Bharat Rakshak

Unusual political statement by a serving IA chief by directly naming political parties as suspects!!!

Chandragupta wrote:

chola wrote:
All of this point to an even greater softening of this race of rice-eating non-warriors in the future. If only the wealthy can marry then their scions would be far less likely to charge up hills when commanded so by their generals.

They may not need to, Chola guru. The Chinese are making advancements in AI and Robotics. Before this happens, I am sure they will have some kind of robotic army ready.

Yes, that is actually a great concern to be perfectly honest. The ramp up in sci-fi drone and robotic technology is ominous and breathtaking.

A few headliners from just this week (Feb. 19 - 22):

They are building the world’s largest test site for drone ships.
https://sputniknews.com/military/201802 ... one-ships/

Exo-skeletons and future battlesuits.
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/02/c ... etons.html

The Rainbow 4 UCAV reported to have made kills in 96% of missions in feedback from customers in the middle east.
http://m.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy- ... -have-96pc

Where are we in any of this stuff?

chola wrote: what makes them flinch at splicing genes from caucasians to start with and then directly manipulating the DNA somewhere down the future?

All it takes is time and money. And a complete lack of ethics.

Let me make a prediction about this. It is feasible but not enough is known to make it a success. As with everything genetic the easiest mistakes are discovered in the foetal stage. The serious mistakes come years and years later. Genes today are the result of millions of years of trial and error - with the worst errors dying out. So James Bond style genetic games IMO will be attempted, but better to go for a mix of robotic army and blonde gigolos. Quick, visible results with no long term uncertainty and interminable waiting.

nam wrote:Got a chance to watch Wolf warrior 2 recently. Thought Bollywood makes lousy movies, the Chinese are even worse.

Lousy flicks from both — except that Wolf Warrior flick made nearly $900M in 2017.

It actually signifies the type of challenge we face in Cheen.

I have a “Variety” hollywood industry report on my laptop stating that there are three chini flicks sitting at $305M, $269M and $188M from opening this weekend onlee. The third dollar figure is from “Operation Red Sea” another Wolf Warrior type chini war movie.

For comparison, Padmaavat — one of the top 10 grossing BWood flicks of all time — is currently at $82M for all of 2018.

But Padmaavat is actually not the best selling Indian flick this year.

A Khan’s Secret Superstar made $120M — from a month’s run in the China box office.

China Dropped Its One-Child Policy. So Why Aren’t Chinese Women Having More Babies?

In late 2015, when China eased its decades-long policy limiting most couples to having only one child, some heralded the change as a move toward greater reproductive freedom. But the government was only embarking on another grand experiment in population engineering: This time it was urging women — though only the right sort — to reproduce for China.

The authorities in Beijing seemed terrified that plummeting birthrates, an aging population and a shrinking labor force might undermine the results of years of double-digit growth rates, and threaten the political legitimacy of the ruling Chinese Communist Party (C.C.P.). So they began allowing most married couples to have two children. They hoped that the new policy would bring three million additional births a year through 2020 and add more than 30 million workers to the labor force by 2050.

But there has been no baby boom. Figures released last month show that the country’s birthrate fell by 3.5 percent in 2017 compared with the previous year. (The number of births had increased in 2016, the first year since the policy shift, though far less than the government had hoped.) According to official statistics, the number of children born to parents who already had one child did rise in 2017, but the number of first-child births dropped.

Why? Because a critical mass of women appears to be in no rush to have babies, particularly urban, educated women — just the category that the C.C.P. is counting on to produce and raise a new generation of skilled, knowledge-based workers.

The latest campaign takes special aim at the educated. An article originally published in December 2015 in the Beijing Youth Daily, the official publication of the Communist Youth League, urged female students to have babies — and featured a photo of the blacked-out silhouette of a woman in university-graduation gown and mortarboard, holding an infant (in full color). It has been widely reprinted, under peppy headlines like “University in Beijing has over 10 female student mothers: Bright job prospects” (The People’s Daily Online) and “ ‘Already had a baby’ becomes a sought-after quality in the job-hunting season — more female university students prepare for pregnancy” (sohu.com). Another article on sohu.com, a popular website that runs state-media reports, played up the romance of having children early: “Female university student’s joyful love: freshman year — live together, sophomore year — get pregnant, junior year — have baby.”

At the same time, the government discourages unmarried women from having babies — by way of fines and administrative hurdles — because it sees marriage and family as a pillar of social stability. As far back as 2007, it was trying to stigmatize women who remained single after the age of 27, calling them sheng nu, “leftover” women. Today, it is expanding official matchmaking initiatives. The Communist Youth League organizes mass blind dates across the country while teaching young people what it calls “the correct attitude” toward love and marriage.

The approach’s eugenic undertones are unmistakable. Even as officials urge college-educated, Han Chinese women to marry and get pregnant, they are discouraging, sometimes through coercion, ethnic minorities with high birthrates — particularly Uighurs in the northwestern region of Xinjiang — from having more children.

vinod wrote:Why can't western powers convinced of China's ascendency do something to slow it down. May be block the CPEC by making sure that UN decides\declares or whatever way, that India is rightful owner of PoK? This will result in Pakistan not being colonised by China.

Assuming China even if its a permanent seat holder has been arm-twisted or side-lined in some way.

That is because most of the deep state in the US and the Anglo-Saxon west has sizeable investments in China. Its their retirement income and a legacy to their descendants. Why do you think people like Madeline Albright, Hank Paulson and similar second rung uber rich people still run their US based think tanks and still take a lot of money from the Confucious institutes.

very good production values and full govt support with some gear, just like usaf/usn supports hollywood psyops esp the carriers / B52 / f22

isnt that yuri boyka himself as the villain ?

Yes Scot Adkins.

Singha wrote:very good production values and full govt support with some gear, just like usaf/usn supports hollywood psyops esp the carriers / B52 / f22

Chinese version of Blackhawk Down...8 against 150...mid-East or African village setting. Humvee like transports...English subtitles? Good for em'...

we got "tiger zinda hai" lol and crude low tech efforts like border, line of control....

Vijeta after all these years, remains the best imo. classy actors and a serious film.

Comparing Bollywood grossers with Holywood suffers from the fact that Bolly tickets retail for barely 1-3 dollars in India.

100 crores translates to about 10 million tickets sold at Rs 100. 10 million tickets at US$ 10 = 100 million USD. Add sales on Netflix etc which are only miniscule in India. But Rs 100 crore is 15 million USD

All this TFTA stuff about stealth fighters and aircraft carriers and whatnot is obscuring a far more grave and immediate threat.

Pakistan has now made Mandarin Chinese an OFFICIAL language of the state. No pretense anymore. Pakistan is a Chinese colony. It is an "atoot ang" of China.

This means that ISI and all its networks within India are atoot ang of MSS. Also, they are funded and resourced by Beijing to a blue-sky degree they haven't enjoyed since the CIA's patronage of 1980s.

Consider the implications. There is an exponential expansion in the capacity of China to interfere in India's internal security, politics, and social faultlines. There was very little the MSS could do all this time: they might have had some agents in Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, and NE states, and in the communist parties, but for various reasons (language, ethnicity, cultural cluelessness) their penetration was highly restricted. They never had anywhere near the degree of influence that CIA, KGB, or ISI had in India.

Now the MSS has ISI as a virtual limb, and commands all the quislings in India's political classes and organized criminal underworld who have traditionally been taking orders from the ISI.

It is of critical importance to China that things in India go back to the way they were before 2013. In 2014, they had little or no influence over what happened on India's political scene. Now they have access to avenues and inroads drilled by ISI termites over several decades, and agents who were formerly controlled from Islamabad at their disposal.

Whatever the Russians are alleged to have done in the US election of 2016 will be nothing compared to what MSS/ISI will attempt in the elections leading up to GE 2019, funded and strategically directed from Beijing, operationalized and coordinated from Aabpara, and tactically implemented by legions of collaborators within our own borders.

Forgive me if this comes across as a "political" post, but I sincerely believe this to be a far greater threat to India's strategic security than any Doklam-Voklam or "string of pearls". This is how the Chinese like to fight their wars, no risk to them, not a shot fired, and an enemy rendered completely disabled by exploiting its own inherent weaknesses. The 2.5 front war is already ongoing, although in a form completely unrecognizable as the "hard-power" scenarios we envision on the mil thread . It will intensify tremendously in the next 18 months.

How do we defang this particular Chinese threat?

^^^^ great post as usual... We can expect atleast 6months before the election total chaos in India, terrorist strikes, attacks on armed forces, mainstream media will paint total negative image of India, but curruption charges have been effective in the last two decades, so lot of curruption charges will be unearthed and painted as BJP's wrongdoings, but expect a lull in painting Hindus as villains as the Congress needs hindu votes, expect too many political outfits to come up to split the Hindu vote, oh boy... the election fever has already begun.

looks like it was about to default on some calls so now the ceo went from hero to zero

CNN

The Chinese government has seized control of a deal-hungry insurance firm that owns major assets in the U.S. including the Waldorf Astoria, and is prosecuting the company's chairman.
China's insurance regulator said Friday that it had taken control of Anbang Insurance for one year. The Chinese firm is best known for its ambitious deal-making efforts overseas, including the $1.95 billion purchase of the Waldorf Astoria, a failed $14 billion bid for the Starwood hotel chain, and unsuccessful talks with the Kushner family business over a Manhattan office tower.

The China Insurance Regulatory Commission said in a series of statements that Anbang Chairman Wu Xiaohui has been removed from his post and is being prosecuted for "economic crimes."


The regulator said the decision to put Anbang under government control was because of "illegal management and operation activities" that could "endanger" its ability to stay in business. It didn't specify what those activities were.

The crackdown on the company follows an investigation that has been running since June, according to the statement. That's when Wu was reported to have been detained by authorities.

chola wrote: Lousy flicks from both — except that Wolf Warrior flick made nearly $900M in 2017.

The movie was desperately trying to create the "Chinese Rambo". It tried to show that physically Chinis are equal to Africans. There was shirtless football scene, who can drink the worst alcohol etc.
Based on the revenues, looks like the Chini society is looking for one as well. At-least the Hollywood Rambo was entertaining enough, preventing us from realizing it is a propaganda movie.

What surprised me the most was, sort of lack of support from the PLAN, PLA etc. Generally half of the USN is permanently on station for Hollywood movies. This movie lacked such a support.

Hollywood propaganda movies are brilliant at showing off victimization and superiority in the same movie.Russians are good as well. Chinis are yet to reach that level.

chola wrote: A Khan’s Secret Superstar made $120M — from a month’s run in the China box office.

I am very suspicious of Akhan's movies doing well in china,

nam wrote:

chola wrote: Lousy flicks from both — except that Wolf Warrior flick made nearly $900M in 2017.

The movie was desperately trying to create the "Chinese Rambo". It tried to show that physically Chinis are equal to Africans. There was shirtless football scene, who can drink the worst alcohol etc.
Based on the revenues, looks like the Chini society is looking for one as well. At-least the Hollywood Rambo was entertaining enough, preventing us from realizing it is a propaganda movie.

What surprised me the most was, sort of lack of support from the PLAN, PLA etc. Generally half of the USN is permanently on station for Hollywood movies. This movie lacked such a support.

Hollywood propaganda movies are brilliant at showing off victimization and superiority in the same movie.Russians are good as well. Chinis are yet to reach that level.

Shirtless football scene? That’s straight from Top Gun and Tom Cruise. LOL

Yah, I think the Wolf Warrior series — there are two flicks so far — is a private franchise and panders to the chini public successfully. It didn’t get the military gear that comes from PLA supported venture but it got its customers right with the story and visuals. I’m assuming since I haven’t seen the movie. But $900M is pretty evident of that.

This was the big PLAAF supported propaganda flick last year, Sky Hunter. It has all the whizz bang Chini stuff: J-10, J-11B, Z-8, Y-20 and even J-20. I’ll be watching this when I find time for the technical interest of the AC.


But Sky Hunter bombed in the Chini box office. A Khan’s Dangal made a $100M more than this propaganda flick. Yes, a Hindi movie about a dad and his wrestling daughters crushed a PLAAF propaganda vehicle that has the mighty J-20.

This tells me a lot about the opponent we face. The PRC has an adept free market private sector that doesn’t necessarily follow the propaganda BS of the CCP and makes loads of money by knowing its customers.

The Chini public is rabidly nationalistic hence the box office success of Wolf Warrior but doesn’t like the official propaganda stuff hence the poor showing of Sky Hunter. It is also cosmospolitan and open to outside trends and ideas. I don’t we would ever have a chini film top our box office. But Cheen had two Bollywood flicks — Dangal last year, Secret Superstar this year — do just that.

The Cheen we face today is a mix of the closed and open. Both authoritarian and free market. Nationalistic and cosmospolitan at the same time. It is a dictatorship on top of a society that is flexible and open to outside trends and ideas.

As such, it is far more harder to deal with than an USSR or North Korea.

Singha wrote:very good production values and full govt support with some gear, just like usaf/usn supports hollywood psyops esp the carriers / B52 / f22

The most they can fight is on the camera. If and when they face the Indian armed forces (or any battle hardened force that doesnt do its fighting on 70mm), they will be found wanting very badly.

This is just one more example of the Chinese being crude and idiotic. Could have accomplished so much if they made the right noises and acted dharmic but them being the yellow Pakis, are going to have their noses rubbed in sand before too long.

Chandragupta wrote: This is just one more example of the Chinese being crude and idiotic. Could have accomplished so much if they made the right noises and acted dharmic but them being the yellow Pakis, are going to have their noses rubbed in sand before too long.

Nope, if they were yellow pakis then our problem with them would be easily solved. Someone would crush them. Or would have crushed them any time in the past four decades of their rise had they been on the warpath like the pakis.

But unlike the Pakis and their martial race meme, the chinis are not delusional about their ability to fight beyond the 70MM film of a blockbuster. They haven’t fought a hot war in forty years (1978 Vietnam) and after all the bluster at Doklam don’t look like they would be fighting one any time soon — if it were up to them.

The question whether we or anyone else is willing to go on the offense on them over the gray zone. If not, they will stay in the gray zone and overwhelm those areas with stuff from their industrial and financial base during times of peace.

Cheen can’t fight but its game is predicated on NOT fighting. Exactly the opposite of pakis. Treating them like Pakis is a detrimental strategy to our future as great power.

We can sit around and simply outgrow the Pakis to make them irrelevent. We can’t do that with Cheen. We need shed our own dharmic and Gandhian nature to instigate war with the chinis to derail them.

X-posting from Maldives Thread. Nice piece of analysis from Observer Research Foundation.

http://www.orfonline.org/research/the-g ... abian-sea/

The game of chicken in the Arabian Sea

Abhijit Singh
Abhijnan Rej

In order to stall an Operation Cactus redux, Beijing would have had to signal India that it has the muscle to push Indian forces out of the Maldives if it so chooses

The ongoing crisis in the Maldives has acquired a particularly serious dimension over the past week. In that time, several reports have emerged suggesting China may be directly backing Abdulla Yameen’s decision to impose—and extend—the emergency in the small island state. These reports suggest that China has implicitly promised support to Yameen in the event that India moves to forcibly change the political status quo there. Several outlets have reported Chinese naval activity in the eastern Indian Ocean earlier this month, ostensibly to signal to India that the People’s Republic will not remain a disinterested spectator in the ongoing imbroglio in the Maldives. They suggest a chronology that is deeply disturbing, and potentially of serious consequence to the troubled India-China relationship. Coming, as it does, six months since the end of the Doklam standoff, any potential Chinese show of force in the Indian Ocean also stands to upturn India’s position as the pre-eminent power in that maritime space, as well as undo the diplomatic gains from India’s resoluteness during that crisis.

This much is known as a fact: Earlier this month, a Chinese naval surface action group (SAG) of three ships entered the eastern Indian Ocean through the Sunda Straits—thousands of nautical miles away from the waters of South Asian littorals—and having made their presence known, exited the area into the South China Sea. One of these ships was a Type 071 transport vessel which is used to land troops for an amphibious assault—of the kind one would need to land Chinese marines in event of an Indian military intervention in the Maldives, for example. The last time this Yuzhao-class ship made its presence known in the waters of the Indian Ocean was in early 2014, again entering those waters through the Sunda Straits. The 2014 People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) exercise caused an international furore, with a US government report noting that the SAG was meant to signal to India that China could, at will, enter and exit a maritime theatre long considered its exclusive preserve. Notably, since then, China has desisted from deploying the amphibian in operational exercises in the eastern Indian Ocean.


The question then is about the timing and intent of the SAG deployment this time around. To wit, was this simply a pre-planned PLAN exercise, as some have suggested? Or was it related to the ongoing crisis in the Maldives? While there is no definitive way of answering this question, several facts suggest that this was indeed the latter. To begin with, the timing: it is quite possible that Yameen’s decision to impose the emergency in the Maldives was based on his impression that the tides were not favourable to him, and that the Mohamed Nasheed-led opposition was about to depose him, potentially with Indian support (do recall that the Maldives has been in New Delhi’s radar since Yameen ramrodded a China-Maldives free trade agreement through the parliament a few months ago). In that case, it is likely that he would have consulted Beijing on the future course of action. In turn, China may have deduced that the opportune moment for an Indian intervention in the Maldives—following the Operation Cactus playbook of 1988—would have been right around the time Yameen would set his counter-plan into motion. In order to stall an Operation Cactus redux, Beijing would have had to signal India that it has the muscle to push Indian forces out of the Maldives if it so chooses.

The alternative—that the SAG deployment earlier this month was a benign exercise—does not hold water, for the simple fact that absent any potential Indian show of force in the region, Beijing does not have the appetite to provoke it months after the Doklam standoff. Between the US President Donald Trump’s increasingly bellicose stance towards China—witness the new US military strategy that bluntly describes China as a military threat—and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s ambitious international outreach to hard-sell the Belt and Road Initiative, Chinese strategic calculus would suggest that Beijing would overtly signal its military might only when its immediate interests are directly threatened. In case of Yameen’s Maldives, China had the right incentive to do so.

But why would China choose to signal that it is not averse to a power-play with India over the Maldives from thousands of miles away? Would it not have been more effective for it to, say, directly dock a flotilla off the coast of Maldives? Again, the answer comes from studying Chinese naval behaviour over the past few years carefully. China has pioneered what Western experts call “grey zone coercion”: a strategy by which China seeks to meet its strategic objective without crossing its adversary’s threshold for conventional military retaliation. By choosing to message its resolve to India from a distance, Beijing ensured that India would not be provoked militarily and yet be compelled to take into account the strategic signal emanating from the east.

What then are India’s options? First, New Delhi must continue to keep up a robust presence in the Arabian Sea, to let Beijing know that regardless of the PLAN’s show of strength, India is unprepared to cede its primacy in its maritime neighbourhood. The Indian Navy must also be allowed to expand its presence operations in the South China Sea, long considered a Chinese preserve. China’s vulnerabilities in its near-seas must be taken advantage of by Indian naval planners. To counter PLAN power-projection in the Indian Ocean, the Indian Navy would need to raise the tempo of operations in littoral-South-East Asia, where Beijing cannot prove a territorial violation and yet feel the pinch of a perceived violation in its sphere of maritime influence.

Most importantly, India must have an alternative plan ready for the Maldives, just in case naval posturing does not beget an optimal solution. This does not have to involve boots on the ground. The Indian Navy must be prepared for a sustained presence around the island state, even as New Delhi ratchets up the diplomatic heat to resolve the political impasse. In the game of brinkmanship afoot in the Indian Ocean littorals, India must not be the first one to blink.

Contrived argument, the Chinese would be worse than reckless to take a naval fight to India's western seaboard, including with the Liaoning and their noisy subs. That would be handing over the Chinese head to India on a platter.

It's oversimplifying things to say they were looking for a "naval fight". That's not what the article is implying either.

The fact remains that a Chinese flotilla stuck its neck out with an amphibious assault vessel beyond the Sunda Strait for the first time since 2014. Yes, they promptly turned tail and went back, but the appearance was timed to coincide with Yameen's putsch, which the Chinese thought may provoke an Operation Cactus Redux. An amphibious assault ship has specific connotations: the willingness and capacity to put boots on the ground and control territory by force. Very different from prowling subs.

Could they actually have made it all the way to the Maldives and landed troops before being interdicted by our navy? Not a chance. If India had committed itself to plant another Cactus, the PLAN flotilla would not have stopped us.

The optics are what matters, both within the Maldives and across the Indo-Pacific region. The Chinese have invested heavily in media, governmental and stink-tank mouthpieces to spin things according to their chosen narrative. Continued Indian inaction on the Maldives is being spun by China as a sign that we were deterred by their "show of force", such as it was; hence, we're not a sufficiently reliable or courageous partner for anyone in ASEAN or our near-abroad, we are not a capable counterweight to China despite any notions that ASEAN leaders may be entertaining after the Republic Day invite; indeed, we are easily cowed by even the hint of Chinese willingness to exercise their military muscle. This narrative has the added benefit (to China) of giving Yameen a shot in the arm and boosting his confidence to carry on with the suppression of democracy. We are left appealing to the rationality of China's intended audience in the hope that they will understand the Chinese gesture as a bluff, lacking any realistic military credibility. And as often said, it takes an order of magnitude more effort to rebut BS than to produce it.

Finally, the gesture represents a sort of reverse-Doklam in strategic terms. In Doklam, India seized the initiative and confronted China on foreign soil. They had to pull back and save face as best they could. This time China set the agenda, coordinating its own show of strength with Yameen's grab for power, and hoping to disadvantage India in similar terms: either force our hand to intervene militarily in the Maldives, leading to international condemnation, or sit still and appear intimidated (in the eyes of some) by the Chinese flotilla.

Well played, and illustrates why we need to engage in more Doklam-type confrontations and gestures at times and places of our choosing to regain the initiative (hence the narrative).

Rudradev wrote:It's oversimplifying things to say they were looking for a "naval fight". That's not what the article is implying either.

...
he gesture represents a sort of reverse-Doklam in strategic terms. In Doklam, India seized the initiative and confronted China on foreign soil. They had to pull back and save face as best they could. This time China set the agenda, coordinating its own show of strength with Yameen's grab for power, and hoping to disadvantage India in similar terms: either force our hand to intervene militarily in the Maldives, leading to international condemnation, or sit still and appear intimidated (in the eyes of some) by the Chinese flotilla.

Well played, and illustrates why we need to engage in more Doklam-type confrontations and gestures at times and places of our choosing to regain the initiative (hence the narrative).

So how do we assign responsibility for (a) either why we actually failed to confront the Chinese or (b) why the optics worked against us or (c) any other reason. Or assign paths going forward.

We've been saying all along what a boss combo Modiji/NSA/ et all are. How about walking back the cat and examining how our leaders could do better?

Well played, and illustrates why we need to engage in more Doklam-type confrontations and gestures at times and places of our choosing to regain the initiative (hence the narrative).

Sorry, Saar. It can’t be just gestures like Doklam. That particular chini open invitation for a beating was sadly declined by us. We could and should have used that occasion to annihilate them across the entire front since we hold the preponderance of force on the whole border.

In exchange for not building the last few meters of a road, the chinis are allowed to openly occupy the rest of the Doklam Plateau nominally in dispute with Bhutan.

No more gestures. Real force must be taken.

We need to GO to war in order to fight a mercantile nation that gains geo-political space when there is no war.

The Chinese came out of Sunda strait? Wow. The Pakis have taught the Chinese well. They were on a soosai mission - they were not planning to go back if they got as far as the Maldives. Most ships do not have the range for a two way from Hainan to the Maldives & back via Sunda without a stopover. Or a sitting duck supply ship. And stopover where? Please check this thread in the mil forum
And why Sunda? Why not Malacca? Chinese version of dhoti shiver?

Long Distance Chinese Navy Deployment - analysis

India, China hold talks ahead of SCO summit - Atul Aneja, The Hindu

Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale has held across-the-board talks with top Chinese officials on advancing ties between India and China, which have encountered several points of friction.

Mr. Gokhale’s visit is also seen as part of preparations for talks between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping at the June summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in the Chinese coastal city of Qingdao. The Foreign Secretary met Politburo member and State Councilor Yang Jiechi {former Foreign Minister and currently the Chinese Special Representative for border talks with us}, China’s top foreign policy official, as well as Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Vice-Foreign Minister Mr. Kong Xuanyou.

Last year, Prime Minister Modi and President Xi met in Xiamen on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in September to revive ties that had been hit by the Doklam border crisis. As a follow-up to these talks, Mr. Yi and Mr. Yang visited New Delhi in December.

“During the consultations, the two sides reviewed recent developments in bilateral relations, including high-level exchanges, and discussed the agenda for bilateral engagement in the coming months,” an Indian Embassy press statement said.

India’s concerns regarding China’s growing influence in the Indian Ocean have been rising, and have peaked after the pro-China President of Maldives Abdulla Yameen declared a state of Emergency on February 5 in the island nation.

Without making any specific reference to the Maldives, the statement said the “two sides also exchanged views on regional and international issues of common interest”.

Building convergence

The statement noted the necessity of building on “convergences” between the two countries. It stressed that Beijing and New Delhi should “address differences on the basis of mutual respect and sensitivity to each other’s concerns, interests and aspirations”.

In the past, Indian officials have pointed to the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which passes through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) as an infringement of India’s sovereignty.

China’s decision to come in the way of a UN ban on Masood Azhar, head of the Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM), and Beijing’s objections to India’s entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group emerged as additional points of abrasion in ties.

Interesting analysis from Yusuf DFI
Quad needs both economic & military plan for Indo-Pacific

Exercise Malabar provides the template for maritime cooperation between the Quad with focus on anti- submarine warfare, antipiracy operations, sea interdiction, humanitarian and disaster relief and joint patrolling, which India has been non-committal about so far. Assigning areas of responsibility will allow better allocation of naval assets.

India will be responsible for the security of the Indian Ocean which it considers as its primary area of interest. The new US national security strategy states that it supports India’s leadership role in the security of the Indian Ocean and throughout the broader region This will allow the US which has major presence in the IOR to allocate more naval assets in the Pacific Ocean and the South China Sea.

This will help India as it will force the Chinese Navy to allocate more resources in that region than expand its footprint in the Indian Ocean.

China sets stage for Xi to stay in office indefinitely - Reuters

Exactly as we predicted here in the days leading up to the 19th Congress.

China's ruling Communist Party on Sunday set the stage for President Xi Jinping to stay in office indefinitely, with a proposal to remove a constitutional clause limiting presidential service to just two terms in office.

Xi, 64, is currently required by the country's constitution to step down as president after two five-year terms. Nearing the end of his first term, he will be formally elected to a second at the annual meeting of China's largely rubber-stamp parliament opening on March 5.

There is no limit on his tenure as the party and military chief, though a maximum 10-year term is the norm. He began his second term as head of the party and military in October at the end of a once-every-five-years party congress.

The announcement, carried by state news agency Xinhua, gave few details. It said the proposal had been made by the party's Central Committee, the largest of its elite ruling bodies. The proposal also covers the vice president position.

"The Communist Party of China Central Committee proposed to remove the expression that the President and Vice-President of the People's Republic of China 'shall serve no more than two consecutive terms' from the country's Constitution," Xinhua said.

The Central Committee also proposed inserting "Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era" into the constitution, Xinhua said in a separate report, referring to Xi's guiding political thought that is already in the arguably more important Communist Party constitution.

Constitutional reform needs to be approved by parliament. That is stacked with members chosen for their loyalty to the party, meaning the reform will not be blocked.

There has been persistent speculation that Xi wants to stay on in office past the customary two five-year terms.

One of his closest political allies, former top graft buster Wang Qishan, stepped down from the party's Standing Committee - the seven-man body that runs China - in October.

Aged 69, Wang had reached the age at which top officials tend to retire. But he has been chosen as a parliament delegate this year and is likely to become vice president, sources with ties to the leadership and diplomats say.

The move is significant because if Wang does not retire, that could set a precedent for Xi to stay on in power after he completes the traditional two terms in office.

However, the role of party chief is more senior than that of president. At some point Xi could be given a party position that also enables him to stay on as long as he likes.

^This can go either way, but my feeling is that it is a lucky break for India. Better a single egomaniac having an extended rule (from our perspective), than a hungry meritocracy-driven competitive selection battle for succession.

He is positioning himself as the lee yuan kew of china
Bad thing for india is he is weeding out a lot of corrupt elites
More the corruption at higher levels there better for india

^I don't think corruption levels are actually going down, in fact with a dictator in place cronyism is bound to develop. The anti-corruption operation is a cover to get people opposed to him out of the way and his own people in. Not sure that it prevents actual corruption.

Corruption in China is up as per China watchers. In the past the various factions used to get the cut. Now everything is a tribute to the supreme leader.

Gotta give it to the Chinese overlords for their class in fake Australian videos on ChinPak and gOBOR etc...
But what took the classy cake was the CCTV New Year’s Gala - oh boy not only is China not colonial, but also not racist like the previous European Whites. You see they are very different - they celebrate Africa because Africa loves their new overload China - read and enjoy!

The segment began with a dance routine to the Shakira song “Waka Waka (This Time for Africa)," then featured an African woman who asks the show's host to pretend to be her husband so her mother does not set her up on a blind date. The mother, played by Chinese actress Lou Naiming, then enters the scene, accompanied by an actor in a monkey costume.

After the host introduces his Chinese wife, the mother says she cannot be angry about the ruse because of the strong bond between Chinese people and African people. “I love Chinese people! I love China,” the mother says

To hear an African perspective on this video and issue:




China Uncensored’s unique views on such superior Middle Kingdom human behavior:



It is but a reasonable conclusion under the mighty boot of XI Gin Peg that all this world, but especially the lowly Africans, would love Chinese People!

There needs to be a BENIS thread Chinese iStyle for this...
Happy Lunar New Year you splittists!

Okay maybe Justin in kurta wasn't that bad.

Pulikeshi wrote: There needs to be a BENIS thread Chinese iStyle for this...
Happy Lunar New Year you splittists!

There is ... sort of..
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7025&start=40

China has been unable to make inroads into Africa. For the much publicized BRI Forum last May, only two African Heads of State attended, those of Kenya & Ethiopia. So, they have to resort to all these 'Africans love China' gimmickry. The Chinese are very funny and they don't know it!

China's ocean observatory in Maldives sparks fresh security concerns - Sachin Parashar, ToI

A Joint Ocean Observation Station which China is looking to establish in the Maldives could prove to be another security challenge for the Indian government with the Maldivian opposition leaders claiming that the observatory will also have a military application with provision even for a submarine base.

The observatory location in Makunudhoo, the westernmost atoll in the north (not far from India), will allow the Chinese a vantage point of an important Indian Ocean shipping route through which many merchant and other ships pass, said political sources in Male. It will be uncomfortably close to Indian waters and test red lines with regard to ties with Maldives.

Indian officials confirmed that an official agreement titled Protocol on Establishment of Joint Ocean Observation Station between China and the Maldives was finalised last year around the time the countries also controversially signed a Free Trade Agreement (FTA). They, however, said they'll have to check the specifics of the agreement before offering a comment.

With both China and Maldives sharing few details of the project though, a leader of the main opposition MDP party said the challenge for India is to ensure that the observation station doesn’t turn out to be another significant addition to Beijing's alleged 'String of Pearls' encirclement of India and one that undercuts India's traditional security ties with Maldives.

The problem for India is that the observatory sounds worryingly similar to the one which Beijing announced for South China Sea (SCS) last year. The SCS observatory is meant to signify to the world, not least to the US, Chinese control of SCS waters.

Strategic affairs expert Brahma Chellaney said India should treat the Maldives as a red line issue and that it should warn the Maldivian and Chinese governments that it will not brook such an ocean observation center.

The Maldives crisis, however, does not offer easy choices for India and any move to lean too hard on the current government can further destablise the situation and increase the possibilty of civil unrest. The international community it keenly looking at India's response to Maldives and the China card in its backyard. So far India has insisted President Abdulla Yameen restore democratic functioning but side stepped urgings that it should intervene militarily.

"The underwater ocean observation center in the South China Sea will be dual purpose, with civilian and military applications. China’s supposed plan to build such a center in the Maldives would effectively open a Chinese maritime front against India, in the same quiet way that China opened a Himalayan front against India in the 1950s," said Chellaney.

Sources here [New Delhi] said that India at some stage, like it did with the FTA, will have to seek a clarification from Male as to what the observatory was all about. Former Maldives President Mohamed Nasheed told TOI in an interview last month that China had already acquired 17 islands in the Maldives and that there was not enough clarity about Chinese activities on these islands.

For the past couple of years, reports that China is looking to build a port in the southern part of the country - in Laamu atoll – have had Maldives agog. While the Abdulla Yameen government has denied it, it hasn’t helped the government’s cause that people from the Gadhoo island (Laamu atoll) have been evacuated and the Chinese have been found building roads in that region. As TOI had pointed in an earlier report too, this island sits at the entrance to the one-and-a-half degree channel which is a major international shipping passage that crosses the Maldives.

Yameen last week extended Emergency in the Maldives paying little regard to India’s call for restoration of the democratic process or to even his own prosecutor general who described the extension as against the Constitution.

Strategically placed next to some of the most important shipping lanes in the world, the Maldives considers itself instrumental in facilitating China's OBOR in the Indian Ocean region. For India though, Chinese investments and projects are marked by a lack of transparency and commercial loans which come at concessional rate but which is offset by the inflated cost of projects.

"All major procurements contracted to Chinese companies are at 2-3 times the actual cost. There’s no disclosure of sovereign guarantees given by Yameen to commercial loans given by Chinese banks," said an opposition leader, adding that islands were leased to China for a fraction of estimated value. A case in point is the strategically located Feydhoo island which was leased for only $ 4 million.

"Most Chinese projects have not undergone proper environment impact or viability assessment. There has been no disclosure of the actual terms of contracts," said the leader.

There's some mystery about the Chinese projects and labourers. They are not seen in entire stretch of CPEC or dredging the SCS shoals etc, but the physical infrastructure is seen only after some satellite pictures are taken.

How do they manage such feat of secrecy? How are they fed, how do they manage water and rest etc., For example the Nepal police academy was built in two years. They brought in bricks and mortar in what form, from where and how?

China launches propaganda push for Xi after social media criticism - Reuters

China's plan for President Xi Jinping to remain in office indefinitely has sparked social media opposition, drawing comparisons to North Korea's ruling dynasty and charges of creating a dictator by a Hong Kong pro-democracy activist.

The social media reaction late on Sunday quickly saw China swing into a concerted propaganda push by Monday, blocking some articles and publishing pieces praising the party.

The ruling Communist Party on Sunday proposed to remove a constitutional clause limiting presidential service to just two terms in office, meaning Mr. Xi, who also heads the party and the military, might never have to retire.

The proposal, which will be passed by delegates loyal to the party at next month's annual meeting of China's largely rubber stamp parliament, is part of a package of amendments to the country's constitution.

It will also add Mr. Xi's political thought to the constitution, already added to the party constitution last year, and set a legal framework for a super anti-corruption superbody, as well as more broadly strengthen the party's tight grip on power.

But it seems the party will have its work cut out trying to convince some in China, where Mr. Xi is actually very popular thanks in part to his war on graft, that the move will not end up giving Mr. Xi too much power.

“Argh, we're going to become North Korea,” wrote one Weibo user, where the Kim dynasty has ruled since the late 1940s. Kim Il Sung founded North Korea in 1948 and his family has ruled it ever since.

“We're following the example of our neighbour,' wrote another user.

The comments were removed late on Sunday evening after Weibo, China's answer to Twitter, began blocking the search term "two term limit".

Widely read state-run newspaper the Global Times, in an editorial carried online late Sunday and published on Monday, said the change did not mean the President will stay in office for ever, though it did not offer much explanation.

“Since reform and opening up, China, led by the Communist Party, has successfully resolved and will continue to effectively resolve the issue of party and national leadership replacement in a law-abiding and orderly manner,” it said, referring to landmark economic reforms that begun four decades ago.

The party's official People's Daily reprinted a long article by Xinhua news agency saying most people supported the constitutional amendments, quoting a variety of people proffering support.

“The broad part of officials and the masses say that they hoped this constitutional reform is passed,” it wrote.

The WeChat account of the People's Daily, after initially posting a flurry of positive comments under its article, then disabled the comments section completely late on Sunday. It was back again by Monday, complete with remarks lauding the party.

The overseas edition of the same paper's WeChat account removed entirely an article focusing on the term limits, replacing it with the lengthy Xinhua report summing up all the amendment proposals.

In one confusing moment for many Chinese, Xinhua initially only reported the news in English.

The decision has also unsettled some in the Chinese territory of Hong Kong, where authorities have been trying to rein in a pro-democracy movement.

“This move, which would allow for a single individual to amass and accumulate political power, means that China would again have a dictator as her head of state - Xi Jinping,” said Joshua Wong, one of the movement's leaders.

“The law may exist in China in form, but this just proves that the Chinese law exists to serve the individual and the party's purposes.”

China is likely though to see any such criticism as a plot against the party.

“Every time China deliberates on reforms and key decisions, effect on public opinion is worth pondering,” the Global Times wrote. “Misinformation and external forces' meddling will affect public opinion in China.”