The looming confrontation over Arunachal

Discussion in 'Indian Army' started by ashdoc, Oct 8, 2010.

  1. ashdoc

    ashdoc Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    965
    Recently I read two magazines ,both of which clearly state that China is dead serious about its claim over Arunachal .

    THE WEEK newsmagazine carried on its front page the story CHINA PROVOKED--THE INSIDE STORY OF HOW INDIA FORTIFIED ARUNACHAL.

    It states that India has now put such a large number of troops in arunachal ,especially mountain divisions ( that is ,divisions trained and equipped for mountain warfare ,each of 15,000 men ),including two brand new ones ,that china's aims have been effectively thwarted.

    Also the military magazine FORCE carried a headline story DEFENDING TAWANG IN A LIMITED WAR .

    On opening it however , I found about seven eight articles discussing India-china confrontation in depth.

    It states that tawang in arunachal is clearly a tibetian monastary ,the second most important in tibetian buddhism ,and china feels that its conquest of tibet will remain incomplete unless tawang is conquered.

    FORCE also discusses the India -china military balance in detail ,having a seperate articles on the air power balance between the two sides ,the comparison between India's road building on our side and china's rapid building of infrastructure on their side and also the comparison between the respective air forces.

    WEEK claims that road building on our side has rapidly improved ,and now matches china's ,and FORCE gives details of this..

    FORCE also agrees that India has so well fortified arunachal ,that if china tries a war like 1962 ,it will be utterly stopped in its tracks........India has not only prepared defences in depth ,but besides the two mountain divisions ,is creating two mobile strike divisions to confront china .

    The four new divisions are being created entirely newly with new recruited troops ,so our army is being enlarged by 60,000 troops.

    However , if China decides to go on high intensity war ,the scenario might be different ..........it can use air power to strike india ,even air-dropping troops in the brahmaputra valley to create panic.

    The greatest advantage that china has over india is that of short range ballistic missiles ,which it has in large numbers.These can be used to fire salvo after salvo to destroy our air fields ,communications ,army depots etc.

    India, on the other hand has been slow to induct the prithvi , which it has is some numbers , but less than the chinese.If inducted in large numbers ,it can be used in a similar manner to counter chinese agression.

    India ,however has been inducting long range rockets like smerch and pinaka to counter this chinese threat ,and roads have been upgraded for carrying batteries of smerch and pinaka.

    The other worry comes from china's rapid reaction forces. It has 3-4 divisions of RECMF ( resolving emergency combat mobile force ),which can be used to be inducted rapidly at any point of china's frontiers , including arunachal.This forms an extremely potent force.

    China also has the capacity to airlift an entire division of 15,000 men in one go ,and a regiment of 3000 men in a single airlift.

    FORCE states that india can put 14 divisions on the frontier in case of a full-scale war ,that is ,near 250,000 men,while keeping pakistan firmly in check on the other side.

    However china can put nearly 30 divisions , a force of 500,000 men.Even in the cold desert of tibet ,infrastructure has been created to induct such a large force with its equipment.

    It also has 5-6 logistics brigades which have stored fast expendible stores like ammunition and fuel ,and will each support a chinese army ,thus helping it maintain the tempo of war.

    However India still can defend its frontier with 14 divisions ,as a defender requires less men ,especially in high mountain terrain which is forested.

    FORCE states that by 2020 china will have 500 sukhois ....right now it has 271 sukhois .

    India will have 272 sukhois by 2020 ....right now it has 115 .

    Our sukhois are better than china's ,which has many old sukhoi-27s , and our pilots training and proficiency is better ,while china's pilots are poorly trained .China recognises this ,and is using pakistani pilots to improve training.

    FORCE frets that our SAMs ( surface to air missiles ) are old ,and the process of replacing them has been delayed too long.

    China will also use its old TU-16 bombers to lob cruise missiles at India.

    FORCE also urges India to induct its AWACS fast to use as force-multipliers.

    It also discusses the possibilities of china using tactical nukes ,if its campaign goes wrong .

    Both WEEK and FORCE magazines agree that china will be ready to launch full scale war only by 2020.

    That gives us 10 years to prepare for what is certainly a looming confrontation...........
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Oct 8, 2010
  2.  
  3. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    Arunachal is just a ploy to make india concentrate in east where as actual attack will happen in west Laddak,POK,uttrakhand and himachal.
     
  4. ashdoc

    ashdoc Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    965
    china has no strategic interest in other places except ladakh. certainly tawang and its monastary for the area of strategic interest for china .i dont think its ploy.
     
  5. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    you lost askai chin in 1962 where as after occupying tawang chinese withdrew .try to understand chinese mindset china will always keep tawang as open issues for future confrontations with india.by diverting GOI's mind towards east china is making foray into POK thereby encircling india in J&K from three sides.Its the same Ploy indian forces applied in 1971 war by holding in west and encircling and then attacking east pakistan from three sides.
     
  6. ashdoc

    ashdoc Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    965
    china clearly now thinks that withdrawing from tawang after occupying it in 1962 was a mistake. at that time the chinese leadership of chou-en-lai was willing to give arunachal ,if india accepted its takeover of aksai chin.

    by the way ,india didnt lose aksai chin in 1962 ....it lost it way before ,in the fifties.

    india had left the border there unguarded , and came to know of the chinese takeover of aksai chin ,when a chinese magazine published photographs trumpeting the building of a road in that region as a engineering marvel in the high himalayas.

    indias ambassador to peking saw this magazine ,and promptly communicated this news to the prime minister nehru........it was this that made nehru give go-ahead for the ' forward policy '.
     
  7. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    First 2012, then 2015, now 2020 is the deadline. After 5 years it will be 2025. I think Chinas time is over as far as finding a military solution to the border problem is concerned. That is why it has propped Pakistan just to keep India bogged down. China would like to have it that way only for the next several years as more than the borders it is now concerned about the rise of India as a threat to its future superpowerdom. As long as India has a decent defense, its not going to be attacked and India is right now building aggressive systems so that can safely rule out any misadventure by china. It will just try those incursions as it is doing all these days. We just have to guard against that as china might employ a policy of taking a few inches a year on the sly.
     
  8. pankaj nema

    pankaj nema Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,453
    Likes Received:
    1,409
    Conflict with China will happen It is inevitable , when we cant say. We needed to be ready for this conflict YESTERDAY.

    What ever might be our preparedness about which our enemies know better because they have been quiet for many years we have many things to do before we can say " BRING THEM ON " to both our enemies
     
  9. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    ^^^ Correctomundo. In fact, Just take a look at the headlines. Our Air Chief is VERY VERY SERIOUS about a two-side war and has kept this lethargic and corrupt government on its toes. I really respect him for taking the initiative to assert our military's requirements in front of politicians. By repeatedly calling for public interactive press conferences, he's taking the military's problem to the people to enlighten them about corrupt politicians butting in and ruining the show. It became so obvious that MMS had (obviously on Sonia's order) to issue statements against tri-service chiefs about "not to go public".

    Check out this link:

    Security scenario alarming, says IAF chief - The Times of India
     
  10. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Our service chiefs have learned from their western counterparts that the best way to get the latest toys and funding is to put fear in the minds of the politicians. So there are leaks, apocalypse scenarios etc about the enemies. That gets funding for new toys. Its good that this is happening so that our forces have what they need to fight a war.
     
  11. ashdoc

    ashdoc Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    965
    in care of tawang this is not simple fear....its for real.

    the considerable forces posted there are testimony to the fact that there is a real chinese threat.

    in fact ,the 1993 agreement for peace and tranquillity between india and china has been completely torn up ,according to the article in the week.
     
  12. amoy

    amoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,521
    Likes Received:
    1,545
    Realpolitik aside, are u serious about 'History'?

    When PLA showed up in Aksai Chin, there was no Indians there. It was very barren except a few Tibetan or Uigur/Tajik herders.

    Ladakh was once a independent kingdom which shared cultural and religious heritage with Tibet as well as political links.

    I don't think China covets Ladakh. It's what it is, now Ladakh is de facto part of India recognized by China except possibly border disputes.

    Will China be distracted by such 'trivialities' and make a fuss over them? Of course not, seriously, having a bigger picture in mind.
     
  13. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,283
    Location:
    BANGalore
    That was in response to Tsherings post. But yes the threat is there about China there is no doubt about it and no we cannnot be complacent too. But one thing is for sure, India and China will not fight a lone war. If at all, we might be adversaries in WWIII. I dont see China attacking India in the near future and completely rule it out in long term.
     
  14. ashdoc

    ashdoc Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    965
    cant say ........unlike pakistan ,which makes its intentions pretty clear ,chinese intentions are difficult to ascertain.

    the incentive to attack us certainly is there ,to put us down ,considering that we are the nation with the second fastest economic growth rate next to them ,and thus prove to the world who is the leader in asia.

    in a recent opinion poll chinese were asked by the govt mouthpiece as to whether china shuold go to war over ' southern tibet ' ,and the response was a resounding yes , with the ayes outnumbering the nos by a considerable margin.
     
  15. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    What big picture are you talking about here? Taking over POK and Arunachal? I agree that Pakistanis will lay themselves down for your grace but remember that area has an international perspective too. It is a bilateral matter between Pakistan and us and therefore PLA troops are not welcome there. As for Arunachal, it is high time that your generals understand the triviality of pinprick border violations lest it escalates to more aggressive standoff. That won't be good for both our economies. Instead of trying to take up more land from other countries, why don't you evenly distribute your population over existing lands? All your population is squeezed in the eastern China region along the coastal areas and Tibet and Sinkiang are almost empty except herders just as you found Aksai Chin to be.

    The big picture possible here by you is attempting to have Tawang in your control which is impractical, Pakistan as your trusty slave and warm ties with Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh which you already have. Other than that when you consider approaching other Southeast countries for territorial claims, PLA would be just making it harder for your own government to back their claims of a peaceful rise. Forget USA for a moment and just think in Asian context. No matter how much your military develops, other nations around you will also take enough measures to at least hold their ground if not win against you. You can become strong economic partners but gaining territory through that means is impossible without conflicts.

    While your government claims to be peaceful, your border generals are a nuisance as they encourage PLA troops to give trouble to us. So I'd say CCP has to control its generals, who'd go nowhere but conflict with neighbour(s) if they continue their belligerence. And this is not good for Asia's peace both you and I know very well.
     
  16. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    What big picture (Asian context only) are you talking about here? I agree that Pakistanis will lay themselves down for your grace but remember that POK area has an international perspective too. It is a bilateral matter between Pakistan and us and therefore PLA troops are seen only as meddlesome. As for Arunachal, it is high time that your generals understand the triviality of pinprick border violations lest it escalates to more aggressive standoff. That won't be good for both our economies.

    Instead of trying to take up more land from other countries, why don't you evenly first distribute your population over existing lands? All your population is squeezed in the eastern China region along the coastal areas and Tibet and Sinkiang are almost empty except herders just as you found Aksai Chin to be. Would barrenness of terrain in your country justify an attack by our forces? Won't you find it equally unjust and apart from military retaliation, politically protest such belligerence? I am sure that CCP would go berserk if such a thing happened. Mutual respect is essential for truly peaceful existence.

    The only big picture possible here by you is attempting to have Pakistan as your trusty slave and warm ties with Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh which you already have. Other than that when you consider approaching other Southeast countries for territorial claims, PLA would be just making it harder for your own government to back their claims of a peaceful rise. Forget USA for a moment and just think in Asian context. No matter how much your military develops, other nations around you will also take enough measures to at least hold their ground if not win against you. You can become strong economic partners but gaining territory through that means is impossible without conflicts.

    While your government claims to be peaceful, your border generals are a nuisance as they encourage PLA troops to give trouble to us. So I'd say CCP has to control its generals, who'd go nowhere but to conflict with neighbour(s) if they continue their belligerence. And this is not good for Asia's peace both you and I know very well.
     
  17. ajtr

    ajtr Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    12,038
    Likes Received:
    715
    Beijing playing its Kashmir card

    By Mohan Malik

    Even as the Chinese navy signals its intent to enforce sea denial in the "first island chain" in the East (comprised of the Yellow Sea, the East China Sea and the South China Sea of the Pacific Ocean), the People's Liberation Army (PLA) is reportedly on the move along China's southwest frontier in Pakistani-held Kashmir.

    In late August, media accounts reported the presence of thousands of Chinese troops in the strategic northern areas (renamed Gilgit-Baltistan in 2009 by Pakistan) of Pakistani-held Kashmir, bordering Xinjiang province.

    A Western report suggested that Islamabad had ceded control of the area to Beijing, prompting denials from both capitals. Chinese Foreign Office spokesperson Jiang Yu denied the story, saying



    the troops are there to help Pakistan with ''flood relief work.''

    Nonetheless, credible sources confirm the presence of the PLA's logistics and engineering corps to provide flood relief and to build large infrastructure projects worth US$20 billion (railways, dams, pipelines and extension of the Karakoram Highway) to assure unfettered Chinese access to the oil-rich Gulf through the Pakistani port of Gwadar. As China's external energy dependency has deepened in the past decade, so has its sense of insecurity and urgency.

    'The Kashmir card'
    While China and India have long sparred over the Dalai Lama and Tibet's status, border incursions and China's growing footprint in southern Asia, a perceptible shift in the Chinese stance on Kashmir has now emerged as a new source of interstate friction. Throughout the 1990s, a desire for stability on its southwestern flank and fears of an Indian-Pakistani nuclear arms race caused Beijing to take a more evenhanded approach to Kashmir, while still favoring Islamabad.

    Yet, in a major policy departure since 2006, Beijing has been voicing open support for Pakistan and the Kashmiri separatists through its opposition to the UN Security Council ban on the jihadi organizations targeting India, economic assistance for infrastructure projects in northern Kashmir, and the issuance of separate visas by Chinese embassies to Indian citizens of Kashmiri origins.

    Amid the current unrest in the valley, Beijing has also invited Kashmiri separatist leaders for talks and offered itself as a mediator, ostensibly in a tit-for-tat for India's refuge for the Dalai Lama. Yet China is actually the third party to the dispute in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K). While India holds about 45% of J&K territory and Pakistan controls 35%, China occupies about 20% (including Aksai Chin and the Shaksgam Valley, ceded by Pakistan to China in 1963).

    The denial of a visa in July 2010 to the Indian Army's Northern Commander, General B S Jaswal – who was to lead the fourth bilateral defense dialogue in Beijing – because he commanded "a disputed area, Jammu and Kashmir", was said to be the last straw.

    Consequently, a new chill has descended on Sino-Indian relations. India retaliated by suspending defense exchanges with China and lodging a formal protest. New Delhi sees these moves as part of a new Chinese strategy with respect to Kashmir that seeks to nix its global ambitions and entangle India to prevent it from playing a role beyond the region. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told Indian media: "Beijing could be tempted to use India's 'soft underbelly', Kashmir, and Pakistan to keep India in 'low-level equilibrium'."

    Resurrecting old issues and manufacturing new disputes to throw the other side off balance and enhance negotiating leverage is an old tactic in Chinese statecraft. The downturn in Sino-Indian ties since the mid-2000s may be partly attributed to the weakening of China's "Pakistan card" against India, necessitating the exercise of direct pressure against the latter.

    Beijing fears that an unrestrained Indian power would eventually threaten China's security along its southwestern frontiers. One Chinese analyst maintains that "Beijing would not abandon its 'Kashmir card.’ The Kashmir issue will remain active as long as China worries about its southern borders." China and Pakistan have been allies since the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict. This enduring alliance was formalized with the conclusion of the China-Pakistan "Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation and Good-Neighborly Relations" in April 2005.

    Likewise, the sharper focus on Tawang is part of a shriller claim over Arunachal Pradesh in the east, which Beijing now calls "South Tibet" (a new Chinese term for Arunachal Pradesh since 2005), ostensibly to extend its claim over the territories.

    It is worth noting that prior to 2005, there was no reference to "South Tibet" in China's official media or any talk of the "unfinished business of the 1962 war." Nor did the Chinese government or official media ever claim that the PLA's "peaceful liberation of Tibet in 1950 was partial and incomplete" or that "a part of Tibet was yet to be liberated.''

    Taking a cue from the Pakistanis, who have long described Kashmir as the "unfinished business of the 1947 partition,'' Chinese strategists now call Arunachal Pradesh, or more specifically, Tawang, the "unfinished business of the 1962 war." China also sought to internationalize its bilateral territorial dispute with India by opposing an Asian Development Bank loan in 2009, part of which was earmarked for a watershed project in Arunachal Pradesh.

    Chinese strategic writings indicate that as China becomes more economically and militarily powerful, Beijing is devising new stratagems to keep its southern rival in check. Some Chinese economists calculate that within a decade or so, India could come close to "spoiling Beijing's party of the century" by outpacing China in economic growth. From Beijing's perspective, India's rise as an economic and military power would prolong American hegemony in Asia, and thereby hinder the establishment of a post-American, Sino-centric hierarchical order in the Asia-Pacific region.

    The past decade has, therefore, seen the Chinese military bolstering its strength all along the disputed borders from Kashmir to Burma (aka Myanmar). Beijing also prefers a powerful and well-armed Pakistani military, as that helps it mount pressure, by proxy, on India. China continues to shower its "all-weather" friend with military and civilian assistance ranging from ballistic missiles and JF-17 fighter aircraft to nuclear power plants and infrastructure.

    Having "fathered" Pakistan's nuclear-weapons program, China is now set to "grandfather" Pakistan's civilian nuclear-energy program as well. Chinese and Pakistani strategists gloat over how Beijing is building naval bases around India that will enhance the Chinese naval presence in the Indian Ocean.

    However, the best-laid plans might come unstuck if Pakistan fails to pacify Balochistan province, where Gwadar is located. The growing Balochi independence movement, which has repeatedly targeted Chinese engineers since 2004, makes the Chinese nervous about implementing their proposals for investment in the construction of a petrochemical complex, a pipeline and a railway line.

    Mutual suspicions, geopolitical tensions and a zero-sum mentality add to a very competitive dynamic in the China-Pakistan-India triangular relationship. Beijing and Islamabad are concerned over the growing talk in Washington's policy circles of India emerging as a counterweight to China on the one hand and the fragile, radical Islamic states of Southwest Asia on the other, viewing a potential US-Indian alignment with horror.

    The US military bases in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and India's growing footprint in Afghanistan cause alarm in Beijing and Islamabad. Some Chinese strategists worry about the destabilizing consequences of a prolonged US military presence in "Af-Pak" for the future of Sino-Pakistani ties, as well as on Pakistan's domestic stability. While the remarkable upturn in Indian-American security ties has exacerbated the security dilemma, the post-9/11 US military presence in Pakistan has sharpened the divide within the Pakistani military into pro-West and pro-Beijing factions.

    A geopolitical crisis of Himalayan proportions may well be in the making from Afghanistan to Myanmar. Chinese state-run media have begun to attack India for supposedly hegemonic designs, with some hinting at the merits of a confrontation. Beijing perceives India as the weakest link in an evolving anti-China coalition of maritime powers (the US-Japan-Vietnam-Australia-India) inimical to China's growth. The real irony is that China and India could stumble into another war in the future for exactly the same reasons that led them to a border war half-a-century ago in 1962.

    New railroad-infrastructure projects in Pakistani-held Kashmir and Tibet are aimed at bolstering China's military strength and intervention options against India in the event of another war between the sub-continental rivals or between China and India. Most war-gaming exercises on the next India-Pakistan war end



    either in a nuclear exchange or in a Chinese military intervention to prevent the collapse of Beijing's "all-weather ally" in Asia.

    Although the probability of an all-out conflict seems low, the China-Pakistan duo and India will employ strategic maneuvers to checkmate each other from gaining advantage or expanding spheres of influence. According to one Chinese analyst, Dai Bing: "While a hot war is out of the question, a cold war between the two countries is increasingly likely."

    Beijing's nemesis: Islam and Buddhism
    Having said that, Beijing's new Kashmir activism goes beyond the strategic imperative to contain India. China's relationship with Pakistan is also aimed at countering the separatist threats in its western, Muslim-majority Xinjiang province. Much like Tibetan Buddhism, Beijing views radical Islam as a strategic threat to China's national integrity, particularly in Xinjiang (formerly East Turkestan), where the East Turkestan Islamic Movement has been fighting for an independent homeland for several decades. Frequent disturbances and protests in Xinjiang and Tibet make the issue more acute, insofar as they show how vulnerable the Chinese hold is over its western region.

    The spillover effects of a rabid Talibanization of Pakistani society worry the Chinese. The past few years have seen Chinese civilians working in Pakistan kidnapped and killed by Islamic militants, partly in retaliation against Beijing's "strike hard" campaigns against Uyghur Muslims and partly in protest against Beijing's resource extraction and infrastructure development projects in Pakistan's Wild West.

    Beijing has repeatedly impressed on Islamabad the importance of tightening control over its porous border with China. Should Islamabad fail to stem the radicalization and training of Uyghur separatists on its territory, it risks undermining the strategic relationship with China. Significantly, Gilgit-Baltistan in northern Kashmir is where the predominantly Sunni Pakistan army is faced with a revolt from the local Shi'ite Muslims.

    For its part, Pakistan has always been extraordinarily sensitive to Chinese interests. Islamabad essentially "carries the water" for China in the Islamic world. Pakistan played a key role in selling China's point of view on the July 2009 riots in Xinjiang, which resulted in 183 deaths.

    Pakistan has ensured that the Organization of Islamic Countries does not pass any resolution condemning China's "strike hard" campaigns (including curbs on the observance of the holy Muslim month of Ramadan) against its Uyghur Muslim minority.

    In return, China has repeatedly used its United Nations Security Council seat to ensure that no harm comes to Pakistan for sheltering anti-Indian terrorist groups. Further, Islamabad offers unequivocal support for Beijing's position on every single issue in international forums, from Tibet and Taiwan to trade and UN Security Council reforms.

    Tightening embrace
    A high degree of mistrust and conflicting relations between India and its smaller South Asian neighbors provide Beijing with enormous strategic leverage vis-a-vis its southern rival. China's strategic leverage thus prevents India from achieving a peaceful periphery via cross-border economic, resource and transportation linkages vital for optimal economic growth.

    Interestingly, Chinese strategic writings reveal that Pakistan and Myanmar have now acquired the same place in China's grand strategy in the 21st century that was earlier occupied by Xinjiang (meaning "New Territory") and Xizang (meaning "Western treasure house," that is, Tibet) in the 20th century.

    Stated simply, following the integration of the outlying provinces of Xinjiang and Xizang (Tibet) into China, Pakistan is now being perceived as China's new Xinjiang (new territory) and Myanmar as China's new Xizang (treasure house) in economic, military and strategic terms. Beijing's privileged access to markets, resources and bases of South Asian countries has the additional benefit of making a point on the limits of Indian power.

    Conclusion
    Both enmity and amity between India and Pakistan have significant implications for China's grand strategy. A hostile stance toward India reassures the Pakistani establishment of China's unstinting support in Islamabad's domestic and external struggles. It also throws a spanner in the works of any US-facilitated India-Pakistan accommodation over the Kashmir imbroglio.

    In the triangular power-balance game, the Sino-Pakistani military alliance (in particular, the nuclear and missile nexus) is aimed at ensuring that the South Asian military balance of power remains pro-China. Nurturing the Pakistani military's fears of Indian dominance helps Beijing keep Islamabad within its orbit.

    However, Pakistan today is facing a "perfect storm" of crises, with its US-backed fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban faltering and the country lurching toward bankruptcy. The linchpin of Beijing's South Asia strategy is potentially a "wild card" because Pakistan's possible futures cover a wide spectrum: from the emergence of a moderate, democratic state to a radical Islamic republic to "Lebanonization."

    If it does not implode or degenerate into another Iran or Afghanistan (a radical Islamic and/or a failed state) and gets its house in order, Pakistan could emerge as a pivotal player in the US-Chinese-Indian triangular relationship. Despite Beijing's disenchantment with the current state of its "time-tested ally," China remains committed to supporting Pakistan. If anything, Pakistan's transformation from being an ally to a battleground in the US-led "war on terror" has forced Islamabad into an ever-tighter embrace of China.

    Mohan Malik, PhD, is a professor at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu. He is the author of China and India as Global Powers: Back to the Future? (forthcoming), Dragon on Terrorism, The Gulf War: Australia's Role and Asian-Pacific Responses, co-editor of Religious Radicalism and Security in South Asia, and editor of Australia's Security in the 21st Century, The Future Battlefield, and Asian Defense Policies. The views expressed here do not reflect the official policy or position of the Center or the US Department of Defense.
     
  18. Iamanidiot

    Iamanidiot Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    5,326
    Likes Received:
    1,493
    The road to cutting Beijing to size is through Pakistan.If we get to slaughter and butcher Pakistanis and the PA to such a point that PA will no longer be a credible force.Beijing will realize that it will no longer be viable to contain India.Right now our aim is to deter beijing but plan scenarios where Pakistan must be made to implode from within or some other scenario where the entire PA officer corps is butchered this will lead to all hell loose in Pakistan
     
  19. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,543
    Likes Received:
    6,547
    We should open a front in Tibet and recapture what is rightfully Indian territory.
     
  20. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
  21. Rebelkid

    Rebelkid Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    453
    Likes Received:
    24
    Everyone is desperate to get their hands on Pakistan's gwadar port, NATO, America, china and India. Now its just a battle to see who actually wins, by the looks of it, Pakistan seems to be on a constant destabilization process. A free Sindh and Baluchistan will spoil china's dreams. China will do all they can to make Pakistan stable.

    And the west i.e U.N will try its best to screw up relationship b/w India and china while trying their best to arm India against china
     

Share This Page