Managing Chinese Threat

[RajeshA]

One is not sure whether its a prior US approval or after the fait accompli to pretend to be tight with PRC. Need more data.

My theory, FWIW, is that as the west (US and EU) declines it will more than willingly cooperate with China at India's expense. This, I feel, is the greatest strategic challenge for India in the coming years.

That is a direct corollary of the perceived behavior that China displays in its dealings with regional rivals. It shows itself as boisterous and adventurous, aggressive and non-yielding, and it automatically gives China

1. The fruits from that behavior. All that it wins it keeps
2. Extra-regional powers come to believe that it is the big boss in town, so they should befriend it, transferring the protection of its interests to China
3. Gives reason for it to continue that behavior, which is profitable to it and intimidating to others.

That is what I am trying to say. If India and the other powers in Asia - Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Indonesia, Australia do not push back Chinese bossy behavior, then the benefits to China would be multiplied by several orders of magnitude. This gives China concessions across the board, and the hope that India may have in closing the gap over the years becomes nullified.

India needs an Asian Security Alliance based on "All for One, and One for All"!

This should prevent China from successfully cowering down an individual member of the alliance on any issue. This should be nothing less than a fully fledged alliance having a mutual defense clause and a mutual support clause.

[RajeshA]

X-Posted from India and Japan: News and Discussion Thread

The Japan Times: A Sino-centric Asia unlikely

"here are at least four possible Asian security scenarios. The first is the rise of a Sino-centric Asia, as desired by Beijing. China seeks a multipolar world but a unipolar Asia. By contrast, the United States desires a unipolar world but a multipolar Asia. A second scenario is of the U.S. remaining Asia's principal security anchor. A third possibility is the emergence of a constellation of Asian states with common interests working together to ensure both power equilibrium and an Asia that is not unipolar. A fourth scenario is of an Asia characterized by several resurgent powers, including Japan, India, Vietnam, Indonesia and a reunified Korea.

Of the four scenarios, the least unlikely is the first one. China's neighbors increasingly are uneasy about its growing power and assertiveness. While Beijing aspires to shape a Sino-centric Asia, its actions hardly make it a credible candidate for Asian leadership."

[Christopher Sidor]

China-Japan fight goes deeper than islands
Location of the islands on the map (courtesy CNN)

While Japan's tensions with China is known, I would like to draw attention to two facts
1) In the Story, first url link, observe the caption under the image closely. It reads

A torn apart Japanese 'Rising Sun' flag is placed on dead fish during a demonstration in front of the Japan Exchange Association - Japan's representative office on Taiwan- on September 14 over the continued island dispute between Tokyo and Beijing.

Taiwan is sliding with PRC, its so called mortal nemesis, against Japan.

2) If the map, as given in the second link above, is observed closely, the islands are closet to Taiwan, then to china and finally to japan. Also these islands give a bird eye view to the waters through which Chinese naval forces have to traverse before they can reach pacific ocean proper.

If we take these two points together, we see something interesting. Taiwan does not see itself as a separate entity, rather it considers itself as China. What is abhors is merging with a Communist controlled China. In fact if CPC had not been the controlling entity of mainland china, it would have been possible, that Taiwan would have already been merged with China, willingly. In fact the Chinese Nationalist KMT were able to escape to Taiwan because Taiwan was under their influence.
This should be a wake up call to those who believe that India should play the Taiwan card with PRC like PRC is playing the Pakistan card with India.

Also recently there was some talk about US and Japan doing some joint military exercises or a war game whose aim was to recapture of islands under some hostile (read Chinese) occupation.
Link1
Link2
Is Japan preparing to fight a limited war with china over these islands?

[RajeshA]

Taiwan does not see itself as a separate entity, rather it considers itself as China. What is abhors is merging with a Communist controlled China. In fact if CPC had not been the controlling entity of mainland china, it would have been possible, that Taiwan would have already been merged with China, willingly. In fact the Chinese Nationalist KMT were able to escape to Taiwan because Taiwan was under their influence.
This should be a wake up call to those who believe that India should play the Taiwan card with PRC like PRC is playing the Pakistan card with India.

President Ma of KMT is pro-China, but the Democratic Progressive Party is pro-Independence. It is also likely that DPP could come to power again after the next elections, in which case the position of Taiwan w.r.t. PRC would change.

Also recently there was some talk about US and Japan doing some joint military exercises or a war game whose aim was to recapture of islands under some hostile (read Chinese) occupation.
Link1
Link2
Is Japan preparing to fight a limited war with china over these islands?

China is bullying Japan into letting go of these islands. Japan cannot do it. There is going to be either tensions or conflict. If it is a cold war, Japan should take away all of its investments out of PRC and put them somewhere else - say in Vietnam or India.

[Manishw]

PRC is getting too big for its boots, good for us Indians if these two worthies(PRC and Japan) get into a spat.

[Kanson]

1.

China has a greater role in South Asia: US
September 21, 2010 22:16 IST

Steinberg said just as much as China had a role in South Asia, the US saw a role for India in East Asia. "Just as we talk about South Asia with China, we talk about East Asia with India, and that's an important part of our dialogue.
"we see India as an East Asia country. We engage with them on issues like North Korea and the like because we think of the importance that India plays".

He said in terms of the evolving order in East Asia, "One of the elements of it is that we think India's a key part, and we think the institutions should reflect that because we think that India has both an important interest and a lot to contribute to the common interest there."

"So, I think at the end of the day, it will be important for all of us to work together," he added.

Few questions comes to mind after reading the above.

1. Few days ago the news of big Chinese Troops presence comes to light. Now, US says China has a role to play in South Asia. Any connection between the two?
2.Is this the outcome from the Obama's last visit to china? IIRC, G-2 talks were doing the rounds that time. Also, US-China were in agreement that US and china will work togather on resolving south asian issues. ?
3. Steinberg also said that US saw a role for India in East Asia. US Chanakyiness? Divide and Rule?

2.

MoD clears joint amphibious exercise at US base near China
Wed Sep 22 2010, 01:29 hrs

A year after the Defence Ministry backed out of a military exercise at a US base near China at the last minute, a go-ahead has been given for a joint amphibious exercise at the US Marines base in Okinawa, Japan. The war game, which will involve senior officers of the Indian Navy and Army is scheduled to start later this week and will continue till October.

Is there a connection between 1st & 2nd news ? If there is a connection it is definitely interesting.

[Hari Seldon]

^^ Makes utter and complete sense for unkil to sow FUD and lovingly nudge Yindia and cheena into a destructive conflict only.

Sadly, the chankian yindoo is so used to frustrating predictability, things may not quite happen as some hope. Dilli seems bent on retaining time and place of its choice to hit back at the pricks doing pinpricks only. Or so I hope.

[ramana]

Another prespective....
Nightwatch
9/21/2010

China: Two recent developments exemplify China's expanding use of military forces in support of diplomacy and to maintain stability along the borders.

Xinhua reported six Chinese aircraft launched "long-range sudden attacks" in Kazakhstan as part of ongoing anti-terror exercises of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Chinese Major General Meng Guoping said on 20 September. Four H-6H bombers and two J-10 fighter aircraft participated in the drill, which General Meng described as China's first simulated cross-border strike.

China's air force hopes the exercise will build early warning, command, long-distance bombing, escort and aerial refueling capabilities, the General said.

On 21 September Pakistan's Daily Times reported China's Central Military Commission has approved the deployment of a contingent of four military helicopters to Pakistan to assist in flood relief. The helicopters and crews have participated in disaster relief in China, but this would be the first time China will send military helicopters outside the country on such a mission, Xinhua reported.

This also would be the second military contingent sent to Pakistan. Pakistan's Defense Minister acknowledged the presence of Chinese troops engaged in relief work on the 13th.

Special Comment: Both items manifest China's "emergence" as a "responsible international actor" and help observers deepen their understanding of what the Chinese might mean by those or similar terms.

Since 1990, when China sent five peacekeepers to the Middle East, it has participated in 23 UN peacekeeping missions, according to official Chinese government data. Nearly 10,000 Chinese personnel presently are participating in 12 peacekeeping missions. As a result, China has developed a core of military and police personnel with experience in commanding and sustaining forces in every crisis region of the world and a wide range of terrain and weather conditions.

The deployment of Chinese ships to the anti-piracy patrols off Somalia has been a successful test of capabilities to sustain a limited naval force far from China. It also has enabled China to gauge international reaction to Chinese naval operations far beyond the Asian littoral.

In Asia, China's emergence has been intimidating and less benign. The fishing boat confrontation with Japan is the latest demonstration of the change in style in handling disputes over contested areas. Previously for many years, China deferred discussion of disputed areas in the interest of good neighborliness, especially towards Southeast Asian countries, but it never surrendered any claims. Lately it is asserting those claims openly and bluntly.

A new mission. The simulated scenario for Kazakhstan and the Pakistan relief deployment are part of the emergence, but with a different twist. The Kazakhstan and Pakistan announcements carry special significance for their substance and for the implications of the press releases.

Substantively, the participation of combat aircraft beyond China's borders means that ground forces also must be engaged in such exercises, though not mentioned in the press release. Air forces cannot hold ground and the Chinese practice "joint" training, patterned loosely after US joint doctrine. Chinese joint operations tend to be "coordinated" more than "joint," but they involve ground and air or units from all three armed services working together.

In short, the People's Liberation Army has acknowledged in public that it is training for operations to project Chinese military power beyond China's borders under some conditions for some purposes. Clearly anti-terror operations qualify.

The second substantive point is the target was Kazakhstan, which is not a historic enemy, such as India or Vietnam; not an ally, such as Pakistan, North Korea, and is not a party to a significant Chinese territorial dispute. Like Pakistan, it is a bordering state. Like the helicopter and ground personnel deployments to Pakistan, the simulation involved the use of Chinese military forces in coming to the rescue of a bordering state in trouble.

The press reports are part of the public information program to test international reaction to China's having crossed another threshold as a "responsible great power," namely, policing its neighborhood. That mission expands China's options for responding to requests for help, for example, from the governments of bordering states should they experience an internal instability crisis. Border states at risk are North Korea, Burma and Pakistan, where China already has a military contingent.

Chinese forces are not yet capable of matching the US ability to send relief or provide rescue. The US, for example, sent 30 helicopters to Pakistan for flood relief. Nevertheless, the two developments spotlight China's intentions and near term strategic objective, which is dominance in Asia … all of it.

China-US: Update. On 21 September China expressed concern about the possibility of a joint statement from the United States and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) addressing South China Sea maritime disputes. The Foreign Ministry said internationalization of the maritime issue would complicate rather than help matters.

Comment: China claims almost all of the South China Sea and its resources as part of its national territory by right of succession from the Chinese Empire. Most members of ASEAN have claims to islands, ocean areas and seabed resources that China does not recognize and disputes.

Until recently the Chinese relied on diplomacy to maintain regional stability and the status quo against other claimants. In hindsight that conciliatory approach stands out as a stratagem to freeze the claims until China acquired the military power to back up its claims by force. By asserting its historic claims, China is the agent of instability.

China's assertive and more bellicose style has generated a multi-billion dollar Southeast Asian arms buildup since 2000. Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam have been modernizing or adding new capabilities to their air forces and navies, primarily, to prepare for almost unavoidable confrontations with China in the future.

Can read a lot between the lines.

[Lalmohan]

once again, the focus on south china sea and the spratleys in particular relates to energy and SLOC security
looking at it from a chinese perspective, they probably feel very insecure about unfetterred access to their economic lifelines. just standing up to this will be minimum required to keep them anxious

[Prem]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... spute.html
China's premier ratchets up pressure on Japan in diplomatic dispute

Mr Wen, speaking in New York ahead of the UN General Assembly, urged Japan "immediately and unconditionally" to release the captain who was detained on September 8 after a run-in with two Japanese coastguard cutters in disputed waters in the East China Sea. Tokyo "bears full responsibility for the situation, and it will bear all consequences," Mr Wen said to a gathering of overseas Chinese nationals hours after China's foreign ministry made clear that he would not meet his Japanese counterpart on the sidelines of the New York meeting. elations between China and Japan are now at their lowest point since long-running tensions flared in 2005, with China issuing an increasingly angry series of rebukes to Japan and cancelling several high-level cultural and business exchanges in protest at the captain's detention.
Japan made an apparently conciliatory gesture on Wednesday, calling for high-level talks to prevent the dispute from spiralling any further. "If possible, it would be good to quickly hold high-level talks, including broad, strategic discussions," said Yoshito Sengoku, Japan's chief cabinet secretary. In New York, Seiji Maehara, Japan's foreign minister, said that no meetings had been set up with his Chinese counterparts in New York and gave no hint of any concessions even as he pledged that Japan hoped to build a "solid, strategic partnership" with China. He added that the detention of the Chinese boat captain was a "legal issue" and rejected any Chinese territorial claims over the disputed chain of islands – known as Senkaku by Japan and Diaoyu or Diaoyutai in Chinese – where the incident took place.

[TonyMontana]

This should be a wake up call to those who believe that India should play the Taiwan card with PRC like PRC is playing the Pakistan card with India.

Well put!

Is Japan preparing to fight a limited war with china over these islands?

No. China will not occupy these islands yet, because the PLAN is not ready to take on Japan. If Japan takes over the islands unilaterally, they will be seen as the agressor by all the parties involved. That will signal a HUGE change in Japanese policy that I just don't see happening.

President Ma of KMT is pro-China, but the Democratic Progressive Party is pro-Independence. It is also likely that DPP could come to power again after the next elections, in which case the position of Taiwan w.r.t. PRC would change.

The position of Taiwan wrt PRC has always been status que. Do you see a move away from that position? If so, why?

China is bullying Japan into letting go of these islands. Japan cannot do it. There is going to be either tensions or conflict. If it is a cold war, Japan should take away all of its investments out of PRC and put them somewhere else - say in Vietnam or India.

Would Japan make more money in these countries? If the answer is yes, they would do it anyway. If it's no...well...wouldn't be much of a investment would it?

[RajeshA]

The position of Taiwan wrt PRC has always been status quo. Do you see a move away from that position? If so, why?

Status Quo is preferred because the Taiwanese want to avoid a military conflict with China, a bully, not because of any ideological reason. We will see how the situation develops after the elections.

China is bullying Japan into letting go of these islands. Japan cannot do it. There is going to be either tensions or conflict. If it is a cold war, Japan should take away all of its investments out of PRC and put them somewhere else - say in Vietnam or India.

Would Japan make more money in these countries? If the answer is yes, they would do it anyway. If it's no...well...wouldn't be much of a investment would it?[/quote]

Japan takes much time before making such decisions. When they are ready, only then will they proceed with determination. China is giving all the reasons to rethink their investment strategy.

[RajeshA]

X-Posted from Pak Occupied Kashmir News and Discussion Thread

Published on Sept. 22, 2010
By Xiaoxinong Yi
Pakistan is a part of China's westward challenge to the U.S.: ZanesvilleTimesRecorder.com

The control of Pakistani-administered Kashmir will give China a strategic land access to the Gulf through Pakistan. As Harrison points out, "It takes 16 to 25 days for Chinese tankers to reach the Gulf. When high-speed rail and road links through Gilgit-Baltistan are completed, China will be able to transport cargo from Eastern China to the new Chinese-built Pakistani naval bases at Gwadar, Pasni and Ormara, just east of the Gulf, within 48 hours."

Chinese People's Liberation Army soldiers also are constructing 22 tunnels in secret locations in Pakistan. One obvious use of these tunnels is for the projected gas pipeline from Iran to China, but they also can be used for missile storage sites in Pakistan.

This will also increase the speed with which Gwadar as a Chinese Naval Base would come online.

[Christopher Sidor]

The position of Taiwan wrt PRC has always been status quo. Do you see a move away from that position? If so, why?

Status Quo is preferred because the Taiwanese want to avoid a military conflict with China, a bully, not because of any ideological reason. We will see how the situation develops after the elections.

China is bullying Japan into letting go of these islands. Japan cannot do it. There is going to be either tensions or conflict. If it is a cold war, Japan should take away all of its investments out of PRC and put them somewhere else - say in Vietnam or India.

Would Japan make more money in these countries? If the answer is yes, they would do it anyway. If it's no...well...wouldn't be much of a investment would it?

Japan takes much time before making such decisions. When they are ready, only then will they proceed with determination. China is giving all the reasons to rethink their investment strategy.

Decisions such as investment strategy are driven by one and only one concern. The profit percentage or margin in question. There is an academic difference between profit percentage and margin. Margin is computed on Selling price, while profit percentage is computed on cost price. Politics, comfort level or ideological affinity are not taken into consideration. Japan cannot take out its investment out of china, for the simple reason, that there would be a massive slump in japan due to it. Japan has a tepid 1% growth due to China.
Let me elaborate a bit. Each and every Japanese firm operating out of India, sends to its parent company in Japan a small percentage of revenue, note revenue and not profit. This is sometimes camouflaged as royalty or ability to use platforms developed by parent company in Japan, etc. For example Yamaha motors India pays a small percentage of revenue to its Japanese parent for allowing it to use its name, technology, etc. The same is done in China. Certain critical parts of a product are also sourced from the parent company in japan. These critical parts may or may not be manufactured in japan, but the parent company in japan is still paid. This happens practically for all the foreign companies operating in India and China. It is due to these so called remittances that the parent company in japan can continue to operate and show a healthy profit. With Chinese GDP being 4 times the size of India, the amount from China is greater.

China offers some very lucrative advantages to japan w.r.t India. China's proximity to japan, endless supply of cheap labor and raw materials are a big advantage over India.

Moreover taking its investment out of china is not a day or a month or year affair. It took japan more than a decade to built up its investment in China. It will take an equal amount of time, if not more for it to build it up in India. The fact that Japan despite its long standing tensions with Mainland China, has not taken its investment out, itself speaks volumes about the state of affair.

[Lalmohan]

one other point to note, japan had initially offshored a lot of complex manufacturing to china and also SE Asia, recently a lot of the really complex manufacturing has been brought back into Japan, with only the less complex and more screwdrivery stuff left offshored
india will offer cheap screwdriver potential to japanese companies for primarily serving the indian market
although if the indian global automotive experiment works, good things could happen yet

[RajeshA]

X-Posted from Mining & Processing Thread

Published on Sept. 23, 2010
By Keith Bradsher
Amid Tension, China Blocks Vital Exports to Japan: New York Times

the Chinese government has blocked exports to Japan of a crucial category of minerals used in products like hybrid cars, wind turbines and guided missiles.

An engine of a Toyota Prius. Each Prius uses at least two pounds of rare earth elements in its various parts.
Chinese customs officials are halting shipments to Japan of so-called rare earth elements, preventing them from being loaded aboard ships this week at Chinese ports, three industry officials said Thursday.

The United States, the European Union and Mexico brought W.T.O. complaints against China last November after it issued regulations limiting the export of yellow phosphorus and eight other industrial materials. American trade officials have been considering for months whether to challenge China’s longstanding and increasingly tight quotas on rare earth exports as well.

China mines 93 percent of the world’s rare earth minerals, and more than 99 percent of the world’s supply of some of the most prized rare earths, which sell for several hundred dollars a pound.

[Kanson]

China mines 93 percent of the world’s rare earth minerals

This is misleading statement.

Until 1948, most of the world's rare earths were sourced from placer sand deposits in India and Brazil.[6] Through the 1950s, South Africa took the status as the world's rare earth source, after large rare earth bearing veins were discovered in Monazite.[6] Until the 1980s, the Mountain Pass rare earth mine in California was the leading producer. Today, the Indian and South African deposits still produce some rare earth concentrates, but they are dwarfed by the scale of Chinese production. China now produces over 97% of the world's rare earth supply, mostly in Inner Mongolia.[7][5]

The highest concentrations of mineable rare earth elements are Inner Mongolia, China, Mountain Pass, California, and Mount Weld, Australia.[7][8]

The use of rare earth elements in modern technology has increased dramatically over the past years. For example, dysprosium has gained significant importance for its use in the construction of hybrid car motors.[9] Unfortunately, this new demand has strained supply, and there is growing concern that the world may soon face a shortage of the materials.[10] In several years, worldwide demand for rare earth elements is expected to exceed supply by 40,000 tonnes annually unless major new sources are developed.[11] All of the world's heavy rare earths (such as dysprosium) are sourced from Chinese rare earth sources such as the polymetallic Bayan Obo deposit.[7][12] Illegal rare earth mines are common in rural China and are often known to release toxic wastes into the general water supply.[7][13] The Mountain Pass rare earth mine in California is projected to reopen in 2011.[7] A site at Thor Lake in the Northwest Territories is also under development. Locations in Vietnam have also been considered.[7][11]

Chinese export quotas have also resulted in a dramatic shift in the world's rare earth knowledge base. For example, the division of General Motors which deals with miniaturized magnet research shut down its US office and moved all of its staff to China in 2006.[14] On Sept. 1, 2009, China announced plans to reduce its quota to 35,000 tons per year in 2010-2015 to conserve scarce resources and protect the environment.[15] In May 2010, China announced a major, five-month crackdown on illegal mining in order to protect the environment and its resources. This campaign is expected to be concentrated in the South, where most mines are smaller.[16] Other sources of rare earth have been searched to avoid shortages and China's monopoly, mainly in Australia, Brazil, Canada, South Africa and the United States.[17] However, mines in these countries were closed when China undercut world prices in the 1990s, and it will take a few years to restart production. Japan's former foreign minister Katsuya Okada raised a protest against the effect of China's sudden action on worldwide production.[18] In response to the continued detainment of a Chinese fishing boat captain by the Japanese Coast Guard, China instituted an export ban on rare earth shipments to Japan on 22 September 2010.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_earth_element

[RajeshA]

Published on Sep 22, 2010
By Daniel Ten Kate and Susan Li
Indonesia Rejects China Stance That U.S. Stay Out of Local Waters Dispute: Bloomberg

Talks between Asean and China on a code of conduct in the sea have stalled since they agreed in 2002 to resolve disagreements peacefully. In a July filing to the UN, Indonesia said China’s claim to the entire sea “clearly lacks international legal basis.”

[Kanson]

China Denies Japan Rare-Earth Ban Amid Diplomatic Row

"China does not have a trade embargo on rare earth exports to Japan," Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economics Co-operation spokesman Chen Rongkai said in a telephone interview today. Industrial Minerals Co. of Australia, an industry publication and consultancy, first reported the ban yesterday, citing an unidentified "leading Japanese rare earth buyer."

"The Chinese government has requested exporters to demonstrate support for the Chinese situation and suspend exports of rare earths to Japan until the end of the month when the situation will be reviewed," said Industrial Minerals owner and former mining executive Dudley Kingsnorth. "It's very regrettable if we have the effective suspension of commercial contracts for political reasons."

"Toyota has a stockpile of the rare earths and minerals used in hybrid cars and electrics parts, so an embargo is unlikely to affect its production anytime soon," said Koji Endo, an auto analyst at Advanced Research Japan in Tokyo. "If China keeps an embargo on sales for more than a year, Toyota might not be able to produce hybrids."

Lynas plans to bring its Mount Weld project in Western Australia and processing plant in Malaysia into production by the third quarter next year. The refinery would be the first outside of China "in about 50 years," Executive Chairman Nicholas Curtis said in an interview last week.

A rare-earth mine in the U.S., in Mountain Pass, California, that was once the world's dominant producer, shut down most operations in 2002. Molycorp Inc., which owns the mine, plans to reopen it this year.

The U.S. military depends on China for the metals required to build smart bombs, night-vision goggles and naval radar, according to a report to Congress obtained by Bloomberg News in April.

China's hold on global production gives it "market power" against the U.S., the Government Accountability Office said in the report. The materials are found in weapons including General Dynamics Corp.'s M1A2 Abrams tank and Aegis SPY-1 radar made by Lockheed Martin Corp.

[Arihant]

China-Japan fight goes deeper than islands
Location of the islands on the map (courtesy CNN)

If we take these two points together, we see something interesting. Taiwan does not see itself as a separate entity, rather it considers itself as China. What is abhors is merging with a Communist controlled China. In fact if CPC had not been the controlling entity of mainland china, it would have been possible, that Taiwan would have already been merged with China, willingly. In fact the Chinese Nationalist KMT were able to escape to Taiwan because Taiwan was under their influence.
This should be a wake up call to those who believe that India should play the Taiwan card with PRC like PRC is playing the Pakistan card with India.

I would disagree with proposition that "the Chinese Nationalist KMT were able to escape to Taiwan because Taiwan was under their influence." Taiwan was a Japanese colony until 1945 (their colonization formally started with the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1892, after China was trounced in the Sino-Japanese War). Post 1945, the KMT established a foothold on the island with US blessing. See this fascinating account by George Kerr, a US diplomat posted in Taiwan at the time:

Formosa Betrayed (the entire book is available online at this site).

The defeated KMT started moving to Taiwan within 3 years of this - that move completed by 1949 (and coinciding with the KMT reign of terror that the Taiwanese resent even today). It is well-recognized today that the KMT was a US-sponsored imposition on Taiwan. Prior to the KMT escape to Taiwan, it had been under KMT "influence" for 3 years at best.

The KMT is quite likely to lose the next election (although the oppostion DPP, very positively inclined towards India, fears Chinese dirty tricks in the run-up to the election). Even the supposedly pro-China KMT has been busy engaging with India - as I and many others have said on this forum in the past, there is some continuity in the Taiwanese establishment in their desire to reach out to India.

So the Taiwan card is indeed ours to play...

[Arihant]

The latest in opinion polls from Taiwan - methinks the KMT will surely go in the next elections:

President Ma Ying-jeou’s approval rating: 30.1 percent were content with his performance while 55.6 percent not [\b]

[Prem]

Is this blinking of the bully or another one of Shunya Zu deception?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b ... ndication=
China denies ban on rare earths exports to Japan

China's Trade Ministry denied reports Thursday that Beijing is tightening curbs on exports of rare earths to Japan after a territorial dispute further strained often tense relations between the rival Asian powers.With offices closed in both Japan and China for public holidays, it was difficult to confirm if the curbs were new or if, as reported by The New York Times, they were specifically targeting only Japan.A spokesman for China's Ministry of Commerce, Chen Rongkai, denied that Beijing had ordered a ban specifically on rare earths exports to Japan. Rare earths are crucial for computers, hybrid electric cars and other high-tech products."I don't know where The New York Times got that information, but we did not issue any ban of that sort," Chen said.The New York Times report cited Dudley Kingsnorth, executive director of the rare earth consulting company Industrial Minerals Company of Australia, as saying he had been getting calls from associates in the rare earth industry who said they had been asked to halt exports to Japan.Kingsnorth told The Associated Press he spoke to a contact at a Japanese trading house and then contacted another consultant in Japan who confirmed that report."I was told it was an 'unofficial ban,'" Kingsnorth said. "(China) requested major companies to withhold major exports to Japan with a clear indication that if they do export, it might impact on their export quotas."Phone calls to Japan's Foreign and Trade ministries were not answered Thursday, as did calls to major automakers in Japan whose new energy vehicles would be most severely affected by restrictions on supplies of key rare earths materials.
In high-level economic meetings late last month, Japanese officials said they urged China to ease export controls imposed earlier this year on rare earths.Japanese Foreign Ministry spokesman Satoru Sato told reporters that Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao explained that the limits on exports were intended to counter problems with excess supplies and smuggling.Relations have sharply deteriorated since then, following Japan's arrest of the Chinese captain of a fishing boat that collided two weeks ago with Japanese coast guard vessels near islands in the East China Sea claimed by both nations. Japan extended his detention Sunday, and China responded by suspending contacts

[Singha]

china has the worlds biggest known deposits of rare earth minerals...and looks like its willing to use that card.

[Arihant]

This article, from the Taipei Times today, clearly articulates why Taiwanese would never identify with China, and why, at the risk of over-repetition, I strongly believe India needs to play the Taiwan card.

Six decades of made-up politics

Routine references to Taiwan and China “splitting” after the Chinese civil war, for example, or the mention that Taiwan and China have been ruled separately for “more than six decades,” are not only misleading — they are wrong. Beyond failing to get the facts right (disunited entities cannot split, and Taiwan was ruled separately for at least 11 decades, counting Japanese rule), these facile insertions tend to reinforce the view that Taiwan and China are one and the same — or rather, that one ought to be subsumed into the other.

Ironically, the external view of Taiwanese politics tends to attribute to the 23 million people in Taiwan the position of a tiny minority on the island. This has been the true since Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) forces fled to Taiwan after their defeat by the communists in 1949. Soon afterwards, this government-in-exile imposed itself on Taiwanese and arrogated upon itself the right to rule the 7.39 million people who lived in Taiwan at the time, 1.37 million, or 18.55 percent, of whom were refugees from China.

When Chiang and the KMT, from 1949 until that dream collapsed as a result of its own stupidity, threatened to retake the “mainland,” the rest of the world assumed they were speaking for Taiwan as a whole, failing to realize that those aspirations were only felt by, at most, one-fifth of the population (and probably less, as mainlanders intermarried, built new lives for themselves and no longer wanted anything to do with the Chinese Civil War).

[RajeshA]

Published on Sep 23, 2010
By Max Fisher
Why Is the U.S. Rehearsing for a Chinese Invasion of Japan?: The Atlantic

But why should all of this matter so much to the U.S.? After all, our military is many times stronger than China's and we still control most of the Earth's seas and skies. The word that many scholars use when talking about long-term U.S.-Sino relations is "multi-polar," which reflects the growing belief that China will one day join the U.S. as the world's second superpower, fundamentally reshaping a world currently defined by American dominance. The question isn't will China rise, it's what happens when it does. If we simply let current trends continue, it's entirely foreseeable that China could cajole, persuade, or bully the rest of East Asia under its influence. The U.S. can handle Chinese competition, but a unified East Asia could undermine the U.S. in any number of ways. Limiting our freedom of movement in the Pacific and Indian oceans would only be the beginning.

[RajeshA]

A View from USA

Published on Sep. 23, 2010
By Max Fisher
The Risks of Isolating China: Atlantic

The U.S. strategy of containing China with the help of Pacific rim states has so far been successful, and China's lashing out has only further driven East Asia into American arms. But we risk over-doing it. If the U.S. and its East Asian allies contain China beyond what the country's leadership is willing to tolerate, we will drive China into a self-reinforcing cycle of isolating behavior. The U.S. doesn't want China to be too powerful, but it also needs China to be a happy and productive member of the global community and not an isolated pariah. As this potentially damaging mineral block reminds us, China is far too big and powerful to simply cordon off as the world has done to, say, North Korea. In addition to its vast economic importance, China also possesses veto power on the United Nations Security Council. It showed its willingness to be a responsible global player when it joined in supporting sanctions against Iran.

[ramana]

^^^^

The U.S. doesn't want China to be too powerful, but it also needs China to be a happy and productive member of the global community and not an isolated pariah. As this potentially damaging mineral block reminds us, China is far too big and powerful to simply cordon off as the world has done to, say, North Korea. In addition to its vast economic importance, China also possesses veto power on the United Nations Security Council. It showed its willingness to be a responsible global player when it joined in supporting sanctions against Iran.

Interesting thinking that US can decide how far PRC will be allowed to go. And how the neighbors can be made to run to US for help by turning up the gain on PRC's behavior. And how PRC is gaming the US fears. Cooperating where it cant influence the situation.

[praksam]

Aquino: Asean united vs China on territorial dispute

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerhe ... al-dispute

NEW YORK—President Benigno Aquino said on Thursday that a group of Southeast Asian nations would be unified should China use its weight as regional superpower in territorial disputes in the South China Sea.

Mr. Aquino, speaking a day ahead of a meeting of President Barack Obama and leaders of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) that will focus on territorial spats with China, said Beijing had so far not tried to “push us around.”

But, he said after a speech on the sidelines of a United Nations global summit, “in case that happens, I think Asean has demonstrated that we will stand as a bloc.”

In a reference to China, he said: “Hopefully we don’t hear the phrase ‘South China Sea’ with reference to it being their sea.”

Speaking before the Council on Foreign Relations, Mr. Aquino expressed support for the US position that the South China Sea territorial dispute should be resolved peacefully.

“The Philippines welcomes Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s statement that while the US takes no sides on the disputes in the South China Sea, the claimant states should resolve their disputes through a ‘collaborative diplomatic process’ and in accordance with international law,” Mr. Aquino said.

“The Philippines and the US share the need to maintain unimpeded maritime commerce and navigation,” he said.

China claims all of the South China Sea, where Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia, Brunei and the Philippines have also laid territorial claims. Aside from rich fishing areas, the region is believed to have huge oil and natural gas deposits.

Mr. Aquino took pride in the Philippines’ role in the revival in May of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

“As President of that [nuclear conference], the Philippines helped... garner consensus towards a comprehensive approach to nuclear disarmament, nuclear non-proliferation and the peaceful uses of nuclear energy,” Mr. Aquino said.

[shiv]

A View from USA

Published on Sep. 23, 2010
By Max Fisher
The Risks of Isolating China: Atlantic

Most significantly this paper says, in the very first paragraph

China has unintentionally played right into the long-term U.S. strategy of unifying the rest of East Asia against China and under the umbrella of American security and leadership.

Supporting Japan, Taiwan and Korea, asking Vietnam to oppose China, talking of troops in POK years after their presence was known are all parts of this strategy. Even India is only a tool here

It now strikes me that the Chinese insistence on supplying Pakistan with nuclear reactors is a Chinese plan to maintain a grip on Pakistan by doing something that the US is unable to offer given US political considerations. Need to see how the US responds to that.

[krisna]

China demands Japan apology as boat captain returns

China has demanded an apology from Japan following the return of a fishing boat captain who was detained for two weeks in Okinawa.

After his release, Beijing reiterated its claim to the islands, calling it "indisputable".

Following his release, China's government demanded an apology and compensation from Tokyo.
"This was an action that gravely violated Chinese sovereignty and the human rights of a Chinese citizen, and the Chinese government strongly protests," said a foreign ministry statement. mango chinese are treated very nicely by CCP thugs
"It is unlawful and invalid for Japan to detain and investigate the boat captain and to take any legal measures against him."

strong words

Japanese prosecutors took the politics into account. They said even though the captain may have deliberately rammed Japanese coastguard ships it wasn't worth detaining him given the importance of ties between Japan and China.

ON going disputes

* Gas fields: The countries argue over gas exploration rights in the East China Sea
* Disputed islands: Both countries claim ownership of Senkaku/Diaoyu islands
* Yasukuni Shrine: Memorial to Japan's war dead which China sees as glorifying war criminals

china despite having won this round instead of keeping quiet is going on for more kill. It may result in negative returns.
The fall out will be felt all across the east and south asia. Hope the madarins in south block are wide awake.
Typical bully attitude. Some one has to stand up and confront this nation.

[SriSri]

Bangladesh Concludes Military Exercise with United States

Is it related to shrinking Chinese influence in BD?

[Pratyush]

When it comes to the BD and PRC or the India relationship, the relationship is dependent upon which side of bed the BD govt wakes up from.

If it is the right side then it is all for good relationship with the Indians. If it the wrong side then all for hostile relationship with India and good relationship with PRC.

So don't read too much into it.

JMT

[Pulikeshi]

China has demanded an apology from Japan following the return of a fishing boat captain who was detained for two weeks in Okinawa.

Typical bully attitude. Some one has to stand up and confront this nation.

Question is why pick on a battle when you have already won -
Something is badly wrong internally in China, that would be why!

[Pratyush]

Double post self deleted

[Pratyush]

^^Agree 400% with you, that the CPC may not be sure of the viability of its economic policy.

[RajeshA]

"China has demanded an apology from Japan following the return of a fishing boat captain who was detained for two weeks in Okinawa."

Typical bully attitude. Some one has to stand up and confront this nation.

Question is why pick on a battle when you have already won -
Something is badly wrong internally in China, that would be why!

Humiliation of the other is the topping of the ice-cream for the Chinese. When the Chinese put pressure on Japan, it is a case of "kahin pe nigahen, kahin pe nishaana". They are telling other countries in the neighborhood, not to even think of opposing China. The more humiliation Japan gets, the bigger is the deterrent that the Chinese build up against all other countries.

Secondly if a country goes on the back-foot, the Chinese will push you even further back to generate a momentum for retreat.

That is why India should never give in to the Chinese, not even on the slightest of issues.

Where others look for compromise, the Chinese look for a win.

[Raja Ram]

Gentle Rakshaks,

Last sunday, I spoke at a private forum on the multi-dimensional threat that China poses to India. It was attended by over 40 corporate executive types. To many what I presented was an eye opener and in the last week many have called and written in appreciating the presentation.

I have prepared the presentation with a lot of inputs gleaned from this thread and the PRC thread. Many thanks. I have also directed the audience to visit these forums to get a better perspective on matters of national interests rather than forming views by an often incompetent and biased media in India.

Special thanks to ramana, SSridhar for their guidance and inputs. The deck is available on slide share (kept it downloadable - search for rajaram.muthukrishnan) and also on my blog - Musings of an Ordinary Indian

http://rajaram-india.blogspot.com/2010/ ... at-to.html

Please feel free to use this presentation and improve upon it. The message needs to get out there.

[RajeshA]

Raja Ram ji,

Great Presentation.

The Link however between Blogspot and Slideshare is not working.

[Pulikeshi]

They are telling other countries in the neighborhood, not to even think of opposing China. The more humiliation Japan gets, the bigger is the deterrent that the Chinese build up against all other countries.

One can understand making a example about of a very minor power to scare others...

You can take this to the bank: The purpose of bullying is to hide inadequacy

Not disagreeing with what China is doing, but one ought to think about why China is doing...

Possibilities:

1. It wants to show other countries in the region who is boss, but flip side this behavior
will only cause the opposite effect.

2. It has internal inadequacies that is causing it to deflect internal concerns to external issues.

I am not a betting man, but I'd put money on 2.

[Pratyush]

Pulikeshi,

My learning of History is a bit lacking, but from what I Know of NAZI Germany & Facist Italy before WW2 and their conduct of International affairs, is making me draw a parallel between them and PRC.

Dont know if my parallel is accurate or not.