Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

[Peregrine]

China says Uighurs being sold as 'cannon fodder' for extremist groups

BEIJING (Reuters) - Uighurs from China's Xinjiang are being given Turkish identity papers in Southeast Asia by Turkish diplomats and then taken to Turkey where some are sold to fight for groups like Islamic State as "cannon fodder", a senior Chinese official said.

Beijing says the Turkic language-speaking Uighur minority are firstly Chinese nationals, and those who flee China should be returned to their home region in the far west of the country bordering central Asia.

"Turkish embassies in Southeast Asia (i.e. Land of Nanga-Bhookas : as labelled by the Late Ardeshir Cawasji) will give them proof of identity," Tong Bishan, division chief of the Ministry of Public Security's Criminal Investigation Department, told a small group of foreign reporters in Beijing on Saturday.

"They are obviously Chinese but they will give them identities as Turkish nationals."

The accusation is likely to further anger Ankara, already alarmed by the return of more than 100 Uighurs to China from Thailand this week.

Some Turks see themselves as sharing a common cultural and religious heritage with their Uighur "brothers".

Hundreds, possibly thousands, of Uighurs keen to escape unrest in China's western Xinjiang region, have travelled clandestinely via Southeast Asia to Turkey. China is home to about 20 million Muslims spread across its vast territory, only a portion of whom are Uighurs

Tong said that hundreds of Uighurs had been given documents by Turkish diplomats, especially in Kuala Lumpur, and then allowed into Turkey.

Neither the Turkish Foreign Ministry nor the Turkish embassy in Kuala Lumpur were able to immediately provide comment.

YOUTHS BRAINWASHED

But upon arriving, they have no chance of finding legal work and some end up with extremist groups, Tong said, like the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, which Beijing accuses of waging an insurrection campaign in Xinjiang to set up their own state.

"They are very easily controlled by certain local forces, especially the East Turkestan Islamic Movement and other terrorist groups. They organise the youths, they brainwash them, and get them to the front line to fight. They are cannon fodder," Tong said.

"There is competition for them. Some are sent to Iraq, some to Syria. The terrorist groups there lack people. They will snatch people away. The terrorist groups will pay, at least $2,000 a person. It's their way of recruiting soldiers."

Tong, who has been helping lead the Chinese effort to get Uighurs in Southeast Asia back to China, said he did not know how many Uighurs were now fighting for Islamic State.

But he said that they have found propaganda videos and messages on the mobile phones and computers of some of those who have been returned, including pictures of dead fighters and promises of the joys to come in the afterlife.

"We are providing education and support, to tell them what real Islam is about. They've been listening to and watching stuff on the Internet, from irregular imams."

ATTEMPT TO 'DEMONIZE' CHINA

Numerous groups have been sent back to China this year from Southeast Asia, Tong said, including the 109 repatriated from Thailand this week. He did not have a full figure for the numbers deported.

The deportations have sparked sometimes violent protests in Turkey, home to a large Uighur diaspora.

The United States and United Nations have condemned the deportations and asked Thailand to stop them, saying the Uighurs could face harsh treatment in China.

Beijing denies the accusations of human rights groups that it restricts the Uighurs' religious freedoms. It blames Islamist militants for a rise in violent attacks in Xinjiang in the past three years in which hundreds have died.

Tong said that concern the Uighurs would be mistreated upon their return was simply an attempt to "demonize" China, and said they were being well looked after, though those suspected of crimes will be prosecuted
Cheers

[Tuvaluan]

Chinese experts said sharing the common platform at the SCO will enable India and Pakistan to understand each other better, and resolve their differences. At the same time, China is worried that the differences between India and Pakistan can cloud the agenda of SCO.

That is exactly India ought to do from day one -- destroy SCO as a useful organization that can be taken seriously.

[Bade]

What Turkey should do is give them stapled visas on their Chinese Passports ! Isn't that what the Chinese do to claim other citizens as their own.

[Pulikeshi]

Come on now. What was the outcome of the dance with pakistan -- i am willing to accept even post-hoc explanations. Tactics are time sensitive, and I can see that with weak leadership of the MMS kind, it made sense to talk peace...as a sort of de-facto justification of MMS regimes treachery and spinelessness.

I understand that the babus are also not monolithic and there are sharp and strong ones in the mix along with weak and spineless ones that kowtow to the political leadership.

Both Pakistan and China are states with shared borders with India.
Any country focussed on transforming will need to seek peace on the boundaries, etc. India for good or bad has not gone down the path of seeking to undo the integrity of Pakistan or China. For reasons best know to whosoever knows and is in the know, the cost of maintaining status quo is evaluated as cheaper than the cost of any such option to change status quo.

That is, the dances has changed, but the outcomes tragically remain the same - Strategems, Tacticums not withstanding!

All that said - Your world view is categorized thusly -
1. India has those leader who are pusillanimous and those others who have drunk their mother's milk and have broad chests.
2. India has those babus in or out of position who are weak/spineless and those who are patriotic.

Whatever I say will fall into one of those buckets - your tea cup, it is your choice how you fill it.

And chinese proliferating nuclear weapons to Pakistan is irrelevant? China has the werewithal to restrict India's membership to cartels associated with nuclear commerce, and also the ability to keep a proxy nuclear state like pakistan remain a hostile and permanent threat to India. How exactly has India confounded the chinese with its own development of nuclear weapons -- all India has done is work hard to ensure that it is not left with a knife in a gun fight. It has not yet nixed the threat of war on two fronts from the chinese and the pakis, or the threat of nuclear war with the paki proxy while china talks the language of peace and friendship for the likes of SS to spread around to Indians.

States can obviously decide how much and when to invest in stability of other states and instability of others. If China is all that powerful, why does it need a rump-state like Pakistan? In turn when the Pakistanis have needed their mai-bhap the Chinese are no where to be found. If indeed there are four-fathers - US, UK, China & Saudi who use (abuse) Pakistan to keep India down - then it follows that India is so powerful that it requires four-fathers to fund a chutiya Pakistan to keep poor little India down. This is indeed incredible that poor little India is really that powerful, that it has been surviving, nay thriving even under these four-fathers. If all that is till now stated can be taken as fact, then it follows that India in her own interest has calculated that with a minimal current investment in weapons, defense personal, etc. she can make it costly for the four-fathers to go beyond a certain point - leave alone two front war etc. That India's geography give her an advantage which reduces her cost, even if Pakistan's geography is a handicap, it is not enough and even if China has Tibet, it is economically better to let the Chinese fund that country called Tibet as well.

Therefore, India has also made an assessment that keeping Pakistan intact is more effective than not, that keeping Tibet with China is more effective than not - I would suspect no Indian leader or babu will tell you this, but their actions are clear if you infer. Indian government x or y, babu s or r, this vector has not changed. BRF has trends, and so does India, but those do not strategy make. Neither does the need to appear strong, the strong may appear weak if it so suits them!

You would do well to articulate where the Indian leader or babu is wrong in this assessment. However, it is entirely your framework and prejudice that you seek to categorize them into one of two buckets I state above. Your analysis of why India's assessment is incorrect is worth hearing, but if we need to go back to the categories - please spare me.

[Tuvaluan]

1. India has those leader who are pusillanimous and those others who have drunk their mother's milk and have broad chests.
2. India has those babus in or out of position who are weak/spineless and those who are patriotic.

Nothing is monolithic was my only point -- the rest of it is words I have not said. Nicely done.

This is indeed incredible that poor little India is really that powerful, that it has been surviving, nay thriving even under these four-fathers.

you are just repeating what you just said -- "India is still standing, so that is proof that the Indian government has had a plan for decades"...yes, that explains nicely why the border roads were not build for decades by these very same people that you pretend had a plan, right? That explains why India has not build local capability to run our own networks too? Anything else I am missing from this master plan that you have divined with your fine intellect unlike the rest of us jokers?

Yes, India "thriving" is neither here nor there -- health indicators and economic indicators are creeping up, and not because of any specific government policies either, and lots of states are still lagging behind terribly and the better performing states have always done so, even with terrible governments. So if the extent of your claims is "we are still standing (even if our enemies still possess the means to take us down), so we win", that is just awesome. When's the victory celebration?

India has also made an assessment that keeping Pakistan intact is more effective than not, that keeping Tibet with China is more effective than not - I would suspect no Indian leader or babu will tell you this, but their actions are clear if you infer.

Keeping pakistan intact for what? Unless you can explain this yourself, instead of pretending this is all part of some master plan that you have inveigled, it just means you are bloviating about some secret master plan based just on faith and contradicting evidence that is plain enough for everyone to see. Keeping Pakistan intact will do exactly what for India? "A strong and stable pakistan is in India's interest", eh? Now where have we all heart that vomit before?

My final point is this: The lack of strong political leadership for decades left policy making to the bureaucracy which got the unanimous backing of the political leadership which was usually clueless in such matters -- the political leadership was also averse to actually having to take any leadership calls that could stir the pot and expose the incompetence of the government in keeping the armed forces and other arms of government in good shape, and both sides were fine with this arrangement as long it was "under control", and their friends and family got to live off the fat of the land.

This has changed after the most recent elections, which is evident from actions of the GoI -- this is not some "continuation of decades of policymaking" as you seem to be pretending, and your reasoning seems to be "because I say so and because the govmint has not yet destroyed the country", which is highly compelling and awesome in its clarity and logic.

[Pulikeshi]

This has changed after the most recent elections, which is evident from actions of the GoI -- this is not some "continuation of decades of policymaking" as you seem to be pretending, and your reasoning seems to be "because I say so and because the govmint has not yet destroyed the country", which is highly compelling and awesome in its clarity and logic.

You need not take my word (and you shouldn't). You did the same as you do above response - I am not arguing for a strong and stable Pakistan, neither am I arguing for a strong and stable China - but you mistake my use of the English language in positioning arguments as actually accepting them and recommending them - please to fix this error onlee.

Saying - "India believes stable Pakistan and China are required for peace on her borders and all her actions prove the same" - does not mean me the author accepts and or is proposing this as well. Just to be crystal clear. You can argue that India does not believe this, but to argue the author is pusillanimous to hold such a position is just your misunderstanding.

To be clear... lets view the actions:

• India continues to talk to Pakistan with no progress on terror (check)
• India continues to talk with China with not a murmur on Tibet or Indo-Pacific (check)

What has the new GoI done to pursue new outcomes?

[RamaY]

Modi reaching out to Chinese citizens thru social media is interesting. Is he trying to introduce democratic values to China? What if he starts sharing some of Indias proposals/vision to Chinese people but may not fit into China's communist vision?

[Pulikeshi]

Modi reaching out to Chinese citizens thru social media is interesting. Is he trying to introduce democratic values to China? What if he starts sharing some of Indias proposals/vision to Chinese people but may not fit into China's communist vision?

1. Does India care to see China become a democracy? If China indeed does, then does it benefit India?
Is a democratic, capitalist China more dangerous or less dangerous to India? Or we to take Friedman
at his clichéd word and assume that Democracies do not fight each other -
ok this one was fun to pull out even if irrelevant.

2. Okies, lets say the Chinese Píngmín (平民) (I prefer Ping-man - similar to our Mango-man)
listened to Modi - what is the outcome? Ping-man still has to go back to living under the
harmonious society established by superior intellectual mandarins of the Middle Kingdom.
What if you what if?

Now I am not saying what you are saying is not sound.. but without setting outcomes it becomes turd flinging...
Strategy is to think at least 3 steps ahead of your opponent innit?
Flinging turd and hoping it sticks makes one at minimum a Paki...

[SSridhar]

Integrating Tibet with the world - Atul Aneja, The Hindu

China is on course to integrate the Tibet Autonomous Republic (TAR) into the global mainstream, with India and Nepal among the spurs that will connect it with South Asia.

In tune with President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road initiative, China has undertaken the Sichuan-Tibet railway project. This is an ambitious undertaking, which, once completed, will connect Lhasa with Chengdu, the booming capital of China’s Sichuan province.

The high elevation railway, passing through the stunning landscape of the Tibetan plateau, will branch out from the existing Lhasa-Shigatse rail line, which terminates at the doorstep of Nepal.

Heading towards eastern Tibet, from the junction at Xierong on the existing track, the first section of the Sichuan-Tibet railway will end at Bayi, 434 kilometres from Lhasa, in the strategic Nyingchi prefecture.

“According to the mid-to-long-term plan of the central government, we have built the Qinghai-Tibet railway, and in September last year completed the construction to Shigatse. We are now constructing the railway from Lhasa to Nyingchi,” says Ji Guogang, Director of TAR’s Development and Reform Commission.

China stresses that its bold enterprise is part of its western development plan to elevate the economies of its relatively backward regions. But looking beyond the developmental perspective, the Indian security establishment is focusing sharply on the project, for the Nyngchi prefecture is in close proximity to the disputed areas of Arunachal Pradesh.

Game changer

The extension of the railway to Chengdu would be a game changer, for it would integrate Tibet with China’s transportation corridor to Europe.

Chengdu is located on the futuristic Yixinou Railway route, which connects China’s Pacific coast with Europe. In December last, the train from the coastal city of Yiwu passed through Chengdu, completing its record-breaking journey of 13,052 kilometres to Madrid.

That distance is larger than the span that separates the North and the South Poles.

Plans are also afoot to connect Nyngchi with Dali in the neighbouring Yunnan province. That step would also be path-breaking, for it would establish a link between Tibet with the proposed Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM) economic corridor. Starting from Kunming, capital of the Yunnan province, the BCIM passes through Dali, before heading for Kolkata via Myanmar and Bangladesh. Indian officials say that Yunnan and West Bengal are emerging as BCIM’s twin growth engines, which exemplify the growing linkages between Chinese provinces and Indian States as the new drivers of Sino-Indian ties.

Chinese authorities are also backing this project on geopolitical considerations, for the BCIM corridor provides an alternative channel of trade and investment that bypasses the Malacca straits — an oceanic trade artery that is subject to Washington’s military domination.

TAR-India connectivity

The Chinese are proposing another rail link, which could revolutionise contact between TAR and India. Mr. Ji of the DRC revealed that the Chinese government is considering extending the Lhasa-Shigatse rail link to Yadong. In case that happens, it would establish a Chinese railhead in the Chumbi valley, only 31 kilometres away from the Nathu La pass that connects Tibet with Sikkim. The Nathu La pass is the channel for border trade, but Chinese officials say that Sikkim could become an important destination for investments and tourism as well.

Last month, China’s ambassador to India, Le Yusheng, told the visiting Indian media in Yadong that following his conversation with Chief Minister Pawan Chamling, Sikkim is expecting Chinese tourists, businesses and investments in the State. “I think all these issues will be discussed in the years to come at the local and the central level,” Mr. Le observed.

In Lhasa, TAR officials expressed optimism about the initiative. “In the near future a result will come out,” said Ge Sang, head of the foreign and overseas office, when asked to comment on the ambassador’s observations.

TAR officials were also upbeat about extending the Lhasa-Shigatse railway to Kathmandu, citing it as a pet project of China’s founding Chairman Mao Zedong. However, they did not comment on the possible extension of the track to Lumbini — the birthplace of Buddha — and Patna in India.

In parallel with the spurt in railway construction, Highway 318 provides a viable road link between Lhasa and Shanghai, passing through Chengdu along a stretch of 5,476 kilometres.

Flanked by the Lhasa river, a tributary of the Brahmaputra, called the Yarlung Tsangpo in Tibet, the highway first heads towards the Mila pass, located at a jaw-dropping height of 16,543 feet. The Mila mountain, from which the pass derives its name, is also a watershed, for a steep descent from the pass opens out towards the fast-flowing Niyang river. Close to Linzhi airport of the Nyngchi prefecture, the Niyang merges into the Yarlung Tsangpo. The confluence is not far from the famed Great Bend of the river, from where the Brahmaputra, taking a U-turn, flows swiftly into India with great force. The steep drop of 3,000 metres over approximately 200 km provides an opportunity for massive, but controversial hydro-electric projects, involving China, India and Bangladesh.

The stretch of Highway 318 from Lhasa to Bayi, which is being rapidly upgraded to world standards, also provides a link to Yunnan. Passing through Mangkang County, the road links up with Highway 214, before snaking along a mountainous stretch to Kunming. Apart from the BCIM corridor, Kunming is also the gateway to Vietnam and Laos. Besides, it links TAR with the Association of the South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), for Kunming is the gateway to the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) grouping, whose membership includes Myanmar, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand and China’s Yunnan province.

[Tuvaluan]

. lets view the actions:

India continues to talk to Pakistan with no progress on terror (check)
India continues to talk with China with not a murmur on Tibet or Indo-Pacific (check)

Well, India does not have capability to do much more than talk until it shores up its own internal problems.
I can accept that your view is that the article is just Mr. Saran reporting on the meeting, rather than any explicit support for China's stance. However, given his position as India's china expert, his views can't just be a regurgitation of the whatever bullsh!t the chinese turd who ran the conference spouted -- there are enough people in India who speak for China's point of view and high time someone articulated and pointed out all the BS spouted by china in its "peaceful rise". Clearly, you don't think it is Saran's job to do that, and that is fine...but then, what is the point of his so-called expertise if he cannot educate the public on the gap between china's talk and actions when given a chance to address the public?

The chinese guy has clearly articulated the contours of china's India policy, which is to ensure that India's policy of playing swing state is used against India to keep it from being a threat to china.

And a Chinese scholar, when asked where India fitted in the hierarchical order that China envisaged, said for China, India was a "swing State" which ought to be kept from leaning too close to the United States or straying too far from its traditional non-alignment.

[SSridhar]

Will not recognise international panel ruling on disputed South China Sea: China - PTI

China today said it will not accept the decision of a UN arbitration sought by the Philippines to solve the South China Sea territorial disputes, saying the proceedings were unilateral and involves "a third party."

The Philippines has asked the international tribunal in The Hague to declare China's claims to virtually all of the South China Sea invalid. "China has repeatedly expounded its position of not accepting or getting involved in these proceedings initiated unilaterally by the Philippines," said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying.

"On the issue of territorial sovereignty and maritime rights, China will never accept any imposed plan, nor any solution arrived at by unilaterally resorting to a third party for resolving disputes," Hua said in a statement.

The Philippines filed its arbitration case at The Hague in early 2013. The hearing on jurisdiction and admissibility of the case began last week and was concluded yesterday.

The petition contests Chinese assertion to exercise "historic rights" over the waters, seabed and subsoil beyond the limits of its entitlements under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) as well as the nine-dash line drawn by Beijing.

She said the Philippines' initiation of the arbitration ignored China's legitimate rights under such international laws as the UNCLOS and breached commitments made by the Philippines not to unilaterally seek arbitration.

The spokesperson laid the blame for the current tension in the South China Sea on the Philippines, saying it has illegally occupied Chinese islands there since the 1970s. "Despite being the victim of the South China sea disputes, China remains highly restrained and keeps safeguarding regional peace and stability in mind," Hua said.

Vietnam is also going to UNCLOS. China cannot keep refusing to subject itself to international arbitration after having signed the UNCLOS. The very purpose of UNCLOS is to resolve such disputes. India graciously accepted the UNCLOS ruling recently in the Bay of Bengal vis-a-vis Bangladesh. China's defiance shows its usual disregard for international agreements and conventions. Its behaviour cannot and should not be allowed to continue.

[Austin]

Former Indian Ambassador and expert in foreign affairs

Why is Pentagon Sweating Bullets Over Sino-Russian Alliance? Melkulangara K. Bhadrakumar

[Pulikeshi]

I can accept that your view is that the article is just Mr. Saran reporting on the meeting, rather than any explicit support for China's stance.
...

And a Chinese scholar, when asked where India fitted in the hierarchical order that China envisaged, said for China, India was a "swing State" which ought to be kept from leaning too close to the United States or straying too far from its traditional non-alignment.

Agreed, I am merely saying we do not know from the article if SS is endorsing what the Chinese spouted or not...

The Chinese scholar should pursue more studies of 36 Stratagems -
What his father goes if India decides to be a "swinger State" or "monogamy State" or "monistic State?"

Lets say an Indian scholar (not you) - Tuvaluan Ulanoor Ganeshan (TUG) decides to call China a "Little Kingdom" and that he considers China to be a subservient state to the US for the forceable future... either TUG can show factually this is the case or he is dealing with hypotheticals and is predicting it, etc. but what TUG can never do as an analyst is to make China become the "Little Kingdom"

One way to elicit a response is to spout the contrary, the other way is to establish hierarchical mandariness!
The Chinese scholar is still an under-graduate from the prestigious -
Harmonious Societies Meddle Oinkdom's - Pingman At Mandariness pursuing a degree of 36 Stratagems.

Ironically - notice the Chinese are doing everything in their power to make India Swinger away to the US.
What he says is Mao's fart - With such Chinese scholars at hand who needs strategy!

[Tuvaluan]

What his father goes if India decides to be a "swinger State" or "monogamy State" or "monistic State?"

What goes is that the chinese have an accurate reading of what India is upto policywise -- which makes India predictable and easier to control, unless India can demonstrate otherwise. In any game, reading the opponent is a good part of having the right reaction, as anyone who plays games like poker or other competitive games would know.

A "swing state" tries to maximize its benefit by playing larger powers against each other, and this is a normal game that lesser power play against larger powers, like Sri Lanka does to India and China.

This also means that China's recent moves of "cooperation" with India are timed as you mention, and they have been able to do this and acquire more leverage over India than the other way around, which mean India's ability to "Swing" gets far less effective as china gets more leverage.

The real question is whether India can demonstrate agility in making unpredictable moves to stymie any chinese "reading" of India's intentions. Past history is no predictor for the future, but given institutional inertia and pathetic response to Chinese in the past, I am not holding my breath for India to acquire agility and unpredictability anytime soon.

China's leverage at the borders (the infrastructure gap), and its massive footprint in Indian telecom/cyberspace infrastructure, its nuclear proliferation to Pakistan and association usurpation of Indian territory in PoK, CoK etc., are some example of some pretty severe leverage they have in terms of toying with India and keeping India's swinging effectiveness pretty low.

India's response has been in the South China Sea and its relationship with Vietnam and Indonesia, resurgence of relations with Bangladesh, Myanmar and Nepal (on which there has been continuity for the past decade across political regime changes in India), but this is not sufficient to stymie China's leverage especially in the technology/infrastructure domain. The jokers in IISC actually think that having the source code to all of Huawei's servers is sufficient to protect India from Zero day attacks on the cell phone and network infrastructure, which would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

[Tuvaluan]

Narendra Modi ‏@narendramodi 3h3 hours ago

Under SARDPNE Rs 35000 Crore will be invested to develop Trans-Arunachal Highway & to connect all district headquarters by a 2 lane highway.

Finally, a leadership that takes Chinese threat to AP seriously...here's to hoping it gets done on schedule.

[SSridhar]

China warns Japan against 'crippling regional peace' - AFP

China on Thursday urged Tokyo to avoid "crippling regional peace and security", after the lower house of Japan's parliament passed bills that could see Japanese troops fight abroad for the first time since World War II.

"It is fully justified to ask if Japan is going to give up its exclusively defence-oriented policy", China's foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said in a statement.

"We solemnly urge the Japanese side to... refrain from jeopardising China's sovereignty and security interests or crippling regional peace and stability," Hua said in the statement posted on the ministry's website.

Hua described the passing of the bills as "an unprecedented move since the Second World War".


Hua referred to the 70th anniversary of Japan's defeat in its conflict with China, which Beijing calls "the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression."

"We solemnly urge the Japanese side to draw hard lessons from history," she added.

China's official Xinhua news agency also condemned the move, saying it meant "a nightmare scenario has come a step closer for Japanese people and neighbouring nations".

If passed, the bill will "tarnish the reputation of a nation that has earned international respect for its pacifist Constitution over a period of nearly seven decades", it said.

[A_Gupta]

Bertil Lintner on China's interests in Myanmar:
http://www.irrawaddy.org/magazine/same- ... ridor.html
"Same Game, Different Tactics: China’s ‘Myanmar Corridor’"

[vijaykarthik]

^Xinhua peddling this vague theory about Japan causing disturbance. this doesn't fit the curious case of pot calling a kettle black. It must be about 10 times the same.

Regional peace and stability was disturbed... which is why Japan was forced to change their SDF rules and will likely change their constitution too eventually as the constitution is getting increasingly irrelevant and archaic with newer changes in circs.

Is there a way to start floating maps which doesn't show Tibet and Xinjiang as part of China and make it wide and prevalent in MNO?

[vijaykarthik]

Good infographic: http://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-cont ... na-us.html

[SSridhar]

China should detail Maritime Silk Road projects to get India's support: Chinese think tank - PTI, Economic Times

China should detail projects under the Maritime Silk Road plan in the Indian Ocean to address India's security concerns as its support is crucial for the key project, a state-run Chinese think tank said today.

Stating that "India bears great significance" for the Maritime Silk Road (MSR) which is part of the Belt and Road plan initiated by President Xi Jinping, an article by Long Xingchun, Director of the Centre for Indian Studies at China's West Normal University, said detailing specific projects will help India to evaluate pros and cons to take a decision.

"India, which has enormous influence on whether the initiative, especially the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road, can be implemented smoothly, has not officially responded. Some scholars therefore believe that the Indian government's official attitude of 'researching' and 'considering' the proposals is actually 'rejecting' them," the article published in the state-run Global Times said.

In his article, Long stated that as the most important nation in the Indian Ocean, India is going through a high speed economic growth and can be a significant partner on the maritime Silk Road in fields such as infrastructures, trade, finance and people-to-people exchanges.

"New Delhi's attitude will also affect other coastal countries around the Indian Ocean, such as Sri Lanka, the Maldives, Mauritius and the Seychelles," the article said.

"India is a major power and deserves more attention. Some Indian scholars think that the China-led maritime Silk Road lacks transparency. India has no idea what China's intentions are. What's the difference between the maritime Silk Road and the current maritime trade and transportation? Is it a replacement or a supplement?" it said

"If China helps in infrastructure projects in the countries along the route, this will mean a lot of Chinese investment moving in. In that case, will the Chinese military step into the Indian Ocean?" the article asks.

It argues that India's objections to CPEC and its own strategic projects may be the real reason to increase its leverage to negotiate.

"It probably makes more sense to say that New Delhi is increasing its leverage in its negotiations with China. India bears great significance for China's maritime Silk Road development," the article said.

"India wants answers to these questions. Some Indian scholars think that China should attach more importance to India and make more explanations, so as to gain India's understanding and cooperation," it said.

"If specific projects for the 'One Road, One Belt' initiative can be detailed as the next step, Indians will be bound to evaluate the pros and cons, and reach a decision over joining it," the article added.

[A_Gupta]

Perhaps Inner Mongolia should seek to secede from China and join Mongolia?
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... 70777.aspx

China deports Indian man after 'Genghis Khan video'

China on Friday deported the lone Indian arrested on unspecified charges in Inner Mongolia, bringing to an end 72 hours of intense negotiations between Indian diplomats and local officials who caught him allegedly watching banned videos with 19 other foreigners.

....
"They watched a documentary on Genghis Khan to further their understanding of the region they were in at the time, and this may have mistakenly been deemed as 'propaganda' material," the statement said.
...
Resource-rich Inner Mongolia region sees sporadic protests by Mongols against government policies which include moving nomadic herders from grazing lands into towns, and vast coalmine development.

[SSridhar]

In a first, China to participate in Indian International Fleet Review - Dinakar Peri, The Hindu

China has confirmed its participation in the Indian International Fleet Review (IFR) in Visakhapatnam in February 2016, official sources told The Hindu . This is the first time the Chinese Navy will take part in the event.

“Their participation will be in terms of both ship and personnel,” a senior Navy official said. The specifics are being worked out.

The development comes at a time of growing competition between the two countries for strategic space in the Indian Ocean with the Chinese Navy’s increasing forays into the region. Commenting on this, the Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral R.K. Dhowan, recently said that “Chinese naval activities are being closely monitored.”

Despite the growing maritime friction, both nations agreed on increasing bilateral naval cooperation during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to China.

“The two sides will exchange visits of naval ships and hold PASSEX [passing exercises] and SAR [search and rescue] exercises,” said the joint statement issued after Mr. Modi’s discussions with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

While 90 nations have been invited, 10 of them landlocked countries, 46 have so far confirmed their participation.

The first IFR on the Mumbai coast in 2001 had 22 countries participating.

Five-day event

President Pranab Mukherjee, as the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, will inspect the fleet review. The event is spread over five days from February 5, beginning with an international seminar.

The fleet review will be the last one for India’s ageing aircraft carrier INS Viraat , which is to be decommissioned after February.

[RamaY]

Modi reaching out to Chinese citizens thru social media is interesting. Is he trying to introduce democratic values to China? What if he starts sharing some of Indias proposals/vision to Chinese people but may not fit into China's communist vision?

1. Does India care to see China become a democracy? If China indeed does, then does it benefit India?
Is a democratic, capitalist China more dangerous or less dangerous to India? Or we to take Friedman
at his clichéd word and assume that Democracies do not fight each other -
ok this one was fun to pull out even if irrelevant.

2. Okies, lets say the Chinese Píngmín (平民) (I prefer Ping-man - similar to our Mango-man)
listened to Modi - what is the outcome? Ping-man still has to go back to living under the
harmonious society established by superior intellectual mandarins of the Middle Kingdom.
What if you what if?

Now I am not saying what you are saying is not sound.. but without setting outcomes it becomes turd flinging...
Strategy is to think at least 3 steps ahead of your opponent innit?
Flinging turd and hoping it sticks makes one at minimum a Paki...

Valid points Pulikeshi Garu. Let me think thru this...

[RajeshA]

Modi reaching out to Chinese citizens thru social media is interesting. Is he trying to introduce democratic values to China? What if he starts sharing some of Indias proposals/vision to Chinese people but may not fit into China's communist vision?

1. Does India care to see China become a democracy? If China indeed does, then does it benefit India?
Is a democratic, capitalist China more dangerous or less dangerous to India? Or we to take Friedman
at his clichéd word and assume that Democracies do not fight each other -
ok this one was fun to pull out even if irrelevant.

It is one thing to market one's democratic ideals and political system. Marketing "democracy" gives Indians, pride in ourselves, as well as allows us to feel "superior" to others who do not "enjoy" the same system.

It is however quite another to start poking the other countries for lack of sufficient democracy.

Just having "democracy" however does not really give India any edge whatsoever in the international arena, contrary to the belief among many "foreign policy experts" that it does. If India gets any positive sentiment abroad, which converts into real benefits for India, then it has more to do with other factors of geopolitics and strategic perception rather than "democracy". The use of "democracy" by "foreign policy experts" as a selling point is limited to telling the West, that they should love us Indians more than they love the Chinese. That itself is a pathetic state of mind. Our democracy has to stand independent of any Western association. That said, it is still okay to use "democracy" as a selling point. Our marketing however should not fool us.

Democracy may become a stick for India some day to thrash the Chinese system, but that is a long way in the future.

Just my two paisa!

[SSridhar]

Democracy may become a stick for India some day to thrash the Chinese system, but that is a long way in the future.

Very true. We shouldn't jump the gun.

[SSridhar]

"Interplay between India, China and US will determine strategic balance in Asia": Jaishankar - Indrani Bagchi, ToI

The interplay of India, US and China "is among the key factors that will determine the strategic balance in Asia and beyond", said foreign secretary S. Jaishankar. In two back-to-back speeches, India's top diplomat has laid out the drivers of the Modi government's foreign policy. . . . With specific reference to India's ties with the US and China, we approach them both positively.

[SSridhar]

PLAN submarine docks at Mumbai

[Tuvaluan]

http://www.canindia.com/2015/07/dramati ... arliament/

The Maldivian govt. needs to be taken down with prejudice if they go through with this -- this is just a round about way to have a permanent Chinese presence in the Indian Ocean right next to India. The current govt. came into power in a coup and is now selling away islands to entities hostile to India -- really bad news. India engaging with the CMAG is not going to help with this situation at all.

[schinnas]

Clear that Chinese have bought the current anti-India government of Maldives. On the positive side, this makes Sri Lanka slightly less critical to Chinese plans.

India should co-ordinate its moves with US and have US use its influence on KSA to end this plan on an urgent basis. Medium term we will all be served well by a more friendly government there.

It can be counted as a colossal intelligence failure on our part if such a major constitutional amendment was kept a secret from us. Maldieves should have been on our active radar given the chinese moves there and the disposition of the current government.

[Pulikeshi]

What goes is that the chinese have an accurate reading of what India is upto policywise -- which makes India predictable and easier to control, unless India can demonstrate otherwise. In any game, reading the opponent is a good part of having the right reaction, as anyone who plays games like poker or other competitive games would know.

No issues here, but predicting is not same as predictable - I can predict the weather tomorrow, but it is quite another thing to control it.... in strategy, no disagreements that irrationality, self-delusion and unpredictability are all valuable tools and any nation-state and leader ought to protect and project it...

A "swing state" tries to maximize its benefit by playing larger powers against each other, and this is a normal game that lesser power play against larger powers, like Sri Lanka does to India and China.

India is anything but predictable under the current leadership, as you yourself have stated. That said, the current capabilities of India does not lend itself to be an arbitrator of another's power. This does not mean India cannot act with deftness and cleverness to co-opt others in the region to boost its capabilities enough to be able to arbitrate another's power. Here, India is correctly not looking at the equation as China vs. US. India is not behaving like a swing state, just as it is not pursuing peace with Pakistan for its own sake... there is a method to the madness and there always has been... what is different now is both circumstance and leadership.

China's leverage at the borders (the infrastructure gap), and its massive footprint in Indian telecom/cyberspace infrastructure, its nuclear proliferation to Pakistan and association usurpation of Indian territory in PoK, CoK etc., are some example of some pretty severe leverage they have in terms of toying with India and keeping India's swinging effectiveness pretty low.

My read, and you are welcome to disregard it, has been that India, even more so then her Western belligerent offspring, has an intrinsic geo-strategic advantage. This on the one hand has dealt India with a strong card and on the other has led it to become fat and happy at times. India sits between West Asia and East Asia -
So long as it is one geographical entity - be it under Maurya, Gupta, Vijayanagara, Chola, Maratha, Mughal or English - it has been an arbitrator of other powers to its West and East. Today's world has more dimensions than merely geography, even if it prevails predominantly. This challenge means, India ought to enmesh the Western and Eastern states into frameworks across these dimensions. Here other powers - especially the four fathers have actively been pursuing frenemy strategies more effectively than India has... The framing of the problem as naive India vs. wily China is quite incorrect... there is serious concern from several powers in India becoming what her promise held at independence. Therefore, India's China policy will have to be, and is complex - more importantly, India's strategic autonomy will need to get anchored on key partners in the West and to the East of India. This is yet to happen in a comprehensive manner - in terms of any multi-lateral fora that India has led and influenced... this is the weakness of Indian strategy as I see it.

The key is to manage China's relative decline not rise. I for one remain skeptical of India's ability to leverage the four fathers, and their multi-lateral fora, to her advantage, but the babus have surprise us again and again

[SSridhar]

‘India, Japan and U.S. can shape China’s peaceful rise’ - The Hindu

Coordination among India, Japan and the U.S. on security cooperation and economic ties are essential because they can fundamentally talk about how they can “shape China’s rise in a peaceful way”, said Nicholas Szechenyi, Deputy Director and Senior Fellow – Japan Chair at the Centre for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS).

“India has unique interests with China, as does Japan and as does the U.S. They may not always align completely, but fundamentally if we are going to encourage China’s rise in a way that favours regional stability, I think this element of regional coordination among likeminded states is critical. Therefore India, Japan and U.S. have an important role to play,” Mr. Szechenyi told The Hindu on Tuesday.

The Japanese Cabinet on Tuesday approved a defence white paper for 2015 which sounded alarm over China’s “one sided maritime activities” in the South China Sea. China’s land reclamation in South China Sea has increased tensions in the resource rich region which is contested by several nations.

On the Japanese white paper and their reinterpretation of the constitution, Mr. Szechenyi said the “collective self-defence” by Japan was defensive in posture meant to deter an aggression. On India’s role, Mr. Szechenyi pointed that Japan is set to join India and the U.S. in the Malabar maritime exercises in the Bay of Bengal and it is a sign of increased engagement and good way to “express shared interests”.

[Tuvaluan]

No issues here, but predicting is not same as predictable - I can predict the weather tomorrow, but it is quite another thing to control it.

Yes, but leaving aside inherently complex systems like planetary weather -- unless you are saying that governmental bureaucracy is highly unpredictable and can change on a whim, like the weather…which is obviously not the nature of bureaucracies in general. To clarify, I used "control" w.r.t. the direction of course of events and not opponent, my fault for not being clearer -- i.e, being able to game an opponents move with high predictability allows one to make the right choices to control the course of events closer to one's goal than without the element of predictability.

India is not behaving like a swing state, just as it is not pursuing peace with Pakistan for its own sake... there is a method to the madness and there always has been... what is different now is both circumstance and leadership.

On the contrary, India's behavior under the current regime is exactly that of a swing state that does not choose one alliance over another, but increases and decreases the degree of the relationship in the various dimensions in a manner that provides it most benefit.

I am not sure about there always being a method to the madness at all time -- only seems to have been true when there was sufficient political leadership that was willing to take the blame for high-risk choices. It seemed more like the bureaucracy compensating for a lack of political leadership and political will to give direction, by making low-risk choices with sub-optimal outcomes. This became some sort of trend with everyone in India believing that foreign policy was driven by the bureaucracy rather than the political leadership, to the extent where the current leadership's behavior is seen as an aberration, than as the norm as one would expect.

This challenge means, India ought to enmesh the Western and Eastern states into frameworks across these dimensions. Here other powers - especially the four fathers have actively been pursuing frenemy strategies more effectively than India has... The framing of the problem as naive India vs. wily China is quite incorrect..

There seems to be some sort of megalomania in such views that disregards the actual heft of India's capabilities -- to actually force other states into India's own designs, India would have to first develop sufficient leverage with states it wants to influence, and that is far from true today, though the current regime seems to clearly recognize that given how they are trying to draw neighboring states into such a framework before looking farther.

China has provided India's mortal enemy with thermonuclear weapons in a deniable manner, and actively works on degrading India's internal and external security, so regardless of other challenges, China must be recognized as a hostile and motivated entity that will use all its power to keep India subservient unless India develops its own leverage over China by viewing it as an hostile, enemy state, even if one that India can have economic ties with.

Therefore, India's China policy will have to be, and is complex - more importantly, India's strategic autonomy will need to get anchored on key partners in the West and to the East of India.

We can agree that everything is complex, not just china policy -- china is hostile and powerful entity that has gained more power and resources in the same time period where India and its leadership and bureaucracy were asleep at the wheel. I am quite touched by your faith on India's partnerships with "key partners" to the west -- even the 123 deal would have been useless had India not signed up the same deals with Russia and France, getting past whatever con job the US state dept. was pulling on India.

Reality says that partnerships mean nothing without Indian capability to back its own agenda with the economic and political and military muscle to take care of its own interests.

The key is to manage China's relative decline not rise. I for one remain skeptical of India's ability to leverage the four fathers, and their multi-lateral fora, to her advantage, but the babus have surprise us again and again

if you say so..glad that taking the blue pill has worked out well for you. China, unlike India, has managed to create far richer and more educated middle class than India has managed so far, and all this talk of "managing china's decline" reeks of megalomania.

[Pulikeshi]

On the contrary, India's behavior under the current regime is exactly that of a swing state that does not choose one alliance over another, but increases and decreases the degree of the relationship in the various dimensions in a manner that provides it most benefit.

ok, all is doomed - India is so transparent and predictable, she can never be but a pawn.

There seems to be some sort of megalomania in such views that disregards the actual heft of India's capabilities -- to actually force other states into India's own designs, India would have to first develop sufficient leverage with states it wants to influence, and that is far from true today, though the current regime seems to clearly recognize that given how they are trying to draw neighboring states into such a framework before looking farther.

If one is a realist - nation-states are doomed to pursue power, even if saner non-megalomaniacs such as yourself prevail

China has provided India's mortal enemy with thermonuclear weapons in a deniable manner, and actively works on degrading India's internal and external security, so regardless of other challenges, China must be recognized as a hostile and motivated entity that will use all its power to keep India subservient unless India develops its own leverage over China by viewing it as an hostile, enemy state, even if one that India can have economic ties with.

Pakistan is a neighbor, so it cannot be a mortal enemy - it is India's problem child literally. China is not the sole creator of the problem and will not be the sole provider of a solution. China is also a neighbor, so it cannot be considered a mortal enemy either. The four-fathers you seem oblivious of... You seem to have developed a rather naive view of state craft and understanding of how to deal with a neighbor versus a neighbor's neighbor, and so on... you are welcome to your opinions of course, but none else need suffer such a view.

We can agree that everything is complex, not just china policy -- china is hostile and powerful entity that has gained more power and resources in the same time period where India and its leadership and bureaucracy were asleep at the wheel.

Strategy has nothing to do with ego or enemies - it is naked pursuit of interests -
as in Chinese drone-acharya fly are over their close friend Pakistan

China is hostile, but India has nothing to gain by taking on China directly. Let the Chinese waste their resources subsidizing Tibet and other restive provinces... l sure hope you had been to China and looked at that society up close and personal before you formed the view seemed to have formed. The Chinese have their own internal compulsions to rake up the idiocies they seem to take on externally - every one of those actions a realist strategic minded state would never take - which then leads one to calculate that China is either attempting to be irrational or is self-deluded. My vote is for the latter...

I am quite touched by your faith on India's partnerships with "key partners" to the west -- even the 123 deal would have been useless had India not signed up the same deals with Russia and France, getting past whatever con job the US state dept. was pulling on India.

You do seem to have a problem understanding English - West Asia and East Asia not West, not East (it is you suffering US influenced terminology, in that, it is the Middle-East for you) - your understanding of what I said is totally incorrect.

if you say so..glad that taking the blue pill has worked out well for you. China, unlike India, has managed to create far richer and more educated middle class than India has managed so far, and all this talk of "managing china's decline" reeks of megalomania.

If India does something she is just a swing state, if she considers becoming the power she was destined to, it is megalomania, if she does nothing its babus and politicians are pusillanimous at best and sold out at worst.
Woe is me

[Tuvaluan]

ok, all is doomed - India is so transparent and predictable, she can never be but a pawn.

Not at all what I wrote, but go ahead and indulge in hyperbole if it makes you feel better.

Strategy has nothing to do with ego or enemies - it is naked pursuit of interests -
as in Chinese drone-acharya fly are over their close friend Pakistan

I use the word "enemy/hostile" to indicate a no-holds competition that has no boundaries, much like the pakis. Nations acting in self interest is all understood as the basis for any realistic analysis. China has raised that bar with India by actively supporting terrorism in India and by providing nuclear weapons to the pakis. India and Indians would do well to keep these actions in mind instead of getting carried away by feelings of democratic superiority and civilizational awesomeness.

China is hostile, but India has nothing to gain by taking on China directly. Let the Chinese waste their resources subsidizing Tibet and other restive provinces... l sure hope you had been to China and looked at that society up close and personal before you formed the view seemed to have formed.

Since when did views of a society have any bearing on the realpolitik practised by the govt. of that country? If you already know that, what is your point?

The Chinese have their own internal compulsions to rake up the idiocies they seem to take on externally - every one of those actions a realist strategic minded state would never take - which then leads one to calculate that China is either attempting to be irrational or is self-deluded.

calculated irrationality is actually a good strategy, as it increases the perception of unpredicable behaviour and thus makes gaming of behavior of that entity harder -- the realistic outcome of such a strategy is that it raises the risks/cost of adversaries gaming your behavior (from their perception).

if she considers becoming the power she was destined to, it is megalomania, (stuff deleted)

No, hardly what was written. Randomly assigning capabilities to India that it does not possess and then pretending that acquiring these capabilities is a given is "India's destiny" maybe good pep talk, but translating capabilities to reality is more than just wishful thinking. The megalomania part is pretending that these non-existent capabilities that are in India's destiny will provide India with an edge over China. India has various strengths and so does china, and acknowledging existing gaps realistically means also keeping in mind that we need to be realistic about India's deficiencies. This does not mean we need to keep tom-toming these deficiencies and self-flagellating -- just saying this in the context of viewing the threat China poses to India.

I am saying that China has some real capabilities such as the capability to take down India's cell phone networks, and engineering capability to manufacture a wide range of products and material and they acquired these same capabilities while Indian bureaucrats and politicians were indulging in anti-business policies and refusing to release their stranglehold on the Indian economy. Just going on about how this and that is in India's destiny indicates a level of hubris that may stop us from doing what is needed and necessary.

I will just point out the utter worthlessness of the Indian bureaucracy's ability to keep Maldives from screwing with us and now selling islands to the chinese -- what exactly did your awesome bureaucracy get right here? They have just allowed China to open a naval military base right next to India and allowed a permanent threat to flower under their benign gaze. That is all. EOD.

[SSridhar]

Will not allow Chinese military bases, Maldives assures India - Suhasini Haidar, The Hindu

The Maldives government’s move to allow foreign ownership of its islands will not affect India’s strategic interests, Maldives President Abdullah Yameen said on Thursday, after ratifying the constitutional amendment on freeholds.

The decision could benefit countries like China that are eager to build land holdings in the Indian ocean.

‘Too small’

“We are too small a country to upset a close neighbour like India,” new Maldivian Vice-President Ahmed Adeeb {the half-a-day old new Veep} told The Hindu in an exclusive interview. “We are open for business, but not open to give up our sovereignty to any country, including China.”

The conciliatory statements from Male come a day after India raised concerns over the land law amendment that was passed overnight on Tuesday by the Maldivian People’s Majlis (Parliament).

In his statement, President Yameen specifically referred to India’s objections to China building military bases, or using reclaimed islands for them, as it is accused of doing in the South China Sea.

[SSridhar]

Full text of the interview with the half-a-day old VP of Maldives - Suhasini Haidar, The Hindu

Q: How do you respond to India’s concerns that the constitutional amendment your government has passed could have ‘national security’ implications?

This constitutional amendment is purely a corporate, commercial decision, as we want to do this for investments of more than a billion dollars. There are many Maldives atolls that need reclamation done. We have already reclaimed two islands near the Male airport, and there are now people living there. There are many hotels there as well. We need much more by way of multinational’s investment for this. It is just a political play by the opposition to try and create a problem between the Maldives and India, to try and say that we would sell off land to China, but there is no such idea or communication in the government. We are open for business, but not open to give up our sovereignty to any country including China.

We have opened for SEZs and we have requests from many companies to be able to own lands in perpetuity. So far we have given leases for 99 years to them, for investments of around $200 million. But now we want to build big projects, like IT parks, like townships, so we need to give them more. Maldives is a great place for them as we have year-round good weather, environment, so this amendment is to help them invest in the Maldives. Even in India, investments over $5 million get several concessions.

In addition we have put into place many safeguards. First, it is only for investments over $1 billion, then parliament has to pass the project, it has to be transparent, and then they have to reclaim land up to 70 per cent to do the project. The opposition wants to say they will come and run military bases, but that is not the reality. We are looking at projects like Singapore Marina Bay Sands or Dubai’s Palm islands. We are not looking at strategic projects.

Q: You speak of Singapore and Dubai type of projects, but some would argue that given the stipulations, only China can actually benefit from the new law: as it has the money, the desire, and the technology for reclamation…

Firstly China has never shown an interest in this kind of project. They would like to partner with us in infrastructure projects, like the airport, give us concessional loans etc. We are seeing much more interest from the Middle East (West Asia), especially from royal families there. Maldives can be like Bahrain is for them. Please remember that President Yameen is a person who declined the American offer for a base under the SOFA agreement. Because our sovereignty is not on offer. And we don’t want to give any of our neighbours, India....any cause for concern. We don’t want to be in a position when we become a threat to our neighbours.

Q: Have there been tensions with India over this? How did India raise its concerns?

The President’s statement today was to communicate to India in particular that what is our intent. We are hoping for a visit to the Indian Foreign Secretary, and we have given assurances to the Indian government about this. It is very strange that the opposition should have caused these concerns with their comments.

Q: Let me ask about the opposition party MDP of Mr. Nasheed… is there any hope of a reconciliation now, given that the MDP supported the government on the votes in parliament?

Yes, we are trying to reconcile politically. There are two processes for appeal in the High Court and the Supreme Court. Those are independent, but the prosecutor general has announced that the State will appeal to the High Court to help finish Mr. Nasheed’s appeal process. So we are now supporting Mr. Nasheed’s request for a proper appeals process in court. We have also allowed international observers to come and they can study the whole process, even the Indian media should come.

Q: Relations with India have been under strain over the government’s treatment of Mr. Nasheed, and PM Modi cancelled his visit. Are you hopeful relations can improve?

The PM’s visit was cancelled because of the opposition’s uproar here, as they had planned a protest to overthrow the government in Male. We understood why PM Modi didn’t want to come in the middle of political turmoil, and India didn’t want to be seen as interfering. We are trying to ensure the right environment so Mr. Modi can visit us soon. People in the Maldives are pro-India, we would not like any tensions in our relations with India. This weekend marks our 50th year of independence, and you can see, we have invited Indian bands to perform, and stars like Bipasha Basu who are very popular here will come to. So I hope this is all taken positively and we build on our relations.

[schinnas]

SSji,
Do you believe we can take the statement of the new VP at face value? This seems like a ploy to ensure that India does not effect a coup there (which India must imho). We just cannot allow China operating islands in our backyard. Regardless of what this newly minted VP says, China will build a submarine base and possibly a dual-use port and a hidden missile base as well.

[A_Gupta]

If the Chinese have Gwadar, do they also need a base in the Maldives?

[SSridhar]

Do you believe we can take the statement of the new VP at face value?

Of course not. The whole 'Land Bill' and 1B $ price tag is to enable China to implement its interests and rule out India. Note that the lease must be approved by their parliament. Fair enough but we know how the Islamist parties will go about it when it comes to India.

[SSridhar]

If the Chinese have Gwadar, do they also need a base in the Maldives?

They do need.

China is acquiring 18 foreign naval bases from East China Sea to Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean. These are divided into three categories. a First Group consisting of Aden Port, Djibouti Port (both at Bab-el-Mandeb), and Salalah Port (Oman). These ports will be used only for logistics supply. A Second group, meant for logistics supply plus naval personnel rest & Recreation. Currently only Seychelles falls under this category. A Third Group which is meant for Logistics Supply, Rest & Recreation and Weaponry Repairing. Currently, only Gwadar falls under this category.

It is my feeling that Maldives will come under the second category, Logistics and R&R. Male is already one of the 18 identified foreign ports.

Maldives went the same way as Sri Lanka & Djibouti which unable to manage the unsustainable rates of Chinese loans buckled and ceded territory, concessions and sovereignty to China.