People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1389
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by ashish raval »

^^ doing this that will eventually end up in nothing !! The only place which is full of strategic donkey's is GoI. They truely live in a world of frogs in well with no sense of what Geopolitical chess game will be in next 5, 10, 50 or perhaps 100 years time. We have now been left with a tiny piece of land with 1 billion population which is growing at massive rate. Do you really think India will become Japan at this rate ever ? I can bet not in my lifetime. Till India elects a leader who is 40 years old, we will never be on 1st step of ladder to become a superpower.
For heaven's sake expand operations in Afghanistan and request Russia to use its territory or provide us with intelligence on Gilgit and Baltistan ! Without intelligence we will end up with bunch of jokers and ducks. Chinese are 10X times superior in Cyber Warfare and our only cutting edge in mountain warfare over them is blunted everyday by them and will overtake us in next 5-7 years. We need to seriously give brahmos free to Nepal, Mongolia, taiwan, vietnam and scrap one china policy. India needs to step up its engagement with nepal on security and military.China is preparing itself for multiple wars 1) take on US in yellow sea region and defend itself against India in west.
Cut chinese to its size. We need to point 10 Agni's on 3 Gorges dam and 10 Nuke tipped one's for each Beijing, Shanghai and Hongkong. Leak this news out to chinese media and see the dance. Bangladesh should be told in clear terms that what happens in Gilgit can happen in Dhaka too. So if they want to gang up with imperialists and communists they can do so but next time they can forget India for any help. Soft power does not work in this world everyone is ready to rape a weak women but no one would dare to go near if she is carrying an ak-47.
India should take aim at chinese manufacturing and take massive piece of slice from it.
We have to make indegenous manufacturing completely taxfree like IT for atleast 10 years and cut deep into chinese export markets.
:evil:
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by SSridhar »

The question to ask is why is GoI saying no such thing happened ?
Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2654
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Jarita »

^^^ Macao
TonyMontana
BRFite
Posts: 529
Joined: 18 Aug 2010 04:00
Location: Pro-China-Anti-CCP-Land

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by TonyMontana »

ashish raval wrote: We need to seriously give brahmos free to Nepal, Mongolia, taiwan, vietnam and scrap one china policy. India needs to step up its engagement with nepal on security and military.

Cut chinese to its size. We need to point 10 Agni's on 3 Gorges dam and 10 Nuke tipped one's for each Beijing, Shanghai and Hongkong. Leak this news out to chinese media and see the dance.
Let's say India does all of these.

BREAKING NEWS: Beijing 2012
After an emergency session of the People's National Congress, China today announced that it will demilitarise the entire Sino-Indian frontier and move all PLA units at least 200km inside Chinese controled terriories in an effort to lower tension in the region. China also halted all current and future military cooperation with Pakistan. A spokesmen was quoted as saying:"We can no longer support a failed regime because our support of the regime puts our entire existence as a civilisation at risk." The Chinese Foreign Minister also met with his indian counter part today in an effort to quickly settle the disputed borders. By analysising the recent editorials in party controled new papers, many expect major concesssions will be made by the Chinese.

Really? Do you really believe this?
sourab_c
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 14 Feb 2009 18:07
Location: around

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by sourab_c »

SSridhar wrote:
The question to ask is why is GoI saying no such thing happened ?
It is our post-independence "Hide under the carpet" diplomacy which ensures that our Government gets away with any inaction.

If the reasons behind removing Indian maps at the Expo are indeed true as mentioned in that TOI article, then the People's party has indeed gone bonkers. This is laughable. No country ever shapes their foreign policy based on what a few fan boys write on their online blogs. This is anything but a mature decision by PRC. Supervising public opinion is one thing, but if such drastic diplomatic actions can be taken so quickly without any thought based on an online blog, then we need not be intimidated by these jokers. One day, PRC will very well go to war for the sake of such public opinion too, all for the wrong reasons and with the wrong country, which will ultimately ensure that it is bombed back to the stone ages.
abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by abhik »

Raghavendra wrote:Why China seized India maps at Shanghai Expo? http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 457769.cms
Bizarre explanation..
The Chinese government closely watches Internet postings to gauze public opinion and often acts on them to calm signs of dissent.
"Anger! World Expo India, the Indian Pavilion brochure map actually includes southern Tibet!" club.china.com said while initiating a thread for discussing the subject. Several other Chinese sites including junshi.xilu.com and bbs.city.tianya.cn have published the maps from the brochures and even questioned the Chinese government's inability to stop its distribution. ...

if only the Indian government worked the same way and read BRF to gauge public opinion :(( .
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by abhishek_sharma »

This was published in May. Sorry if posted before:

The Geography of Chinese Power

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ ... ?page=show

...

Like Xinjiang, Tibet is essential to China's territorial self-conception, and like Xinjiang, it affects China's external relations. The mountainous Tibetan Plateau, rich in copper and iron ore, accounts for much of China's territory. This is why Beijing views with horror the prospect of Tibetan autonomy, let alone independence, and why it is frantically building roads and railroads across the area. Without Tibet, China would be but a rump -- and India would add a northern zone to its subcontinental power base.

With its one-billion-plus population, India already is a blunt geographic wedge in China's zone of influence in Asia. A map of "Greater China" in Zbigniew Brzezinski's 1997 book The Grand Chessboard makes this point vividly. To some degree, China and India are indeed destined by geography to be rivals: neighbors with immense populations, rich and venerable cultures, and competing claims over territory (for example, the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh). The issue of Tibet only exacerbates these problems. India has been hosting the Dalai Lama's government in exile since 1957, and according to Daniel Twining, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund, recent Chinese-Indian border tensions "may be related to worries in Beijing over the Dalai Lama's succession": the next Dalai Lama might come from the Tibetan cultural belt that stretches across northern India, Nepal, and Bhutan, presumably making him even more pro-Indian and anti-Chinese. China and India will play a "great game" not only in those areas but also in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Xinjiang and Tibet fall within China's legal borders, but the Chinese government's tense relations with the peoples of both provinces suggest that as Beijing expands its influence beyond its ethnic Han core, it is bound to encounter resistance.

...

The largest country of mainland Southeast Asia is Myanmar. If Pakistan is the Balkans of Asia, at risk of being dismembered, Myanmar is like early-twentieth-century Belgium, at risk of being overrun by its great neighbors. Like Mongolia, the Russian Far East, and other territories on China's land borders, Myanmar is a feeble state abundant in the natural resources that China desperately needs. China and India are competing to develop the deep-water port of Sittwe, on Myanmar's Indian Ocean seaboard, with both harboring the hope of eventually building gas pipelines running from offshore fields in the Bay of Bengal.

...

But Korea's enmity toward Japan is significantly greater than its enmity toward China. (Japan occupied the peninsula from 1910 to 1945, and Seoul and Tokyo continue to argue over the status of the Tokdo/Takeshima islets.) Economic relations would be stronger with China than with Japan: a unified Korea would be more or less under Seoul's control, and China already is South Korea's biggest trading partner. Finally, a reunified Korea that tilted slightly toward Beijing and away from Japan would have little reason to continue hosting U.S. troops. In other words, it is easy to conceive of a Korean future within a Greater China and a time when the United States' ground presence in Northeast Asia will diminish.


...


The political scientist John Mearsheimer wrote in The Tragedy of Great Power Politics that "the most dangerous states in the international system are continental powers with large armies." This might be reason to fear China's influence as the country becomes more of a continental power. But China only partially fits Mearsheimer's description: its army, 1.6 million strong, is the largest in the world, but it will not have an expeditionary capability for years to come.

...

China's unprecedented strength on land is partly thanks to Chinese diplomats, who in recent years have busily settled many border disputes with Central Asian republics, Russia, and other neighbors (India is the striking exception).

...

But China is not so self-confident. Still an insecure sea power, it thinks about the ocean territorially: the very terms "first island chain" and "second island chain" (the second island chain includes the U.S. territories of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands) suggest that the Chinese see all these islands as archipelagic extensions of the Chinese landmass. In thinking in such a zero-sum fashion about their country's adjoining seas, China's naval leaders are displaying the aggressive philosophy of the turn-of-the-twentieth-century U.S. naval strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan, who argued for sea control and the decisive battle.

...

According to a 2009 RAND study, by the year 2020, the United States will no longer be able to defend Taiwan from a Chinese attack. The Chinese, argues the report, will by that time be able to defeat the United States in a war in the Taiwan Strait even if the United States has F-22s, two carrier strike groups, and continued access to the Kadena Air Base, in Okinawa, Japan. The report emphasizes the air battle. The Chinese would still have to land tens of thousands of troops by sea and would be susceptible to U.S. submarines. Yet the report, with all its caveats, does highlight a disturbing trend. China is just 100 miles away from Taiwan, whereas the United States must project military power from half a world away and with more limited access to foreign bases than it had during the Cold War. China's strategy to deny the U.S. Navy entry into certain waters is designed not only to keep U.S. forces away generally but also, specifically, to foster its dominance over Taiwan.

...

There is, however, a contradiction at the heart of China's efforts to project power at sea in the Asian Mediterranean and beyond. On the one hand, China seems intent on denying U.S. vessels easy access to its coastal seas. On the other, it is still incapable of protecting its lines of communication at sea, which would make any attack on a U.S. warship futile, since the U.S. Navy could simply cut off Chinese energy supplies by interdicting Chinese ships in the Pacific and Indian oceans. Why even bother trying to deny access if you never intend to enforce it? According to the defense consultant Jacqueline Newmyer, Beijing aims to create "a disposition of power so favorable" that "it will not actually have to use force to secure its interests." Showcasing new weapons systems, building port facilities and listening posts in the Pacific and Indian oceans, giving military aid to littoral states located between Chinese territory and the Indian Ocean -- none of these moves is secret; all are deliberate displays of power. Rather than fight the United States outright, the Chinese seek to influence U.S. behavior precisely so as to avoid a confrontation.

...

Tensions on land may reinforce tensions at sea: the power vacuums that China is now filling will in due course bring it into uneasy contact with, at a minimum, India and Russia. Once-empty spaces are becoming crowded with people, roads, pipelines, ships -- and missiles. The Yale political scientist Paul Bracken warned in 1999 that Asia was becoming a closed geography and faced a crisis of "room." That process has only continued since.

...


The Garrett plan also envisions a dramatic expansion of U.S. naval activity in the Indian Ocean. It does not envision enlarging existing U.S. bases, however; it anticipates relying on bare-bones facilities in the Andaman Islands :eek: , the Comoros, the Maldives, Mauritius, Réunion, and the Seychelles (some of which are run directly or indirectly by France and India), as well as on defense agreements with Brunei, Malaysia, and Singapore. This would ensure free navigation and unimpeded energy flows throughout Eurasia. And by both de-emphasizing the importance of existing U.S. bases in Japan and South Korea and diversifying the United States' footprint around Oceania, the plan would do away with easy-to-target "master" bases.

The United States' hold on the first island chain is beginning to be pried loose anyway. Local populations have become less agreeable to the presence of foreign troops in their midst. And the rise of China makes Beijing intimidating and appealing at once -- mixed feelings that could complicate the United States' bilateral relations with its Pacific allies. It is about time. The current crisis in U.S.-Japanese relations -- which has arisen because the inexperienced Hatoyama government wants to rewrite the rules of the bilateral relationship in its favor even as it talks of developing deeper ties with China -- should have occurred years ago. The United States' still extraordinarily paramount position in the Pacific Ocean is an outdated legacy of World War II, a function of the devastation that China, Japan, and the Philippines suffered during the conflict. Nor can the United States' presence on the Korean Peninsula, a byproduct of a war that ended over half a century ago, last forever.

...

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12686
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Pratyush »

Marten wrote:Why is there a complete lack of consternation among the DDMs over the transfer of control of Gilgit to PRC?

11,000 troops on the ground is a huge number! When people talk of the glacier, are they talking of Baltoro? In which case, how many of these troops are in Skardu? Worse, how many should we expect shortly across the Saltoro?

SNIP

.
Marten, for the DDM the POK is a relic of the past. They are busy building a constituency in India to give up Cashmier to TSP. So how can you expect them to show any concern for Indian POK.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by abhishek_sharma »

SSridhar wrote:
The question to ask is why is GoI saying no such thing happened ?
Last year a FIR was lodged against the ToI reporter who wrote an article on ITBP soldiers being injured due to Chinese firing. So this is not unexpected.

Moreover, we can always explain why the Chinese (and the Paakis) behave in the way they do. What is great about GoI (and DDM) is that they have superhuman capacity to understand the viewpoints of others and empathize with them.
krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5881
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by krisna »

Pratyush wrote:
Marten wrote:Why is there a complete lack of consternation among the DDMs over the transfer of control of Gilgit to PRC?
11,000 troops on the ground is a huge number! When people talk of the glacier, are they talking of Baltoro? In which case, how many of these troops are in Skardu? Worse, how many should we expect shortly across the Saltoro?
SNIP
.
Marten, for the DDM the POK is a relic of the past. They are busy building a constituency in India to give up Cashmier to TSP. So how can you expect them to show any concern for Indian POK.

Army readies for China threat
The New York Times’ disclosure on Saturday that there are 11,000 Chinese troops in Gilgit-Baltistan is a “developing story” for the Indian Army, sources said.

The sources added that they were aware of what was going on.

The issue has been discussed and a strategic response worked out based on the apprehension that the threat would manifest itself by 2020.

Silence was being deliberately maintained, sources
After this , now we have this report from TOIlet

India to verify reports of Chinese presence in PoK, says govt

who is fooling whom!
Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15178
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Suraj »

India to resort to stapled visas for Tibetans
Agitated by Beijing's denial of visa to a senior Indian Army official and now concerned over the presence of the biggest neighbour's army in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK), India is looking at measures to tackle the Pakistan-China nexus.

Meanwhile, New Delhi is considering issuing stapled visas for applicants from Tibet and those from areas conceded to China by Pakistan if China persists with stapled visas.

The proposal under consideration by the foreign office has to be cleared by Cabinet Committee for Security.

Recently, China had denied entry to general officer commanding-in-chief of northern area command Lieutenant General B.S. Jaswal saying he was responsible for Jammu and Kashmir, a state that the neighbouring country claims is disputed.

Also, China has been stapling visa to people from Jammu and Kashmir instead of stamping on the passport as it does in other cases. India has already objected to the move but Beijing has been adamant.
pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4172
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by pgbhat »

If it was upto moi, I would stamp an Indian visa with the text "Communist Occupied, Oppressed People's Republic of China" in it. :evil:
Manishw
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 21 Jul 2010 02:46

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Manishw »

^^ You have my vote Sir.
Chinmayanand
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2585
Joined: 05 Oct 2008 16:01
Location: Mansarovar
Contact:

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Chinmayanand »

SSridhar wrote:
The question to ask is why is GoI saying no such thing happened ?
If GoI accepts that such thing happened, GoI will have to come up with a response... :P If things keep going like this , GoI may try asking for dominion status under the middle kingdom. Time to start learning mandarin ? :roll:
Arihant
BRFite
Posts: 199
Joined: 02 Aug 2009 05:17

Crisis in China?

Post by Arihant »

I understand there are rumours that People’s Bank of China (PBC) Governor Zhou Xiaochuan has defected? Coupled with the PLA moving into Gilgit - are we looking at greater turmoil under the surface than meets the eye?
krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5881
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by krisna »

JFR Jacob on Chinese troops in Gilgit
The Russians in the 19th and 20th centuries dreamt of a getting warm water port on the Arabian Sea. The Chinese seem well on the way to fulfilling this Russian dream.
The presence of Chinese troops in Gilgit is a matter of great concern. During the Kargil conflict, the five battalions of the intruding paramilitary Northern Rifles were maintained from Gilgit and thence from Skardu. There is a good road from Gilgit to Skardu. In pre-Partition days, road communications to Gilgit were along the Kargil-Skardu-Gilgit route. This section can easily be restored in a short period of time.

The reported presence of Chinese troops in Gilgit poses a serious threat to Indian road communications to Ladakh running through Kargil.

Another matter of concern is the increased Chinese interest in the Indus Valley. The easiest approach to Leh is along this valley. The Chinese have not only shown interest in the Indus Valley but also the Karakoram Pass between India and China. Any Chinese move through the Karakoram Pass will threaten our troops in Siachen and our base there. In the contingency of any future conflict with the Chinese, new areas of conflict in Ladakh will open up
There is no Soviet Union with its Treaty of Friendship to help us now [in 1971, the Soviets moved 40 divisions to the Xinjiang and seven to the Manchurian borders to deter the Chinese]. We have to rely on our own resources. We must show that we have the will and wherewithal to meet the emerging contingencies.
Requires new weapons aircrafts armoured divsions weapons helos etc according to him etc.
surinder
BRFite
Posts: 1464
Joined: 08 Apr 2005 06:57
Location: Badal Ki Chaaon Mein

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by surinder »

India can further stipulate that those who travel out of India without a proper visa stamp on its pages, will not be admitted. No Indian would dream of stepping outside of India with the stamp on the paper.

In other words, the PRC visa will not be worth the paper it will be stamped on. :-)
krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5881
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by krisna »

Arihant wrote:I understand there are rumours that People’s Bank of China (PBC) Governor Zhou Xiaochuan has defected? Coupled with the PLA moving into Gilgit - are we looking at greater turmoil under the surface than meets the eye?
you are right
China’s Central Bank Chief Rumored To Have Defected
Ming Pao, a Hong Kong-based news agency, saying that because of an approximately $430 billion loss on U.S. Treasury bonds, the Chinese government may punish some individuals within the PBOC, including Zhou.
Zhou’s name has been blocked from Internet search engines in China.
Zhou is known to have lofty political ambitions and is believed to be a close ally to former Chinese President Jiang Zemin, as well as a core figure for Jiang’s “Shanghai Gang.” There has been no shortage of rumors about Zhou’s possible dismissal in the past five years, as he is believed to be associated with several high-level financial scandals.
krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5881
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by krisna »

China's South-North to rival Three Gorges?
China is moving forward with its South-North Water Transfer Project aimed at diverting water from the massive Yangtze River Basin more than 620 miles, with 60,000 people to be relocated by Sept. 30 and several hundred thousand by 2014.
The South-North Water Transfer Project, by contrast, is expected to cost $62 million and is considered the biggest engineering endeavor in Chinese history. It is expected to supply 45 trillion gallons of water for hundreds of millions of people in Beijing and northern China by 2030.
Yet "the ecological cost impacts of the project are not really [acknowledged] by the government," said Peter Bosshard, policy director for International Rivers, National Geographic News reports.
csharma
BRFite
Posts: 695
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by csharma »

Can someone download the following paper. BRFites in school maybe able to do that.

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/conten ... mptype=rss

Manjeet S. Pardesi (2010), “Understanding (Changing) Chinese Strategic Perceptions of India,” Strategic Analysis, 34 (4): 562-578.
csharma
BRFite
Posts: 695
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by csharma »

Gen Jacob article sounds pretty ominous though not entirely new. Bharat Verma had written the same last year.

Also what happened to the Copenhagen spirit?
Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7115
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Muppalla »

Chinese chequers in PoK - Vikram Sood
In the context of China’s protestations on Arunachal Pradesh, its hardening attitude on Jammu & Kashmir is reflected in the continuing visa row. This is to remind us that both the western and eastern portions of the India-China border remain disputed. Also, China is making its presence felt in the sub-continent as the next power to reckon with
Since the 1970s Pakistan has been nibbling away at Gilgit-Baltistan in an effort to detach it from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir to make the region an integral part of the rest of Pakistan. The Karakoram highway is a strategic life line for both China and Pakistan. Ruthless suppression of the Shia Ismaili minority and demographic changes by sending in Sunni Pushtoon was the favoured tactic of the various dictators to tame this remote region that borders Afghanistan and China. Not satisfied with access to Xinjiang through the Khunjerab Pass on the Karakoram Highway, Gen Zia-ul Haq tried to enhance Pakistani and Chinese positions when he moved towards the Karakoram Pass across the Siachen glacier. Had this move succeeded, China would have had an alternative access to Pakistan through Tibet with immense permanent consequences for our security and geostrategic interests.

China has always been interested that Pakistan retains control over Gilgit-Baltistan. This not only ensured its own vital interests in Gwadar overlooking the Persian Gulf and its vital resources but also was another brick in the wall against India’s access to Central Asia. About three years ago, there were reports that China was incorporating the Gilgit-Baltistan area into Xinjiang’s logistic grid by widening the highway and exploring the possibilities of a Pakistan-China rail link, with the ultimate aim of securing a land route for its energy supplies.

Recent reports of the presence of 7,000 to 11,000 PLA troops in the region and a simmering revolt there would suggest that Pakistan has sought Chinese assistance to tackle this crisis. This is an addition to other no-go areas for the Pakistani administration, which include Balochistan and FATA. Besides we must not overlook that there are US bases west of Indus and more than 1,000 US Marines have landed in Pakistan, ostensibly for flood relief.
Jammu & Kashmir has a population of a little more than 10 million; only a section of the population in the Valley talks of self-determination. Surely this cannot hold a billion of us to ransom. As for this constant refrain of political problems, Jammu & Kashmir has its own Constitution, Article 370 and bounty for being troublesome. There is no ‘good boy bonus’ for the other States. When the US floods Pakistan with money and goodies, we complain that this is aiding terrorism. Are we not doing the same thing in Kashmir then?

A state has to be just, not soft; it has to be sympathetic, not indulgent. Jammu & Kashmir needs good governance in all its manifestations; so do we all. For those who talk of azadi, let it be said that we attained our independence in 1947. There is no greater independence than that.
Mukesh.Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 1410
Joined: 06 Dec 2009 14:09

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Mukesh.Kumar »

Rumblings in the Chinese Central Bank.

http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/201008 ... 16e083302a
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by SSridhar »

krisna wrote:JFR Jacob on Chinese troops in Gilgit
The Russians in the 19th and 20th centuries dreamt of a getting warm water port on the Arabian Sea. The Chinese seem well on the way to fulfilling this Russian dream.
It was a similar 'warm-water-access-paranoia' that TSP used to milk the Western nations. This time around, the communist expansion is not a mere paranoia, but a relaity and yet the same Pakistanis are facilitating it.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12686
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Pratyush »

SS sar and others,

Perhaps I am being dense and not comprehinding things. Just what will a nation acheave by getting a warm water port in a second nation. Especially, when the second nation is a weakr one and the access can be turned off by a third nation. Also I presume, the port will be linked to its own teroritry. If that is the case then it can only be done through KKH. Running through the Himalayan ranges. Just how difficult will it be to intradict the KKH in case of any hostilities between India and TSP or India and PRC.

So why expose your self to an obvious and exploitable weakness.

That is what I am unable to understand?
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Philip »

It has finally happened! A few years ago I predicted that te PLAN would start a surge into the IOR and. start using Burmese ports.There was a lot of scepticism from some non-Indian members.with various quotes about the weakness of the PLAN,etc.I also warned for a decade+ about the creeping Chinese presence in Sri Lanka and while we slept,the Chinese moved in.With Pak now in dire straits,the PRC has decided to confront India dramatically on all fronts,in the Himalayas,POK and in the IOR,especially with a weak MMS govt. at the centre.This is all part of the strategy that began in earnest last year with Chinese troops intruding into Indian territory and their absurd and insulting statement by their envoy that Arunachal Pradesh was not Indian territory and now they even question J&K as being Indian! It is now past time for India to similarly question China's sovereignity in Tibet and Taiwan and send pronto a special govt. delegation to the island to further Indo-Taiwanese relations.In addition,Indian naval warships should regularly sail in the S.China Sea with almost permanent visits to Vietnamese ports and bases.The sale of Brahmos to Vietnam should be accelerated along with other Indian tactical/ballistic missiles like Prithvi.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Sou ... a/(page)/2

China warships dock in Burma, rattling rival naval power India

China and India have overlapping ambitions in the Indian Ocean. So as China flexes its naval reach, India is left debating how to assume leadership in the Indian Ocean.

Excerpts:
New Delhi
Two Chinese warships docked at a Burmese port Sunday, highlighting China’s expanding naval presence near Asia’s other rising giant, India.

Chinese news agency Xinhua described the friendly port call as a first-ever in Burma – also known as Myanmar – by Chinese warships. It comes amid heightened tensions between Beijing and New Delhi, including India's reported suspension of military exchanges with China.

Though the two Asian heavyweights share a disputed border in the Himalayas, the Indian Ocean could become a more serious flashpoint for their overlapping ambitions. Beijing is developing ports around India to help secure Chinese maritime routes while India’s security establishment is debating how best to assume leadership in the Indian Ocean.

“With this particular port of call I don’t think there is anything that needs to be done. Just watch very closely,” says P.K. Ghosh, a senior fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi and a retired Navy officer. But China, he says, is sending a signal. “The underlying message is a strategic message: ‘Look, we are in the area and we can operate in the region.’ ”

China's 'string of pearls'

In recent years, China has expanded port facilities in countries that border India, including Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Burma. Indian strategists refer to the projects as a “string of pearls” encircling India in its strategic back yard.

Dr. Ghosh points out that the ports are commercial structures, not designed to be naval bases. But, he adds, “if a push comes to a shove, they can definitely use it for a base.”

The Indian Ocean will only grow in importance for both India and China as their interconnectivity with the global economy grows. The Indian Ocean is the Silk Road of the 21st century, moving Gulf oil and African minerals to the world’s two most populous nations.

The securing of the sea lanes – once the province of Great Britain, then the US – could evolve cooperatively, rather than competitively, to include India and China. Indeed, both countries have participated in a global effort to protect ships from pirates off Somalia.

But for India to realize its ambition to be able to project its Navy over a distance to secure economic access abroad, it will need access first to regional ports – some of which are now under Chinese expansion.

“We saw that happen in Sri Lanka. When Delhi slept over Colombo’s invitation to build a new port at Hambantota, China stepped in,” said C. Raja Mohan, the strategic affairs editor of the Indian Express, at a talk given before a packed public audience in New Delhi last month.

The two countries failed to resolve their border disputes in the Himalayas earlier this decade, prompting India to beef up border infrastructure in the face of Chinese incursions.

Recently, Beijing denied a visa to an Indian general who planned to join a military delegation to China – reportedly because he oversaw Army operations in Indian-controlled Kashmir. An Indian newspaper reported Saturday that India had responded by suspending military exchanges. When asked by the Associated Press, China said this was news to them while India refused to comment.

Meanwhile, the Indian Express reported Saturday on Page 1 that the state-run People’s Daily posted in a discussion forum an article titled “How likely is China’s launch of a limited war against India?”

While the Indian press plays up Chinese “provocations,” officials in Delhi tread lightly, taking care to avoid direct clashes with Beijing.

India's next steps
But among Indian naval experts, China’s moves have spurred along a debate over how India should assert itself in the Indian Ocean.

During his talk in New Delhi last month, Dr. Mohan argued for a more assertive approach that includes basing agreements and naval assistance to “weaker states of the Indian Ocean littoral.”

“No great power has built a blue-water navy capable of projecting force without physical access and political arrangements for ‘forward presence,’ ” said Mohan. “This would mean creation of arrangements for friendly ports and turnaround facilities in other nations that will increase the range, flexibility, and sustainability of Indian naval operations.”

Mohan says this makes Indian strategists uncomfortable. For decades they have rejected anyone building “foreign bases” in the Indian Ocean – something India itself must now do, Mohan argues.

Ghosh argues against becoming the big brother of the region. In 2008, he helped organize the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium, a forum for talking and cooperation on common issues between the naval chiefs of 28 Indian Ocean nations.

“Initially there was a lot of apprehension in the minds of a lot of countries as to what was the hidden agenda,” says Ghosh.

India, he says, went to great lengths to explain this wasn’t an effort to become big brother but to create a forum with the Indian Navy – the largest in the region – as the “unintrusive fulcrum.”

For now, that’s the right posture for India, argues Ghosh.

“I firmly believe that if you’ve got to carry a big stick, please talk softly,” he says. “I think there are a lot of negativities associated with being visualized as a hegemon.”
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7827
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by rohitvats »

On the POK/NA and PLA thing, did anyone read this news:

http://bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=13340

From the same:
The Army has received confirmation that China deployed an infantry battalion of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) at the 15,397-feet Khunjerab Pass on the Karakoram highway this month for the security of its workers engaged in building a railroad. This railroad will eventually connect Xinjiang to the port of Gwadar in Balochistan, Pakistan. The Khunjerab Pass straddles the border between China and PoK and is 272 km from Gilgit in the Northern Areas. This PLA deployment is expected to be raised to brigade strength (3,000 troops) as work on the railroad progresses in the Northern Areas.
The military assessment, based on intelligence inputs, suggests that the PLA battalion is involved in providing security to Chinese Han workers building the high speed rail and road link to Gwadar and ports at Pasni and Omara on the Makran coast.

“The deployment may be to support its infrastructure in the Northern Areas in the long run but the immediate issue is the possibility of Pakistan-based jihadis linking up with the largely Muslim population of the sensitive Xinjiang province,” said a senior official. The PLA keeps the area under strict control to avoid infiltration from the Northern Areas.
Manishw
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 21 Jul 2010 02:46

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Manishw »

Philip wrote:It is now past time for India to similarly question China's sovereignity in Tibet and Taiwan and send pronto a special govt. delegation to the island to further Indo-Taiwanese relations.In addition,Indian naval warships should regularly sail in the S.China Sea with almost permanent visits to Vietnamese ports and bases.The sale of Brahmos to Vietnam should be accelerated along with other Indian tactical/ballistic missiles like Prithvi.
I understand everything else but for this! Why has not the Indian government done this 'at least' and more. What is being hidden from us?
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Philip »

I think that the reason for this is that the MEA have no "ghoulies"! The track record of the MEA especially in Sri Lanka over the last decade has been so lukewarm,that too when our current For.Sec. now on a visit to the island was HC in Colombo,has allowed the Chinese to march across the IOR and encircle India like "soldier ants" .Whenever China and the Chinese threat is mentioned,the MEA appear to behave like rabbits caught in headlights-simply paralysed with fear! Whatever happens,"don't upset the Chinese",appears to be the mantra of the Foreign Ministry.That too when Chinese envoys to India have made the most audacious statements right here on Indian soil,questioning our sovereignity of parts of our country! Afflicted with such fear,the GOI and NSA's in the recent past,also appear to have downplayed the creeping threat from China which now like a snowball is beginning to accelerate downhill,which will eventually cause a massive avalanche heading for India. Unless immediate steps are taken to augment the armed forces and take strong diplomatic measures (inter-govt. agreements on bases and logistic facilities with friendly IOR littoral nations) sufficiently enough to check the Chinese march into the IOR,we will be checkmated by China with or without China receiving help from Pak.The very fact of handing over large parts of POK to China is in reality another '62 .CHina has gobbled up even more Indian territory with India unable to do anything,because its asinine foreign policy has all but given up without a fight its two trump cards Tibet and Taiwan.
Karan Dixit
BRFite
Posts: 1102
Joined: 23 Mar 2007 02:43
Location: Calcutta

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Karan Dixit »

Manishw wrote:
Philip wrote:It is now past time for India to similarly question China's sovereignity in Tibet and Taiwan and send pronto a special govt. delegation to the island to further Indo-Taiwanese relations.In addition,Indian naval warships should regularly sail in the S.China Sea with almost permanent visits to Vietnamese ports and bases.The sale of Brahmos to Vietnam should be accelerated along with other Indian tactical/ballistic missiles like Prithvi.
I understand everything else but for this! Why has not the Indian government done this 'at least' and more. What is being hidden from us?
I have a slightly different take on this. We supported China on Taiwan because US supported Taiwan. In those days for various reasons, it was impossible for us to be seen in the same camp as US. Our policy should have been and should be to work with every country on the issues where our interests converge. For example we can work with China on greenhouse effect. Similarly, we can work with US on Taiwan issue. On Taiwan, we do not even need to do much, US is already doing the things necessary. All we need to do is say. "Taiwan is a disputed land."

As far as Tibet is concerned, China is the clear and present culprit. It has not followed through on any of the agreements. China has simply overtaken Tibet which neither the Tibetans nor Indians agreed to.

What we need to do as a country is speed up our defense preparedness and that is what we seem to be doing. So, there is no need to be anxious about the war which is inevitable. China is an arrogant and totalitarian power. It needs to be confronted through a global alliance. We need to be part of that alliance. Remember we should be willing to work with any country where our interests converge. There should be no room for emotions and hot heads.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by SSridhar »

Things may change, hopefully, for the better in India in future as Indian babus begin to think more strategically. They are being compelled to do so as Indian power slowly increases. However, past behaviour has been conditioned and constrained by various things. One of the important things was our over analysis of events, something that we also see in various think tanks etc. Over analysis leads to paralysis of actions. Our lack of relationship with Israel (earlier) and Taiwan are prime examples of such over analyses. We succumb to various pulls and tend to do a little bit in each direction to 'appease' those pulling in that direction with the result that our efforts are frittered away and go a waste. We probably feel that a little investment made in each direction will enable us to capitalize later if somehow events begin to move that way later on. Of course, various other failures have also contributed to our pitiable situation with Pakistan and China. We allowed things to develop and become monstrous without adequately taking care of them and nipping them in the bud. It is dismaying to read an MEA spokesperson say that GoI is still evaluating the situation in Gilgit or that the Army has passed on information to the Government. Why should these even be a news item ? A false sense of India being on top of the situation is deliberately being created here. This is a bit like another news item that the PM has ordered all help to be given to flood affectees along the Yamuna. Why should the PM even order that ? Isn't the duty of the district administration along the river to do all that they have to do ? I think this is a general malaise.
krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5881
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by krisna »

Small things which will magnify the effect--
1) some one in Indian embassy should give a statement that Taiwan and Tibet should be made independent/disputed.
2) Make nosies about China should be democracy etc.
of course dragon will come like ton of bricks and demand that the concerned person be non grata and vacate the pandaland immediately issue demarche whatever etc etc. GOI should be prepared for this and do the needful.
3) GOI should this a couple of times- to make sure etch and dee of panda is pricked.
4) spotlight will fall on these places temporarily.
5) Peaceful Tibetan protests in India. India is a democratic country and everyone has a right to protest. Media coverage should be allowed liberally. Regular protests in front of china embassy and elsewhere. we offer moral support to the peaceful nation of Tibet.
6) Demand that POK is an integral part of India and china has no role in it.
7) Meanwhile fortify our defences and offensive capabilities.
8 ) Build our friendship around china's neighbours, (economic and military).
9) barring pakistan, others like SL,BD and Burma can be made friendly to us by giving more help in developing their economy etc.
10) make noises in generalassembly in UNO about illegal brutal occupation of Tibet and/or disputed Taiwan.
11) demand that google etc make the tibet as independent like or disputed in its maps.
We should remember that all these are not excuses for war, but hurting them also as they did to us. At the same time, keep ammo dry.
Can GOI do it.

OTOH, forget GOI at least why cant some nationalist MPs in parlaiment question the Tibet illegal brutal occupation by china, mobilise some supporters in front of china embassy etc and make noises.
Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Johann »

Interesting piece on the PRC's fast approaching economic challenges - interesting because this is coming out of the Party-State establishment's own think-tanks

Analysis: Bears bet time is running out for China to change

By Alan Wheatley, China Economics Editor

BEIJING | Mon Aug 30, 2010 10:05am EDT
Zhou Tianyong, a professor at the Central Party School in Beijing, which trains rising Communist Party officials, has long argued that China needs steady but far-reaching political reforms.

In a new book, "Where Is China Headed?", Zhou says China could be heading for a political car-crash unless it reduces bloated government, unshackles small business and ends distortions in the housing market.

"Which way will we go down? If we choose the right route we can avoid falling into a development trap; if we choose the wrong one, we may fall into a 'China trap' of social and political turmoil, slow economic growth, enduring lack of prosperity, and weak and declining national competitiveness," Zhou writes.

The 'China trap' looms if policymakers continue to promote a pattern of growth that "privileges industry, big corporations, big capital and big projects", Zhou believes.

Shifting gears will be difficult, he reckons, because of the habits China has formed and the entrenched interests that have built up.

And there's the rub. Does the Communist Party have the will to remove some of the power and wealth it has bestowed on its favorites?

China's markets for the factors of production are riddled with distortions that subsidize producers, exporters and investors, according to Huang Yiping and Wang Bijun from the China Center for Economic Research at Peking University.

Labor, capital, land and energy are all cheap, they write in "China: The Next Twenty Years of Reform and Development", a joint Australian-Chinese collection of essays.

This is equivalent to taxing the owners of these inputs, mainly consumers, which is why household income and consumption have plummeted as a share of GDP, they argue.

"All these suggest that factor-cost distortions have been a fundamental force behind China's structural imbalances, which alongside other problems such as inefficient resource use and pollution could seriously affect China's ability to sustain its rapid growth in the future," they write.

VESTED INTERESTS

Seen in that light, the problem is not one of economic policy but of political economy.

Yao Yang, also an economics professor at Peking University, bemoans that the government itself, its cronies and state-owned enterprises are forming powerful interest groups.

Writing in the same volume of essays, Yao says the Chinese Communist Party should realize for its own sake that there is no alternative to fuller democratization if it wishes to maintain both high economic growth and enhanced social stability.

"The emergence of strong and privileged groups will block equal distribution of the benefits of economic growth in society, which will then render futile the CCP's strategy of trading economic growth for people's consent to its absolute rule," he says.

Diana Choyleva, who follows China from Hong Kong for Lombard Street Research, a consultancy, says that because of the new international environment it will become clear in the next two years whether Beijing has the appetite to change.

"I want to believe that they'll move in the right direction, but every time the going really gets tough you don't seem to get that response," she said.

Financial journalist Richard McGregor says the Party should not be counted out despite the political risks that the next stage of economic reform entail.

"Does unraveling the state's economic interests irreparably damage the party's political clout? There is no easy way to chart a course through this thicket but the Party's adaptive abilities should not be underestimated," McGregor writes in a new book, "The Party". (Additional reporting by Chris Buckley; Editing by Mathew Veedon)
This is why it is so very important to understand the dynamics within the CPC in order to grasp the PRC's direction. Many of the people who have been promoted have risen not only by being part of the right clique, but because they performed well according to the indicators set by a politburo committed to a particular model of growth. To adopt a new model of growth would require some kind of internal party struggle that would allow the 'left wing' of the Party to rise to the top. Those kind of changes usually happen when people at the top have something really embarassing or catastrophic happen.
Last edited by SSridhar on 31 Aug 2010 20:46, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Fixed URL
Venkarl
BRFite
Posts: 971
Joined: 27 Mar 2008 02:50
Location: India
Contact:

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Venkarl »

SSridhar wrote:.. It is dismaying to read an MEA spokesperson say that GoI is still evaluating the situation in Gilgit or that the Army has passed on information to the Government. Why should these even be a news item ? A false sense of India being on top of the situation is deliberately being created here. ..
I guess the news item of India considering stapled visas to Tibetan folks also falls in the same category.....these 3 news items are just to massage hot heads in India.....they are only fooling us--general public to contain histeria


that'll suffice somebody's question "who's fooling who?"
Krishna_V
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 39
Joined: 10 Oct 2009 02:34

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by Krishna_V »

If chini aggression continues this could be our chance to once and for all test our Thermo nukes and blame it on chini
paramu
BRFite
Posts: 669
Joined: 20 May 2008 11:38

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by paramu »

As experts say, only way to come out of current global economic crisis is to have a war. PRC movements indicate where the war will be.
TonyMontana
BRFite
Posts: 529
Joined: 18 Aug 2010 04:00
Location: Pro-China-Anti-CCP-Land

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by TonyMontana »

Krishna_V wrote:If chini aggression continues this could be our chance to once and for all test our Thermo nukes and blame it on chini
Do you propose a false flag nuclear attack on Indian soil as a pretext for the nuclear extermination of the Chinese Civilisation? Or do you propose a preemptive nuclear strike on China and then tell the world all of China's nuclear reactors suddenly went super critical at the same time? Just trying to understand what you're getting at. :D

P.S. Oh I get it now. You want to test new Thermo nukes.

My question remains. Would Indian exterminate the Chinese if China began a limited scale boarder war with India. Where would India draw the line?
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by RajeshA »

TonyMontana wrote:My question remains. Would Indian exterminate the Chinese if China began a limited scale boarder war with India. Where would India draw the line?
If China attacks India, be it a border war or something bigger, then China can forget to become any superpower. India would turn into a highly militaristic country, which she is not at all right now.

It will be a 1000 year enmity, and China's Southern and Western borders would become extremely vulnerable. With USA putting pressure on PRC in the Pacific, India putting pressure on China in the South, it will become a very difficult time for PRC.

All diplomatic space that PRC enjoys right now in the international arena, will disappear for a long long time.

The question is not what India would do if China attacks, but rather what India would become if China attacks!
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4727
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by putnanja »

X-Posting from US-PRC-India thread ...

KP Nayar writing in Telegraph ...

THEY HAVE DONE IT AGAIN - America’s role in India’s visa row with China
Like many aspects of Sino-Indian relations, last week’s media frenzy over the Northern Army Commander’s non-visit can be traced to the shenanigans in Indo-US relations. The United States of America’s military industrial complex and the American lobby in New Delhi needed to whip up fears about Beijing in the run-up to the trip to Washington, in the last week of September, of the defence minister, A.K. Antony. And the rancour over Jaswal, which has been beneath the surface in India’s relations with China, came in handy. It was more than a month ago that the Chinese expressed their reservations about receiving Jaswal. Immediately, with a swiftness that took the Chinese by surprise, India suspended all military exchanges with Beijing. One of the more reassuring aspects of this episode was that, for over a month, the entire controversy remained under wraps.

The ministry of external affairs normally leaks like a sieve, but the discipline with which this extremely sensitive development in Sino-Indian relations was prevented from getting into the spotlight proved that the MEA’s east Asia division and the Indian embassy in Beijing are run as tight ships. This is the absolute need of the times, an imperative to meet the challenges in bilateral relations with Beijing. The news that eventually broke, last week, of an impasse in Sino-Indian military exchanges was a deliberate leak, which, of course, is not unusual in New Delhi. But if the discipline of the MEA’s east Asia division was reassuring, it was equally disconcerting that South Block has now traced the leak to those seeking to protect and promote US interests.

The American embassy in New Delhi has long boasted that it can do anything it wants with sections of the capital’s media. The mission’s officials have in the past narrated to this writer, off the record, instances where they have used their moles in the media to bring about policy changes within the Indian government. The manner of the spin of the army visa story is the latest example of the Americans doing it again. It is absolutely important for them that a paranoia should be whipped up in New Delhi over China’s ‘evil’ intentions against India in the days and weeks before the defence minister travels to Washington.
When Pranab Mukherjee was shifted out of the ministry of defence in the last big cabinet reshuffle of the first United Progressive Alliance government, the Americans miscalculated that Mukherjee’s successor would be someone they could manipulate or push around. They found Mukherjee far too tough to crack, but they also mistook the soft-spoken Antony’s demeanour and brevity as shortcomings in a defence minister.


...
...
But the MEA is unlikely to play ball in this scheme. It wanted to keep the Jaswal controversy under wraps because it had taken the effective action of freezing all military exchanges with China in retaliation for the discourtesy shown the Northern Military Commander. While the MEA was convinced that this firm retaliation had rattled the Chinese, it did not want the situation to escalate through any emotive debate in the media over a holy cow that the army continues to be for an influential section of Indian public opinion.

The UPA’s leadership believes that the issue has to be resolved at the political and diplomatic levels, and is looking at the military retaliation of freezing bilateral defence exchanges as merely a short-term tactic. There is a powerful school of thought in the UPA leadership which believes that the Jaswal episode may not have been a bad thing altogether and that its dramatic nature may help clear the air over where China actually stands on the status of Jammu and Kashmir.

Continuing the Washington- inspired spin designed to escalate the visa row, there were weekend reports that China’s ambassador to India, Zhang Yan, had been summoned to South Block last Friday to be administered a rebuke over the treatment of Jaswal. Zhang and South Block officials have been discussing the issue for weeks now. Friday’s meeting was to finalize the arrangements for travel to China by Gautam Bambawale, the MEA’s joint-secretary for east Asia, who will reach Beijing this weekend to work out political solutions to irritants in Sino-Indian relations, including the Jaswal case. Hopefully, if Bambawale’s mission, which is on schedule at the time of writing, is successful, Antony may not have to succumb to American tactics in Washington on September 27.
paramu
BRFite
Posts: 669
Joined: 20 May 2008 11:38

Re: People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

Post by paramu »

TonyMontana wrote:My question remains. Would Indian exterminate the Chinese if China began a limited scale boarder war with India. Where would India draw the line?
Till we go back to where we were for thousands of years, i.e. erase the shared boarder between India and China that caused the war. I mean, an independent Tibet is formed. :mrgreen:
Post Reply