Bharat Rakshak

Dragon in your dongle

By Anupam Dasgupta
Story Dated: Saturday, September 1, 2012 9:27 hrs IST

Fears over Chinese telecom hardware escalate after ZTE bags plum BSNL contract

For some time the Research and Analysis Wing, the Intelligence Bureau and the Enforcement Directorate have been fretting over imported telecom hardware made by Chinese giants Huawei Technologies and ZTE Corporation. The anxiety increased when Huawei was recently asked by the Chinese counter-espionage division to sweep and debug many Chinese diplomatic missions, including the one in Delhi.
Almost immediately, the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology asked Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd to test all equipment supplied by Huawei for trapdoors, black boxes and malware. BSNL was also asked to “check if it [the equipment] is susceptible to remote hacking”, before using the devices.
THE WEEK has documents of confidential assessments made by four top national security and financial intelligence agencies on this issue. All of them agree that the Chinese threat is real and credible. One report said Chinese vendors were “supplanting and not supplementing" indigenous players in India's telecom equipment manufacturing sector. Another report was cautious about the vendors' reluctance to share technical information and system keys of their products with Indian operators.
An R&AW note of April 2012 has cautioned the Department of Telecommunications about Huawei's links with the Chinese ministry of state security and the People's Liberation Army. BSNL had cancelled a contract with Huawei in 2010, over security issues. And, during 2009-2010, both Huawei and ZTE registered a growth slowdown after Indian security agencies voiced their fears.
The Telecom Equipment Manufacturers Association wrote to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on March 27, highlighting the need to keep the “know-how and control of telecom equipment” in Indian hands. TEMA said that the flawed preferential market access policy had resulted in the influx of Chinese vendors in core sectors.
Telecom equipment worth over 070,000 crore are added to the Indian network every year, and only around 3 per cent of this is made here. The National Telecom Policy 2012 wants the “domestic production of telecom equipment to meet Indian telecom sector demands to the extent of 60-80 per cent” by 2020; experts and critics call the policy over-ambitious.
Another MCIT letter dated May 31, 2011, called for network forensics, network hardening and network penetration tests by telecom service providers. It warned service providers of “non-addressable vulnerabilities” and asked them to get their “network audited from the security point of view once a year”. It placed the onus of network security solely on the service provider and mooted the creation of a Telecom Security Council of India.
The Cabinet Committee on Security, chaired by the Prime Minister, too, is wary, say sources. And, the fear is not restricted to India. The US House of Representatives' Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence had recently cleared a probe into national security threats arising out of foreign telecom equipment. Australia has banned Huawei from entering the nation's broadband network.
Sources said that, variously, Union Home Secretary R.K. Singh, Union Commerce Secretary S.R. Rao, Union Telecommunications Secretary R. Chandrashekhar, former Union home minister P. Chidambaram and National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon were briefed on the potential threat.
Attempts by THE WEEK to reach Chandrashekhar on phone were unsuccessful. And, attempts to reach Ram Narain, deputy director general (security), department of telecommunication, resulted in his office curtly asking this correspondent to “stop disturbing a senior government official”.
Security sources say the potential threat from Chinese vendors is twofold—espionage and disruption. Under espionage comes tapping and remote accessing of networks and devices, while disruption could mean Beijing throwing the kill switch and silencing all infected devices.
Sources within Indian intelligence agencies said that they had come across Chinese sleeper agents in India who seemed to have no designated function. Like all sleepers, they, perhaps, are in place to set in motion a pre-prepared espionage blueprint.
The PLA's technical department is responsible for gathering SIGINT (signals intel) and COMINT (communications intel), and the department is believed to have the capability to conduct sophisticated operations throughout southeast Asia. Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei is a retired PLA officer and former director of the PLA's Information Engineering Academy.
“The sheer complexity of telecom networks comprising several hundred network elements is one of the reasons why it is so vulnerable from the outside,” said Ashok K. Aggarwal, honorary director-general, TEMA.
According to documents on security assessments available with THE WEEK, Huawei bribed telecom officials to bag its first contract in Chennai in 2006. The company is also accused of tax evasion by under-invoicing imported goods. What also spooked the Indian intelligence fraternity was that Huawei sought approval from the Foreign Investment Promotion Board for setting up manufacturing facilities in India.
In 2010, the R&AW wrote to the Department of Telecom asking it to stop Reliance Communications from seeking a loan worth $600 million from the Export-Import Bank of China. The note said that the loan was being facilitated by Huawei and ZTE with malicious objectives.
Investigations by the ED have found instances of ZTE staffers trying to bribe Indian officials. A senior official of ZTE had allegedly arranged visas and funds for some Chinese nationals who overstayed in India. These people never informed the Foreigners Regional Registration Offices about the extension of their stay. And, at least 140 ZTE officials have visited India on tourist visas.
An ED official confirmed to THE WEEK that they were probing Foreign Exchange Management Act violations by ZTE. “There is substantial evidence against the companies in certain BSNL projects they have recently bagged,” the official sad. “This needed to be examined threadbare and carefully.” The official also touched upon a probe on hawala money reaching certain Chinese nationals in India.
Despite security agencies and the department of telecommunications being wary of Chinese vendors, ZTE recently bagged BSNL's GSM deal worth 04,000 crore. The deal gives the Chinese company access to over 10.15 million GSM lines across telecom circles in India. The contract also gives ZTE sweeping access to indigenous technology and the existing network.
But senior officers in BSNL and Mahanagar Telecom Nigam Ltd feel that they are being singled out on account of national security apprehensions. “If there is a security challenge, then the government should contemplate banning the Chinese telecoms gear vendors. The MHA needs to take a clear call on the matter,” said Naresh Kumar Gupta, director (consumer fixed access), BSNL. “BSNL had okayed a contract to one of the Chinese vendors following government guidelines in 2010. And, insofar as national security challenges are concerned the home ministry has to take a call or offer a security template.” He declined to comment on the ZTE deal.
“When there are issues pertaining to granting security clearances to foreign business players, we will certainly take a tough call,” said Ajay Chadha, special secretary (internal security), Ministry of Home Affairs.
The IB and defence ministry had, in 2009, advised BSNL not to award business contracts to the two Chinese companies. The then IB director Rajiv Mathur said, “Given the current security situation in the country, even the southern region, because of its coastline, can be considered sensitive. Moreover, distinction in terms of zones is irrelevant in the communication sector.”
Leading telecom expert Rajshekhar Murthy said, “BSNL has a long history of lame security in regard to their critical web servers. This makes us internally vulnerable.” Murthy is also founder manager of National Security Database, a government-accredited programme aimed at the upkeep of critical national infrastructure.
Huawei had sometime back sought clarity on the security concerns raised by the Indian intelligence and national security agencies. The company's top brass had also met members of the National Security Council Secretariat and officials in the Prime Minister's Office to dispel fears.
Huawei India spokesperson Suresh Vaidyanathan said, “We strongly deny these baseless and malicious allegations which are basically rumours and falsehood and conjectures at best. Huawei has been in India for over a decade and has contributed to the growth and development of the Indian telecom sector immensely by investing in India and by also providing state-of-the-art technology to all top 10 telecom operators in India.”
Huawei has invested over $400 million in research and development in India over the past 10 years and is set to invest another $150 million in a new R&D facility in Bangalore by 2013. And, ZTE has developed an advance value-added service platform for Vodafone India and is part of a three-vendor consortium that was awarded the BSNL's network expansion contract, which is different from the GSM deal.
But network security hawks like Murthy are not convinced. “[Look at] Operation Orchard [September 6, 2007] when Israeli jets bombed a suspected nuclear installation in Syria,” he said. “Mysteriously, Syrian radars failed. It is suspected that microprocessors in the radars were 'back doored', temporarily blocking the radar.”

http://week.manoramaonline.com/cgi-bin/ ... d=12326856

There he sought to play down Indian fears that China is threading a "string of pearls" -- or encircling it by financing infrastructure and military strength in neighbors stretching from Pakistan to the Maldives. "China attaches great importance to its relations with the South Asian nations, and commits itself to forging harmonious co-existence and mutually beneficial and win-win cooperation with them," he said in speech to Sri Lankan soldiers. \"The PLA's (People's Liberation Army) efforts in conducting friendly exchanges and cooperation with its counterparts in the South Asian nations are intended for maintaining regional security and stability and not targeted at any third party." China's leadership has one primary objective: how do we continue without any convulsions," said Uday Bhaskar, director of the National Maritime Foundation, a New Delhi think-tank. "You do not want to have anything to do with India just now which is rocking the boat, as it were," he said.
AID FOR ISLANDS
In Sri Lanka, Liang pledged $12 million in military aid, adding to billions of dollars spent helping President Mahinda Rajapaksa win a 25-year-old civil war and rebuild his ruined nation's ports and roads. Emphasizing China's growing clout in the region, President Mohammed Waheed of the Indian Ocean archipelago nation the Maldives left for Beijing on Friday to arrange $500 million in loans, partly for infrastructure. Liang's delegation includes Yang Jinshan, commander of the Tibet military district -- on the vast and troubled Himalayan plateau bordering India. China and India fought a brief border war in 1962, two years after India gave asylum to the Dalai Lama, who Beijing considers a separatist.
The last time a Chinese Defense minister visited India was in 2004. Since then, Beijing has spent billions of dollars on train lines, roads and military hardware in Tibet. India has also spent heavily to strengthen its defenses along the frontier, which the two sides dispute, despite years of talks. Minor incidents of both nations' troops crossing the border are common, but major flare-ups are avoided through meetings of low and mid-rank officers, as well as senior military delegations and a cabinet-level hotline. Instability has increased in Tibet in the lead up to the Chinese leadership change, with 51 Tibetans setting fire to themselves in gruesome protests against Beijing's heavy-handed rule in the region. Liang's visit follows a number of high intensity unilateral military exercises by both countries in the border region in the past year. More recently, India's ambassador to China was allowed to tour Tibet, a rare occurrence, and an Indian military delegation was taken to the region's capital Lhasa. Jayadeva Ranade, a retired Indian senior civil servant and China expert, said China's recent warmth toward India reflected its concerns about military escalation in the South China Sea, and perception that India is being drawn into the U.S. "pivot" to Asia, which Beijing sees as containment. While he welcomed Liang's trip, Ranade said India was disappointed China's next president had not yet visited. "It's a tepid gesture -- earlier they were expecting a higher level visit, Xi Jinping was expected to come. That would have been something," Ranade said

Gen Liang, whose bilateral meetings with the defence minister will begin on Tuesday, will not be paying homage at the war memorial for the unknown Indian soldiers who lost their lives in the wars fought by the country including the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict, sources said. The Chinese side apparently did not want this visit to the memorial to be included in Gen Liang's itinerary and the Indian side also did not press for it, they said.

nakul wrote:Visiting minister from China to skip Amar Jawan Jyoti

Gen Liang, whose bilateral meetings with the defence minister will begin on Tuesday, will not be paying homage at the war memorial for the unknown Indian soldiers who lost their lives in the wars fought by the country including the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict, sources said. The Chinese side apparently did not want this visit to the memorial to be included in Gen Liang's itinerary and the Indian side also did not press for it, they said.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 230222.cms

"The government is aware of the infrastructure development by China at the border and their (Chinese) undertaking infrastructure projects in PoK. The government has conveyed its concerns to China about its activities in PoK and asked them to cease such activities," said defence minister A K Antony, in a written reply in Lok Sabha on Monday.

"The government is fully seized of the security imperatives of the country and reviews the threat perception from time to time as well as the need for developing requisite infrastructure (to counter China) in the border areas."

"Indian territory under occupation by China in J&K since 1962 is approximately 38,000 sq km. In addition to this, under the so-called China-Pakistan `boundary agreement' of 1963, Pakistan illegally ceded 5,180 sq km of Indian territory in PoK to China. In the eastern sector, China illegally claims approximately 90,000 sq km of Indian territory in Arunachal Pradesh," he added.

In reply to another query over the Chinese naval presence in IOR, Antony said the government was keeping track of projects like port development and deep sea mining by China in the region.

The PMO felt that China in the last few last years has not increased its troop strength along the 4,500 km long Sino-Indian Line of Actual Control (LAC) and any accretions by India will prove counter-productive as both the countries are holding regular dialogue to resolve the vexed boundary dispute.

Incidentally, Chinese Defence Minister General Liang Guanglie is in India and will hold talks with Defence Minister AK Antony on the entire gamut of military relations here on Tuesday.

Justifying the need for strike corps, sources said China has improved its military infrastructure all along the LAC and Tibet backed by excellent sensors and radars and therefore, did not need to have troops on the ground to guard its territory. Enjoying this advantage over India, China has not increased its troop strength in the last few years.

However, India lacks infrastructure including roads, rail and airfields and has to maintain its presence in the Ladakh region and Arunachal Pradesh throughout the year. While China has built more than a 10,000 km long rail network and airports in Tibet region and can rush troops and maintain logistical support in case of an eventuality, India is way behind and troops have to be physically present there.

The Finance Ministry has also asked the Defence Ministry to have a re-look at the proposed strike corps which will have more than 60,000 troops and entail massive expenditure. The strike corps was to have its own dedicated mountain artillery units, troops trained in mountain warfare, helicopters for reconnaissance and the IAF backing the corps during actual combat.

The chiefs of Staff Committee comprising three service chiefs were asked to redraw a comprehensive plan to meet the growing military might of China and have more synergy between the three Services for this purpose, sources said.

nakul wrote:Visiting minister from China to skip Amar Jawan Jyoti

Gen Liang, whose bilateral meetings with the defence minister will begin on Tuesday, will not be paying homage at the war memorial for the unknown Indian soldiers who lost their lives in the wars fought by the country including the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict, sources said. The Chinese side apparently did not want this visit to the memorial to be included in Gen Liang's itinerary and the Indian side also did not press for it, they said.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 230222.cms

"The United States does not take a position on competing territorial claims," she told a news conference in Jakarta. "But we believe the nations of the region should work collaboratively to resolve disputes without coercion, without intimidation and certainly without the use of force."

Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa, who has been shuttling between capitals trying to find common ground among the members of Asean so they could present a unified front, agreed that a code of conduct was an important next step and that the Asean economic bloc must work together.

"Asean cohesion and unity is essential if we are to make progress," Mr. Natalegawa said in the joint news conference with Mrs. Clinton after their meeting on Monday.

China, meanwhile, indicated that the U.S. shouldn't be meddling in disputes it isn't involved in. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said in Beijing on Monday that the South China Sea issue should be resolved directly by concerned parties, according to the state-run Xinhua news agency.

India and China have decided to resume bilateral military exercises stalled in 2010 as part of their efforts to boost defence ties and build confidence between the two neighbours.

Defence Minister A.K. Antony, who joined his Chinese counterpart Gen Liang Guanglie, at the delegation-level talks, accepted the invitation to visit Beijing next year.

During the 90-minute talks, the two sides also agreed upon high-level official exchanges, training of armed forces personnel at each other’s facilities and maritime security cooperation between the two navies.

Terming the delegation-level talks as “very fruitful”, Antony said: “We have decided that (to resume Army-to-Army exercises) and I have also accepted the invitation by him to visit China sometime next year as per mutual convenience.

He said that during the talks, the two sides held discussions about “improving relations at the border areas and the situation in South Asia and Asia-Pacific region’’.

The two sides are understood to have discussed the American plans to shift bulk of its Navy to the Asia-Pacific region and the presence of Chinese troops in the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) region.

The Chinese Defence Minister said the two countries have “reached consensus for cooperation” and reviewed the progress made by the two sides.

“We reached consensus for cooperation between the sides in various fields including exchange of high-level visits, exchange of young officers and also the armed forces personnel training, inter-college exchanges and non-traditional security fields,” Gen Liang said through his interpreter. Cooperation between the two navies and maritime security also came up, he said.

The Chinese Defence Minister said this was the year of “friendship and cooperation” between India and China and the two countries should make the most of this opportunity.

China and the U.S. appeared unable to bridge differences over the South China Sea issue and Syria but pledged to work together to build trust as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton concluded a day of meetings with the Chinese leadership here on Wednesday.

Ms. Clinton — who met President Hu Jintao, Premier Wen Jiabao and Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi — reiterated her calls for China to push forward talks on a Code of Conduct for the South China Sea before November’s East Asia Summit. Chinese officials, however, did not commit to a timeline and rebutted U.S. concerns about its interests in the region by stressing that freedom of navigation in the contested waters had been fully guaranteed. {I believe that over-stressing on freedom of navigation by the Americans may be counterproductive and may let the Chinese off the hook. The US and the stakeholder nations in the South & East China Sea disputes with PRC must emphasize that UN's laws of the Seas must determine limits. China cannot arbitrarily claim vast areas of the sea that lawfully belong to other nations or to humanity by resorting to 9-dashes or 7-dashes}

Differences notwithstanding, both sides appeared keen to highlight their desire to work together and minimise differences. President Hu Jintao praised Ms. Clinton’s contributions to the relationship and stressed that China was willing to “eliminate any disturbance in order to ensure that bilateral ties will forge ahead in the right direction”.

Ms. Clinton acknowledged to reporters that while differences persisted, both sides were “able to explore areas of agreement and disagreement in a very open manner, which I think demonstrates the maturity of the relationship and the chance to take it further in the future”.

Ms. Clinton, in her talks with Foreign Minister Mr. Yang, repeated her call, made recently in Jakarta, for China and other ASEAN countries to “help lower the tensions” in the South China Sea and “create the Code of Conduct… hopefully in preparation for the East Asia Summit”.

Mr. Yang, however, did not commit to a time-frame, only repeating China’s position that the dispute should be solved through dialogue and that countries needed to abide by the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties (DOC). He also repeated China’s position that it would discuss disputes through bilateral talks with concerned countries, rejecting U.S. calls for a multilateral approach.

The two countries also appeared unable to bridge differences on Syria. Ms. Clinton said pointedly that it was “no secret that we have been disappointed by Russia and China’s actions blocking tougher U.N. Security Council resolutions”.

Mr. Yang defended China’s position, saying that “history will judge” that it had promoted “the appropriate handling of the situation”. “For what we have in mind,” he said, “is the interests of the people of Syria and the region and the interests of peace, stability and development in the region and throughout the world.”

Media reports from Japan say the government has reached a deal to buy disputed islands in the East China Sea from their private owner.

The government will pay 2.05bn yen ($26m, £16.4m) to buy islands known as Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China.

Kyodo news agency, citing government sources, said the agreement to buy three of the five main islands was reached with the owner on Monday.

"The Chinese government is monitoring developments closely and will take necessary measures to defend its national territorial sovereignty," Hong Lei said.

apan sensationally raised the stakes in its long-running territorial dispute with China yesterday, reportedly agreeing to buy three of the disputed Senkaku islands south-west of Okinawa from their private Japanese owners for 2.05 billion yen ($26m).

The islands, which the Chinese call Diaoyu, form part of a series of barren and largely uninhabited clumps of rock south of China which have assumed an importance out of all proportion to their modest size and unimpressive appearance as China and the US jockey for power and influence in the region. Arguments over the claims and counter-claims have overshadowed a visit to China by the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, which concluded yesterday with both sides admitting their differences with unusual frankness.

Jorge Luis Borges famously described the Falklands War as "two bald men fighting over a comb." The South China standoff may look like more of the same: none of these arid atolls have anything to offer tourists or hoteliers. But the stakes are far larger than they appear – connected in some cases to reportedly vast quantities of untapped oil and gas, and in all to strategic control of the surrounding waterways. And everywhere, these disputes are feeding into a dangerously febrile nationalistic mood throughout the region.

Senkaku is a case in point. The islands reverted to Japan in 1972 in the treaty signed with the US which also returned Okinawa to Japan. Gas reserves had been identified nearby in 1968, but it was not until a visit to Japan by Deng Xiaoping in 1978 that China staked a claim to the archipelago, which is much closer both to Taiwan and the south China coast than to the Japanese mainland.

The issue has steadily risen in importance since then, with firebrands on both sides using it to urge their governments to stand up to claimed humiliations by the other side. The issue came to a head in August when Chinese demonstrators landed on one of the islands, Uotsurijima. They were arrested by Japanese authorities stationed on the island and deported. A few days later Japanese nationalists hoisted the national flag on the same island, sparking protests in China, in one of which the Japanese flag was torn from the bonnet of the ambassador's car.

Yesterday's agreement by the Japanese government to purchase three of the islands, including Uotsurijima, provoked an immediate and furious Chinese reaction. A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said: "In disregard of China's solemn representations and firm opposition, Japan single-mindedly pushes forward the island purchase process, which severely harmed China's territorial sovereignty and hurt the feelings of the Chinese people. We cannot help but ask where is Japan trying to lead China-Japan relations?"

The spat left Ms Clinton high and dry at the end of a bruising visit to Beijing which was dominated by similar tensions over other little spots in the ocean.

After a marathon negotiating session, Ms Clinton tried to put the best face on her visit at a news conference yesterday. "Our two countries are trying to do something that has never been done in history," she said, "which is to write a new answer to the question of what happens when an established power and a rising power meet." She did not go so far as to say they had succeeded.

Prime Minister Wen Jiabao spoke more plainly. "Generally speaking, our relationship has been moving forward," he said, "but recently I am more or less worried. I feel that our two countries should maintain political mutual respect and strategic mutual trust. The United States should respect China's sovereignty and territorial integrity."

As any Tibetan could point out, the People's Republic has shown a repeated tendency to claim as its own since time immemorial territories whose histories are far more complex than that. On Monday, for example, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said that the Senkaku islands had been "inherent" parts of China since "ancient times."

The islands which are under dispute in the South China Sea include the Scarborough Shoal (named after an East India Company ship of that name which sank here with all hands in 1784), claimed by China, Taiwan and the Philippines, and the Spratly Islands, variously disputed by these countries but also by Vietnam, Brunei and Malaysia. Yet as the regional giant, China has no hesitation about insisting on the pre-eminence of its own rights. And to increase the likelihood of its claims winning the day, it also insists on negotiating each individual case bilaterally. It has refused to allow ASEAN, the Association of South-East Asian Nations, to play a part.

The reason is clear – and if it wasn't, Wen Jiabao's blunt rebuff to Ms Clinton yesterday made it clearer: although none of these issues involves territory claimed by the US, China is in no doubt that it is America that stands behind China's adversaries, using them as proxies.

It was last November that President Obama spelled out the new foreign policy doctrine which is keeping the Chinese leadership awake at nights. Addressing Australia's Parliament, he said he had "made a deliberate and strategic decision" that the US "will play a larger and long-term role in shaping this [Asian-Pacific] region and its future...I have directed my national security team to make our presence and mission in the Asia Pacific [region] a top priority." He went on, "we will allocate the resources necessary to maintain our strong military presence in this region. We will preserve our unique ability to project power and deter threats to peace."

President Obama backed up his rhetoric with the announcement that at least 2,500 US Marines would be stationed in Darwin, in Australia's Northern Territory. The US is also said to be planning to fly long-range surveillance drones from Australia's remote Cocos Islands, and to be dusting off bases in Thailand abandoned after the Vietnam war.

Underlying this so-called 'pivot' in American priorities is the belief, first spelled out in an internal Pentagon report in 2005, that China is "building strategic relationships along the sea lanes from the Middle East to the South China Sea in ways that suggest defensive and offensive positioning to protect China's energy interests but also to serve broad security objectives." These "strategic relationships", described by the US as a "string of pearls", includes the disputed islands in the South China Sea as well as new ports being developed by China in Bangladesh, Burma, Sri Lanka, and Pakistan.

A still rampant China is in this way seen to be expanding helter-skelter into its surrounding oceans. The determination to secure its vast and rapidly growing energy needs is the clearest motivation. Meanwhile the US, with a military that still dwarfs those of all its friends and enemies combined, refuses – for the time being – to allow the logic of economic decline to dictate either its rhetoric or its strategies.

In the midst of stresses such as these, and with governments on both sides that are rapidly approaching the end of their mandates, it is not surprising that the latest attempt by the US and China to thrash out a bilateral agreement was so fraught. Their failure to do something "that has never been done in history" will leave the new administrations in both Washington and Beijing with problems that are rapidly growing toxic.

Philip wrote:PS:The Japanese need to only declare themselves a nuclear power to stymie any Chinese bullying.It may in the end force Japan to go nuclear,if the US reneges on its obligations to protect Japan from nuclear bullying from China.Notwithstanding WW2,a nuclear armed japan would actually be a stabilising force in Asia as a counterweight to the greed and arrogance of the dragon.

China today said the two countries had agreed to push forwards relations and step up military to military exchanges.

Two Indian air force pilots who flew the visiting Chinese defence minister from Mumbai to Delhi were given 100,000 rupees ($1,788; £1,124) as "tips".The pilots were given envelopes containing the money by General Liang Guanglie who returned to China on Thursday after a four-day India visit.Surprised by the "unusual gift", the pilots informed their superiors.Officials said the money would be deposited in the government gift chest along with other official gifts.Reports said Gen Guanglie was "pleased" with the way the pilots handled the flight in the stormy monsoon weather.Officials said the Chinese minister was possibly not briefed properly on Indian protocol and customs which forbid government officials from accepting money as gifts. Gen Guanglie, the first Chinese defence minister to visit Delhi in eight years, also did some sightseeing during his tour

Abhi_G wrote:http://www.dailypioneer.com/home/online ... corps.html

MMS scrapping mountain division - repeat of 1962 in the offing

Pratyush wrote:^^^

The cash award was a pre-planned move. As a defense minister is unlikely to carry such an amount in his pocket or even in his brief case.

This visit has been a case of one insult after another. Yet not a peep from the Indian GOI on such a behavior.

May be they have decided not to respond to such petty provocation. Or may be they are shivering in their Jockeys.

RajeshA wrote: There effort to deny us respect or equality in such a pathetic way actually shows upon them that they themselves feel insecure in our company!

RajeshA wrote: What becomes obvious is that there are some symbols in India that make the Chinese very uncomfortable! There effort to deny us respect or equality in such a pathetic way actually shows upon them that they themselves feel insecure in our company!

Shyam Saran, the former foreign secretary and Chinese language speaker, the other day delivered in New Delhi a most insightful and enlightening public lecture on China. Equally, there has not been a more damning indictment of India’s China outlook, approach, and policy. It was not intended to be that way. Saran’s aim apparently was to explain the nuance and the complexities involved in dealing diplomatically with the Chinese whose written language, he observed, requires mastery over some 5,000 alphabetic ideograms before a half-way serious analysis in Mandarin can be attempted.

The difficult language empowers Chinese officials at the expense of befuddled foreigners who have to deal with tailored levels of ambiguity that is hard to pin down. What the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) takes to be a firm commitment is later discovered to be just a play of words. Thus, Saran recalls the meeting of the MEA director-general R K Nehru with Zhouenlai in 1962, a few months before the war, in which Zhou indicated that China never said it did not recognise India’s sovereignty over Jammu & Kashmir, which was taken by MEA to mean China accepted India’s position, only to have Zhou later say, with similar composure, that China never said it accepted Indian sovereignty over that state. Saran blamed India’s “not being conversant with Chinese thought processes” for this misunderstanding. He retailed another such episode. In 2003, China conceded Sikkim as part of India and, two years later during Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit, handed over maps of India with Sikkim, only for Chinese scholars to recently point out that because no official statement of the erstwhile kingdom’s status has ever been made, there’s the possibility of China putting Sikkim back on the negotiating table. “The Chinese will insistently demand and sometimes obtain formulations from friends and adversaries alike on issues of importance to their interests,” explained Saran, “but will rarely concede clarity and finality in formulations reflecting the other side’s interests.” If the MEA knows this, then why isn’t it inflexible as well?

However, such Chinese diplomatic success stories surely appear to be less the result of obfuscatory language or some inscrutable machinations on the part of the Chinese than the lack of matching effective diplomatic riposte of getting a lot in return for giving away little. The larger concern is this: the MEA may have been tricked this way one time, ok; shame on it when it was done in the second time, but if this sort of giveaways become a diplomatic habit, then there’s something definitely wrong.

For instance, at the time of the 1996 visit by President Jiang Zemin, the Congress government headed by P V Narasimha Rao signed the accord on peace and tranquillity on the border. It necessitated a virtual demilitarisation of a 40-km-(presumably, as the crow flies)wide belt on either side of the LAC. Except, the Chinese side is, for the most part, the flat Tibetan plateau while, on the Indian side, it is mountain ranges. In a contingency, mandating the rushing of troops to forward posts, guess which side is hugely disadvantaged? So, the question is, were the MEA negotiators unaware of the terrain in question, or didn’t they appreciate the difficulty of our army units having to climb up to the heights, even as Chinese soldiers are trucked to their jump-off line? It may be that the Indian government of the day thought it politics to have such a lopsided agreement for the sake of atmospherics than not having one at all. It shows certain recklessness on the part of the MEA in even allowing this proposal to be tabled highlighting, in the process, the disconnect between the military and the foreign office.

Saran dilated on the near-war incident in 1986 on the Somdurong Chu River, revealing the MEA’s casual attitude to Chinese cartographic creep in the Himalayas. Chinese troops crossed the Thagla Ridge and established a post on the Somdurong Chu in the disputed territory but instead of leaving some evidence of their presence and withdrawing as is normally done by both sides, they built a helipad. The Indian Army reacted fast and furiously, with the chief, General K Sundarji, ordering an airlift of troops, occupation of the parallel Lurongla-Hathungla-Sulunga Ridge overlooking the new Chinese forward station, and setting up of two forward posts on the river just 10 metres from the Chinese presence — all done without consulting with the government. Saran admits that “there was...a reluctance (in government) to take any military counter measures.” As a result of this “over reaction” (in Saran’s words), things eased for India, the Chinese became, according to the ex-foreign secretary, “more polite”, and an invitation from Chairman Deng Xiaoping to Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to visit China, ensued.

In the interaction with the audience after his lecture, when I asked Saran if the Somdurong Chu event did not highlight the need for Indian foreign and military policy to be more “proactive”, and whether the country was not better off because Sundarji did not seek the usual advice from the MEA to do nothing, which would have prevented army action and perpetuated the Chinese perception of India as a punching bag, Saran, to my utter surprise and, with some vehemence, iterated the government line that India needn’t be “aggressive” to get its way.

Saran and the MEA’s stand is that all India needs to do to neutralise China, which believes in deception and opportunistic use of force, is to have “cultural exchanges” and “get inside the Chinese mind”, understand its strategic “calculus” and monitor the regional and international “context” and building up web of partnerships to ensure it doesn’t turn adverse enough for Beijing to exploit with aggression. Such timidity may indeed win India peace but on China’s terms.

The awe that Indian officials hold China in is difficult to fathom. It disables our diplomacy and sells India short. China is respectful of the military power of adversaries and, even more, the willingness to use it. If only the Indian government appreciated hard power.

(Bharat Karnad is professor at Centre for Policy Research and blogs at www.bharatkarnad.com)

Shishir Gupta, Hindustan Times
New Delhi, September 05, 2012


India’s military intelligence (MI) has picked up credible reports about the presence of at least 834 Chinese personnel working on road and hydroelectric infrastructure projects in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). Chinese participation in projects in PoK was discussed on Tuesday in a
meeting between defence minister AK Antony and visiting Chinese defence minister General Liang Guanglie. Liang has told an Indian newspaper not a single soldier of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is present in PoK.

While India has asked China to cease participation in infrastructure projects in PoK, MI reports have said 735 Chinese nationals are working at the site of the ongoing $2.89-billion, 963MW Neelum-Jhelum hydroelectric project, executed by a Chinese consortium, near the line of control in Jammu and Kashmir.

Apart from this, the Indian Army headquarters is also aware of 99 Chinese nationals working on the 84-km Muzaffarabad-Athmuqam road project.

CHINA's POLITICAL POWER TRANSITION

Dr Roshan Khaniejo*

Introduction

The 18th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is expected to convene sometime in 2012.It will test the orderly succession and formation of the new government as established by the CCP. It will be a challenge for China’s “Heir apparent” to see if the senior party members can overcome various factional divides and emerge as one unit under a new collective leadership. In the People’s Republic of China, the Party rules both state and society, hence it is very important to understand how the political leaders emerge in various generations and the way in which they shape their country’s future.


Leadership Succession

The era of political slogans and ideologies such as the “Anti rights campaign” and the “Great Proletariat Cultural Revolution” marked the beginning of an all-powerful Mao Zedong’s repressive rule, along with the commencement of “First Generation Leaders”. During his reign there was a lack of an organized cadre system .The CCP political leaders suffered under Mao’s vindictive and mercurial campaigns. His autocratic ways brought a suppressed unrest in the party. After Mao’s death, Deng Xiaoping a prominent member of the “Gang of Four” succeeded him and he started a series of political reforms, the effects of which can be seen even today. Along with Deng Xiaoping the “Second Generation leaders “ were Chen Yun, Zhao Ziyang,Li Peng to name a few, and they represented the powerful “ Eight Immortals”. Although Deng Xiaoping was an autocrat, he designed a system of collective leadership which in years to come became a strong pillar in the Chinese political system .He made the revolutionary cadre youthful and professional, by starting the process of early retirement (68yrs+) for political leaders.


The mass political unrest in 1989 in conjunction with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Block had a great impact on the survival of the Communist Political system in China. CCP leaders observed Russia’s debacle keenly, and the party elders decided to resist the liberal political leaders in the party. Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao who had suppressed the “Bourgeois liberation” in Shanghai, and the “unrest in the Tibetan region” respectively; were given the reigns to lead the country successively. Thus emerged the “Third and Fourth generation Leaders”. The consolidation of power by Jiang Zemin led to the formation of the “Shanghai Clique”, which was a list of Jiang Zemin loyalists who were given prominent party positions. At the 14th Party Congress in 1992 Hu Jintao was nominated to the Politburo’s Standing Committee (PSC). He was made the director of the Central Party School where he influenced the grooming of rising CCP cadres. His tenure in the past as Head of the “Chinese Communist Youth League”(CCYL) helped him to bring young and loyal party workers to the forefront and later on these along with other members of this league became his key supporters.


Fifth Generation Leaders

The “Fifth Generation” leaders of the CCP are getting ready to assume the leading posts in the CCP at the 18th Party Congress. These leaders were exposed to the Cultural Revolution at a very young age, and this had a major impact on their lives. For example Xi Jinping was sent to the country side when he was just fifteen. In the 1950s and 60s China pursued the industrialization policies followed by Russia. As a result most of its leaders took a degree in engineering. However; with time the new generation leaders became educated in diverse fields like economics and humanities. They completed their higher studies (mainly their post graduate degrees) from renowned universities in China and abroad. Xi Jinping did his PhD majoring in Marxist Theory from the elite Tsinghua University. Those who were in the commercial sector worked as corporate executives in the state owned enterprises. Thus the Fifth Generation leaders have emerged as more educated, skilled technocrats compared to their predecessors. They also have immense administrative experience, as they have worked in various capacities in the Chinese provinces. Xi Jinping worked in the Fujian Province as Governor. There he encouraged the Taiwanese investors to invest in the province and he also gained a good working knowledge about the political economy and the finer nuances of the cross-strait relations. Most of these new generation leaders are also “princelings” for example Xi Jinping’s father Xi Zhongxun was the governor of Guangdong province in southern China. These leaders are also divided in their affinity, either to “Shanghai Clique” or to the “China Communist Youth League”.


The Balancing Act

The PSC members have their allegiance to one of the two factions namely the “China Communist Youth League”.(CCYL) or the “Shanghai Clique”. The former had patrons like Hu Jintao, Li Keqiang whereas the latter had Jiang Zemin, Xi Jinping etc. The policies formed by the former group have more to do with China’s inland Province and centre on propaganda, legal affairs etc. Whereas the policies formulated by the latter centre towards coastal area development and deal with trade, commerce and finance. .What remains to be seen is whether the Fifth Generation leaders are able to work towards strengthening the status of the Party by not only maintaing the balance between the two warring factions but also appeasing the third faction supported by the so called “Party Elders “ who even after their retirement ,influence the party’s political and administrative policies.


Economic Stability

The economic growth of a country depends on the foresight of its leaders, the political stability, and the continuity in economic policies. China in Xi Jinping has a leader who not only wants economic modernization, but is also an advocate of market socialism. Not only does he believe in economic and political reforms, but he also has excellent organizational skills required to implement them. He was responsible for the success of Beijing Olympics. Wikileaks in 2007 said Xi Jinping was “attentive to social security challenges, political reforms and efforts to fight corruption”. Next in league is Li Keqiang likely to be the PRC Premier .He is known as an astute technocrat especially on economic issues .He holds a PhD in economics from Beijing University and will be responsible for China’s macroeconomic policies. These two important political leaders with a sound background in economics are going to see China through 2020.


Political Stability

The standing committee has nine members out of which seven are likely to retire. Similarly another seven members are expected to retire from the full politburo which has a strength of twenty five members. The party posts will be filled mostly by Fifth generation leaders, who will continue to hold office till 2020, thereby ensuring a decade of continuity in political and economic policies. In all probability the CCP will be able to control the political infighting by maintaining the appropriate balance between all the factions, thus ensuring a smooth leadership transition.


Conclusion

China under Xi Jinping will probably grow stronger economically, militarily and politically. It is difficult to predict how China will behave in the coming years. Initially the new team may continue the old policies and maintain a status quo, however once the new members of the PSC consolidate their positions, they are bound to be more assertive in their approach. The fire of the red dragon would be felt by most countries, especially India, as India’s relations with China have been turbulent in the past .The uncooperative attitude of China in solving the border issue along with the speed with which China is modernizing its armed forces are causes of concern. In comparison to China India’s political stability will face some anxious moments as she is also due for elections in 2014. A hung parliament or a coalition government is not a very encouraging scenario for the country’s economic growth and military development. India needs to watch these developments carefully and take appropriate measures.


* Dr Roshan Khaniejo is Associate Research Fellow at the Centre for Strategic Studies and Simulation, USI.

(Article uploaded on May 31, 2012).

Jhujar wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-19498935
China minister gives cash 'tips' to Indian pilots

Two Indian air force pilots who flew the visiting Chinese defence minister from Mumbai to Delhi were given 100,000 rupees ($1,788; £1,124) as "tips".The pilots were given envelopes containing the money by General Liang Guanglie who returned to China on Thursday after a four-day India visit.Surprised by the "unusual gift", the pilots informed their superiors.Officials said the money would be deposited in the government gift chest along with other official gifts.Reports said Gen Guanglie was "pleased" with the way the pilots handled the flight in the stormy monsoon weather.Officials said the Chinese minister was possibly not briefed properly on Indian protocol and customs which forbid government officials from accepting money as gifts. Gen Guanglie, the first Chinese defence minister to visit Delhi in eight years, also did some sightseeing during his tour

eklavya wrote:Looks like the Crown Prince of the Middle Kingdom has "sprained his back" ....

Where is Xi Jinping?

ramana wrote:

eklavya wrote:Looks like the Crown Prince of the Middle Kingdom has "sprained his back" ....

Where is Xi Jinping?

Same place as Visha Kanya?

eklavya wrote: ....

Where is Xi Jinping?

The daily noted that Japan depends on the Chinese market more than China does on the Japanese market.

"A political confrontation will bring insignificant economic damage to China," it said. "...with China's nuclear deterrence, Japan is less likely to launch a military attack on China."

It said that China has been advocating friendly ties with its neighbour, but "Japan has created enough troubles for China over the years".

"But its behaviour toward the US and Russia demonstrates its inferiority toward strong countries. China cannot repeat what the US and Russia did to Japan. But a lesson is necessary to dispel its contempt toward China..."

Chinese and Japanese government ships exchanged warnings on Friday in waters near disputed islands in the East China Sea, while Tokyo called on Beijing to protect its citizens amid anti-Japan protests and reported assaults in China.

Tensions between the Asian giants have flared anew after the Japanese government bought the islands from their private Japanese owners this week. The uninhabited islands, claimed by both countries as well as Taiwan and called Senkaku by Japan and Diaoyu by China, have become a rallying point for nationalists on both sides.