering from Indian “hegemony”, as India allegedly sought to “befriend the far (US and Russia) and attack the near (Pakistan and China)”. The Chinese conveniently forget how they colluded against India with the Nixon Administration during the Bangladesh conflict in 1971 and with the Clinton Administration, after India’s nuclear tests in 1998.

While China has relentlessly sought to denigrate and undermine India’s relations with countries in its Indian Ocean neighbourhood, even going to the extent of transferring nuclear weapons designs and know-how to Pakistan, India has yet to fashion coherent policies on the fears that China’s East Asian and South-East Asian neighbours have of China’s efforts to dominate the Asia-Pacific Region.

Assured by the support it received after a visit by Deng Xiao Ping’s visit to Washington, China launched an unprovoked attack on Vietnam in order to “teach” Vietnam a “lesson” in 1979. Deng proclaimed that the “lesson” was meant to be similar to that administered to India in 1962. China again used force against Vietnam when it forcibly occupied the Paracel islands in 1974. There was yet another military engagement between China and Vietnam, when China occupied the “Johnson Reef” in 1988. In July 1992, China occupied Vietnam’s Da Lac Reef, establishing its first military presence there since the 1988 clash with Vietnam.

China’s expansionism

Chinese “expansionism” is feared all across East and South-East Asia. China claims that its territorial waters engulf 3 million square kilometres out of the total area of 3.5 million square kilometres in the South China Sea. Given such claims about its ever expanding maritime frontiers, China is today engulfed in maritime disputes with Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei, Indonesia, Japan and both North and South Korea. Earlier this year, China complained about an “official landing” by Malaysia in islands it had claimed.

In the same week, the Philippines President, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, signed a decree laying claim to two islands that China had claimed. In February 1995, China militarily occupied the “Mischief Reef” in the Spratlys Islands, which was claimed by the Philippines. A month later Filipino forces seized Chinese fishing boats and destroyed Chinese markers in “Mischief Reef”.

Malaysia and Vietnam have joined hands to counter Chinese expansionism, by jointly submitting a proposal to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea questioning China’s claims and definition of its continental shelf.

It is precisely such belligerence, which prompts China’s Asia-Pacific neighbours to seek a US presence in the region. India would be well advised to seek a more wide ranging strategic engagement with China’s Asia-Pacific neighbours like Vietnam and Philippines in response to China’s policies of seeking to undermine India’s relations with its immediate neighbours.

While intimidating its smaller neighbours on issues of its maritime boundaries by its growing military strength, China finds its quest for hegemony hampered by two large Asian neighbours — Japan and India. It seeks to exclude the United States and India from regional forums by calling for the establishment of an “East Asian Community”.

Equation with Japan

Concerned by such Chinese moves, Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong asserted: “I think the US has to be part of the Asia-Pacific and the overall architecture of cooperation within the Asia Pacific”. This fear of Chinese expansionism is accentuated by the virtual paralysis in Japanese foreign policy, in recent times.

The Chinese have spread fears about a revival of World War II Japanese “militarism” and put Japan on the defensive by protesting about visits of Japanese leaders to the Yasukuni Shrine, which is dedicated to the memory of soldiers killed in service of the country.

Having emerged as the largest trading partner of Asia’s three largest economies — Japan, South Korea and India and a major trading partner of the Asean, China appears determined to combine its economic clout and its military potential to emerge as Asia’s dominant power.

Apart from using its maritime strength to enforce its territorial claims in the Asia-Pacific, China now seeks to become a dominant player in the sea lanes of the Indian Ocean.

Hence its proposal to the Commander of the US Pacific Fleet that in return for recognition of American dominance in the Eastern Pacific, the Americans should acknowledge that the Western Pacific and Indian Ocean Regions as China’s sphere of influence.

China’s growing belligerence on the border issue should be seen in this context of its determination to be the dominant power in Asia. Given Japan’s readiness to succumb to Chinese pressures and avoid taking adequate responsibility for peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean Regions, Beijing’s rulers see an emerging India, which shows the potential for rapid economic growth, while being respected in the comity of nations as a stable democracy, as an irritant and challenge to its larger ambitions.

Issues with India

The unresolved border issue serves as a useful tool to keep India on edge and under pressure. China knows that no government in India can agree to its claims on populated areas like Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh and has yet to explain why it reversed the position it took in 2005, when it implicitly acknowledged that while seeking a border settlement, the status of populated areas would not be changed .

Moreover, even though China acknowledged on November 7, 1950 that the “so-called McMahon Line” was the Line of Control in the Eastern Sector and reiterated this on November 21, 1962, Chinese forces increasingly violate the McMahon Line.

One of the greatest failures of China’s Communist Revolution is that despite Han Chinese constituting 91 per cent of the country’s population, the Chinese are paranoid and insecure about their ability to handle 9 per cent of their minority populations in the strategically important Buddhist-dominated Tibetan Autonomous Region and in the Muslim-majority Xinjiang Province, despite bringing in Han settlers to reduce the indigenous populations to a minority.

Tawang is seen as symbolically crucial in Chinese eyes as a centre of Buddhist spiritualism. By laying claim to the whole of Arunachal Pradesh, China seeks to put India on the defensive, diplomatically and militarily. The Prime Minister told his Chinese counterpart in Bangkok that India regards the Dalai Lama as an “honoured guest” and a spiritual leader.

Even as the dialogue with China continues, to maintain peace and tranquillity along our borders India should not buckle under Chinese pressure by reversing its decision on the Dalai Lama’s visit to Tawang. Firmness, together with restraint in rhetoric, and not appeasement, should be the basis for dealing with a growingly jingoistic China.

(The author is a former High Commissioner to Pakistan. [email protected])

Related Stories:
Dragonspeak on border
India and China — Complex engagement
Chinese designs on the border

Also in the same issue,another great piece,"Who believes China's Bernie Madoff economic data".

http://www.rgemonitor.com/globalmacro-m ... adoff_data

Who Believes China’s ‘Bernie Madoff’ Data?
PrintShare
Delicious Digg Facebook reddit Technorati Barry Ritholtz | Oct 22, 2009
I don’t want to spend too much time on this, but I have to laugh every quarter when we get economic data out of China.

China’s economy expanded at the fastest pace in a year as stimulus spending and record lending growth helped the nation lead the world out of recession. Gross domestic product rose 8.9 percent in the third quarter from a year earlier, the statistics bureau said in Beijing today. The median of 34 estimates in a Bloomberg News survey was for a 9 percent gain. Separate reports showed industrial production and retail sales accelerated in September.

The dollar headed higher and Asian stocks dropped on concern that the acceleration in China’s growth will spur policy makers to consider withdrawing record fiscal and monetary stimulus in coming quarters. Qin Xiao, chairman of China Merchants Bank Co., this week said it’s “urgent” for the central bank to tighten policy to avert asset-price bubbles.

I look askance at the US economic data — skewed, massaged, modeled to within an inch of its life. But its mostly transparent, with the statisticians readily available for further discussion.

The Chinese data looks to me as if it is issued by edict — they are non-transparent, well managed, and remarkably consistent over time.

I wonder if Beijing’s accountant is an 80-year-old with offices in New City and Florida . . .

Originally published at The Big Picture and reproduced here with the author's permission.

Opinions and comments on RGE EconoMonitors do not necessarily reflect the views of Roubini Global Economics, LLC, which encourages a free-ranging debate among its own analysts and our EconoMonitor community. RGE takes no responsibility for verifying the accuracy of any opinions expressed by outside contributors. We encourage cross-linking but must insist that no forwarding, reprinting, republication or any other redistribution of RGE content is permissible without expressed consent of RGE.

James B · Post by **James B** » 30 Oct 2009 04:46

Prosperity Index.

http://prosperity.com/rankings.aspx

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 Oct 2009 06:05

sheroo wrote: Rahul ji

Can you please change my user name to santoshriyer

Santosh

done.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 30 Oct 2009 06:32

The article by Ashley Tellis proves that India counts on a strong India US relationship to counter China. In other words India on its own cannot counter China. There are uncertainties regarding this under Obama administration. Let' see what happens during the Nov trip by MMS.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 30 Oct 2009 08:10

What was written 50 years back as Editorial in The Hindu is worth recalling.

The split in the Indian Communist Party over the attitude to be adopted to Chinese aggression on our border areas, is likely to go very deep and may decide the future of the party in this country. While leaders like Mr. Ranadive have consistently held China up as the model and accepted Peking’s leadership for Asia, Mr. Dange has openly criticised Chinese moves, both in Tibet and on the Indian border. The Secretary of the Party, Mr. Ajoy Ghosh, has tried to gloss over these differences and expressed the belief that they arise over a temporary misunderstanding. But the fact remains that, once constitutional methods are adopted, as the Communist Party purported to do at its Amritsar Congress, the forces of public opinion have to be taken into account and such opinion will make itself felt not only in Parliament but in the very States where the Communists are most strongly rooted, such as Kerala and West Bengal. We may expect the division in the Indian Communist Party to be reflected in the whole Communist world where Chinese policies have not by any means been popular. The West could justifiably express scepticism regarding Communist professions of anxiety for peace and disarmament when China, with its army of two and a half million, is openly pushing forward her frontiers in Asia.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 30 Oct 2009 09:03

csharma wrote:The article by Ashley Tellis proves that India counts on a strong India US relationship to counter China. In other words India on its own cannot counter China. There are uncertainties regarding this under Obama administration. Let' see what happens during the Nov trip by MMS.

I agree.

Should the US and PRC coordinate to screw Dilli (say, as Beijing's pound of flesh demanded from DC), we would be in doo-doo, maybe. Hope and pray our TNs are as reliable at command performances as are our TN politicians.....

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 30 Oct 2009 13:09

Rahul M wrote:
sheroo wrote: Rahul ji

Can you please change my user name to santoshriyer

Santosh
done.

can you please change mine also to "Gabbar Singh". Thanks.

Sachin · Post by **Sachin** » 30 Oct 2009 14:08

While leaders like Mr. Ranadive have consistently held China up as the model and accepted Peking’s leadership for Asia, Mr. Dange has openly criticised Chinese moves, both in Tibet and on the Indian border

Noted communist leader from Kerala EMS Namboodirippad had made a statement some time during 1962 war that "India is fighting for an area which both India and China claims it as their own" (it was like a US citizen making a neutral statement, when our man EMS was happily sitting in Kerala). And recently I think A.Rajah (of CPI) also went ahead and said that EMS's findings were true, as the Indian Ambassador to China Nirupama Rao also made such a statement. I am not sure whether EMS made this "neutral" statement when our ill-equipped Jawans were dying out there in the Himalayas, or some time after the war.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 30 Oct 2009 15:52

Govt to extend rail link to Sikkim

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 30 Oct 2009 17:29

shyamd wrote: Intel machinery is gearing up for China threat. NTRO is leading interceptions in stations in Arunachal. RAW is having a bit of trouble sorting out the China dept. More later and when appropriate.

Uma Mishra was supposed to become head of China operations at RAW. He was a deputy director and a former station chief in Beijing for many years but his circle had been penetrated by Chinese intelligence. He was operating under the diplomatic cover of first secretary at the Indian embassy in Beijing. The chap was sleeping around and had 2 mistresses(his chinese interpretor and housekeeper) There was some sort of fight between the two and RAW got a little suspicious. Both turned out to be from 2 rival chinese intelligence agencies. (Double penetration

) For the last few weeks, he is under investigation for corruption. This guy was supposedly our top china watchers. This means the head of china desk at Dilli is vacant.

NTRO has set up listening stations in Arunachal. Yindu special forces have been doing some reconnaissance and other missions into China. The 30,000 men of mountain division will join up and work with these special forces. Chinese have also been sending their special forces into indian territory. Both sides are little worried that the 2 special forces troops may meet and cause a border clash of some sort. The chances are very high at the moment.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 30 Oct 2009 18:01

Is India more prosperous than China?

Is India more prosperous than China? Yes, says the Legatum Prosperity Index. India ranks 45th in the index well ahead of China.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 30 Oct 2009 18:17

SS you should have added 'when it had not been taken over and turned into a propaganda mouthpiece of the Stalinists and their masters' ...

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Oct 2009 19:10

India cannot count on the US or anyone else in daling with China or any other obnoxious state .It will have to depend upon its own resources.The US and China remember let down Pak very badly during the '71 War,when both sides were in close touch,establishing a handshake and Nixon told the Chinese that they could attack India if they so wished! Mrs.G outsmarted all three nations,Pak,the US and China! The knee-jerk reaction to the current Chinese threat (extending the rail lnik to Sikkim,new roads,reactivating old WW2 airstrips,extra mountain divisions,etc.,etc.) show our alarm and desperation and will take years to accomplish.That we've been sleeping thanks to China's disarming diplomacy that has now been discarded,with the dragon showing its true face and fire,is entirely our fault,more so of the current regime which did bugger all for the last 5 years and is now trying to show that it has the wherewithal,at least diplomatically,to meet the challenge.The stark truth as our dear service chiefs have put it,is that China is way ahead of us militarily both in conventionala nd nuclear weaponry and we will have to resort to using our native cunning,innovation and improvisation-for which we are famous,assymetric warfare in modern lingo,to douse the dragon's flames.