Bharat Rakshak

RajeshA wrote:
Their intentions are clear on Dalai Lama, Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Gilgit-Baltistan, Nepal, Chittagong, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Maldives, Indian Markets, Indian Raw Materials, India's tilt towards USA. Which carrots are you willing to offer, if you could? What makes you think, they'll be satisfied, if you did?

We need psy ops carrots on some these items. Can we think of what and how.

Acharya wrote:

RajeshA wrote:
Their intentions are clear on Dalai Lama, Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Gilgit-Baltistan, Nepal, Chittagong, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Maldives, Indian Markets, Indian Raw Materials, India's tilt towards USA. Which carrots are you willing to offer, if you could? What makes you think, they'll be satisfied, if you did?

We need psy ops carrots on some these items. Can we think of what and how.

Psy-Op Carrots come in two varieties

1. Illusions, and
2. Promises

You can give them the illusion that they own something - somebody's loyalty, some basing rights, which in fact they don't. Possible if you are a good puppeteer and own all the puppets staging a drama and singing peons to China's Mandate of Heaven.

Promises can be helpful too and tell them all is possible but it will take time to prepare public opinion for the concessions. In the end you always defer it.

So whereas promises carrots are possible, illusions carrots are India's bane. In fact India has little in the form of illusions carrots that we could have given, but the Chinese make up for the small size of their eyes by keeping them always open. China has pushed so many Chinese prostitutes into Islamabad and Rawalpindi and who knows where else to keep an eye of all the biggy-wiggies there. They do what is necessary. So keeping illusions intact is difficult.

Besides China already owns most of what used to be ours, so what need of illusions there either - Nepal, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Gilgit-Baltistan, Burma, Chittagong. We hardly have much influence left there, it would be far fetched to speak of being puppeteers there.

RajeshA wrote:
Psy-Op Carrots come in two varieties

1. Illusions, and
2. Promises

These should turn into traps and danda in the long term for the Dragon. That is how we need to think.

The only carrot they want is neutrality in their cat fight with uncle.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 652918.cms

China has got Apple to rig the mapping application in its iPhone4 to show Arunachal Pradesh as part of its territory, according to local media reports. Apple has apparently accepted Beijing's diktat in view of its vast market potential.

This is contrary to what Google does -- which is to indicate it as disputed territory.

The time for carrots have long gone. India needs to threaten the core interests of China - esp Taiwan. Showing the stick and then holding it back is also a form of carrot.

naren wrote: Showing the stick and then holding it back is also a form of carrot.

This is what I was talking about.
It could be also a carrot now and what they have and in future make it a stick later. - Like Tibet.

ramana wrote:The only carrot they want is neutrality in their cat fight with uncle.

This is the biggest stick they will ever bow to.
But can India manage the US-India relations to play the big boys politics.

In my opinion, the biggest issue is not how to manage the Chinese threat. There's a lot of good ideas in this thread. It's all just talk if the GoI doesn't do anything about it. The biggest issue is how to influence the Government of India to actually do anything about the Chinese threat. You are relying on the GoI to respond to Chinese "moves", so to speak. Half the battle is lost already.

Any ideas?

TonyMontana wrote:In my opinion, the biggest issue is not how to manage the Chinese threat. There's a lot of good ideas in this thread. It's all just talk if the GoI doesn't do anything about it. The biggest issue is how to influence the Government of India to actually do anything about the Chinese threat. You are relying on the GoI to respond to Chinese "moves", so to speak. Half the battle is lost already.

Any ideas?

Please do not disturb our discussion here. There are more threads for you in other place.

Acharya wrote: Please do not disturb our discussion here. There are more threads for you in other place.

You underestimate Indian's ability to scroll down.

Maybe you would like some sort of ranking system for posters? Maybe certain types of posters are only allow to post in certain threads and interact with only certain types of posters?

Acharya wrote:But can India manage the US-India relations to play the big boys politics.

Very difficult. The probability of being "played" is higher than "managing". Our system is excessively addicted to "preservation of status quo" & "short termism".

--- self delete. point taken Hari ji ---

Trollahu Akbar.

We wouldn't even be discussing a cheeni threat but for the fact that our progression to middle income status in per capita terms by 2020 is now threatened. Its not as if Dilli is clamoring or scheming/plotting to recover areas lost to cheena.:


naren
Kindly don't feed trolls. Might bite a bit in the beginning but pls ignore. Trolls tend to like being confronted etc but get all frothy and upset at being ignored. Try and see.

Hari Seldon wrote: Kindly don't feed trolls.

I make a serious contributing post and get derailed right away, and I'm the troll?

I think China does a lot of things with bluff confidence and pretends as if it is going to have some long term benefit somewhere down the line. Since we will all be dead in the long term we will not be around to ROTFL at China's long term failures. So we go around imagining that the Chinese have go everything right and we Indians have got everything wrong. When we have to say that we are doing something right - we do it apologetically and diffidently as if it is sheer luck - like a coin was being tossed to choose whether you will be shot or strangulated and the coin landed on its edge.

China on the other hand lets off a loud fart in a silent prayer hall and claims that that is the Chinese version of silence. And we all nod our heads solemnly and say "Sun Tzu. Sun Tzu. Why didn't we think of farting? Anyhow Indian farts can never be so loud. India does not know how to fart"

China will be China. India will be India. India will never be China.

Let's move on. If Indians knew the benefits of bluff confidence my name would be Li Bingbing.

TonyMontana wrote:In my opinion, the biggest issue is not how to manage the Chinese threat. There's a lot of good ideas in this thread. It's all just talk if the GoI doesn't do anything about it. The biggest issue is how to influence the Government of India to actually do anything about the Chinese threat. You are relying on the GoI to respond to Chinese "moves", so to speak. Half the battle is lost already.

Any ideas?

Ah! don't worry, this is taken care by CCP/PLA themselves. If there is anyone who could be thanked *first* for the rise of India as military power it must go to China/CCP/PLA. Not only in the military power, China gave practical lesson in statecraft to the modern Indian leaders who thought wold had changed for good after WW2 and still reminding them to become world power as they were in 16th century.

Some notable milestones in morphing India as Great Power by influence/instigation/interference by CCP/PLA:

• Though India had a head start in Nuclear Science among Asian powers, only thanks to China's provocation, it started pursuing its weaponization programme to become Nuclear power.
• Thanks to China's aggression in Tibet and Tawang/Arunachal, India moved away from the idea of having mediocre military power to robust enough to separate Bangladesh from Pakistan and challenging enough for China.
• Thanks to China's naked proliferation of Nuclear arsenal and Missiles to Pakistan, India accelerated their Nuclear & Missile programme to the extent enough to taunt back as Indians are much ahead of China in missile development.
• Why go back far in the timeline, recently, only thanks to China's Cyber intrusion, we started our own Cyber offensive programme. Point to be noted that hackers associated with Pakistan were hacking Indian websites for years. And it should also to be noted that, other Cyber power could have intruded India Cyberspace before. But the accolade for influencing Indian Government to go offensive in Cyberspace should go only to China. Another point to be noted is, we are IT power for years but we never started the offensive programme before.

so relax, that specific job is taken care by mandarins of CCP/PLA.

Kanson wrote: so relax, that specific job is taken care by mandarins of CCP/PLA.

This is my point exactly. India has been reactive the whole time. So are you saying that if China didn't push India, she would not have nuclear weapons, a decent armed force and a crediable deterance? No offence meant, but to me India is always responding to crisis. The fact that when Indians get their sh!t together, for the lack of a better word, great things are done speaks volumes. Why is this not the case, always?

x posting from deterrence thread

iPhone4 shows Arunachal Pradesh in China

China has got Apple to rig the mapping application in its iPhone4 to show Arunachal Pradesh as part of its territory, according to local media reports. Apple has apparently accepted Beijing's diktat in view of its vast market potential.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 652918.cms

TonyMontana wrote:

Kanson wrote: so relax, that specific job is taken care by mandarins of CCP/PLA.

This is my point exactly. India has been reactive the whole time. So are you saying that if China didn't push India, she would not have nuclear weapons, a decent armed force and a crediable deterance? No offence meant, but to me India is always responding to crisis. The fact that when Indians get their sh!t together, for the lack of a better word, great things are done speaks volumes. Why is this not the case, always?

That depends upon what is considered as greatness by their respective people.

>>No offence meant, but to me India is always responding to crisis.

There is no offence as everyone is also responding to crisis.

TonyMontana wrote:

Kanson wrote: so relax, that specific job is taken care by mandarins of CCP/PLA.

This is my point exactly. India has been reactive the whole time. So are you saying that if China didn't push India, she would not have nuclear weapons, a decent armed force and a crediable deterance? No offence meant, but to me India is always responding to crisis. The fact that when Indians get their sh!t together, for the lack of a better word, great things are done speaks volumes. Why is this not the case, always?

When the Chinese react to their history and build a nation to defend against their deepest historic fears, it is called "being pro active"

When India tries to get its historic shit cleaned up it is called weakness (by Indians). And as India cleans up its shit and faces external threats - it reacts to them and its called "being reactive".

China has taken a different route from India. China has used "bluff confidence" to forcibly reduce its rate of population growth using a one child policy. I guess some Indians are jealous. Others call it a police state. You need fairly severe coercion to enforce such a policy. Indians are undecided whether China did a great Sun Tzu thing or whether it was stupid.

China put a lot of restrictions on its own population in terms of travel and freedom of speech to achieve the twin aims of curbing negative propaganda about itself of the sort that Indians never restrict themselves about, and it also helped building up some extremely developed urban areas by clearing out people and houses making a magical western style concrete jungle that Indians jealously admire. Both these tactics only helped the reputation of the Communist party as efficient and good. The Chinese believed it first - now Indians are also convinced. India on the other hand struggles with human rights and the right of the government to displace anyone from anywhere and struggles with building cities that do not cut down trees and is now struggling with "sustainable development" where every building must have solar water heating and rain water harvesting.

China built up a huge armed forces of decrepit, copied and third rate arms. But Indians must thank China for attacking in 1962. An India that came out of colonialism after WW2 imagined that there would be no more wars. But I think the Chinese were incompetent in 1962. They should have taken what they wanted and kept it. That would have ensured that Indians do not wring their hands forever. Now you Chinese are keeping Indians anxious all the time with your bluffs and feints It's like a Chinese opera on one side and and India woman dancing an Indian dance on the other side.

But the Chinese communist party were definitely far more efficient than India in areas where India needs to do better. Literacy, infrastructure and poverty.

How the Chinese oligarchy will handle 1.3 billion people with the problems that are coming up needs to be seen. The only method used as far as I can tell has been coercion and self delusion that all Chinese are like minded. Politically India has done better in allowing 1 billion people to have a voice. Even the protests and violence that appear in the media are part of that.

When it comes to war - its a different ball game. Won't talk about it now.

RajeshA wrote:Published on Sep 29, 2010
By Sachiko Sakamaki
Maehara Says China `Escalated' Tension Unnecessarily Over Boat Collision: Bloomberg

“It was regrettable as China’s response was escalated to the extreme,” Maehara, 48, said in a group interview today in Tokyo. “The people of the world have seen an aspect of China’s true nature.”

Yes, We Have!

Practically there is no difference between the behaviour of Islamist of Pakistan and CCP of China. Both crave for projecting their face. They couldn't withstand loss of face. Both thrive upon projecting a wrong history to their own people. If there is any moment in history which is not favourable to their stand it will be rejected or modified. CCP erased their history in the name of Cultural revolution. Islamist of Pakistan erased their history in the name of becoming religiously pure. Both created, religious code in case of Pak and party mechanism in the case of CCP in restricting their people to their one & only world view. Their MO is same. Their world view is same as they considered themselves as superior race/caliph and rest are to be ruled/bullied.

shiv wrote: China has taken a different route from India. China has used "bluff confidence" to forcibly reduce its rate of population growth using a one child policy. I guess some Indians are jealous. Others call it a police state. You need fairly severe coercion to enforce such a policy. Indians are undecided whether China did a great Sun Tzu thing or whether it was stupid.

Indeed. I, myself is a one child, and I do wonder what's gonna happen to my parents if I get run over or something. As I mentioned in another thread, the one child policy has no historical parallels. So your guess will be as good as mine on how it will turn out. Watch this space I guess.

shiv wrote: China put a lot of restrictions on its own population in terms of travel and freedom of speech to achieve the twin aims of curbing negative propaganda about itself of the sort that Indians never restrict themselves about, and it also helped building up some extremely developed urban areas by clearing out people and houses making a magical western style concrete jungle that Indians jealously admire. Both these tactics only helped the reputation of the Communist party as efficient and good. The Chinese believed it first - now Indians are also convinced.

I am convinced. China is the size of Europe. It's a huge place with a lot of people. Internal population movement has huge consequences. Think infrastructure, think depopulation and a thousand other reasons. The biggest fear of any Chinese is instability. Call it our historical baggage. But that's how we think. Anything that promotes stability is okay in my book. That being said, draconian oppression infact invites instability. So this is the high wire that I think the CCP is trying to balance. Good or bad job? You decided.

shiv wrote: China built up a huge armed forces of decrepit, copied and third rate arms.

We do what we can, with what we have.

shiv wrote: But Indians must thank China for attacking in 1962. An India that came out of colonialism after WW2 imagined that there would be no more wars. But I think the Chinese were incompetent in 1962. They should have taken what they wanted and kept it. That would have ensured that Indians do not wring their hands forever. Now you Chinese are keeping Indians anxious all the time with your bluffs and feints It's like a Chinese opera on one side and and India woman dancing an Indian dance on the other side.

1962 happened at a particular time for particular political reasons. I don't see those specific circumstances in the near future. How long ago is too long ago? Should we still be analyising the CCP with what they did in the Korean War? What about their actions in the 1930's?

shiv wrote: How the Chinese oligarchy will handle 1.3 billion people with the problems that are coming up needs to be seen. The only method used as far as I can tell has been coercion and self delusion that all Chinese are like minded. Politically India has done better in allowing 1 billion people to have a voice. Even the protests and violence that appear in the media are part of that.

All nations are a form of coercion. As for all Chinese are like minded, it's not a delusion, it's a national strategy. You can't be a nation if you don't share a sense of belonging. Thus the "Chinese People" thing. It's my opinion that India needs some sort of national unifying strategy. You can be different, but one people. Not different and different people.

ramana wrote:The only carrot they want is neutrality in their cat fight with uncle.

How do they wish to achieve that if they keep on pushing India to a point where it has no choice but to join the unkil bandwagon. Why are they not seeking to reach an accomodation if that is their goal.

It seems the goal of china is to be the sole power in Asia. If it is so then, we can play the same game with them that the TSP is playing with us. That they must have peace with us if they wish to be a competing powere with the US.

India had a lot of sticks with which to beat the PRC. We must use them.

But it is difficult with a section of the GOI. Actively bating for the PRC interests.(Environment / Telcome / HRD)

JMT

In the early 1960s, Mao was on the political sidelines and in semiseclusion. By 1962, however, he began an offensive to purify the party, having grown increasingly uneasy about what he believed were the creeping "capitalist" and antisocialist tendencies in the country. As a hardened veteran revolutionary who had overcome the severest adversities, Mao continued to believe that the material incentives that had been restored to the peasants and others were corrupting the masses and were counterrevolutionary.

To arrest the so-called capitalist trend, Mao launched the Socialist Education Movement (1962-65), in which the primary emphasis was on restoring ideological purity, reinfusing revolutionary fervor into the party and government bureaucracies, and intensifying class struggle.

How different it is from the concept of religiously pure Pakistan ? Not a surprise why these two are taller than & deeper than friends.

TonyMontana wrote: All nations are a form of coercion.

It never fails to surprise me how "power-centric" Chinese thinking can be: nation is a form of coercion and religion is a form of control (another common thought). Why not get rid of Chinese state then, why live with all that coercion?

TonyMontana wrote: All nations are a form of coercion. As for all Chinese are like minded, it's not a delusion, it's a national strategy. You can't be a nation if you don't share a sense of belonging. Thus the "Chinese People" thing. It's my opinion that India needs some sort of national unifying strategy. You can be different, but one people. Not different and different people.

TM,

Can you share the mechanism used by China to achieve this like mindedness?
Zhuang, Manchu, Hui, Miao, Uighur, Yi, Mongols, Tibetan, etc. all like minded with Han
That's right the rest are all minorities less than 20 million at most... but really?
No Shanghai vs Beijing, no North versus South, wow! sounds like there is a secret sauce...
So, why is there unrest around China? If there is such like mindedness?

Glad to know it is so easy to coerce all these folks including you!
Whatever you final intention to post on this forum. I congratulate you for educating others

"Thus the "Chinese People" thing. It's my opinion that India needs some sort of national unifying strategy. You can be different, but one people. Not different and different people."

India could use more unity on vital issues; the problem is there are different views, openly expressed on even matters affecting national sovereignty and security. That must be the price of being a democracy. As for the rest, Shashi Tharoor put it eloquently when he said that India is a country where everyone need not agree on everything, but that they should accept the ground rules on how they can disagree. That kind of Indian thoughtfulness would be beyond the ken of Beijing politbureau goons and their supportive drones, or even the majority of the Chinese.

naren wrote:The time for carrots have long gone. India needs to threaten the core interests of China - esp Taiwan. Showing the stick and then holding it back is also a form of carrot.

We need carrots made of iron! - orange painted iron rods!

Better yet a shooting match in the PLA mode. Under conditions of local superiority

Many have suggested that we play the Tibet or Taiwan or Xinjiang card with China. But none of them have, have listed out what playing these cards will entail.


Some have even suggested that we do not recognize Tibet as part of China. Let us assume that we do that, then after this what? Will our problems with China evaporate? Will China drop its claims on AP and vacate northern ladakh territories (I refuse to call them Akash Chin) that it has occupied? Do we have sufficient power (armed forces and economic strength) to compel the Chinese to leave Tibet and not return back into Tibet? Will china stop aiding pakistan with weapons and other strategic items?
For all of these questions the answer is no.


Let us take the example of Taiwan. Taiwan itself has not sought independence from China. Some have said Taiwan has been threatened by China so it has not sought independence. China has in the recent past 5-7 years become strong enough to threaten Taiwan. Before that it was not strong enough. Post the Cold-war ended, Taiwan could have declared independence. It did not. So for some 12 odd years, i.e. 1989-2001, when its power (militarily and economic) was greater than China it did nothing. Taiwan could have declared independence post Tienanmen incident in 1989. Taiwan did not. Supporting Taiwan will not provide us with anything. Will Taiwan support India, if India were to play the Tibet card? The answer is no. India will not be able to help Taiwan with men and/or material, in case the push becomes a shove.


There have been suggestions that we align with other countries like US or Japan or Vietnam. Barring Vietnam, the other two options are worse. US is a highly un-reliable partner. It is now trying to align India with itself because it is worried about China outpacing it. And it wants India's manpower and geopolitical capital just like the allies required it against Nazis and Nippon. Japan is a preaching country, which sitting under the umbrella of a nuclear power, see it fit to lecture and hector other countries about their nuclear weapons. Japan is in a mess with China due to its own reasons. Japan-China of East Asia will be like Pakistan-India of South Asia. One party is bigger in fact massively bigger than the other.


There is saying in hindi, which roughly translated means "The Dogs bark and the troop of elephants marches on regardless." (Kutaa Bhoka ta rahata hai, Hathiyon ki baarat chalte rahate hai). None of the actions of China, stapling Visas or AP map issue have in any way affected the reality. AP is a part of India. India has not given up its claim over northern ladakh. What we have to worry about is that we keep a capability to deter china from repeating a 1962 or doing a kargil on us. We will also need to have the capability to fight and win a two front war. US and Britain in world war showed that it is possible. But we need this capability on our own. Not by being dependent on others, especially not on US. If it is dependent on others, we will be at their mercy and will have to act after we have got their agreement to act.
I prize India's freedom and ability to act independent of anybody. Be it China, or US or Japan or Taiwan or any other tom-dick-and-harry country. And I hope there are others who prize the same and are not willing to sacrifice it on the altar of some deal or border agreement.

Ok here is the counter question. If changing policy on Tibet does not change the status quo or chinese position, what disadvantage would it bring to China or India?

As for Taiwan, Taiwan does not have problem with China . In fact it considers itself as part of China. Taiwan's problem is with usurpers CCCP regime which has evicted them. Once CCCP vanishes, raison d'etre would also disappear.

chaanakya wrote:Ok here is the counter question. If changing policy on Tibet does not change the status quo or chinese position, what disadvantage would it bring to China or India?

As for Taiwan, Taiwan does not have problem with China . In fact it considers itself as part of China. Taiwan's problem is with usurpers CCCP regime which has evicted them. Once CCCP vanishes, raison d'etre would also disappear.

About Taiwan, you have hit the nail right on its head.

For China the disadvantage would be, that it would have to focus more on Tibet and India rather than on Taiwan and East China Seas. Right now PLA is focusing on re-uniting Taiwan with the so called motherland. Also since India is unable to repeat a Bangladesh on China, w.r.t Tibet, it will not cause the Chinese so much worry now or in the medium term (i.e. 3-7 years). However if in the long run (7+ years), India is able to sustain double digit growth and China stumbles, then the tables would be turned.


Please note that I am not advocating that India should never ever play the Tibet card. Rather, we should play it when we are ready and capable of doing so. Right now we are not in a position to play it. And also right now the benefits that it will accrue will be negligible. It is a sad commentary that more than 40 years after 1962, we have been unable to turn the tables, but I hope that in the next 40 years we are able to do so.

SO can I assume that China would have to spend more man and material towards Tibet that it is already doing? That too without changing any stance on the part of China. So it would cost them economically and politically.
What India gains is that if it continues its two digit growth it would be in a position to challenge Chinese hold over Tibet. At that time this policy would help. Otherwise status quo with increased cost to China would continue. If we are not in a hurry to retake POK despite UN Resolutions , why would we hurry for Tibet. Nepal would come first.

However it would have other repercussions as well. Chinese would be forced to rethink its Water policy and India might be able to secure a better bargain in the short term.

China could ill-afford Indian hostility as economic impact would derail them as they spur to conquer the world. Witness Huawei and ZTE and security spectre. Chinese have little leverage with India is it continues with its policy of aggravation. Its over dependence on USA and frozen currency would work to its detriment only.

Since I don't see much trouble on military front , unless we bungle up badly, I would like to assess impact on other areas.

^^^ why would we 'take' nepal? or for that matter tibet?
both these countries should be independant and free as they have traditionally been with their own flourishing religions and cultures
[J&K remains an integral part of the Indian Union, including POK]

Christopher Sidor wrote:Many have suggested that we play the Tibet or Taiwan or Xinjiang card with China. But none of them have, have listed out what playing these cards will entail.


Some have even suggested that we do not recognize Tibet as part of China. Let us assume that we do that, then after this what? Will our problems with China evaporate? Will China drop its claims on AP and vacate northern ladakh territories (I refuse to call them Akash Chin) that it has occupied? Do we have sufficient power (armed forces and economic strength) to compel the Chinese to leave Tibet and not return back into Tibet? Will china stop aiding pakistan with weapons and other strategic items?
For all of these questions the answer is no.

No our problems with China would remain. They may even intensify. China will not drop its claims on Arunachal Pradesh either. We also do not have sufficient power to compel the Chinese to leave Tibet. China will continue to aid Pakistan with weapons and other strategic items, provided there is a Pakistan.

So the question is what does de-recognizing Tibet as part of China, or Tibetan merger with India, brings us?

Well consider two wrestlers, hands locked, each trying push the other out of the ring! If one is simply trying to hold his ground but not push back, he will inadvertently lose. He would have to exert an equal force to hold the other wrestler back. He would have to push back as well.

Why do we need to have the expectation to win back Tibet, right now? That depends on us becoming stronger than the Chinese, which can be a possibility some day, not necessarily today. So our pushing back is only for the purpose of holding our ground. That is the primary purpose. We don't want to be on the back-foot.

Some people say, it suffices that we have our military there. In the end they will hold the fort. We need not worry.

The question is why can't we strengthen our claims on Arunachal Pradesh politically? The legitimacy of our rights to Arunachal Pradesh are based on some British time treaties with Tibet, which China just does not recognize. Just having British treaties as our sole savior, is in my opinion, extremely insufficient.

The Chinese have based their claims on their lands upon their civilization. We are basing our claims on basis of dealings of our one-time occupiers - the British. Even the basis of legitimacy reeks of inequality.

Chinese say Arunachal Pradesh is disputed, so Google shows it as disputed, and Apple shows it as Chinese territory. So the logical answer is that we say whole Tibet is disputed, which means the whole of Greater Tibet would be shown in a different color on the maps.

India should go for a symbolic merger of Tibet into India, only then can we claim that Tibet is disputed. Why fight with our hands tied behind our backs? This has been my refrain in the Should HH The Dalai Lama be elected India's next President? Thread

Christopher Sidor wrote:Let us take the example of Taiwan. Taiwan itself has not sought independence from China. Some have said Taiwan has been threatened by China so it has not sought independence. China has in the recent past 5-7 years become strong enough to threaten Taiwan. Before that it was not strong enough. Post the Cold-war ended, Taiwan could have declared independence. It did not. So for some 12 odd years, i.e. 1989-2001, when its power (militarily and economic) was greater than China it did nothing. Taiwan could have declared independence post Tienanmen incident in 1989. Taiwan did not. Supporting Taiwan will not provide us with anything. Will Taiwan support India, if India were to play the Tibet card? The answer is no. India will not be able to help Taiwan with men and/or material, in case the push becomes a shove.

Most of the Taiwanese want either Independence or Status Quo. Those who want Status Quo want it just so as to not provoke China. They want it because of their fear of invasion or attack.

Let's consider a scenario, where Taiwan is a member of an anti-PRC security alliance (Asian Security Alliance, ASA) composed of an (independent) Japan, (independent) South Korea, Vietnam, India, Australia, Singapore and Indonesia. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, India, Vietnam are all nuclear powers with enough missiles pointed at PRC. The Alliance's Navy ships frequently visit Navy bases in Taiwan. Taiwan is a hub where ASA troops train together and coordinate their security. Taiwan is by DPP Party, and not the pro-Chinese KMT.

Do you think, that those who consider them as Status-Quoist would still not dare to declare Independence?

They surely can be persuaded to, and China cannot do a thing about it.

India should create bridges to both DPP and KMT but should favor DPP for obvious reasons.

Christopher Sidor wrote:There have been suggestions that we align with other countries like US or Japan or Vietnam. Barring Vietnam, the other two options are worse. US is a highly un-reliable partner. It is now trying to align India with itself because it is worried about China outpacing it. And it wants India's manpower and geopolitical capital just like the allies required it against Nazis and Nippon. Japan is a preaching country, which sitting under the umbrella of a nuclear power, see it fit to lecture and hector other countries about their nuclear weapons. Japan is in a mess with China due to its own reasons. Japan-China of East Asia will be like Pakistan-India of South Asia. One party is bigger in fact massively bigger than the other.

Let's not forget that 'Necessity is the mother of Invention'. Now that China is pissing off everybody in the region, the Asian countries would start feeling the necessity to look for strength both in numbers and in coordination.

USA is unreliable. That is a fact. I think Asian countries should build a security alliance with only Asian countries in it. USA should retain their security relationships with the various countries - Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc. but should stand outside the alliance, as a partner country. We can train together with the Americans, and if the situation gets difficult may be they might choose to come to our assistance. But the Asian countries should learn to stand politically and militarily independent of USA and coordinate amongst each other.

Another few sea and diplomatic skirmishes with China, and Japan would start singing a different tune, including on nukes.

Christopher Sidor wrote:There is saying in hindi, which roughly translated means "The Dogs bark and the troop of elephants marches on regardless." (Kutaa Bhoka ta rahata hai, Hathiyon ki baarat chalte rahate hai). None of the actions of China, stapling Visas or AP map issue have in any way affected the reality. AP is a part of India. India has not given up its claim over northern ladakh. What we have to worry about is that we keep a capability to deter china from repeating a 1962 or doing a kargil on us. We will also need to have the capability to fight and win a two front war. US and Britain in world war showed that it is possible. But we need this capability on our own. Not by being dependent on others, especially not on US. If it is dependent on others, we will be at their mercy and will have to act after we have got their agreement to act.
I prize India's freedom and ability to act independent of anybody. Be it China, or US or Japan or Taiwan or any other tom-dick-and-harry country. And I hope there are others who prize the same and are not willing to sacrifice it on the altar of some deal or border agreement.

I don't like the fortress mentality. When the enemy puts up a siege all around us and keeps on strengthening it every year, it is short-sighted to say, we have not lost anything - We have lost our strategic freedom.

• If we want to send our air force to Ayni base in Tajikistan, how do you suppose we should do it?
• If we want to tap into Russian Gas pipelines, how do you suppose we should do it?
• If we want to interject Chinese delivery of nukes and weaponry to Pakistan, how do you suppose we do it?
• If we want to stop Nepali Maoists from supporting Indian Maoists, despite an open border, how do we exert influence over them?
• If we want to avoid Indian ships from being harassed by Chinese Navy ships hosted at Marao, Maldives Navy Base, would protests be enough?
• If we want to stop Rajapakse's men slaughtering Tamils some day, how do you suppose we should confront a Sri Lanka, which has a Defense Agreement for Mutual Security with China?
• If we want to stop ever more areas of India to be shown as disputed on multiple maps in the world, how do we go about it?
• ...

Let's not kid ourselves. The siege is real. The loss is real. And we need to get out of it.

we seem to be missing a Russian angle in this analysis
The Russian Far East is also a prize up for grabs in Chinese eyes...

Lalmohan wrote:we seem to be missing a Russian angle in this analysis
The Russian Far East is also a prize up for grabs in Chinese eyes...

Russia would do well to import labor on a massive scale from some country/countries which does not cause integration problems like Islam, nor gives China a freer hand to expand in Russian Far East.

Indian immigration could save Russia from an otherwise inevitable takeover by the Chinese.

TonyMontana wrote: All nations are a form of coercion. As for all Chinese are like minded, it's not a delusion, it's a national strategy. You can't be a nation if you don't share a sense of belonging. Thus the "Chinese People" thing. It's my opinion that India needs some sort of national unifying strategy. You can be different, but one people. Not different and different people.

Thank you for stating your viewpoint so candidly. For one thing you are honest - even if I think you are - umm - shall I say "less exposed" to certain realities of existence in an absolutely free country. This is not meant to be an insult. I find your post utterly fascinating and it say a lot more about yourself than you probably meant to reveal.

You views of "One people" and "different people" are things that you have been taught about. They are set in your mind as the truth. You have seen nothing else and believe that to be true. China has done this to a lot of people. Like putting blinkers on and saying "This is the right path. Anything outside this path is wrong".

And as a result you see non uniformity of people and opinions as "non unifying".

So it is pure luck that there are a lot of uniform Han Chinese who are unified as "one people". By the same token it is just bad luck that there are only a few Eskimos. By the argument that "like minded people" and "one people" are needed for unification any nation with Eskimos cannot be a uniform, unified nation. Because they will always be different from non Eskimos. That is true for any nation with any minorities.

But then, use the same argument and you find that Tibetans are different, They are not one people with the Han Chinese. But China insists on including them as "one people" which is a lie of course. Then coercion is needed to make a nation. So you have been taught that all nations are some form of coercion (which is what you said).

So there you have your Chinese "national strategy": Unification as "one people" unless someone disagrees. Those who disagree will be coerced because all nations are some form of coercion.

For a person such as myself living in what appears to be a chaotically free society, what you describe about Chinese strategy and ideas are that of a rigid system of indoctrination with suppression of variation much like fundamentalist Islam. Have you ever considered looking at the religion on offer by your tallest and deepst friends the Pakistanis. It is exactly like that. In fact they are trying to give you Islam in Xinjiang - but the CCP won;t have any of it. "There only one God and that is the CCP"

"God says all people are the same. therefore you are all the same and must kowtow to that God to make the nation of Islam. If you disagree God says to chop off your head . All nations are coercion"


Replace "God" with the Chinese Communist Party and you have China.

I am certain that the communist party is on tenterhooks. They really have unified a whole lot of people with two or three simple lies. "You are one people. If you disagree you will be coerced to be one people". I now know why the CCP are probably worried abut the free Tibetans in India.

As an OT aside:


The more you see the world, the more you realise what you do not know. If you have not seen much of the world, you think you know a lot. The more you know, the more you see of how much you do not know. Your contact with the unknown increases. So if you take humans and expose them to a very narrow amount of information, and restrict their contact with what they do not know - they think they know a lot. This is what China has done to its people and this is what Islamism does too. The concept is clearly illustrated with the diagram below that shows how the more a person knows, the more his area of contact with the unknown and the more he realises that he does not know much. Only the least informed are sure of themselves.

Click on image. The yellow rectangle represents "all possible knowledge"

Christopher Sidor wrote: There is saying in hindi, which roughly translated means "The Dogs bark and the troop of elephants marches on regardless." (Kutaa Bhoka ta rahata hai, Hathiyon ki baarat chalte rahate hai). None of the actions of China, stapling Visas or AP map issue have in any way affected the reality. AP is a part of India. India has not given up its claim over northern ladakh. What we have to worry about is that we keep a capability to deter china from repeating a 1962 or doing a kargil on us. We will also need to have the capability to fight and win a two front war. US and Britain in world war showed that it is possible. But we need this capability on our own. Not by being dependent on others, especially not on US. If it is dependent on others, we will be at their mercy and will have to act after we have got their agreement to act.

I prize India's freedom and ability to act independent of anybody. Be it China, or US or Japan or Taiwan or any other tom-dick-and-harry country. And I hope there are others who prize the same and are not willing to sacrifice it on the altar of some deal or border agreement.

Well said.