Thai Chinese arms gunrunner to be extradited to India

[W.G.Ewald]

Also, very 'well known' by whom? Hyperbolic journalists or paranoiac natsec hawks?

Lashkar-e-Taiba: Latest News on Lashkar-e-Taiba, Lashkar-e-Taiba Photos | Outlookindia

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Except the proof is that Willy was trying to get arms for the NSCN. Willy is Thai. How does his conviction prove that Norinco knew what was going on or was even contacted?

I believe BG Ray's comments after the original post address that question; and Willy is being extradited, not yet convicted. Surely the evidence presented by prosecutors will further provide and answer to your question.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Benne is reverting to his old tricks again - when he can't attack the logic or the points @no smoking is raising, he attacks the motive and the psychology to incite a flame war.

@mods @pmaitra . Not sure if this is what you guys want in terms of debate on DFI

It's OK for no smoking to say someone is brain-damaged though? Let's be more reasonable here.

Besides, my brain is about the same age as BG Ray's :-( Maybe older!

 

[p2prada]

Except the proof is that Willy was trying to get arms for the NSCN. Willy is Thai. How does his conviction prove that Norinco knew what was going on or was even contacted?

We almost never know the full details, do we?

Extraditing ones own citizen is a big deal and they won't do it unless there is concrete evidence.

Also, very 'well known' by whom? Hyperbolic journalists or paranoiac natsec hawks?

Chinese markings on captured guns.

 

[t_co]

We almost never know the full details, do we?

Extraditing ones own citizen is a big deal and they won't do it unless there is concrete evidence.

Concrete evidence against whom though? Willy or Norinco? The two are not the same.

It would be like saying Bayer or Eli Lilly is guilty of supporting the methamphetamine trade because one of their affiliates (not the parent company) talked to an intermediary about a possible codeine sale, and that intermediary was trying to buy codeine on behalf of a meth manufacturer.

Or like saying that JP Morgan is guilty of supporting Pakistani terrorism because a Pakistani real estate developer talked to them about getting a loan when the money was to be diverted into a LeT cell.

Chinese markings on captured guns.

Mmm. First, where are the Chinese markings? Second, do they account for a minority or majority of arms seized? If they are a minority of arms seized and that is your sole evidence China is backing an insurgency, then does that not mean that every other country's weapons seized from Naxalites/Naga/Maoists means those other countries are all backing an insurgency in India?

 

[t_co]

It's OK for no smoking to say someone is brain-damaged though? Let's be more reasonable here.

Besides, my brain is about the same age as BG Ray's :-( Maybe older!

Fair enough, and I don't think it's right for @no smoking to call someone names on the forum.

 

[p2prada]

Concrete evidence against whom though? Willy or Norinco? The two are not the same.

It would be like saying Bayer or Eli Lilly is guilty of supporting the methamphetamine trade because one of their affiliates (not the parent company) talked to an intermediary about a possible codeine sale, and that intermediary was trying to buy codeine on behalf of a meth manufacturer.

Or like saying that JP Morgan is guilty of supporting Pakistani terrorism because a Pakistani real estate developer talked to them about getting a loan when the money was to be diverted into a LeT cell.

You are looking at things far too deeply without any concrete information from the source.

Fact 1: Willy is a gunrunner.
Fact 2: He is being extradited.
Fact 3: His extradition is supported by a court. Obviously
Fact 4: The chargesheet names NSCN as the recipient.
Fact 5: All gunrunning that happens involves China or Myanmar or Thailand, through Bangladesh or Nepal.

Whether Willy is directly linked to Chinese arms manufacturers, I don't know, neither does the article make that clear. Perhaps once this guy is in India we may get more news about it. But the fact that Chinese arms manufacturers are linked to gunrunning in India, that is a well known phenomenon. Chinese links to the Maoists, Naga rebels, ULFA etc is so well known that not believing in it is a real joke. However, actual proof is not available in open source because the situation is not contained and details are still operationally relevant.

Btw, the examples you provided are enough to involve JP Morgan and Bayer as accomplices. Deals are conducted after thorough investigation by the parent company, and this includes tracking the merchandise from the factory to the final user, be it medicines or drugs. There are people called auditors who handle this. That's the reason why you need prescriptions for such drugs and that's why you have gun licenses. So, it is the responsibility of the Chinese arms manufacturer to make sure their armaments are going to the right people. If it deviates, the Chinese company is also held responsible. You can't get away by feigning ignorance in real life. Gunrunning is illegal in any country as long as it is not backed by the govt. And this is what's happening.

 

[Ray]

Excerpts from UN Guidelines for international arms transfers

However, international transfers of conventional arms have, in recent decades, acquired a dimension and qualitative characteristics which, together with the increase in illicit arms trafficking, give rise to serious and urgent concerns.

2. Arms transfers should be addressed in conjunction with the question of maintaining international peace and security, reducing regional and international tensions, preventing and resolving conflicts and disputes, building and enhancing confidence, and promoting disarmament as well as social and economic development. Restraint and greater openness, including various transparency measures, can help in this respect and contribute to the promotion of international peace and security.

20. Arms producing or supplier States have a responsibility to seek to ensure that the quantity and level of sophistication of their arms exports do not contribute to instability and conflict in their regions or in other countries and regions or to illicit trafficking in arms.

41. The General Assembly, by its resolution 43/75 I of 7 December 1988, expressed its conviction that arms transfers in all their aspects deserve serious consideration by the international community, inter alia, because of: (a) their potential effects in areas where tension and regional conflict threaten international peace and security and national security; (b) their known and potential negative effects on the process of the peaceful social and economic development of all peoples; and (c) increasing illicit and covert arms trafficking.

- UN Guidelines for international arms transfers

________________________________

Controlling international Arms Transfers

The need for states to exercise control over international transfers of conventional weapons is widely accepted. National governments remain ultimately responsible for permitting or denying the transfer of arms and military equipment. Although the need to avoid supplying arms to zones of conflict or tension and contribute to destabilizing accumulations are considered in arms export decision making processes, domestic economic and political implications, as well as foreign and security policy priorities, continue to play an important role in decision-making. Nevertheless, discussions are underway within the framework of the UN for a global, legally binding Arms Trade Treaty.

Groups of states have agreed guidelines and common minimum standards for regulating international arms transfers in supplier control regimes as well as in regional and sub-regional organisations and groupings. The participating states of the Wassenaar Arrangement and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), as well as the member states of the European Union (EU), have agreed common standards and adopted guidelines for controlling their arms exports. Regional organisations ECOWAS, the OSCE, OAS, SADC, as well as regional groupings of states in Eastern and Central Africa, have also adopted transfer control measures to prevent the illicit trade in SALW.

Controlling international Arms Transfers — www.sipri.org

_________________________________________


An End-user certificate, or EUC, is a document used in international transfers, including sales and arms provided as aid, of weapons and ammunition to certify that the buyer is the final recipient of the materials, and is not planning on transferring the materials to another party. EUCs are required by many governments to restrict the flow of the materials to undesired destinations, such as embargoed states or rebel groups, governments with bad human rights records or states which are considered a threat by the original supplier of the arms.
__________________________________

Of course if China is beyond the purview of the UN guidelines or does not believe in End User Certificates, then China is not responsible.

And if China is not responsible as to how its weapons are routed or of the end use, then China is not a responsible State.

Now, you can decide as to whether China is a stand alone country beyond international protocols or it is a part of the international community, responsible enough not to allow its weapons to fall into the hands of anti State operators.

 

[no smoking]

You are looking at things far too deeply without any concrete information from the source.

Whether Willy is directly linked to Chinese arms manufacturers, I don't know, neither does the article make that clear. Perhaps once this guy is in India we may get more news about it. But the fact that Chinese arms manufacturers are linked to gunrunning in India, that is a well known phenomenon. Chinese links to the Maoists, Naga rebels, ULFA etc is so well known that not believing in it is a real joke. However, actual proof is not available in open source because the situation is not contained and details are still operationally relevant.

Oh, please! Having weapons produced by Chinese doesn't prove anything. As the world biggiest infrantry weapon producer, it is not strange that the market is flood with chinese products. You can accuse Chinese being responsible for the victims in India as much as Americans accusing those domestic weapon sellers being responsible for the death in New York street gun shot. But if you want to claim that Chinese are supporting the insurgence with India, you need further proof.

Btw, the examples you provided are enough to involve JP Morgan and Bayer as accomplices. Deals are conducted after thorough investigation by the parent company, and this includes tracking the merchandise from the factory to the final user, be it medicines or drugs. There are people called auditors who handle this. That's the reason why you need prescriptions for such drugs and that's why you have gun licenses. So, it is the responsibility of the Chinese arms manufacturer to make sure their armaments are going to the right people. If it deviates, the Chinese company is also held responsible. You can't get away by feigning ignorance in real life.

If this is your accusation, I would say: Yes, Chinese weapon producer should take measures to manage their ultimate customers, such as informing Thai gov about their citizens' weapon purchase so Thai gov can follow it up.

Gunrunning is illegal in any country as long as it is not backed by the govt. And this is what's happening.

Domestic gunrunning is illegal in any country, but gunrunning exportation is not so illegal, especially when corruption is getting involved.

 

[p2prada]

Oh, please! Having weapons produced by Chinese doesn't prove anything. As the world biggiest infrantry weapon producer, it is not strange that the market is flood with chinese products. You can accuse Chinese being responsible for the victims in India as much as Americans accusing those domestic weapon sellers being responsible for the death in New York street gun shot. But if you want to claim that Chinese are supporting the insurgence with India, you need further proof.

That's what I said. There is proof, it is just not declassified to civilians due to its operational relevance.

Why would it be declassified to just prove a point? It is well known that insurgency in India is supported by foreign govts. Until we stamp out the insurgency from the roots, there is no real incentive to reveal information to the public.

Domestic gunrunning is illegal in any country, but gunrunning exportation is not so illegal, especially when corruption is getting involved.

Illicit trafficking of arms is illegal by international law. Gunrunning is just another word for arms trafficking.

 

[CCP]

What did Indian Govt. say so far?

 

[CCP]

That's what I said. There is proof, it is just not declassified to civilians due to its operational relevance.

Why would it be declassified to just prove a point? It is well known that insurgency in India is supported by foreign govts. Until we stamp out the insurgency from the roots, there is no real incentive to reveal information to the public.

Those journalists got the "classified evidence" some how.:cool2:

 

[p2prada]

Those journalists got the "classified evidence" some how.:cool2:

They only report what our top honchos say.

 

[CCP]

They only report what our top honchos say.

You mean GOI asked they to report that? If so，why GOI not make it official?

 

[no smoking]

That's what I said. There is proof, it is just not declassified to civilians due to its operational relevance.

Then, you can't accuse anyone unless your gov says:"Yes, we have solid evidence to prove that China is behind all of this!"

Why would it be declassified to just prove a point? It is well known that insurgency in India is supported by foreign govts. Until we stamp out the insurgency from the roots, there is no real incentive to reveal information to the public.

Oh, please. Your security department already tried to lead people to believe that China is the black hand behind the insurgence. Now you tell me that they even have no incentive to acknowledge that they have the proof?

Illicit trafficking of arms is illegal by international law. Gunrunning is just another word for arms trafficking.

Yes, but we know that corruption can make these "legal".

 

[p2prada]

Then, you can't accuse anyone unless your gov says:"Yes, we have solid evidence to prove that China is behind all of this!"

ULFA leaders confess to China link-India-TIMESNOW.tv - Latest Breaking News, Big News Stories, News Videos

ULFA military chief in China, claims top UNLF leader | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

Something from Bangladesh
Smuggling of China-made weapons in focus - Asia-Pacific - Al Jazeera English

A judge in the Bangladesh port city of Chittagong last week sentenced 14 men to death for their role in what was an aborted bid to smuggle in 1,500 boxes of weapons that needed ten trucks to carry.

The judge said in his ruling that the weapons seized in the trucks were all made by China's Norinco ordnance company.

Funny that. Now there's a court judge confirming Norinco's involvement.

The rebels have started picking up Chinese weapons from the Sino-Burmese border and bringing it to their bases in Northern Myanmar, points out G M Srivastava, former chief of Assam police.

"From there, these weapons are carried into India and possibly Bangladesh and Nepal."

Just read the rest of the article.

And more,
Bangladesh Islamist party leader sentenced to death for arms smuggling | World news | theguardian.com

he weapons, most of which were made in a Beijing factory, also included 300 rockets, 2,000 grenade-launching tubes, 6,392 magazines of ammunition and 1.14 million bullets, according to Ahmed.

 

[p2prada]

Then, you can't accuse anyone unless your gov says:"Yes, we have solid evidence to prove that China is behind all of this!"

I forgot to add this link as well.

Northeast insurgents getting arms from China: Govt - The Times of India

China may not be behind the unrest in the northeast, but insurgent groups in the region are getting arms and ammunition that country, the government has said.

Minister of state for home affairs M Ramachandran replied with a "no" when asked whether the government has received information regarding assistance provided by China to separatist groups involved in large-scale violence that took place in the northeastern states in recent years.

"However, there are reports that the insurgent groups operating in the north eastern states of India have been augmenting their armoury by acquiring arms from China and Sino-Myanmar border towns and routing them through Myanmar. There are no confirmed reports to suggest that the insurgent groups are receiving funds from China," he said in a written reply in Lok Sabha.

 

[p2prada]

And this,

'China given evidence of its aid to NE insurgents' - Hindustan Times

"There was evidence that insurgents from India's northeast were meeting Chinese intelligence officials regularly in Yunnan (China) and in Nepal. We tracked top NSCN (National Socialist Council of Nagaland) arms procurer Anthony Shimray who had ordered a massive supply of weapons. The procedures involved in shipment, export orders, regulatory compliances, etc are impossible without China's involvement," said GK Pillay, former home secretary.

"We have also given China details of Ulfa (United Liberation Front of Asom) chief Paresh Barua's travel to Yunnan, including airline tickets, period of stay, etc," he said.

 

[CCP]

And this,

'China given evidence of its aid to NE insurgents' - Hindustan Times

Well, I can not find GOI said anything such that China is behind this in the reports you listed.
All those reports draw their conclusion( or lead readers to draw conclusion) from that some arms were made in China or some words from former officers.

 

[p2prada]

Well, I can not find GOI said anything such that China is behind this in the reports you listed.
All those reports draw their conclusion( or lead readers to draw conclusion) from that some arms were made in China or some words from former officers.

Check post #38. The Home Minister stated that Chinese weapons are coming into India.

Lok Sabha is like the Chinese Great Hall of the People. What more proof do you want?

Which part of this statement confuses you?

Northeast insurgents getting arms from China: Govt

Should I also explain what a Home Minister is?

Edit: And Home Secretary isn't "some" official. That's the top bureaucratic position in the Home Ministry, it is a big deal.