Why is China allied with Pakistan?

  1. #136
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,130
    Likes
    200
    China
    Nobody is coming to help Pakistn to win a war. Both US and China is just trying to help Pakistan not to lose the war completely. In other wards, keep pakistan's pressure on India's back.

    Then why do you mind China's help to Pakistan? How can a third world country aid to another third world country threat a world power like india?

  2. #137
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,414
    Likes
    3720
    India
    If conducting a state visit is called as begging for peace why are you holding trillions of dollars in forex reserves in the currency of your biggest your enemy who helps Taiwan?And your biggest enemy is also your biggest trading partner.Never in the history of the world such a combination existed.

  3. #138
    Senior Member nimo_cn
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,144
    Likes
    468
    China
    China holds trillions of dollars to beg mercy from Americans.

  4. #139
    SORCERER SpArK
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    KINGDOM OF TRAVANCORE
    Posts
    2,095
    Likes
    1087
    India
    What if tommorow when asked to repay reserve bills ,US shows and tell all chinese manufacturing to who will u replace US, the biggest trading partner,??? Guatemala???
    ersakthivel likes this.

  5. #140
    Regular Member EXPERT
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    243
    Likes
    167
    India
    I think We have the athority to explore in SOUTH CHINA SEA (SCS) because we ve got tenders to do so from Veitnam . . .
    CHINA cant claim whole of SCS and if they are doing so then where do their neighbours stand . Why Chinese have disputes with almost all of the countries whom it shares borders with?
    Do you knw why because they r aiming and claiming so high that cant be beared by any of its neighbour
    As far as talking abt Pakistan they have to do alot to reach us , and we have to do more to contain Chinese Ambitions . .
    ersakthivel likes this.

  6. #141
    Senior Member nimo_cn
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,144
    Likes
    468
    China
    Dealing with a superpower like US, China is always put in a disadvantageous positon. American defaulting the debt is very likely to have a devestating impact on Chinese economy, no arguement on that. But people should keep in mind that US is also going to pay a huge price for doing that, something like the crown of being the most powerful country on the planet. And why would the Americans do that?

    I have always pointed out that China has intention to replace America as the lead of the world, and China is demonstrating that by supporting American economy through purchasing American debts.

    As long as China keeps acting dscreet and posing no overwhelming threat to Americans, they are not going to take adventurous move against China. Instead, they are going to contain China in a slow and gradual way by allying countries like Japan, India.

    As of now, Americans gain more and lose less in the growth of China, so we are safe.
    hello_10 likes this.

  7. #142
    Senior Member nimo_cn
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,144
    Likes
    468
    China
    India has the neither the ability or authority to explore in South China Sea. Vietnam only introduces India into South China Sea to confront China, but not to drill oil for them, instead they are banking on French to do that.

    Vietnam claims the whole South China, no one seems to be bothered, so yes, China can and is claiming what belongs to us in South China Sea.

    Border disputes in Asia is quite common, India is having land disputs with almost every of its neighbors, too. Vietnam is no exceptional as well, land and water disputes with China, water dispute with Philippine, land dispute with Cambodia, etc. Thailand and Cambodia, Thailand and Malaysia, Malaysia and Singapore, NK and SK, SK and Japan, Japan and Russia, you name it, who doesn't have dispute with whom.

  8. #143
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    4,414
    Likes
    3720
    India
    Just count your losses in true value , because a decade back gold was going for a sixth of it's current price in dollars.
    That's why it seems incredible when people say china and US are rivals. Through out the world history which rival held the other's currency and which rival had their enemy as NO-1 trading partner?
    China's so called moves of countering US with new weapons is in reality a covert attempt to dominate others in ASIA.As risking a confrontation with US will spell trouble for it's own economy.
    Last edited by ersakthivel; 22-12-12 at 10:52 AM.
    EXPERT likes this.

  9. #144
    Regular Member EXPERT
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    243
    Likes
    167
    India
    @nimo_cn : Who told that india having border disputes with any country exept bloody Pak and You Chinese . . .
    We see our neighbour as friend and equal to us,neither like China who dominate others.

  10. #145
    Tihar Jail
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    unconfirmed
    Posts
    1,881
    Likes
    661
    Former Soviet Union
    sir I tell you something about export business of China to US and EU. even if US+EU ban import from China, it would be a loss of around $700bil "manufactured products" business for China, out of total $2.1trillions China's export, while half of it, around $350billions can be consumed by increased demand from Asia, Africa South America etc, along with increase in home consumption. as, if CHina export to EU+EU then they import also and if the same CHina Import from Japan+Korea+ASEAN+SOuht America, CHina will get at least $300billion additional export order in return..... hence a total loss of around $350billions export of Manufactured products, out of $2.1trillions, if both US+EU impose ban on CHina suddenly.....

    from here, the very first question US+EU have, do they still have those industries to supply those products, they import from China? I mean to ask, even to wear cloths, shoes, cheap cars etc. specially fridges, TVs, Micro Wave type stuffs which we generally buy and throw in Australia in case of any problem as it is cheap to buy a new one than maintenance cost etc. do the West still have these industries? and even if they start from now, it would take at least 5-6 years to have little bit industrial infrastructure like this, they have lost in 80s and 90s

    and the second and the most important question, are their civilians prepared to have high inflation for the next 10-12, if these industries back to US+EU?? they already have around 106% debt to total US's GDP to date, with borrowing around $1.2trillions every year to meet expenditure commitments, as of last 2 years. then here, high inflation, say at 7%, will also make then have interests rate close to 7% on their debt. how will they finance it under their current expenditure, which requires around 44% to be spent on Social Security+Medical only????? check it as below....

    U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

    US+EU have traveled so long that its really hard for them to return until they have to, say after an economic fall like how Russia faced in 90s. while now they are going to lose business of High Tech products to China, then how will they maintain their CAD under so high price based competition from China on side of High Tech products also.......
    lets see what exactly we will see in our time
    Last edited by hello_10; 22-12-12 at 12:46 PM.
    ersakthivel likes this.

  11. #146
    Tihar Jail
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    unconfirmed
    Posts
    1,881
    Likes
    661
    Former Soviet Union
    Border Disputes of India Vs China:

    there is difference between border disputes, India and the China have with its neighbors, I explain it as below:

    1st. China has border disputes with that Taiwan whose governments have been a puppet to US against China under over 66% majority governments. Taiwan, whose every strength was used against China during 80s, 90s and last decade under over 66% voting of the governments they elected but now they look like have surrendered to China

    and again, China has border disputes with India on Arunanchal Pradesh whose every system wants to fight against CHina in case of any war. Arunanchal Pradesh is that part of India who wants to fight against China's claim over it, many voting were also done in this regard, and mainly Mr D.Lama lead those people who consider him like a Lord.....

    a straight and bottomline difference between border disputes, India and China have with its neighbors

    2nd, India has border dispute with that Pakistan on Kashmir issue whose every state wants separation from Pakistan. Indian Kashmir has an "Elected State Democratic Government", while POK is now the most peaceful part of Pakistan. rest, neither Muhajir's want Karachi to go on the control of rest of Pakistanis, neither Balochistanis itself have their mid-set with the mainstream of Pakistan and want independence, and not even the North West state of Pashtun's Pakistan ever wanted Punjabi dominance over them and want to go with their Pashtun brothers of Afghanistan........ and with that, neither Indian Muslims also find Muhajirs of Pakistan in any good condition, which always give a lesson to Kashmiris too to always be ready to fight with infiltration from Pakistan to maintain their independence
    Last edited by hello_10; 22-12-12 at 12:59 PM.

  12. #147
    Tihar Jail
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    unconfirmed
    Posts
    1,881
    Likes
    661
    Former Soviet Union
    An Indian Stand on the Border Dispute with Pakistan on the Kashmir issue is as below, in the light of historical facts and agreements signed at the time of freedom of both the countries.......

    this article below represents Indian claim on POK but I find partition of Kashmir was done in the same as rest of other border states of India-Pakistan. for example, "East Bengal" went to Pakistan and "West Bengal" to India, "East Punjab" to India and "West Punjab" to Pakistan, 'Sindh' to Pakistan and 'Gujarat' to India and hence, POK to Pakistan and Indian Kashmir, the crown of India

    while on my own side, when I was to open my mouth on this issue and I found people of POK more willing to come to join India, once I proposed $60billion offer to Pakistan in return of POK, which will make them free of whole external debt, and it may then be saved by Indian side too on long run by saving on the military expanses on the border of Pakistan over LOC, they spend right now to avoid infiltration. my personal level proposal

    Last edited by hello_10; 23-12-12 at 11:21 AM.
    hit&run and ersakthivel like this.

  13. #148
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    China
    Posts
    2,254
    Likes
    559
    China
    List of disputed territories of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    1.1 People's Republic of China
    1.1.1 Aksai Chin
    1.1.2 Disputed areas located between Aksai Chin and Nepal
    1.1.3 Trans-Karakoram Tract
    1.1.4 Arunachal Pradesh
    1.1.5 Depsang Plains
    1.2 Pakistan
    1.2.1 Siachen Glacier
    1.2.2 Saltoro Mountains
    1.2.3 Sir Creek
    1.3 Bangladesh
    1.3.1 Boraibari
    1.3.2 Indo-Bangladesh enclaves
    1.3.3 New Moore / South Talpatti
    1.4 Nepal
    1.4.1 Kalapani
    1.4.2 Susta
    1.5 Myanmar
    1.5.1 Narcondam Island
    1.6 Sri Lanka
    1.6.1 Kachchatheevu

    It seems you are wrong, good sir.
    farhan_9909 likes this.

  14. #149
    DFI TEAM Rage
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,385
    Likes
    783
    No prob.


    In the medium-term India is a strategic regional threat to China from the perspective of vital IOR shipping lanes which still account for well over 70% of China's crude. From a conventional military standpoint you are right in saying that China's dominance over the Tibetan plateau affords it 'strategic depth' which India cannot exploit. But any military standoff between India and China will involve a naval confrontation, since that is India's only real stranglehold over China: something China realizes as it is looks to diversify its crude supplies. China also realizes however, that the IOR shipping lanes will continue to be important from the perspective of trade in both crude and commodities given the rising importance of Africa as both a market and resource supplier; which is why it is looking to establish a naval footprint in the IOR. In the medium-long term, India becomes a threat to China from two viewpoints: 1) from the perspective of both a massive resource-consumer and resource-competitor (which needless to say are scarce, costly and often essential): everywhere from Africa to Afghanistan to the Middle East and the South-China Sea; and 2) as a polar influence in competitive engagement: both from a larger geo-political perspective, as it looks to deepen its own political and military ties and engagement with many of the states China is currently courting, in order to establish security of access for both resources and markets and to limit the forex impingement from scarcity; and from a more regional militaristic perspective as it seeks its own 'strategic depth' from pliant allies. Many of these, often exclusive, politico-military maneuvers: such as joint military training, arms and advanced technology transfers, comprehensive military exercises, establishment of military interoperability, construction of dual use ports etc. will be seen as aggressive posturing by either country, regardless of the rhetoric.

    Concomitantly, India is wary of China because it currently blocks Indian access to Central Asia via its occupation of Aksai Chin and the Trans-Karakoram tract, which in concert with Pakistani occupied Kashmir prevents an Indian land route to Central Asia: for both a commodity market and energy security. More regionally, China is perceived as a possible long-term adversary because of its continued claims over the state of Arunachal Pradesh, which India is loathe to relinquish. The unresolved borders: Aksai Chin, the Transkarakoram tract and Arunachal Pradesh, gaining in strategic significance every time and the only China has with a nuclear neighbor, creates a recipe for possible conflagration. Moving away from strictly bilateral issues, the India-China engagement is compounded by Chinese construction activity in the P-o-K, which violates the Pakistani position of the territory being disputed and is a direct affront to India's position of the territory being an integral part. From a military standpoint, it enervates India's position as it leads to the possibility of a China-Pakistan logistical axis in the event of a confrontation with Pakistan. India also views China as an elemental long-term threat because of China's dominance of certain rivers as an upper-riparian state, most notably of the Brahmaputra which feeds India's north-eastern states: China has been known to ignore international convention and diplomatic best practices (read threats to Taiwan) even as a previously weaker state, when it deems its "national interest", defined in far more immiscible terms, is at stake. As its military power grows, this impulse is only likely to exacerbate. What makes the combination particularly volatile is that both are irredentist states: India over Kashmir and China over territories it claims its own, including Aksai Chin, the South China Sea, Taiwan and Arunachal Pradesh.

    Whatever 'conventional wisdom' you may hear about the simultaneous rise of nation states being 'non-zero sum', even you must realize and understand that resources are scarce; and in the case of India and China, this predicament is particularly acute. The gains from successful outcomes in competitive engagement are manifold: from secure access to markets and resources to reduced prices and transactional costs to a more assorted range of non-military and military instruments of power to asymmetric ontogeny of technical, technological and industrial bases that offer a distinct, if not decisive, advantage in military conflict, no matter how remote.

    Chinese nuclear support for Pakistan has enabled Pakistan to conduct military misadventures such as the Kargil War which have scuttled peace measures proceeding apace at the time these misadventures were conducted. China's nuclear and military support for Pakistan has also emboldened Pakistan to launch, through its covert 'non-state agents- that elements, within the Pakistani military, have admitted to having full state-backing- relentless acts of terror against the Indian Government and its people: including the attack on the Indian Parliament and the 2008 terror carnage in Mumbai, knowing full well that India's options were limited under enhanced nuclear overhang and that its reprisals could be calibrated via threats of nuclear war. At the time these attacks took place, India and Pakistan were, by the candid admissions of no less than Pakistan's military dictator, a hair's breadth away from resolving the Kashmir issue, and a coterie of other less contentious issues that prevented bilateral ties from being exploited to their full potential. China's continued direct support to the Pakistani military, conventionally and to its intelligence agencies, covertly facilitates the preeminence of these institutions in Pakistani politics and their entrenchment in foreign policy, permits an abiding patronage of non-state actors, prevents democratic discourse and frustrates a diplomatic solution to outstanding issues.

    Pakistan is certainly not China's only 'window' into the Islamic world; nor is it the best among its available. The reasons mentioned afore are certainly compelling enough to reconsider the very flawed proposition. A country like Syria, for example, prior to the Arab Spring, was both geo-politically and geo-economically better positioned for being China's 'gateway' to the Arab world; as well as being more coherent and less susceptible to meandering in its foreign policy. Qatar, the Sudan, the UAE, Algeria and Mali also offer better alternatives: culturally, demographically, geo-economically, geo-politically and regional-organizationally. The argument in terms of making Pakistan the 'gateway' to the Islamic world, is a flawed one: it is neither culturally compatible nor geo-politically significant, and is increasingly dysfunctional.

    Chinese aid is tailored to more than just making Pakistan a 'friendly, stable' neighbor. China's funding of the Gwadar port is a firm example: Pakistan does not need the Gwadar port to be stable, but China does require it a strategic vantage point over and transit point from the Persian Gulf. Pakistan did however require tons of aid to recover after the 2010 floods, for which China provided a paltry $ 9 million (India an enemy state provided well over $25 million). Nor does Pakistan require long-range missiles to achieve nuclear deterrence, which China has ensured it has. Nor for that matter does Pakistan require non-state military actors prosecuting a jihadi war to remain stable, which China has assured it has.

  15. #150
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,130
    Likes
    200
    China
    Yes, you can do that. And we can send the fishing boat, marine police boat to disturb your "exploration" so your cost will reach sky high.

    Just as your tender - Vietnam, claiming the whole SCS too.


    Welcom to the great game!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 71
    Last Post: 02-12-12, 12:58 AM
  2. Article: What if India was allied with the US during the Cold War?
    By ejazr in forum Defence & Strategic Issues
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-01-11, 08:43 AM
  3. US Global Strategy and Allied Issues
    By Ray in forum Americas
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 18-11-10, 10:29 AM
  4. What if India was allied with the US during the Cold War?
    By Yusuf in forum Defence & Strategic Issues
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 01-09-10, 12:51 AM
  5. Allied Militants Threaten Pakistans Populous Heart
    By Daredevil in forum West Asia & Africa
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14-04-09, 05:41 PM