Managing Chinese Threat

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 08 Dec 2011 15:20

The building of infrastructure - mainly rail roads etc will serve defence purpose well.

RajeshA ji, remember I was telling you about using religion against PRC from Singapore and Malaysia?
Well, its happening - The current Bhuddist convention was an intel project per BK.

PRC knows well our levers of influence and the sword has been brandished by India. Also In the future, with major civil unrest like we saw a few years ago in Tibet, Inda could if it chooses to do so develop the capabiliies to liberate Tibet. But we are miles away from that day, key thing is that its on Beijing's mind and india is hInting.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 08 Dec 2011 15:27

shyamd ji,

Yes I remember. I also remember you telling me about turning Myanmar over as part of an alliance against Chinese expansionism. On both counts we have seen welcome positive developments.

What I feel is that in order to make most of our Buddhist heritage, we need to turn Nepal as well into our corner. There I am afraid, the only way to counter the Maoists there is through hardline Hindu upsurge! We need Nepal both because of its long border with Tibet as well as for consolidating our Buddhist heritage line.

member_20617 · Post by **member_20617** » 08 Dec 2011 16:30

Thank you Rajeshji

We need to develop our infrastructure in NE India very fast and connect it to Myanmar. We also need to invest heavily in Myanmar for infrastructure as well as for business purposes. We are already helping them in terms of port development. Indian companies like Reliance can and should develop gas exploration near Myanmar. We also need to have closer ties with Myanmar military and we should train their army and sell them appropriate arms. All these strategies will help India to wean Myanmar away from China.

I understand that our government recently announced a huge financial package for Maldives. We need to ensure that we get the value for our money particularly making sure that no terrorist network is allowed to operate from Maldives. For Myanmar, we need to invest 10 times more to protect our long term strategic interests.

A similar approach is required for Nepal as we need to crush the Maoists in Nepal. The one and only Hindu country, Nepal, is now ruled by Maoists. Paki terrorists have used Nepal in the past and may use it again. What a pity! Unfortunately, our foreign policy has always been reactive and not proactive.

We should go ALL the way to Vietnam!!!!!!

(I am sure you all know that our ancestors ruled Vietnam, Indonesia etc. many years ago!)

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 08 Dec 2011 19:13

Published on Dec 02, 2011
By Andrey Karneev
Myanmar - between the US and China: Voice of Russia

Only acting in alliance with powerful powers, including both regional and world powers, Myanmar will be able to make itself free from China’s influence. Practically all of them have interests in Myanmar. Myanmar has very close contacts with India. The point is that earlier they were part of the British Empire. Relying on India with which the USA has been actively broadening cooperation, Washington can seriously affect China’s positions in Myanmar, an expert with the Russian Institute of Oriental Studies, Feliks Yurlov, said in an interview with the Voice of Russia.

“America’s move towards Burma is aimed at strengthening relations between the USA and India. In a certain context this step could be regarded as interaction between the USA, India and Burma, which is aimed against China. And it is not by chance that Hillary Clinton said that she was opening a new chapter in the relations between the two countries. We can’t say that what will occur will be a fierce struggle but we are sure that this will be a tough rivalry in the fight for Myanmar”.

The activization of contacts between the USA and the countries of the Asia-Pacific Region may become an additional complicating factor in the Sino-American relations. The USA is consistently taking steps to restrain the growth of China’s influence in Asia. We can mention here America’s steps towards a warming in its relationships with India, the activization of the USA’s contacts with Vietnam, and the revival of military cooperation with Australia. Now is Myanmar’s turn. . Simply the Obama administration can do nothing but offer Myanmar peace and lift sanctions, to prevent Myanmar becoming a Chinese protectorate.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 08 Dec 2011 19:22

Published on Nov 29, 2011
By Peter Ford
What will happen to China as Burma (Myanmar) gets closer with Vietnam, US?: Christian Science Monitor Blog

For decades, each time a new Burmese military chief of staff was appointed, like clockwork, he would make his first foreign trip to Beijing, his nation’s firmest diplomatic ally and longtime economic bulwark.

But Gen. Min Aung Hlaing, currently on a visit here, was busy in some unusual places before he came to China. Earlier this month he was talking to the special US envoy to Burma, Derek Mitchell. Then he went to Vietnam. He will be back home later this week when Hillary Clinton makes the first visit to Burma by a US Secretary of State since 1955.

The fact that General Hlaing chose Vietnam, a near neighbor building closer military ties with Washington and making no secret of its nervousness about China’s regional ambitions, has not gone unnoticed in Beijing.

Now “we want to have a regular relationship” with the United States, the powerful speaker of the Burmese parliament and former member of the military junta Shwe Mann told reporters on Friday.

The government’s foreign policy would be based on “peaceful coexistence with all nations,” Mr. Mann said

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 08 Dec 2011 19:58

Fascinating reading!!!

Published on Nov 29, 2011
By Bertil Lintner
China embrace too strong for Naypyidaw: Asia Times Online

ccording to several sources, the first bilateral blow against China came in October 2004 when then prime minister and former intelligence chief Lt Gen Khin Nyunt was ousted, charged with corruption and given a stiff prison sentence which was later converted to house arrest. Khin Nyunt was considered "China's man" in Myanmar and a well-placed source with access to inside information says that the Chinese could not at first believe he had been ousted. Both sides managed to smooth things over and bilateral relations later appeared to return to normal after the internal purge.

The next big blow to bilateral ties came in August 2009 when the Myanmar Army moved into the Kokang area of northeastern Shan State. Populated mainly by local ethnic Chinese, Kokang had received a considerable influx of residents from across the border. Given the similarities between Kokang Chinese and Yunnanese Chinese, it was not difficult for the latter to obtain local Myanmar ID papers for a fee. While many began to do business in the area, others moved to cities such as Mandalay as legal Myanmar citizens.

The Myanmar Army offensive into Kokang drove more than 30,000 people across the border into China. Chinese authorities allowed only Kokang-based Chinese nationals to cross into China and many ethnic Kokang-Chinese refugees were stopped at the border.

On the Myanmar side, government soldiers beat up Chinese nationals, stole their property and an unknown number of people were killed in the melee. There were also reports of rape of Chinese women. Chinese authorities were outraged by the violence against their citizens but then did nothing, probably hoping that the situation would once again return to normal.

Anti-China promotions
The military operation in Kokang was masterminded by Lt Gen Min Aung Hlaing, then head of the Myanmar military's Bureau of Special Operations 2. The commander on the ground who ordered his soldiers to beat up the Chinese was the head of the 33rd Light Infantry Division, Brig-Gen Aung Kyaw Zaw. Both soldiers have since been promoted for their work.

Min Aung Hlaing has been elevated to joint chief of staff of the defense services - the army, navy and air force - replacing General Thura Shwe Mann, who is one of the top "civilians" in the new setup in Naypyidaw. Aung Kyaw Zaw, meanwhile, has been promoted to a major general and commander of the Northeastern Command of the Myanmar Army based in Lashio. In that new capacity, he is in charge of most of the border areas which are under the government's control, including the economically and strategically important trading post at Jiegao.

Myanmar's move towards a new China policy thus more clearly began in 2004, not after the 2010 election. An important internal document compiled by Lt Col Aung Kyaw Hla, a researcher at Myanmar's Defense Services Academy, seems to have set the stage for this policy shift. His 346-page confidential thesis, entitled "A Study of Myanmar-US Relations", outlines specifically many of the policies now being implemented, including strategies for improving relations with the US and how to mitigate Myanmar's dependence on China.

It seems the Burmese have just as much spine to take on the Chinese as the Vietnamese do: Quite a Lot!

Published on Nov 30, 2011
By Bertil Lintner
India-Myanmar: a half-built gateway: Asia Times Online

Published on Dec 01, 2011
By Bertil Lintner
US-Myanmar:Engagement as nuclear pre-emption: Asia Times Online

Published on Dec 02, 2011
By Bertil Lintner
China-Myanmar: border war dilemma: Asia Times Online

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 09 Dec 2011 19:26

Published on Dec 10, 2011
By Greg Sheridan
India's rise as a superpower has China on edge: The Australian

At the Kolkata conference I interviewed one of the most influential figures in Indian strategic policy. Gopalaswamy Parthasarathy is a former Indian ambassador to Australia and to Pakistan.

Partha, as he is universally known, is now a professor of strategic studies, but also a highly influential adviser to government on security matters.

"China is today the greatest proliferator of nuclear weapons technology and missiles," he says.

"It has over the last four decades supplied Pakistan with nuclear weapons designs and equipment for enriching uranium. In more recent years it has been supplying Pakistan with plutonium reactors and reprocessing plants to make plutonium warheads to fit on Chinese-designed missiles. These warheads can develop thermo-nuclear capability.

"This Sino-Pakistan nuclear co-operation has enabled Pakistan to proliferate nuclear technology to North Korea, Libya and Iran."

China's actions, Partha says, are "obviously primarily directed at India. Pakistan is the instrument of Chinese containment of India."

But the Chinese do provide support to some of the ethnic insurgencies that operate in northeast India, near India's border with China and its border with Burma.

"Some Chinese weapons do come to the Maoists from the ethnic insurgent groups which do have Chinese connections," Sahni says. "Some of these groups earlier had safe havens in Bhutan, Bangladesh, Nepal. They have all closed down. The groups have been drawn to Myanmar (Burma) and there they can be presented in one easy group to the Chinese government."

Praveen Swami, a renowned strategic analyst for the Hindu newspaper, tells me some Naga insurgents get weapons and support from China and have been passing this on to the Maoists in India.

"So far it's mainly been Kalashnikovs, improvised explosive device courses and training," Praveen says. "Whenever this is raised with the Chinese they say it's black-market stuff, but some people say it's carried out by people with high (Chinese) People's Liberation Army connections."

The strategic conflict between India and China is the subject of a fascinating new book, China and India, Great Power Rivals, by Mohan Malik, a scholar based at a Hawaii think tank. One of the best books on any foreign subject this year, its thesis is that China is trying to stymie India's rise.

Malik paints a devastating portrait of Chinese nuclear proliferation, primarily to Pakistan. But he makes a persuasive case that Pakistan's subsequent proliferation to nations such as North Korea and Iran is carried out with Chinese consent and serves Chinese strategic interests.

Malik also demonstrates how China has effectively encircled India with Chinese strategic assets.

"All of India's neighbours," Malik writes, "remained China's top five largest arms buyers: Pakistan, Burma, Bangladesh, Iran and Sri Lanka."

Malik writes that Beijing's strategy towards India has three elements. The first is encirclement, with "strengthened Chinese strategic presence in Tibet, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Burma and in the Indian Ocean island states". The second element is envelopment, which is essentially integrating all of India's neighbours into the Chinese economy. The third element is entanglement, which Malik describes as "exploiting India's domestic contradictions and multiple security concerns".

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 12 Dec 2011 11:05

RajeshA wrote:shyamd ji,

Yes I remember. I also remember you telling me about turning Myanmar over as part of an alliance against Chinese expansionism. On both counts we have seen welcome positive developments.

What I feel is that in order to make most of our Buddhist heritage, we need to turn Nepal as well into our corner. There I am afraid, the only way to counter the Maoists there is through hardline Hindu upsurge! We need Nepal both because of its long border with Tibet as well as for consolidating our Buddhist heritage line.

Nepal is WIP at the moment. We continue to build our relations with them and hopefully normalise them. We are building a Asian buddhist centre in SL, however MEA seems to be messing up the project with delays.

The chinese have problems with everyone surrounding them and I'm sure Nepal will get its fair share. I'm sure politicians are aware of what happened in Tibet.

Lets hope the good work continues

Meanwhile
China to open its first military base abroad in Indian Ocean

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Dec 2011 07:07

Looks like the PRC's options are closing in and hence they are doing their best to hedge.

Economically their two biggest markets are in funk
Their vaunted $1T reserve is getting them out of jail
Their bestest ally and minion is in deep trouble and in undeclared state of war with US
Cant rely on TSP to do any brilliant moves in these circumstances
Anglo -World is changing and in eclipse pen umbra region

There are reports of civil unrest in PRC.

What and where would PRC try to attack India

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 13 Dec 2011 08:16

China makes inroads into Indian Ocean, but says no military base

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 13 Dec 2011 10:32

shyamd wrote: RajeshA ji, remember I was telling you about using religion against PRC from Singapore and Malaysia?
Well, its happening - The current Bhuddist convention was an intel project per BK.

The establishment in China has always viewed religion as a form of control, but not as a mechanism for spiritual enlightenment. If Buddhism turns into a tool in India-China great game, then it would only reinforce the Chinese viewpoint that "religion is a form of control" to be exercised by those in power and that by itself would be a hidden victory for China.

IMHO, part of the battle involves fighting the CCP mindset and brainwashing, so my hope is that the goal would be to provide enough space and infrastructure to Buddhism so as to allow it to remain totally free of any state control rather than using it as a foreign policy tool.

So, IMHO, using Buddhism as a foreign policy tool specially against China is a disaster waiting to happen, but giving Buddhism enough space to grow freely outside Chinese control would be a great achievement in itself.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 13 Dec 2011 10:42

abhishek_sharma wrote:China makes inroads into Indian Ocean, but says no military base

LOL, this Naval base is dead even before its arrival as there will never be a safe Chinese supply line to any puppy east of A&N islands (or maybe even Vietnam now that India-Vietnam defense cooperation seems to be on the rise courtesy of Chinese love affair with South China Sea)

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 13 Dec 2011 11:58

ramana wrote:Looks like the PRC's options are closing in and hence they are doing their best to hedge.

Economically their two biggest markets are in funk
Their vaunted $1T reserve is getting them out of jail
Their bestest ally and minion is in deep trouble and in undeclared state of war with US
Cant rely on TSP to do any brilliant moves in these circumstances
Anglo -World is changing and in eclipse pen umbra region

There are reports of civil unrest in PRC.

What and where would PRC try to attack India

Most likely in the middle sector.

They would try to make inroads into UP or Uttaranchal

kumarn · Post by **kumarn** » 13 Dec 2011 13:24

^^^Naah, better to take self-defense action against Indian naval aggression in South China Sea?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Dec 2011 21:56

On land effects are very visible. And this time it has to be Indian territory, not disputed one.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 13 Dec 2011 22:43

Dhiman wrote:courtesy of Chinese love affair with South China Sea

We need to rename the Sea as Indochina Sea. It was the French who gave the region Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia the name of Indochina Peninsula.

We need to emphasize that the South China Sea belongs far more to Vietnam than it does to China. The way to do it is to emphasize the sea's geography, its proximity to the 'Indochina Peninsula'.

We should explore the possibility of getting France and thus EU to change the name accordingly in their geography. ASEAN too may come around to renaming the South China Sea accordingly. USA too may relent.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 14 Dec 2011 00:21

"The establishment in China has always viewed religion as a form of control, but not as a mechanism for spiritual enlightenment. If Buddhism turns into a tool in India-China great game, then it would only reinforce the Chinese viewpoint that "religion is a form of control""

Very aptly expressed! India should emphasise( and will emphasise for the most part) the values, ethics and spiritual quality of Buddhism, and the sharing of those values with other countries where Buddhism is prevalent. Whereas China will see it purely as a projection of power and control, and a method of exclusivism, which is against the essential spirit of Buddhism.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Dec 2011 07:55

Rohitvats
Can you put the map of the middle sector near Himachal. It could be near the Dharmasala

Chinese could be very tricky and they could mass troops hidden under the cover and without letting other know. Uncle may be aware of this

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 15 Dec 2011 08:28

Acharya wrote: Most likely in the middle sector.

They would try to make inroads into UP or Uttaranchal

my guess is that China will stage a terror attack in Tibet when HHD is in a western/US tour and will flatten Dharmashala with conventional LCMs killing entire new leadership in a retaliatory attack. Unkil may wink-wink nod-nod for this plan.

This will ensure fee things:
- west cannot blame PRC as they did the same thing in other places.
- HHD is safe but will be taken care by Kala-Purusha. Who cares about Tibetan 3.0?
- india cannot escalate the war for a bunch of buddhist immigrants. These napunsaks did not attend an annual meet in India for the fear of PRC dossiers. Imagine what they will do when real danda is out

My humble request to our Tibetan guests is to disperse all over india. make sure that they are not tracked down by china spies or maoists or RNI

Prepare for real suppression in Tibet. The only way they can get their voice heard is by hurting china where it hurts the most. Their H&D within and without china

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 15 Dec 2011 08:32

W.r.t india I want to see what GoI and IA will do after 50 years and $100bs budget. If they fail again hopefully commoners take the matters into their own hands. If they succeed it is good for india anyways.

It is better to get lose to a stronger enemy than suffering daily insults at the hands of his whore.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 15 Dec 2011 20:34

Wake up to Chinese dragon in Nepal

For the record, the cancellation of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s high profile official visit to Nepal and Myanmar next week was due to domestic compulsions or what has been described as economic and budgetary issues back in Beijing. While the cancellation has caused serious embarrassment in Kathmandu with Baburam Bhattarai government looking forward to economic and infrastructure assistance, it has also skewed the balancing game often played in the sandwiched Himalayan kingdom.
The script never changes in Nepal only the actors do is the political thumb rule in Kathmandu for balancing both Indian elephant and Chinese dragon. The Nepalese media has put this cancellation of three day visit to economic and political instability in Kathmandu but the reasons apparently were multiple. The cancellation was due to threat to Wen’s security, danger of a fiery reception at the hands of Tibetan refugees, high public bidding by Nepal government spokespersons on the outcome of the visit and a degree of lack of Chinese confidence in present Nepalese leadership.
This apart, other concerns could be much closer to the border with western embassies often using the hippy capital to watch events in Tibet—just 150 kilometres away on the all weather 988 km friendship highway to Lhasa. Beijing on its part has denied any political motives to this cancellation and used Myanmar cancellation as an example to dismiss any diplomatic conspiracies.
Yet one cannot help wondering whether the cancellation of Chinese built and aided Myitsone hydroelectric project on Irrawaddy River headwaters by the Myanmarese junta in September 2011 is the reason behind Wen’s calling off his visit to Burma.
For the moment, I will confine myself to Nepal as it shares 1751 km long open and porous border with Indian Hindi heartland and Chinese inroads into Kathmandu is a matter of serious concern to New Delhi. Advent of Chinese interest in Nepal seriously began after their supporter King Gyanendra was forced to give up power on May 28, 2008 and Beijing suddenly found itself friendless in Kathmandu as they were opposed to Prachanda’s men and had labelled them as anti-government forces. The other reason was pro-active attitude of western embassies led by the US in Tibetan affairs in Kathmandu. The fact is that Beijing was reconciled to Nepal-India relations due to historic linkages but could not afford to have westerners pry into Tibet from Kathmandu watch towers. The net result is that overt moves by westerners in Kathmandu forced Chinese to counter for space in Nepal, which in turn raised hackles of India. Even though Wen’s cancellation has left red faces in Kathmandu, the bottom line is that Beijing is building leverages in Nepal must faster in comparison to New Delhi. The process of integrating Nepal with 3,105 km long Western Tibet Highway and Qinghai Tibet Rail (QTR) has begun with work on four more cross-border linkages in progress apart from the Friendship highway. The QTR is being extended to Yadong, close to Nepal border, and the process to have a gas pipeline all the way up to Kathmandu is progressing fast and the day is not far when Kathmandu will tell Indian Oil Corporation to take a hike.
The Chinese pro-active engagement is in sharp contrast to the Indian lethargy. The cross-border road linkages are poor, the planned rail linkages with Nepalese Terai are on drawing board and there are hardly any high visibility Indian infrastructure projects in Kathmandu. While New Delhi is stopped playing the Viceroy after the exit of Ambassador Rakesh Sood and his government supported policy of political interference with an aim of not allowing the Maoists to come to power, India needs to wake up as the Kathmandu game is going out of hand. The Foreign Direct Investment of Indian private sector is falling in Nepal and has dipped below 50 per cent of the total investment, the hydropower projects are work in progress and even the military to military links are weakening as compared to the past. The security situation on India-Nepal border is precarious, yet not only oneof the four proposed integrated check posts on the international border has been completed. It is clearly evident that the Indian leverage in Nepal is declining with the Chinese linkages on the rise. The age-old links between Nepalese and Indian politicians and political parties have virtually disappeared and Beijing appears a more attractive destination to Nepalese for economic growth than New Delhi.
Given the paralysis in the UPA government decision making, the India-Nepal relations continue at the same indifferent pace as foreign policy is not a priority area for Raisina Hill as it grapples for day to day political existence. The classic example is that it took UPA government more than eight months to replace Sood despite Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreeing to his replacement in wake of serious criticism of the then ambassador in January 2011. While India’s new Ambassador Jayant Prasad is trying to recover the lost political ground, the Chinese are working with single minded dedication to link Nepal with Lhasa and counter Dalai Lama’s friends in Kathmandu.
Even though New Delhi may cock a snook at Nepal over Wen’s visit cancellation, the very thought of Beijing building roads and dams in Terai is enough to send shrivers down the Indian spine. After all, only 45 kilometres of Siliguri chicken neck separates Nepal from Bangladesh.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Dec 2011 20:57

HT is a INC supporter owned paper and acts like its an unattached and dispassionate news paper! It castigates the UPA govt for lethargy, what gives?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Dec 2011 21:08

Nightwatch 14 Dec 2011

China-Seychelles: China's Xinhua news agency disseminated the following report on 12 December 2011:

"China said on Monday that its naval fleet may seek supplies or recuperate at appropriate harbors in Seychelles or other countries as needed during escort missions.

"It is international practice for naval fleets to resupply at the closest port of a nearby state during long-distance missions, the Ministry of National Defense said in a press release commenting on a recent report stating that China will establish a military base in Seychelles to crack down on piracy.

"Chinese naval fleets have resupplied at harbors in Djibouti, Oman and Yemen since the country sent its first convoy to the Gulf of Aden in 2008, according to the ministry."

"Defense Minister Liang Guanglie paid an official goodwill visit to Seychelles earlier this month. During Liang's visit, the two sides exchanged views on their countries' and armies' cooperation, as well as on the global and regional situation."

"Seychelles appreciates China's efforts to maintain safe navigation on the Indian Ocean, as well as the support it has granted to Seychelles, the ministry said."

"Seychelles also invited China's navy to resupply and recuperate in the country during escort missions, the ministry said."

Comment: India has been the primary protector of the Seychelles since the emergence of the Somali pirates, who have attacked ships and craft in the Seychelles' Exclusive Economic Zone. India has trained most officers in the small defense force and provided equipment, including a naval patrol ship in 2005.

In 2009, the Indian Navy responded to a request for increased anti-piracy patrols by rotating patrol and support ships to the area, as the Somali pirates began to operate farther east into the Indian Ocean. Since January 2011 India has stationed a naval maritime patrol aircraft in the Seychelles. India has played down the suggestion that the Chinese threat is increasing or that China is encircling India.

Recent press reports indicate that the US operates a drone base in the Seychelles, providing indirect defense cover for this rich island nation and supporting US forces in Africa..

The Xinhua announcement depicts the Chinese as reluctantly responding to an unsolicited offer. That is for public consumption to allay Indian and US fears that China is again expanding its sphere of influence, which it is. No news service reported what the Chinese gave or promised the Seychelles in return.

China brags that it is the only permanent member of the UN Security Council that does not possess overseas bases. It will not build a base, but access to the Seychelles would facilitate Chinese poaching in India's Ocean as well as support for Chinese anti-piracy operations and security for oil shipments bound for China from African ports.

With the invitation to the Chinese, all major naval powers that operate in the Indian Ocean, except Japan and France, will have access to the island nation. Japan opened its naval base in Djibouti in July.

France has its Reunion Island for its ships.

Most likely the Seychelles wants to hedge its security and invited the Chinese.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Dec 2011 22:23

Can someone post a map of the LAC with PRC?

M.L.SaliIndia-China Border Dispute

Published in 1998

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Dec 2011 22:27

Published on Dec 15, 2011
By Zbigniew Brzezinski
As China Rises, A New U.S. Strategy: Wall Street Journal

We should embrace Russia, Japan and South Korea as we seek to manage the rise of China.

Is he now embracing Russia?

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 15 Dec 2011 22:56

Zbig will sing the tune of whatever outright fantasies he has that are passing fads....
anything that comes out of his mouth is suspect. the man is as slimy as they come. and more importantly, on many issues, he is either wrong or deliberately plays deceptive games.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 16 Dec 2011 00:55

Published on Dec 15, 2011
By Zbigniew Brzezinski
As China Rises, A New U.S. Strategy: Wall Street Journal
We should embrace Russia, Japan and South Korea as we seek to manage the rise of China.

He doesn't mention India. YaaaY

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 16 Dec 2011 00:59

Without mentioning India they are able to target India.
By not mentioning India they are providing the message to rest of the readers that what is their real target

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 16 Dec 2011 05:30

Acharya, I don't fully understand- though I'm aware of Zbig's general antipathy, or cold indifference to, India. So it is being suggested that while China has to be 'managed'( by also bringing in Russia) India is the real 'target'. Target of what, essentially? Again, since India is not promoting communism, theocracy, strongman rule, colonisation, military dictatorship or monarchy, how does Zbig in his own mind rationalise this targeting of India? Is it as a couple of forum members have strongly hinted, something racio-cultural that India represents, or its potential or actual intellectual prowess that concerns the likes of ZB? If so, what about that capability is seen as a threat, since India has no world rule ambitions. Do they fear that India might integrate its own world view and cultural perspectives, with that of the "West" or America, thus diluting the strength and domination of the latter? Excuse the naivete!

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 16 Dec 2011 07:11

There is a rivalry between US and UK on asia pacific for the last 150 years.
India is off limits to US and hence it has courted PRC for a long time.

The global economic system for the last 1000 years is based on India and China system.
This system was owned by British empire for 100+ years and then the cold war brought US into this system. This colonial system is breaking now and they are working to fix it. India is not to be touched by the US but it can meddle in Pakistan and keep trying. Use of Pakistan and courting of PRC is mainly as a way to get back against UK (Rothschild). But they both have common goals in CAS, Middle east and Indo Pacific ocean

PRC is being controlled by the use of India and Indian currency now. India is indirectly is helping the global system to contain PRC.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 16 Dec 2011 08:54

Acharya wrote:Without mentioning India they are able to target India.
By not mentioning India they are providing the message to rest of the readers that what is their real target

Exactly! I was sarcastic. Can we have a sarcasm smily please.....

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 17 Dec 2011 22:01

Acharya wrote:Rohitvats
Can you put the map of the middle sector near Himachal. It could be near the Dharmasala

Chinese could be very tricky and they could mass troops hidden under the cover and without letting other know. Uncle may be aware of this

Middle Sector consists of both the HP-Tibet and Uttarakhand-Tibet border. Chinese has raised the issue of border for the first time in 1956 in this sector when they claimed the Barahoti Pass on border. It is high mountain country which will not permit any large scale troop action. Land grabbing here or there is possible.

LAC in HP is extension of Ladakh but differs considerably in terms of geography. This is again very high mountain country. Even the PLA will have difficulty in concentrating large scale forces - the geography is such. The valley floor is >3500mtrs or 10,000 feet+ and mountain ridges well beyond 4500mtrs or 13,000 feet+. On the Indian side, the Pir Panjal runs in general direction NW-SE and seperates areas close to LAC/Border (Lahaul and Spiti District and Kinnaur District) from the Kullu and Manali. 39 Division sits in Palampur towards west of this area at around 08 hrs land journey from Kullu and Manali.. So, I guess, from our perspective, we can move troops pretty fast into the sector. However, from Kullu/Manali to border areas of Lahaul and Spiti and Kinnaur, the roads pass through some serious terrain. And that will be logistic challenge in itself.

edited - Middle Sector consists of HP-Tibet and UK-Tibet border and not UK-Tibet Border alone.

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 18 Dec 2011 20:48

RamaY wrote:
Published on Dec 15, 2011
By Zbigniew Brzezinski
As China Rises, A New U.S. Strategy: Wall Street Journal
We should embrace Russia, Japan and South Korea as we seek to manage the rise of China.

He doesn't mention India. YaaaY

That is good. Let these two entities slug it out. We should sit out of this.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 18 Dec 2011 21:05

Acharya wrote:There is a rivalry between US and UK on asia pacific for the last 150 years.
India is off limits to US and hence it has courted PRC for a long time.

The global economic system for the last 1000 years is based on India and China system.
This system was owned by British empire for 100+ years and then the cold war brought US into this system. This colonial system is breaking now and they are working to fix it. India is not to be touched by the US but it can meddle in Pakistan and keep trying. Use of Pakistan and courting of PRC is mainly as a way to get back against UK (Rothschild). But they both have common goals in CAS, Middle east and Indo Pacific ocean

PRC is being controlled by the use of India and Indian currency now. India is indirectly is helping the global system to contain PRC.

How does UK own India? What stops US from showing a middle finger to UK and 'touch India'? What is the secret of UK's power and influence?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 19 Dec 2011 01:46

That is 64 Million dollar question.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 20 Dec 2011 03:57

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj
OPINION ASIA DECEMBER 20, 2011 Meeting the China Challenge
The U.S., Japan and India confer on security concerns in response to rising aggression from Beijing.

The U.S., Japan and India on Monday held their first trilateral security meeting to discuss security issues in East Asia, and the Washington event is set to be the start of a trend. Beijing is predictably unhappy about this convergence of the world's superpower, the second-largest economy in Asia, and the other large developing country. But China must prepare itself for more such meetings, because China's own actions are bringing them about.Technically, China's rise did not feature at the meeting. Security of sea lanes of communication, coordination of humanitarian assistance and global terrorism were the focus. But China was the unspoken subtext. After all, one of the biggest threats to free navigation in Asia is China's growing assertiveness in pursuing unreasonable territorial claims in the South China Sea and in various island disputes with Japan. A pressing humanitarian problem is North Korea, a totalitarian state sustained by Beijing's patronage. India faces a serious terrorism threat from Pakistan, another friend of China.The question facing the three powers that met in Washington is how to manage these concerns. Traditionally the American presence in the region on its own has been a strong guarantor of stability. But economic constraints back home increasingly will force the U.S. to seek a new arrangement. This is likely to include reliance on regional allies to carry more of the security burden, as is the case with America's North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies in Europe. India's ties with Japan, in particular, have been gaining momentum thanks to growing enthusiasm in both New Delhi and Tokyo. India's booming economy makes it an attractive economic partner for Japan as the latter tries to overcome long years of stagnation. Japan also is reassessing its traditionally passive security stance and looking for opportunities to play a greater role while staying within the bounds of its non-aggression commitments. Of all Japan's neighbors, India seems most willing to acknowledge Japan's central role in guaranteeing Asian security.
Moreover, a new generation of political leaders in India and Japan view each other with fresh eyes, allowing for a break from past suspicion. China has inadvertently hastened this process along. Both India and Japan are well aware of China's not so subtle attempts at preventing their rise. It is most clearly reflected in China's opposition to the expansion of the United Nations Security Council to include India and Japan as permanent members. This has set the stage for this week's meeting. It was an opportunity for Japan and India to further cement their bilateral ties while also discussing ways to coordinate security efforts with the U.S. While no major initiatives resulted (none were expected), there was some progress on joint naval exercises. Nor is this the only trilateral meeting on the horizon. There are growing calls for another initiative involving the U.S., Australia and India. There is a distinct convergence of interests among these three countries across of a range of issues including the security of global commons, maritime security and counterterrorism. Trilateral coordination would be the next logical step.

there's no escaping China's own role in bringing about this security realignment. Beijing's expansive maritime sovereignty claims; its aggressive behavior pursuing them; its support for states such as North Korea and Pakistan; and its nontransparent military build-up all raise questions about its willingness to act as a responsible stakeholder in the region. Beijing will have to come to terms with more meetings such as this week's.

kumarn · Post by **kumarn** » 21 Dec 2011 23:45

An Indian fox for the Chinese dragon

The previous NSAs were interested in maintaining status quo on the border dispute and they thought that fending off Beijing’s claim over Arunachal Pradesh was an achievement. Menon is made of different stuff. He turned the tables on China by asking Beijing to return Indian land lost in the 1962 war if it wanted to settle the border issue. Many may laugh at this “preposterous” proposal but there have been several surprises for the Chinese since Menon took over. First, India last year cancelled an unprecedented 30,000 business visas issued during Nirupama Rao’s tenure as ambassador to China.

Vashishtha · Post by **Vashishtha** » 22 Dec 2011 00:35

^^Surprising...

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 23 Dec 2011 07:48

x-post
India-Pacific strategic environment: IDSA

Before lifting the Uranium ban, Australia had floated the idea of a trilateral strategic dialogue with India and the US in October 2011. The idea was proposed to India through high-level diplomatic channels on the lines of the then proposed India-US-Japan tripartite talks, the first round of meeting of which was finally held in Washington on December 19, 2011, to discuss the India-Pacific strategic environment.

Australia has noted that China is ambitiously claiming South China Sea as its backwaters and the PLA Navy is acquiring long legs through surface platforms. The India-Pacific powers, including Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Vietnam and the US have expressed their concerns over an assertive China. India has been engaging the US Pacific Command in Hawaii, Japan, South Korea and Vietnam through high-profile bilateral visits but Australia somehow has not figured in India’s strategic calculus prominently. There seems to be some reluctance in India to engage Australia seriously as the latter often tends to punch above its weight.

Australia may get caught in the US-China crossfire as it agrees to host nearly 2,500 US marines in the north, thereby escalating political and military tension in the region....In fact, one can also argue that the Australian decision to strengthen the US presence in the region may in due course force China to shift its attention away from the Indian borders towards the South China Sea. From India’s strategic interests, increased US military presence in the region could be a balancing factor. It is to be noted that India’s Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. (ONGC) is involved in exploring oil along with Vietnamese oil firms in the South China Sea.

Christopher Sidor · Post by **Christopher Sidor** » 23 Dec 2011 10:49

kumarn wrote:An Indian fox for the Chinese dragon

The previous NSAs were interested in maintaining status quo on the border dispute and they thought that fending off Beijing’s claim over Arunachal Pradesh was an achievement. Menon is made of different stuff. He turned the tables on China by asking Beijing to return Indian land lost in the 1962 war if it wanted to settle the border issue. Many may laugh at this “preposterous” proposal but there have been several surprises for the Chinese since Menon took over. First, India last year cancelled an unprecedented 30,000 business visas issued during Nirupama Rao’s tenure as ambassador to China.

Why would somebody laugh at the most natural thing? Those territories are Indian territories.

In fact Menon was still being chicken. He should have asked Beijing to honor its agreement to provide autonomy to Tibet. That would have been truly a mark of a bold. Right now, if this story is true, then Menon was being conservative to say the least.