Bharat Rakshak

Anti-Outsourcing Bill Stirs Fears In India, Philippines Check out the comments.

Anish,no "Marxist" leanings (whether Harpo,Groucho or Karl!),but sympathy for the impoverished Indian peasant who struggles to survive both class and caste inequalities.I am a "running dog of capitalism",not crony capitalism either .Encounters with babes,either from east or west (and one has not been biased here I assure you!) do not affect the political swing of my "pendulum",pun intended!
I put Indian interests first always and in the case of Russia,we have in the past (71) and as of now (ATV tech,Akulas,etc.),recd. considerable political and military support,which has allowed us to stand more solidly on our own feet,especially our strategic deterrent (ATV assistance).Contrast this with the US's numerous clauses for mil.eqpt. that impinge upon our independence.

Our stand on Iran,oil supplies and building a rail link to Afghanistan is in our own interests and is going to clash with those of the US and Israel too.Some deft diplomacy is required here.Contrast this with the US now wanting to hand over Afghanistan ,or its effective control to the Taliban (who cut of the noses of women),which is a tool of the ISI who will then control the booming drug trade worth at least $1B each year.This is the real prize of Afghanistan,its drug and mineral wealth.When you consider what damage the LTTE did with annual profits of $300M,imagine what the ISI/Pak will do with $1B! The US is an untrustworthy partner,from its track record.Watch how it will engineer another military coup in Pak,while pretending to support Zardari.All it wants from us is to be a servile lackey like Pak,and to be its catspaw against China,for which we do not need anyone to tell us about the chicanery of that entity.

PS:On my recent flight,I read a report about India supporting Iran on payments for oil as well as the plans for building the rail link to Afghanistan. Links with Teheran are vital to us in order to protect our national interests.Merely "business"as the Godfather would say.

US willing to work with India on missile shield
http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-new ... 99113.aspx

I have a doubt Chinese are trying to get India away from US by supporting India's closer links with Iran.

India needs to be alert on Iran: Reddy
http://www.hindustantimes.com/business- ... 99031.aspx

Why India needs to support desperately Iran? Are we desperately in need of their oil?

Govt suggests caution on Iran oil situation
http://business-standard.com/india/news ... /155602/on

India has long term relationship with Iran.

Vir Sanghvi had written many years ago about a conversation he had with PVNR in ealy 90s (when he was PM). He said Rao had remarked that US and China will encreasingly clash with each other at a global level, and that India should align with China in this battle.

TWIW.

I think that is important. One should side with its neighbor when a conflict happens between the neighbor and an outsider. Your neighbor is there to stay forever, but not the outsider. Just think over what Jaichand was thinking and the folly of his actions in the long term.

^^^^
This neighbor has illegally acquired Indian Territories. It continues to eye another Indian state. It continues to illegally occupy another nation since 1950, claiming it to be an "inalienable part of motherland."

America and China are both evil. Currently America is a lesser evil as compared to China.

Further there is just one statement by an individual. We have no idea on the context in which PVNR said what he said, that is if he actually had said it.

With the drastic demographic changes underway in massaland which will eventually peak sometime 20-30 years down the line and will have a significant impact on their economy, it is better we put in our best to somehow dislodge the CPC from power in China and do a USSR on them. Chinese respect power and when we support them 5-10 years from now when we truly will be a mini-super power then our support might galvanise Chinese mindset to look upon us an ally. Right now, with a communist China being the reality, I dont see it happening because a known devil (US) is better than an unknown angel (China).

China is not an evil as such, nor is the United states. Now when we look at their political class and the ideology of nations, the Chinese administration and the U.S administration are both threats to India. They have been doing things that hurt India in all possible manner. One is ruled by the Communist regime that has shown hatred towards anything thats not communist. The threat of China increases with Communism in China and reduces with weakening of communism in China.
Now how we treat the threat that exits from China. India must always be prepared for any eventuality from China. That never means we must be so scared of the Chinese military and their power, but we can do what we are at the same time taken care of our own defenses with regard to China. And to be prepared to give the Chinese military a befitting reply if they try any adventure. Now regarding the U.S we must ensure that the U.S goals are defeated as long as they are not in India's interest. Be it in our neighborhood or anywhere in the world. And we must also keep to improve relationship with the people of these two countries in all possible and positive ways.
If the U.S and China is going to war, we must just watch the fight while eating popcorn. Nothing else.

But before everything else, our main and primary objective before we can rest in peace is the elimination of Pakistan and recapturing all the territory lost back upto where Indian civilization existed to the west of us. To this one can expect opposition from both U.S and China. But it's in India's interest to see the destruction of Pakistan. That will reduce the power of U.S and China Vs India.

shyam wrote:I think that is important. One should side with its neighbor when a conflict happens between the neighbor and an outsider. Your neighbor is there to stay forever, but not the outsider. Just think over what Jaichand was thinking and the folly of his actions in the long term.

Saar the logic in reverse is equally valid.

The threat next door is far more serious than a threat from far. In case of a conflict between China and US, we should ensure the defeat of our stronger neighbor. The fight will anyway weaken the US and that would leave us stronger by default in the neighborhood.

JMT

uddu wrote:China is not an evil as such, nor is the United states. Now when we look at their political class and the ideology of nations, the Chinese administration and the U.S administration are both threats to India. They have been doing things that hurt India in all possible manner. One is ruled by the Communist regime that has shown hatred towards anything thats not communist. The threat of China increases with Communism in China and reduces with weakening of communism in China.
Now how we treat the threat that exits from China. India must always be prepared for any eventuality from China. That never means we must be so scared of the Chinese military and their power, but we can do what we are at the same time taken care of our own defenses with regard to China. And to be prepared to give the Chinese military a befitting reply if they try any adventure. Now regarding the U.S we must ensure that the U.S goals are defeated as long as they are not in India's interest. Be it in our neighborhood or anywhere in the world. And we must also keep to improve relationship with the people of these two countries in all possible and positive ways.
If the U.S and China is going to war, we must just watch the fight while eating popcorn. Nothing else.

But before everything else, our main and primary objective before we can rest in peace is the elimination of Pakistan and recapturing all the territory lost back upto where Indian civilization existed to the west of us. To this one can expect opposition from both U.S and China. But it's in India's interest to see the destruction of Pakistan. That will reduce the power of U.S and China Vs India.

I agree with your views except that there is NO guarantee that a democratic China will not go to war with us. If you look at Bangladesh which is a democratic country, you will notice that when Awami League is in power it is more amenable towards us compared to Khalida's government. Bhutto was elected by Pakistani people but he said that 'Pakistanis will eat grass if necessary but we will have a nuclear bomb' (to be used against us). I am not sure who said it (I think it was Bhutto) but someone from Pakistan said that 'we will make India suffer from thousand cuts' which they are doing for decades. If Imran Khan is 'elected' by Pakistani people in future, there is NO guarantee that Pakistani hate for us will be reduced!

CSidor and pankajs,

Both of you are using the exact same logic Jaichand used. He felt that the neighboring Prithviraj Chauhan was bigger threat to him than the outsider Ghori.

Of course, there will be wars between neighbors. Governments will change in neighboring countries and situations will change over a period of time for both good and bad. But, if you let a powerful outsider to defeat and occupy your neighbor, his next target will be YOU!!! This outsider will be more powerful after the war because, its original powerbase far away is fully intact and gets new resources to exploit.

If you expect American power to go down in another 20 to 30 years, and you help them to defeat China, they will occupy China and that will give them a new lifeline to remain the most powerful country in the world for next 500 years (similar to old mighty Britain). You will need unexpected events, like what WWII did to Britain, to shorten that.

For us, China is not the enemy, the communist party is. Looking at what the CCP is doing to PRC, we should only avoid a war with them, or in the worst case defend against any aggression by them. Ordinary Chinese will eventually take care of CCP.

shyam wrote:CSidor and pankajs,

Both of you are using the exact same logic Jaichand used. He felt that the neighboring Prithviraj Chauhan was bigger threat to him than the outsider Ghori.

Below is the excerpt from an interview with K Subrahmanyam
http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-part-two-an-interview-with-k-subrahmanyam/20110420.htm

Q:America can continue its pre-eminence only if it aligns strongly with India. Only then will it have access to man power, innovation, technology etc.

You are quite right. That is why the US needs India and India needs the US. What would be the Chinese reaction to this alliance?

China and the US are not going to fight with each other. It is a rivalry between the two for the top position in the world.

I have heard many people say, 'Why should we choose the Americans, why not the Chinese? After all, we have a 5,000-year-old relationship.'

So I tell them, 'Don't worry about yourself, but ask your son and grandson where they want to go to. China or the US? And you will have the answer!'

I would go a step further. Where would you be able to build a Balaji temple or a Meenakshi temple in China, which you can in the US?

Regarding China, it should be 'If you are not friendly to us, we will intensify our relationship with the US. We are prepared to balance our relationship with both of you. But if you are not going to be civil to us we will intensify our collaboration with them.'

Before I read his answer, I too was not convinced about the choice between US and China. It was the highlighted part that convinced me. That is the power of asking simple questions.

Let us assume that at the end of the battle for supremacy between US and China, whoever wins will then dominate and enslave India. So given our understanding of the world as it is now, who would we prefer to serve, assuming it is a fate we cannot avoid. Would we prefer a US dominated world or a China dominated world? My answer will be to opt for US domination. So I would root for a US victory in this battle for supremacy.

The best option for India would be to extract concessions from both with the promise to be neutral but alas the world does not work that way.

pankajs wrote:
Let us assume that at the end of the battle for supremacy between US and China, whoever wins will then dominate and enslave India. So given our understanding of the world as it is now, who would we prefer to serve, assuming it is a fate we cannot avoid. Would we prefer a US dominated world or a China dominated world? My answer will be to opt for US domination. So I would root for a US victory in this battle for supremacy.

The best option for India would be to extract concessions from both with the promise to be neutral but alas the world does not work that way.

India will be largest populated country in another 30-40 years. This will be a game changer and US and China could align against India. This assumption of whoever wins will then dominate and enslave India may not be valid.

Both US and China have kept their real intention on India still hidden. All the alliances in the last 30 years have been done to reduce the influence of India with other countries.

pankajs, I disagreed with KS garu on that reading. Its in the PRC and not China that you cant build a Meenakhsi temple, And that is because of the Communist party in power. That ideology will self destrct as its unnatural. And then shyam's logic comes in.

What makes us think China will be a good neighbour unlike PRC? 3-4 generations of Indians had to deal only with PRC and I see no reasn why Commie free China will be any better.

Acharya wrote: India will be largest populated country in another 30-40 years. This will be a game changer and US and China could align against India. This assumption of whoever wins will then dominate and enslave India may not be valid.

Both US and China have kept their real intention on India still hidden. All the alliances in the last 30 years have been done to reduce the influence of India with other countries.

The game will always be between the 1st and the 2nd power and the remaining powers will align with one or the other. Temporarily the powers that are contenders are US and China. Once we are in a position to challenge either, things will change again. In one of my earlier post I had stated that in this game for supremacy between US and China, if US is victorious it will then turn on India and the same holds true for China.

While you are correct about US and China trying to hobble us in the last 30 years, it was due to our non-aligned status. US, China and even USSR were suspicious about our motive at one time or the other. As the Americans have said 'You are either with us or against us' and that thinking was true for USSR too at one time. Everyone is suspicious of the non-aligned one, especially if it is a strategically located big country like ours. We simply cannot avoid the scrutiny and the consequences.

My reply was on the evolving situation as it is stands now. Between US and China, US is the lesser evil from our pov. The assumption on being 'dominated and enslaved' was to simplify the picture and help us identify the 'lesser evil'.

We can try being neutral (non-aligned) and try extracting concessions from both but it is a hard game to play. From China our expectation would be on the border settlement to our satisfaction and from the US it should be economic and technology related.

In 30-40 years we will be one amongst the top 2 world power. So US and China may very well join hands against us. Till we get catapulted into the hot seat we should build our economy, our infrastructure and our defenses utilizing whatever opportunities are presented to us by either party.

JMT

There is a difference between what K Subrahmanyam looks into the future and what PVNR sees in the future between US and PRC.

ramana wrote:pankajs, I disagreed with KS garu on that reading. Its in the PRC and not China that you cant build a Meenakhsi temple, And that is because of the Communist party in power. That ideology will self destrct as its unnatural. And then shyam's logic comes in.

I will have to read shyam's again to comment on it and both you and he may be right.

My point and KS garu's is related to the present geopolitical configuration that we have to deal with. I am with you on the ultimate destruction of the CPC ideology.

pankajs wrote:
The game will always be between the 1st and the 2nd power and the remaining powers will align with one or the other. Temporarily the powers that are contenders are US and China.

They will come together to go after India. That is geo politics. It is not what happens but what they have been planning for the last 40 years together.
They both see India as a natural world power who will become powerful in the future.

Israeli influence over the US:
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com ... tion-.html

Ancient Jewish scrolls found in North Afghanistan.

http://news.yahoo.com/ancient-jewish-sc ... 50424.html

Both China and the US have been problematic. It is not distance that should be the determining factor, but an assessment of long and short term intentions. It may well be that there is a short term advantage to good relations with the US and a long term advantage to good relations with China.

pankajs wrote: Q:America can continue its pre-eminence only if it aligns strongly with India. Only then will it have access to man power, innovation, technology etc.

You are quite right. That is why the US needs India and India needs the US. What would be the Chinese reaction to this alliance?

China and the US are not going to fight with each other. It is a rivalry between the two for the top position in the world.

I have heard many people say, 'Why should we choose the Americans, why not the Chinese? After all, we have a 5,000-year-old relationship.'

So I tell them, 'Don't worry about yourself, but ask your son and grandson where they want to go to. China or the US? And you will have the answer!'

I would go a step further. Where would you be able to build a Balaji temple or a Meenakshi temple in China, which you can in the US?

I don't think KS understood the nature of political control in the US, which is strictly enforced through assassinations, media control, vote rigging, monetary manipulation etc. If things continue the way they are going, one very much doubts that the US will be a particularly attractive place in 50 years' time.

The best option for India would be to extract concessions from both with the promise to be neutral but alas the world does not work that way.

It can work that way if you can strengthen your defenses to the point where you can impose unacceptable costs on any adversary. India does not have that capability, primarily due to the mental colonization of its elites.

Pranav wrote:Both China and the US have been problematic. It is not distance that should be the determining factor, but an assessment of long and short term intentions. It may well be that there is a short term advantage to good relations with the US and a long term advantage to good relations with China.

1. In the short term: We need to ask who is sitting on India's land and claims another whole state and we have fought a war with?
2. In the long term (Say 50 years as you have taken below): Given that India and China will be the worlds top 2 powers (Assumption: Economy roughly equals power), who would our strategic competitor be between China and US(Assumption: All other factor being equal between US and China)?

My answer to both the above question is China.

Pranav wrote:I don't think KS understood the nature of political control in the US, which is strictly enforced through assassinations, media control, vote rigging, monetary manipulation etc. If things continue the way they are going, one very much doubts that the US will be a particularly attractive place in 50 years' time.

In 50 years the world as we know now will have changed. US may become a China and China may become like the US currently is. That should not change our view of the challenges facing us now. If we slip on today's challenge, will there be any tomorrow to think about?

As things stand today, what would you say about China on the very same things like political control, media control, voting, monetary manipulation, etc?

Pranav wrote:

The best option for India would be to extract concessions from both with the promise to be neutral but alas the world does not work that way.

It can work that way if you can strengthen your defenses to the point where you can impose unacceptable costs on any adversary. India does not have that capability, primarily due to the mental colonization of its elites.

Agree. I have already elaborate on this in my previous post

In 30-40 years we will be one amongst the top 2 world power. So US and China may very well join hands against us. Till we get catapulted into the hot seat we should build our economy, our infrastructure and our defenses utilizing whatever opportunities are presented to us by either party.

pankajs wrote: As things stand today, what would you say about China on the very same things like political control, media control, voting, monetary manipulation, etc?

China may be worse, but everybody recognizes it. As regards the US, and some Indian policy makers, the problem is more insidious. "None are more enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."

pankajs wrote: 2. In the long term (Say 50 years as you have taken below): Given that India and China will be the worlds top 2 powers (Assumption: Economy roughly equals power), who would our strategic competitor be between China and US(Assumption: All other factor being equal between US and China)?

My answer to both the above question is China.

Who is a greater threat depends on intentions. The long-term aim of the western model is total control of the planet.

IMHO, if China does become the preeminent economic and military power then western model of past 500 plus years will break down. Western elites may try something drastic before that can happen.

However China will be limited by the lack of freedom and fairness. You can't sustain yourself as a major power on the back of an oppressed population. This may also become a limiting factor for western elites in the coming decades.

Pranav wrote:Who is a greater threat depends on intentions. The aim of the western model is total control of the planet.

China's aim is total domination of Asia. The moment they sensed US weakness, they became aggressive on the south china sea. In the last couple of years they have shifted their position on Kashmir from neutral to puki pasand. Not to mention anti-India push in Nepal, Bangladesh, Burma. So from our pov China is as bad as US if not more.

Pranav wrote:IMHO, if China does become the preeminent economic and military power then western model of past 500 plus years will break down. Western elites may try something drastic before that can happen.

As Acharya saar has pointed out a large population has its own logic. So if China and India do not disintegrate first, they will become the top dogs. It is only a question of time. US will be constrained with nukes in play.

What it will try of course is to weaken the countries from inside and encourage hostile powers on the outside. This will keep the countries from breaking out of their neighborhood. Look at the configuration of the neighborhood for both China and India.

US is lucky in this respect, it has two friendly neighbors and another hostile but insignificant one(Cuba). On the population front, the US has the option of a merger with both Canada and Mexico or at least a much more relaxed border control on the US-Mexico border.

All in all an interesting century ahead. We will have to be on our toes and guard against both but China is our immediate concern.

pankajs wrote:China's aim is total domination of Asia.

I would not agree with that. They have an exaggerated idea of what belongs to them (e.g. South China sea), and they are happy to create trouble for others, but they are essentially nationalists.

China Faces Demographic Shift as Population Ages
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-2 ... ideo-.html

Play Video
Jan. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Bloomberg's Margaret Conley reports on China's aging population, its implications for the nation's economy, and the investment opportunities it may create. The latest government census shows 178 million Chinese were over 60 in 2009. That figure could reach 437 million, one third of the population, by 2050, the United Nations forecasts. While the elderly were looked after in the past by their children, urbanization and the nation’s one-child policy have eroded the tradition of family care. (Source: Bloomberg)
Bloomberg's Margaret Conley reports on China's aging population, its implications for the nation's economy, and the investment opportunities it may create.
The latest government census shows 178 million Chinese were over 60 in 2009. That figure could reach 437 million, one third of the population, by 2050, the United Nations forecasts. While the elderly were looked after in the past by their children, urbanization and the nation’s one-child policy have eroded the tradition of family care. (Source: Bloomberg)

pankajs wrote:[

US is lucky in this respect, it has two friendly neighbors and another hostile but insignificant one(Cuba). On the population front, the US has the option of a merger with both Canada and Mexico or at least a much more relaxed border control on the US-Mexico border.

All in all an interesting century ahead. We will have to be on our toes and guard against both but China is our immediate concern.

Notice that the native population which was in these countries 400 years ago has put to the sword and replaced by majority Europeans, which gives these advantages.

PankajS

You wrote:
‘In one of my earlier post I had stated that in this game for supremacy between US and China, if US is victorious it will then turn on India and the same holds true for China’

Both USA and China are screwing India NOW!

Pakis would not have got nuclear weapons without the help of USA & China

USA has given millions of dollars and arms to Pakistan for decades and continues to do so. Western powers also have powerful lobbies inside India. They use NGO’s, missionaries, media, corrupt politicians etc to manipulate situations in their favour.

China has also used the Paki whore against India and is giving financial & military aid to anti India groups in NE India. But their main card inside India is Maoists.

What we need to do is to escalate violence in PAKI SATAN!!!!!!

Unfortunately, we cannot do much to harm USA and China but I would like to be proved wrong!

Shankaraa wrote:Both USA and China are screwing India NOW!

Pakis would not have got nuclear weapons without the help of USA & China

USA has given millions of dollars and arms to Pakistan for decades and continues to do so. Western powers also have powerful lobbies inside India. They use NGO’s, missionaries, media, corrupt politicians etc to manipulate situations in their favour.

China has also used the Paki whore against India and is giving financial & military aid to anti India groups in NE India. But their main card inside India is Maoists.

What we need to do is to escalate violence in PAKI SATAN!!!!!!

Unfortunately, we cannot do much to harm USA and China but I would like to be proved wrong!

So should we just sit on our collective musharraf and bemoan our fate? Saar let us look at our options and see if we might not make them work. To start we need to identify the 'lesser evil' between China and US.

The US has propped up the puki army for a long time with money and conventional arms. While troublesome, conventionally armed pukis never posed a long term threat. China gave nukes to Pukis and that has allowed the pukis to escape retribution on a number of occasions. During Kargil ops, our forces avoided crossing the LOC even if it meant more casualties on our side. The US was indifferent to our concern on the jihadis and the nukes as long as its objective in Afghanistan were met. After the situation was resolved to its satisfaction, it just walked away leaving India to deal with the toxic aftermath. As a token measure, it imposed sanctions on pukistan.

Does this absolve the US for its short-sighted policies? Hell No!!! But we need to differentiate between collusion and indifference. We cannot classify all the current powers as our enemies for it would reduce our options. So based on the data that we have, the US can be classified as the ‘lesser evil’ of the two.

With that in mind, we should formulate strategies that will help us without exposing us too much. Wouldn't it be great if we could drive a wedge between US and China on one hand and China and the pukis on the other?

US-China: US had proposed the "G2" grouping with the notion that the US and China could get together, harmonize their positions, and rule the world. The Chinese, reading the offer as a sign of weakness, rejected it. The US slowly realized their mistake and latest defense policy reflects the new understanding. It gives us the opportunity to play the 'swing state' card.

To quote KS

Regarding China, it should be 'If you are not friendly to us, we will intensify our relationship with the US. We are prepared to balance our relationship with both of you. But if you are not going to be civil to us we will intensify our collaboration with them.'

From China our expectation would be the border settlement to our satisfaction. In the long run, CPC will self-destruct and perhaps leave Tibet free to take up its traditional role as a buffer between India and China.

From the US our expectation will be on economic and technology related help. India will expand its footprints in the Indian Ocean, leaving US free to focus on the Pacific. In the long run, we will overtake US as the world biggest economy and that will again change the game. By then we will be strong enough to take on the US. My guess is at that stage US will be eager to do a "G2", with us as the central pillar in the Indo-Pacific area.

China-paki: This is a tough nut to crack. If the jihadis destined for India are redirected to Xinjiang it can work wonders for us. If Xinjiang becomes turbulent, it would put pressure on both China and pukistan and on their taller/deeper friendship. If the Chinese have any control on the puki nukes, and I think they have, they will ensure that all such risks are taken care of. Such an outcome will get us out of our nuke dilemma wrt pukis.
There was a Xinghua news item about Chinese interest in a FATA base to counter the jihadis. If the jihadis are upset over drones what will their reaction be to Chinese presence in FATA, especially when the ground fight starts?

US-paki: The longer the US stays in Afghanistan the better it is for us.
1. The jihadis and pukis focus will be on the western border, making our side relatively calmer.
2. It keeps the jihadis and the pukis at odds over Americans presence in Afganistan.
3. It keeps the Americans and the pukis at odds over the jihadis presence in pukistan.
4. It keeps Russians and the Chinese wary and at odds with the Americans.
5. It weakens America and hastens its downward slide.

The above scenarios will keep China at bay and the US on our side till we outgrow them both. It will make the pakis irrelevant, especially if the jihadis force China to grab the nukes. Of course all this is easier said than done.

I have tried to use my limited knowledge to identify the pressure points in this four cornered relationship and see if they can be worked to our advantage. I realize there are better solutions out there. I just hope I am not wasting your time.

Brilliant post, PankajS!

I really enjoyed reading it.

Please don’t call me ‘saar’ and don’t be so apologetic ref: ‘wasting your time’

You are not wasting any one’s time. You write what you want to write.

I wrote in rush; what I should have written was ‘how do we harm USA & China’ without exposing us to too much harm (using your phrase).

US Paki – I agree with you 100% that it is beneficial to us if US stay put in A’stan.

US China- Both have tight grip over each other. China holds trillion dollars (I don’t know the precise figure) in US bonds whilst US has massive investment in China. The game we should play is two - fold:

(1)The value of US bonds should go down dramatically so Chinese investment in US has little or no value – don’t know how this can be achieved by us & over what period

(2)Entice US to invest heavily in India. It is up to us to show the Americans that the return on their capital is better than China; it is also helping another democratic country; there will be future labour problem in China due to demographic changes but India has the largest young population in the world etc.

We should also encourage China, Japan, Singapore, South Korea to invest in India. I think China & Japan will be forced to invest in India in future due to demographic changes but rather than wait we need to hasten this. Except China, all others are also democratic countries.

China Pak- you are right about turning the jihadi fire towards China. We need to buy out some Jihadi factions and start a little ‘forest fire’ in Xinjiang – hoping that China does not extinguish it quickly and it turns into a towering inferno!

Why do people want to harm US and China? This is a foolish and dangerous concept set to make India fall! Some are interestingly trying to push India to a corner by creating a negative feeling about US and China.

For me we should see we grow together with US and China. Yes there is competition between nations to retain jobs and keep or increase money. We may not like in some ways China because it is trying take inch by inch every corner in India by threatening or forcing us. They have also openly supported Pakistan in their terror acts against India. They are not democratically and people centred nation so dictorial ranks have done damage to their own people, Tibetians and Indians, and others around the world. For Indians US shares a lot of common ground than negative impact on us. In this sense we Indians should see that China is democratically growing and also in business in Chinese terms, "this world has enough place for China and India to grow". I think Tibetians should be given autonomous power to many extent then Chinese should stop working against Indians strategically and internationally. they should not set Pakistanis against us. In spite of all these of things i do not wish Chinese to be harmed or economically going down, but Chinese should not play like a big company and should keep a balance in economic relationship with the rest of the world. I think US too has develop a very positive attitude towards India which should be encouraged and nourished. In this sense I would not look for bad things to happen to U S or China or any other countries which is a bad idea. If other falls down economically we will also have serious implications in our economy as well. We should work for good relationship wherever possible but Indians should also become apowerful nation by engaging with US and China.

joshua john jee, preach moderately please. Onlee.

There're so many 'shoulds' in your posts, it'd make the papacy blush blue in the base.

uddu wrote: The threat of China increases with Communism in China and reduces with weakening of communism in China.
Now how we treat the threat that exits from China. India must always be prepared for any eventuality from China.

Where do people get this idea that Communism (China is only Communist in name now) is the problem?

The fact is that Han imperialism is a very old phenomenon long preceding communism and underlying it is the idea of legalism (google it).

By the way the Jaichand story is a myth (not saying to you personally but others who brought it up) spread later through Chand Bardai's Prithviraj Raso and no contemporary chronicle makes mention of any such betrayal or any Sanyogita. Airavat has pointed this out many times.

The operation of the chIna-s is understood poorly by most outsiders. The old rAjan jAvAharlAl was an example of this. Starting with the notorious Shi Huang Di of the Chin, they developed a system of cloaking the inner political infrastructure of legalism with outer coats. These coats are used both to fool their own people as well as outsiders depending on the situation. This inner legalism-outer coat model also allowed the chIna-s to imitate the dominant geo-cultural trends of the age while retaining an inner control and identity via the legalist structure. Originally it was the outer sheen of Confucianism coating legalism, while in the Sui/Tang period the outer coat included the bauddha mata while retaining same the inner pattern. In more recent times this outer coat has included socialism and more recently “Westernism”. This duality allows the chIna-s to interact and participate successfully with the dominant geo-cultural trend while retaining a certain inner identity. This inner identity is also projected inside the sphere of the dominant geo-cultural trend by careful image building. One striking example is that of the British biochemist Joseph Needham who was attracted to the chIna-s due to the shared common outer core of socialism. But he was soon used by the chIna-s to project an enormously positive image of their intellectual achievements to the world. While there is no question of the genuine achievements of the chIna-s, it is clear that Needham has exaggerated and over-attributed stuff to the chIna-s. Even today in the US the government pays to have exhibitions and seminars on ancient chIna medicine. In contrast, other civilizations with comparable achievements are typically denigrated by the west and negatively portrayed. Another aspect of this image building has been the acceptance of the chIna-s as equals or superiors by the western system. This aspect is based on a variety of factors such as: 1) the chIna-s exploiting the mlechCha fascination for shveta-tvacha and presenting themselves as shveta-charman-s too. 2) The chIna-s trying to project themselves as having higher IQ than the mlechCha-s. 3) Taking up mlechCha names and emulating aspects of mlechCha culture to make the mlechCha-s feel comfortable with them. As a consequence the mlechCha-s have gained respect for the chIna-s and have a positively larger than life image of them. Finally, the mlechCha-s have in quest of an unnecessarily lavish lifestyle shipped away much of their production and debt to the chIna-s, creating a dependency. All this image-building has made the chIna-s themselves feel a sense of superiority and entitlement to world dominance...

http://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/20 ... opolitics/

The pagan Indianized inhabitants of Central Asia- Turks and Iranians, as well as surviving Zoroasterians and Sogdhians were alarmed at the Arab call for conversion to Islam and the threat of Jihad and turned to China for help. But typical to the Chinese attitude no help was forth coming. Instead Su-lu came to their aid...

But the Tuergish faced a new danger from the East in the form of the aggressive Chinese imperialism, which was also religiously intolerant. The wife of Khan Su-lu sent an ambassador to China to stop persecution of pagans and various streams of the Bauddha matas different from those of the Chinas. Hsuan-Tsung, the imperialist Chinese emperor asked his favorite general Tu to kill the envoy and destroy a Tuergish trading party and called the Tuergish Kha’Khan a bandit. This duly sparked of a conflict with between the Turks and the Chinas. The Chinas moved armies rapidly to the West to first attack Tibet and thereby outflank the Turks. The Tibetans suffered heavily at the hands of the Chinese and formed an alliance with the Tuergish. Su-lu hatched a plan to seek revenge for the Chinese actions and dispatched an army to raid the Chinese territory and draw the Chinese general I-chen into an ambush. He was also attacked simultaneously by the Tibetan army under their resourceful commander Chog-ro-Manporje. The Chinese were beaten back and at the same time one of their greatest generals, Wang Chun Cho was killed by the Uighur Turks. In 730 AD realizing that the war in the West was not favoring the Chinese, Hsuan Tsung diplomatically entered into peace negotiations with the Tuergish. However, this was only on the surface, because he was hatching a secret strategy to destroy them completely. Hsuan Tsung sent envoys to the Arabs, asking them to ally with the Chinas against the Tuergish. The Kalif had now sent Ashras al Sulami to strengthen the Moslem force and avenge the old defeats. Al Sulami was particularly violent on the people of Sogdhiana and persecuted non-Moslems and tortured them in numerous ways...

Su-lu with a small mobile force of just 4000 men tried to launch a surprise attack on Balkh and take it in the height of winter, when the Arabs rarely fought. However, sadly for him the Chinese agents figured out his plan and informed the Moslems well in advance. The Moslems were ready for the small mobile force of Su-lu as it by-passed Balkh and try to take it in the rear. bin Abdullah kept a large army waiting for the Turks at Kharistan. With the element of surprise gone, Su-lu was totally out of wind and had to fight desperately for survival against the numerically superior, motivated Jihadi army. He barely cut his way out of their cordon and retreated with heavy losses to Tukharistan. There he started regrouping his hordes for a renewed campaign when unexpected events transpired.

Kuel Chur, the general of the Tuergish army and Khan Su-lu were playing a game of back-gammon with the stake being a pheasant. Su-lu won the stake but Kuel Chur refused to give him the bird. A fight broke out between them in which Kuel Chur and his men killed Su-lu.

This was not just the death of one man but the death-blow to the Tuergish nation, and any possibility of a defense against Islam’s oppressive spread into central Asia. With that the Tuergish nation and the many pagan states of Transoxiana and Sogdiana were open to the imperialist China and Moslem troops that poured in for the final contest...

http://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/20 ... -of-islam/

The general perception that India and China never had any historical conflicts is flawed, and in part is the fantasy of communists. While the past relationships between India and China have been better than what we see today, we should keep in mind that Chinese have played a major role in destroying Indic cultures of Central Asia and have even led direct invasions of India with the help of the Tibetans and attempted to seize mainland Indian territory. I shall outline briefly the historical conflicts between China and India starting from the destruction of the satellite Indic civilizations in the Tarim region prior to the foundation of the Uighur Khanate...

http://www.oocities.org/somasushma/tarim.html

Well the leveraging of the Han population is one of China's most important traits. It is not merely demographic warfare but there is an additional cultural dimension associated with it. To understand this we need to take a look at China and India's historical dynamics.

The similarities:
-Both are ancient civilizations with a large base of urban populations with extensive cultural adaptation for technological capabilities.

-Both India and China have faced ferocious assaults from invaders from the North/NorthWest and have been defeated repeatedly by the invaders and conquered.

-Both have reasonable natural resources.

But then the differences creep in:

India while constantly exporting new ideas failed to project power. India culturally defeated China in Tibet (My post in the earlier History thread) but China still militarily overran Tibet. While China was beaten by invaders it always took the fight back to them. Now it occupies the very lands of these erstwhile invaders. Tai T'sung's ideal of military imperalism was never forgotten by the Chinese.

The second point is that the Chinese Han population has been a master of internalization of external influence. For example recently a China acquaintence provided me with a chinese version of Hindu deity kArttikeya. The deity was portrayed in a thoroughly Chinese form with slanting eyes etc. But the same deity in Java or Cambodia would be quite Indian. So just as the Indian ideas were completely Sinicized, Marxism too was completely internalized and blended with Tai T'sung's spirit. It is this trait that makes the Han demographic expansion really potent.

Unfortunately India faced Abrahmic invaders, unlike China. I wonder if Chinese civilization would survived the way it has if Timur's intended invasion of China had fructified (Imagine the horrors of an Islamic China ).

In short the differences between India and China are merely a function of their differential attitudes towards using their demographic power.

Thanks Akash, but evidently I did not put the point accross well enough:
Quote:
Originally posted by Carl:
Didn't India also assimilate earlier pre-Islamic intruders?
Yes, there is no disagreement here. The point I was trying to make was per say not about assimilation in our own territory but demographic war fare outside our center of gravity.

Quote:
And didn't India also 'project power' in the north-west and south-east?
Agreed, we did project power on many occassions in history, and even against China. But these attempts were not consolidated by taking over occupied territories. A good example is the failure to take back what now forms the Terrorist state and Kashmir from the Moslem invaders. The difference I was trying to bring out is that we did not deposit our populations from the doabs or the banks of the Kaviri in captured territory the way, the fertile Han population is deposited all over the world. When we Indianized central Asia and the Far East in the historical past, there was a core Indian elite but the local population was infused to a very small extant with Indian genes.

By internalization of Marxism, I would say that the Chinas did not become brown Sahebs like many of us, but incorporated Marxism in their imperialistic dynastic world view.

Han China conciously reduced Indian and Iranian influences, however compatible and benign they were.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 896#p23896

It is up to us to study and learn from history.

How many of our analysts know Chinese or know about all this history?

A few like Lokeshchandra (I had posted his interview in the dealing with China thread) might but the rest merely grope in the dark.

Surasena ji,

thanks for the treasure!

shyam wrote:I think that is important. One should side with its neighbor when a conflict happens between the neighbor and an outsider. Your neighbor is there to stay forever, but not the outsider. Just think over what Jaichand was thinking and the folly of his actions in the long term.

What if instead of Ghori the outsider attacker was someone who would have evolved into a Kanishka? Does the neighbor against all outsiders rule still hold?

There are many kinds of neighbors, geographic is only of them.

pankajs wrote:

ramana wrote:pankajs, I disagreed with KS garu on that reading. Its in the PRC and not China that you cant build a Meenakhsi temple, And that is because of the Communist party in power. That ideology will self destrct as its unnatural. And then shyam's logic comes in.

I will have to read shyam's again to comment on it and both you and he may be right.

My point and KS garu's is related to the present geopolitical configuration that we have to deal with. I am with you on the ultimate destruction of the CPC ideology.

KS's question about Meenakshi temple is brilliant. In historic times, we have worked with Chinese to build Buddhist monasteries if not temples.

It is a matter of balancing between China and US. Not outright taking sides. We should also spend some time asking what side China or US will take if we get into conflict with US or China resprctively.