India should de-recognize Tibet as an autonomous region of China

[ice berg]

What aid did USSR send to Bay of Bengal?

Since are unable to read basic reference, let me spoon-feed you then:
Belchman & Kaplan 1978, p. 188. If you cant be bothered to read my link or book then here is wiki:
Task Force 74 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Admiral Krishnan was ready to take on the US 7th Fleet.

Kissinger's opinion is his opinion and not the statement of fact.

I will take his words over some fanboys any day. He was there when the decisions were made.

If one goes by the report that you have appended that Pakistan was being aided with Four Jordanian planes moving to Pakistan and 22 more in the pipeline and with the Saudis, the Turks found are willing to give five, with China Chinese being very helpful & willing to move some forces or threaten to move some forces, the French to selling some planes to the Paks, the UAE sending in half a squadron of fighter aircraft and the Indonesians dissipating at least one naval vessel to fight alongside the Pakistani Navy, the US Seventh Fleet including the guided missile cruiser USS King, guided missile destroyers USS Decatur, Parsons and Tartar Sam, and a large amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli, and the British naval group led by the aircraft carrier Eagle had moved closer to India's territorial waters, what did you expect USSR, as the other global superpower to do?

What USSR may or may not do is not the topic. The question was whether India was in Soviet camp, the answer is yes.

Twiddle their thumbs and let the competitor US and it surrogates change the geopolitics and geostrategy of the region wherein the Indian subcontinent and the Indian Ocean become a personal preserve of the US and its surrogates, to include China? In this context, it would be worth noting that though China was a communist country and a 'partner', it was being looked at by the USSR with a suspicious eye.

What was the Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation all about?

With your fondness to google, I am sure you can manage to google that?

India was already getting USSR arms on purchase and so there was no dearth of supplies coming so long as payment was made, even before the Treaty was signed.

It was basically a 'threat in being' to America that overplaying her hand could lead to what they feared that there could be the possibility of expansion of Soviet influence in South Asia.

Indeed it came in handy since the Soviet 'threat in being' sabotaged the US plan.

Meaning India was in the Soviet camp. revisionism and selective Alzheimers isnt gonna help your cause.

 

[ice berg]

A few items that need to be stated:

ROC and Hong Kong have constitutions that permit and provide pathways to self-determination that can potentially impact the territorial integrity of the Chinese one country system and the consequence on the PRC region and areas will be immense. These constitutions of ROC and Hong Kong are not a single Chinese constitution and also do not need to be "earned". It's the beauty of the times we are living in and one of the challenges PRC will have to handle in the next few years. Will force be used to prevent the natural progression of the people of ROC and Hong Kong to observe what their own constitutions provide on pathway to self determination is something that is being talk about. Even the simple fact the free speech is permitted in ROC and Hong Kong has a impact on PRC region territorial integrity and the PRC has to develop a response(s) in the next few years.

I cant speak for ROC. that is another matter entirely. For Hongkong there is no issue. The PRC constitution is Lex superior.
In other words the Hongkong constitution must exist within the framework

Next Falkland Islands the British brought out the big guns because it was their territory that was invaded and they had the right to defend. Because they did not defend the Falklands immediately but took their time this is used to show the right to self defence over ones own territory is not precluded by time. It does not show that one used big guns to enforce and control the citizens of Falklands to be british. If that were the case the people would have become argentines because they used the big guns first in the Falklands war.
Like I said Falklands people have in a recent referendum said they want to remain british. That's evidence of self-determination and it overpowers big guns and countries that use power to enforce control. If states put in places mechanisms that demonstrate that people are having self determination it reinforces territorial integrity. If the area does not have self determination it opens up the question of recognition and legitimacy (per the topic of this thread)

No, it proves my point. You can hold as many referendums as you want, If the british wasnt there with their fleet. All the self-determination will mean nothing. There are tons of ethnic people living in different country, should all countries be based on ethnicity?India?

Next you mention about international alliance change. Yes states have alliance change but they are done with principles. What is the principle of PRC alliance with Pakistan. What is the principle of PRC alliance with North Korea. PRC is judged by the company it keeps. Some say both North Korea and Pakistan have suffered since entering into alliance with PRC (but that's a separate topic). Is that what states think when being asked to entering into alliance with PRC.

There is no principles. US has supported some of the worst dictators in the world. What principles are there except self interest?

I am reading more and more the distance and difference in status that PRC displays when talking about its alliance partners the Pakis and North Koreans. A bit like a upper class kid ashamed of its lower class cousin. Why the shame. But yet behind such words and shame the company PRC keeps is with North Korea and Pakistan. And the shame does not prevent it keeping such company but why ... What's the benefit.

Simple.
Pakistan: Pin down the indians. You give refuge to Dalai? We provide aid to Pakistan. Tit for tat.
North Korea: You give aid or you watch millions of starving NK refuges across your border because farmine. China choosed the former for obvious reasons.

India was never with a camp during 1971 we had the fortune of what the PRC did to the Soviets before 1971. Also the soviet treaty was there if USA intervened. The USA played their card to bring that out in the open and it's debatable if they would have attacked india. There are reports where the Americans asked the PRC to get involved but they did not (what does Pakistan think about that). The international community got together to keep West Pakistan (current Pakistan) from being finished off. And the world has suffered because of that consequently. You can read the Zhou Enlai and Nixon transcripts on what played out from American angle,

It is fact that india had support of Soviet Union during 1971 liberation of Bangladesh (a wonderful example of intervention on humanitarian grounds and subsequent implementation of self-determination done properly).

You tell me the treaty was a mere paper? that Soviet came to your aid out of brotherly love? You were in the Soviet camp in every thing but the name. It was how it was perceived among others including US. That is what matters.

We have not backstabbed the Russians on principle. we have got closer to Americans on principle. We have got closer to PRC on principle.

Iam not sure what international alliance PRC had during those years. Aim not sure what alliance PRC has now. I can say that there is a PRC camp that has Pakistan and North Korea. I think the Pakis are vulnerable in the PRC camp. I also worry the Pakis are one step ahead of you and you will feel their reaction to rediscover their value to you. The North Koreans will be there because of total dependence.

There is no camp. PRC have converging interests with Russia, Pakistan, Thailand etc. Alliance is a too strong word.

The most important alliance that PRC ought to have is with the Russians but PRC fought the Soviets and later backstabbed and consequently entered into a relationship with America (that exposed the PRC unprincipled approach to the Soviets).
The PRC has also embezzled technology and prestige from the Russians.

Like how India who were in the soviet camp now buys more weapons from US? Right....

Is that what you mean when you say "it does not matter who's company you are keeping as long as it benefits you".

Apparently that's true if you keep PRC company they surely will take advantage of you.

Obviously it is mutual otherwise they will just switch.

I am wishing that the PRC see sense and with their alliance with Pakistan puts in principles above short term greed. I am hearing more from PRC people that Pakistan is unreliable and not worthy. Wish its true voices and not a mirage like they are saying about North Koreans in the six party talks.

the pakis will cause PRC trouble ask the Americans. I am sure manmohan singh told li keiqiang the same during the bilateral. And I am sensing the response was in the affirmative,

Like you said Indian and China is a more natural alliance compare to China and Pakistan.

The Sino Pakistan "alliance" will continue as long as the border dispute between India and China is not solved.
As long as India give refuges to tibetans and Dalai lama, Pakistan will not be abandoned. You just need to accept that no matter how a Sino-india alliance will make more sense.

 

[Compersion]

The Sino Pakistan "alliance" will continue as long as the border dispute between India and China is not solved.
As long as India give refuges to tibetans and Dalai lama, Pakistan will not be abandoned. You just need to accept that no matter how a Sino-india alliance will make more sense.

Like how India who were in the soviet camp now buys more weapons from US? Right....

It doesnt equate because the India relationship with Russia now along with USA is different in nature and quality of what the PRC had with Soviet Union and USA in 1970s. Where the PRC showed its principle is that it can back-stab the Soviets for a relationship with USA. The Americans brought that out in the open.

India is able to buy weapons from both Russia and USA. The last time i checked USA does not sell weapons to PRC and Russia convergence in relationship is not the same like before 1960s.

Also India has defense development projects with Russia. India wants to have good relationship with both USA and Russia. But it wont take the easy and senseless approach by ditching one for the other and even back-stabbing one for the other. Because that is a principle that India does not want to abide by in the comity of nations.

yes it is difficult but its better to do the right thing through difficulty compare to the easy thing wrongly.


respond to few of the items you said to keep the focus on the thread title:

I cant speak for ROC. that is another matter entirely. For Hongkong there is no issue. The PRC constitution is Lex superior.
In other words the Hongkong constitution must exist within the framework

Both ROC and Hong Kong are under the "one country" umbrella. If you cannot speak for ROC and can speak for Hong Kong. What happens if ROC stretches the self-determination paradigm in the region.

next you mention lex superior but that applies in "conflict". it is a means to observe in a conflict of laws. for hong kong to reach a level of conflict for PRC to apply lex superior the self-determination paradigm would have to be stressed and stretched. and what happens in that situation. its not a simple means of throwing down the hammer (literally).

In both ROC and Hong Kong there are constitutions that are not a single Chinese constitution. The PRC constitution has nothing on free speech and assembly of people and universal suffrage (tangible and authentic). but ROC and Hong Kong do. there are provisions on electoral and legislative rules and selection in ROC and Hong Kong that interject into the unitary system of the PRC.

will these have the ability to stretch the self-determination paradigm and territorial integrity of PRC. i leave that to your thoughts. Will Tibet be impacted by what happens in Hong Kong and ROC more compared to what happens in Beijing is also a question for you to think about in the next few years (both legally and territorial). also what about the integrity of the PRC unitary system.

No, it proves my point. You can hold as many referendums as you want, If the british wasnt there with their fleet. All the self-determination will mean nothing. There are tons of ethnic people living in different country, should all countries be based on ethnicity?India?

the referendum by the falkand people reinforces the territorial integrity of the british in falklands. self-determination can change and transform the territorial integrity of a region and state. there are many many such examples. you are confused on what self-determination is probably because there is not much discussion about it in PRC in the intellectual fields and in practice.

also ethnicity is a different topic. and India is a federal structure that allows ethnicity to prosper. all the states have structure and arrangement that allows each citizen to exercise their self-determination that strengthens territorial integrity of the state and country.

what you say will work if india was a unitary state. PRC is a Unitary state.

Unitary state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can you answer me if Tibet is a constituent country of PRC. Shall we refer to PRC to be PRC and the Tibet Autunomous Region. A bit like United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Constituent country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Self-determination and ethnicity brings divergence to states that are Unitary in nature because such areas have to provide political power through devolution through local government by statue and when that happens self-determination can cultivate and grow (look at Bangladesh in 1970 before liberation and also scotland and the intellectual discussion that is taking place in UK on both sides of the coin for reference to possible orientation on PRC).

If the states are federal in nature self-determination and ethnicity strengthens the structure.

The Sino Pakistan "alliance" will continue as long as the border dispute between India and China is not solved.
As long as India give refuges to tibetans and Dalai lama, Pakistan will not be abandoned. You just need to accept that no matter how a Sino-india alliance will make more sense.

North Korea is a different character because it is a appendage of PRC unlike Pakistan. Also there are six-party talks to bring out the nature of the relationship.

For Sino-Pakistan "alliance" to reach such heights against India must equate that Tibetans refugees and Dalai Lama are equal in influence and purpose against PRC. Forget against India one can say against the world (the impact Pakistan has had on the world by way of terrorisim and nuclear proliferation must be in the thoughts of leadership of PRC)

Why does Tibetans refugees and Dalai Lama deserve such a impact and reaction by PRC on India and the world. Tibet is part of PRC you have said over and over again.

You have also said Indian and China is a more natural alliance than China and Pakistan.

In case of Tibertans and Dalai Lama they are not Pakis (in thought and behavior). They wont be able to do to India what Pakis can do to PRC.

Like i have said will India change its stance. I doubt it. India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does.

But will Paki make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.

 

[ice berg]

It doesnt equate because the India relationship with Russia now along with USA is different in nature and quality of what the PRC had with Soviet Union and USA in 1970s. Where the PRC showed its principle is that it can back-stab the Soviets for a relationship with USA. The Americans brought that out in the open.

India is able to buy weapons from both Russia and USA. The last time i checked USA does not sell weapons to PRC and Russia convergence in relationship is not the same like before 1960s.

What backstabbing? It takes two to make a deal. Who says China can not back it out? Cuba stayed with Soviet, what happende to them? What about NK? They were in the soviet camp until Sovietunion collapsed.

Also India has defense development projects with Russia. India wants to have good relationship with both USA and Russia. But it wont take the easy and senseless approach by ditching one for the other and even back-stabbing one for the other. Because that is a principle that India does not want to abide by in the comity of nations.

yes it is difficult but its better to do the right thing through difficulty compare to the easy thing wrongly.


respond to few of the items you said to keep the focus on the thread title:



Both ROC and Hong Kong are under the "one country" umbrella. If you cannot speak for ROC and can speak for Hong Kong. What happens if ROC stretches the self-determination paradigm in the region.

War.

next you mention lex superior but that applies in "conflict".

it is a means to observe in a conflict of laws. for hong kong to reach a level of conflict for PRC to apply lex superior the self-determination paradigm would have to be stressed and stretched. and what happens in that situation. its not a simple means of throwing down the hammer (literally).

In both ROC and Hong Kong there are constitutions that are not a single Chinese constitution. The PRC constitution has nothing on free speech and assembly of people and universal suffrage (tangible and authentic). but ROC and Hong Kong do.

Really? Kindly point me to the relevant passages. and how they are in conflict with PRC constitution

there are provisions on electoral and legislative rules and selection in ROC and Hong Kong that interject into the unitary system of the PRC.

Not sure what you trying to say here.

will these have the ability to stretch the self-determination paradigm and territorial integrity of PRC. i leave that to your thoughts.

Will Tibet be impacted by what happens in Hong Kong and ROC more compared to what happens in Beijing is also a question for you to think about in the next few years (both legally and territorial). also what about the integrity of the PRC unitary system.

Nop, Tibet and Hongkong are part of China. There is no territorial or legal issues there.

the referendum by the falkand people reinforces the territorial integrity of the british in falklands. self-determination can change and transform the territorial integrity of a region and state. there are many many such examples. you are confused on what self-determination is probably because there is not much discussion about it in PRC in the intellectual fields and in practice.

Son, I live in Europe. My sources is not limited by what is avaiable in PRC.

also ethnicity is a different topic. and India is a federal structure that allows ethnicity to prosper. all the states have structure and arrangement that allows each citizen to exercise their self-determination that strengthens territorial integrity of the state and country.

Prosper? You are surely jesting. There are huge difference between states based on ethnicity. Does Maoists ring a bell? Or you gonna blame that on hostile force?

what you say will work if india was a unitary state. PRC is a Unitary state.

Unitary state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So is the great majority of states in the world. What is your point?

Can you answer me if Tibet is a constituent country of PRC. Shall we refer to PRC to be PRC and the Tibet Autunomous Region. A bit like United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Constituent country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Will you bother to read your own link? Was China and Tibet mentioned there?

Constituent country is a term sometimes used in contexts in which a country makes up a part of a larger political entity, such as a sovereign state. The term constituent country does not have any defined legal meaning, and is used simply to refer to a country which is a constituent part of something else.Tibet is not a country.

Self-determination and ethnicity brings divergence to states that are Unitary in nature because such areas have to provide political power through devolution through local government by statue and when that happens self-determination can cultivate and grow (look at Bangladesh in 1970 before liberation and also scotland and the intellectual discussion that is taking place in UK on both sides of the coin for reference to possible orientation on PRC).

If the states are federal in nature self-determination and ethnicity strengthens the structure.



North Korea is a different character because it is a appendage of PRC unlike Pakistan. Also there are six-party talks to bring out the nature of the relationship.

For Sino-Pakistan "alliance" to reach such heights against India must equate that Tibetans refugees and Dalai Lama are equal in influence and purpose against PRC. Forget against India one can say against the world (the impact Pakistan has had on the world by way of terrorisim and nuclear proliferation must be in the thoughts of leadership of PRC)

Why does Tibetans refugees and Dalai Lama deserve such a impact and reaction by PRC on India and the world. Tibet is part of PRC you have said over and over again.

THat is a long story. To make it short, China was and is still suspicious of indian motives on Tibet because she harbours tibetan refugees and Dalai Lama. As far as CHina is concerned, they pose a threat to chinese sovereignity. If India helps them, then China helps Pakistan. Counter balance.

You have also said Indian and China is a more natural alliance than China and Pakistan.

In case of Tibertans and Dalai Lama they are not Pakis (in thought and behavior). They wont be able to do to India what Pakis can do to PRC.

THat is not how China sees it.

Like i have said will India change its stance. I doubt it. India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does.

But will Paki make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.

I cant imagine other who will recognize Tibet. Even if they do, it will matters little. Why? Because what I said earlier. No boots in the ground to support the claim.
Until the 70s the world only recognize ROC. Does it matter for the people living in PRC? No.
Does it matter for tibetans if India recognize them or not? No.

 

[Ray]

Does it matter for tibetans if India recognize them or not? No.

Do you speak for the Tibetans?

Your credentials to do so?

 

[Ray]

Meaning India was in the Soviet camp. revisionism and selective Alzheimers isnt gonna help your cause.

Are you that indoctrinated that you act like a parrot.

Why use the same words that others have used?

I thought you were the expert in English advising Bose on Englsh.

Sure you would have a repertoire to use another word, or don't you have that luxury?

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Some history:

The need for India to play an active part in protecting her security and interests in the northeast is all the greater today [written in 1953] because of the strongly imperialist policies adopted by Communist China and the U.S.S.R. The ostensible objective of the Chinese invasion of Tibet is the "liberation" of the Tibetan people. But in fact Mao Tse-tung has assumed the expansionist rôle formerly played by the Manchu Emperors. In other words, Tibet in Chinese eyes is once again a province of China, composed of the present Tibetan territory plus all the areas which originally were Tibetan and later were lost to India or Nepal. Years ago, Tibet owned all of Sikkim down to Siliguri in India, including Darjeeling; it also owned Bhutan, now an Indian vassal state, and had Nepal as a protectorate. Nepal discontinued her quinquennial missions to Peking only about 40 years ago, and shook off Chinese suzerainty.

Thirty years ago, Sir Charles Bell, one of the greatest experts on Tibet, made clear in his work, "Tibet, Past and Present,"[ii] that if the Chinese should disturb the Tibetan balance of power as laid down in the Simla Convention, both Nepal and India would be threatened. He also expressed grave concern about the future of the system of security initiated by the British in the event that India were to become independent. He foresaw that with a transfer of power from the British to an independent India the Simla policy would automatically break down, since, he thought, independent India whether through lack of interest or lack of firmness would not support Tibet against Chinese imperialism (yellow or red). In such circumstances Tibet would have to break away from the Indian environment, and Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim would find it difficult to continue in friendly partnership with India; for when the inhabitants of these countries saw that India had abandoned the effort to maintain a balance of power in Tibet, and had assumed a passive attitude there, they would be tempted to turn to China of their own accord. One of Sir Charles Bell's practical recommendations for delaying Chinese penetration in Tibet was to prevent Chinese agents from entering that country through India. He also noted that the lines of communication direct from Peking to Lhasa are highly inadequate and emphasized that if ever Chinese troops and officials succeeded in seizing Tibet the export of rice or other food grains and supplies to them through India should be prevented. It is significant that at the present time all Chinese missions enter Tibet via Calcutta and Kalimpong, and that Tibetan missions to China do not travel from Lhasa direct to Peking but take the same roundabout route by way of Kalimpong and Calcutta.

India and the Tibetan Tragedy | Foreign Affairs

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Sinicisation of Tibet has failed to resolve Tibetan issue. Tibetan haspreserved their distinct cultural and religious identity with the help of India and global community.Settlement of Han people in Tibetan area has inflamed their passion for independence. Tibetans resentthe presence of Han people and Chinese troops in their land. China won over Panchem Lama to itsside but failed to undermine the authority of Dalai Lama, who is most revered Tibetan figure. Withoutinvolving him no solution to Tibetan question is possible. Here India can play a positive role inpersuading Dalai Lama and his followers to accept the resolution of Tibet problem. Over the years,Dalai Lama has also accepted the futility of seeking independence for Tibet. Dalai Lama whileaddressing the European Parliament in Strasbourg has unveiled his plan for the resolution of Tibetanproblem within China. Among other things, it envisages full autonomy within China anddemilitarization of Tibetan Autonomous Region. This proposal, which is now called Strasbourgproposal, is closer to Indian demand of granting full autonomy to Tibet. Demilitarization of Tibet willfulfill the Indian security needs of having a buffer state between India and China. Since this proposalaccepts the Chinese suzerainty over Tibet and does not talk about splitting China, it can be acceptedby China without compromising its sovereignty over Tibet. But China does not want to dilute itsposition in Tibet and want to integrate it completely with China.Unless China is not granting full autonomy to Tibet, this problem will continue to haunt it. Chineseaggressive posture of claiming Indian territories in Arunachal Pradesh in eastern sector and Ladakh inwestern sector will not help it in consolidating its position in Tibet. Repeated incursions in IndianTerritory by PLA have annoyed Indian government and people. Without involving India no solution of Tibet imbroglio is possible. Any lasting solution of Tibet must be acceptable to the Indian, Chinese andTibetan people.

Tibet Factor in Sino-India Relations | Tej Pratap Singh - Academia.edu

 

[Compersion]

I cant imagine other who will recognize Tibet. Even if they do, it will matters little. Why? Because what I said earlier. No boots in the ground to support the claim.
Until the 70s the world only recognize ROC. Does it matter for the people living in PRC? No.
Does it matter for tibetans if India recognize them or not? No.

Good stuff.

When you mention "War" thats the apprehension everyone has because people think and believe that is how CPC will behave when even confronted with peaceful civil disobedience that is right on principle and in agreement with the mainstream. a bit like a coward would behave when confronted by people trying to change the cowards behavior through non-violence (the coward will attack instead of listen). Some people with strong conviction will face the coward with will-power based on principle. And when that happens that will be everlasting.

There are news items that say what the people in Tibet, Hong Kong and Taiwan are doing in light of the PRC aggression on Chinese territory is commendable. It has never happen on Chinese territory what they are doing and they are the pioneers. Read the news of Tibet people getting arrested, Taiwan people voting and peacefully electing their leaders. Hong Kong people are demonstrating peacefully and debating about issues of great importance. Are they doing something that will grow in importantance. Are they doing something that will fade away. Thats the beauty of the times we are living in. Thats "One Country" of China.

But not sure if "War" is the solution on Taiwan, Tibet and Hong Kong.

Really? Kindly point me to the relevant passages. and how they are in conflict with PRC constitution

Taiwan Constitution:

Second Revision (1992)

Adopted by the extraordinary session of the Second National Assembly on May 27, 1992, and promulgated by the president on May 28, 1992

After the Second National Assembly was elected in December 1991, it met for its first extraordinary session from March to May of the following year. On May 27, 1992, eight amendments were adopted by the session and promulgated by the president on May 28. The highlights of these additional articles are as follows: (1) when the National Assembly convenes, it may hear a report on the state of the nation by the president; (2) the president and the vice president shall be elected by the people in the free area of the Republic of China for, at most, two terms of four years each; (3) local self-government was granted a legal basis and the provincial governor and municipal mayors shall be elected by popular vote; (4) rather than being elected by the provincial and municipal councils, members of the Control Yuan--a watchdog body--shall be nominated and, with the consent of the National Assembly, appointed by the president, whereas the president, vice president and members of the Examination Yuan and the president and vice president of the Judicial Yuan, and its Grand Justices shall also be nominated and, with the consent of the National Assembly, appointed by the president; (5) expand fundamental national policies to promote culture, science and technology, environmental protection, and economic development and to safeguard the interests of women, aborigines, and the handicapped; and (6) the Grand Justices of the Judicial Yuan shall form a constitutional tribunal to adjudicate on the dissolution of political parties for constitutional violations.

History of Constitutional Revisions in the Republic of China

Article 14 guarantees freedom of assembly and association.

Freedom of assembly - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hong Kong Constitution:

Article 26
Permanent residents of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall have the right to vote and the right to stand for election in accordance with law.

Article 28
The freedom of the person of Hong Kong residents shall be inviolable.

No Hong Kong resident shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful arrest, detention or imprisonment. Arbitrary or unlawful search of the body of any resident or deprivation or restriction of the freedom of the person shall be prohibited. Torture of any resident or arbitrary or unlawful deprivation of the life of any resident shall be prohibited.

Article 32
Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of conscience.

Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of religious belief and freedom to preach and to conduct and participate in religious activities in public.

Article 35
Hong Kong residents shall have the right to confidential legal advice, access to the courts, choice of lawyers for timely protection of their lawful rights and interests or for representation in the courts, and to judicial remedies.

Hong Kong residents shall have the right to institute legal proceedings in the courts against the acts of the executive authorities and their personnel.

Hong Kong Basic Law Article 27

"Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, of the press and of publication; freedom of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration; and the right and freedom to form and join trade unions, and to strike."

Hong Kong Basic Law Article 45

"The method for selecting the Chief Executive shall be specified in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress. The ultimate aim is the selection of the Chief Executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures."

Basic Law Full Text - index.html

Will Tibet be impacted by what happens in Hong Kong and ROC more compared to what happens in Beijing.

Under the one country principle it is ironic that Taiwan and Hong Kong have such principle(s) above yet Peoples Republic of China does not (and Tibet Autonomous Region does not). It is a question for PRC leadership and the people of PRC to think about in the next few years (both legally and territorial) and also the composition of the integrity of the PRC unitary system.

Why the preferential treatment of Hong Kong and Taiwan and not the same for Tibet and other PRC regions. Like mentioned above the aspect of self-determination paradigm can be stretched and impact the territorial integrity of PRC. How long can the existing state of affairs be achieved. With Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong the state of affairs that PRC needs to deal with cannot only be dealt by "war". I know Chinese people are pragmatic and how much pragmatism will be shown by PRC leadership is the juice of the story.

Before you start and complaining about India and taking it to be India assault on PRC and saying the above is a INDIAN thought the above is not a Indian but Chinese created state of affairs. It is by the Chinese people(s). It is what is out there it is a fact. The Taiwan Constitution is by people of Taiwan. The Hong Kong constitution is signed by government (people) of PRC and government people of Hong Kong with co signature of UK. Does the above have the potential of interjecting into the PRC people mainstream and PRC constitution thats for the people of PRC to determine. But there are significant principles and laws and constitutions in the "One Country" region that are not in PRC region.

And when PRC behave like they do with Pakistan against India because of Tibet and Dalai Lama like I have said India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does. There is thought that behavior of Pakis will bring India and PRC closer not wider apart.

Will Paki make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.

I also add will Taiwan and Hong Kong make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.

When it comes to Tibet recognition India need not (have) to deal with the Tibet question because there are forthcoming authoritative issues and questions (like Taiwan, Hong Kong and relationship with Pakis) that PRC will have to face with that can have more greater impact.

India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does.

 

[t_co]

Tibet Factor in Sino-India Relations | Tej Pratap Singh - Academia.edu

Demilitarization of Tibet? How can the Dalai Lama force such a strategic retreat from China if he is not willing to bleed for it?

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Demilitarization of Tibet? How can the Dalai Lama force such a strategic retreat from China if he is not willing to bleed for it?

You see everything as armed struggle, probably because to you the answer to every international problem is to unleash the PLA.

"Give a small boy a hammer, and he will find that everything he encounters needs pounding." - - Abraham Kaplan

 

[t_co]

You see everything as armed struggle, probably because to you the answer to every international problem is to unleash the PLA.

"Give a small boy a hammer, and he will find that everything he encounters needs pounding." - - Abraham Kaplan

No, I see demilitarization in Tibet as an armed struggle, because that implies removal of military elements from a region against the wishes of the central actor.

"Fallacy in a debate is like fraud in a transaction." - Anonymous

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

[W.G.Ewald]

No, I see demilitarization in Tibet as an armed struggle, because that implies removal of military elements from a region against the wishes of the central actor.

"Fallacy in a debate is like fraud in a transaction." - Anonymous

Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your central actor is China, which gets its way by armed aggression, or by the threat of armed aggression. That is why China is in Tibet in the first place. "Might makes right" is a position which is morally impoverished.

 

[ice berg]

Good stuff.

When you mention "War" thats the apprehension everyone has because people think and believe that is how CPC will behave when even confronted with peaceful civil disobedience that is right on principle and in agreement with the mainstream. a bit like a coward would behave when confronted by people trying to change the cowards behavior through non-violence (the coward will attack instead of listen). Some people with strong conviction will face the coward with will-power based on principle. And when that happens that will be everlasting.

What civil disobedience are you thinking?

There are news items that say what the people in Tibet, Hong Kong and Taiwan are doing in light of the PRC aggression on Chinese territory is commendable.

No idea what you are talking about.

It has never happen on Chinese territory what they are doing and they are the pioneers.

Pioneer in the history of China or PRC? You will be wrong on both accounts.

Read the news of Tibet people getting arrested, Taiwan people voting and peacefully electing their leaders.

And how long have taiwanere people voted? We are talking about a freaking island. Now apply that to PRC.

Hong Kong people are demonstrating peacefully and debating about issues of great importance. Are they doing something that will grow in importantance. Are they doing something that will fade away. Thats the beauty of the times we are living in. Thats "One Country" of China.

But not sure if "War" is the solution on Taiwan, Tibet and Hong Kong.

War between who?

Taiwan Constitution:

Second Revision (1992)

Adopted by the extraordinary session of the Second National Assembly on May 27, 1992, and promulgated by the president on May 28, 1992

After the Second National Assembly was elected in December 1991, it met for its first extraordinary session from March to May of the following year. On May 27, 1992, eight amendments were adopted by the session and promulgated by the president on May 28. The highlights of these additional articles are as follows: (1) when the National Assembly convenes, it may hear a report on the state of the nation by the president; (2) the president and the vice president shall be elected by the people in the free area of the Republic of China for, at most, two terms of four years each; (3) local self-government was granted a legal basis and the provincial governor and municipal mayors shall be elected by popular vote; (4) rather than being elected by the provincial and municipal councils, members of the Control Yuan--a watchdog body--shall be nominated and, with the consent of the National Assembly, appointed by the president, whereas the president, vice president and members of the Examination Yuan and the president and vice president of the Judicial Yuan, and its Grand Justices shall also be nominated and, with the consent of the National Assembly, appointed by the president; (5) expand fundamental national policies to promote culture, science and technology, environmental protection, and economic development and to safeguard the interests of women, aborigines, and the handicapped; and (6) the Grand Justices of the Judicial Yuan shall form a constitutional tribunal to adjudicate on the dissolution of political parties for constitutional violations.

History of Constitutional Revisions in the Republic of China

Article 14 guarantees freedom of assembly and association.

Freedom of assembly - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hong Kong Constitution:

Article 26
Permanent residents of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall have the right to vote and the right to stand for election in accordance with law.

Article 28
The freedom of the person of Hong Kong residents shall be inviolable.

No Hong Kong resident shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful arrest, detention or imprisonment. Arbitrary or unlawful search of the body of any resident or deprivation or restriction of the freedom of the person shall be prohibited. Torture of any resident or arbitrary or unlawful deprivation of the life of any resident shall be prohibited.

Article 32
Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of conscience.

Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of religious belief and freedom to preach and to conduct and participate in religious activities in public.

Article 35
Hong Kong residents shall have the right to confidential legal advice, access to the courts, choice of lawyers for timely protection of their lawful rights and interests or for representation in the courts, and to judicial remedies.

Hong Kong residents shall have the right to institute legal proceedings in the courts against the acts of the executive authorities and their personnel.

Hong Kong Basic Law Article 27

"Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, of the press and of publication; freedom of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration; and the right and freedom to form and join trade unions, and to strike."

Hong Kong Basic Law Article 45

"The method for selecting the Chief Executive shall be specified in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress. The ultimate aim is the selection of the Chief Executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures."

Basic Law Full Text - index.html

Will Tibet be impacted by what happens in Hong Kong and ROC more compared to what happens in Beijing.

Under the one country principle it is ironic that Taiwan and Hong Kong have such principle(s) above yet Peoples Republic of China does not (and Tibet Autonomous Region does not). It is a question for PRC leadership and the people of PRC to think about in the next few years (both legally and territorial) and also the composition of the integrity of the PRC unitary system.

As far as I know nobody really cares. Laws can be changed. It is not written in stone. Not to mention the chinese constitution is lex superior compared to Hongkong, It is never an issue.

Why the preferential treatment of Hong Kong and Taiwan and not the same for Tibet and other PRC regions.

It needs to be earned. What have tibetans done to give them those treatments?

Like mentioned above the aspect of self-determination paradigm can be stretched and impact the territorial integrity of PRC. How long can the existing state of affairs be achieved. With Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong the state of affairs that PRC needs to deal with cannot only be dealt by "war". I know Chinese people are pragmatic and how much pragmatism will be shown by PRC leadership is the juice of the story.

Three complete differene cases. You should see their respective historical context.

Before you start and complaining about India and taking it to be India assault on PRC and saying the above is a INDIAN thought the above is not a Indian but Chinese created state of affairs. It is by the Chinese people(s). It is what is out there it is a fact. The Taiwan Constitution is by people of Taiwan. The Hong Kong constitution is signed by government (people) of PRC and government people of Hong Kong with co signature of UK.

Government isnt neccesary the same as people. At least when we talk about Hongkong and PRC.

Share with us how the basic law of Hongkong become

Does the above have the potential of interjecting into the PRC people mainstream and PRC constitution thats for the people of PRC to determine. But there are significant principles and laws and constitutions in the "One Country" region that are not in PRC region.

And when PRC behave like they do with Pakistan against India because of Tibet and Dalai Lama like I have said India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does. There is thought that behavior of Pakis will bring India and PRC closer not wider apart.

Will Paki make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.

I also add will Taiwan and Hong Kong make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.

I dont see how

When it comes to Tibet recognition India need not (have) to deal with the Tibet question because there are forthcoming authoritative issues and questions (like Taiwan, Hong Kong and relationship with Pakis) that PRC will have to face with that can have more greater impact.

India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does.

Exactly, India isnt a priority for China. Taiwan and North Korea is.

 

[jmj_overlord]

Exactly, India isnt a priority for China. Taiwan and North Korea is.

taiwan.......ok, but why north korea ?

 

[ice berg]

taiwan.......ok, but why north korea ?

China does not want a nuclear NK or the refugees to swarm over when shits hit the fan. Their best armies the 38th and 39th are for Nk contingency. Defending Beijing isnt their only job.

 

[Compersion]

Exactly, India isnt a priority for China. Taiwan and North Korea is.

What civil disobedience are you thinking?

Do you know what civil disobedience and non-violent civil disobedience is. Please explain it in your own words. Read about it before you answer because I suspect you don't.

I also read an article in India Today where it said that transitions to democracy in over 70% of these the authoritarian regimes fell not because of an armed struggle but because of boycotts, strikes, fasts and other methods pioneered by a Indian thinker.

No idea what you are talking about.

Please share what you are knowing about Tibet, Hong Kong and Taiwan and its relationship with PRC under the "One Country" principle.

Pioneer in the history of China or PRC? You will be wrong on both accounts.

If you go all the way into history and refer to Sun Yat Sen that would be enthusiastic at best. Please share other and previous examples of pioneers under the "One country" system. Please also share pioneers under PRC system. Like Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong are doing and pioneering in recent times.

And how long have taiwanere people voted? We are talking about a freaking island. Now apply that to PRC.

Time is relative. Its like India in 1960s without "One China principle". Taiwan people are voting and peacefully electing their leaders. The "freaking island" is under the "One Country" region like Tibet, Hong Kong and each of the provinces of PRC.

A good question to ask you what is Taiwan. Answer that with PRC region and PRC unitary system in mind. Make it simple and easy to read (if possible) and agreed by both Taiwan and PRC people.

War between who?

You referred to it. You can explain.

As far as I know nobody really cares. Laws can be changed. It is not written in stone. Not to mention the chinese constitution is lex superior compared to Hongkong, It is never an issue.

Out of everything that you mention this is most important for this thread topic because it interjects into the recognition and legitimacy of a region and state. It would be good if you read about law and rule of law and its role in sovereignty and self-determination. When you mention nobody cares I would be careful for you to think like that.

Can you share with everyone how laws are changed in Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, PRC and One Country China. Also are laws important in PRC.

What is the difference between the legislature in Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, PRC and One Country China (some might not be existent yet).

Also do you understand the meaning behind the laws stated from the Taiwan Constitution and Hong Kong Constitution and they are NOT in the PRC Constitution.

It needs to be earned. What have tibetans done to give them those treatments?

Because there is a preferential treatment and different paradigm of self-determination in the "One Country" and PRC region people will ask why Taiwan and Hong Kong deserve this. And it wont be the Tibetans that ask only. You can ask the people in Guangdong, Shanghai and Beijing. Ask them why you dont have what Taiwan had and what Hong Kong has. Hong Kong is treated the best by PRC but why. Are they better. I refer to a quote i read recently in reference to the Shanghai Free Trade Zone (what happened to that).

"Wang said the country had more than a son, referring to the several hubs, but it would reserve the best policies for Hong Kong," said Chan Wing-kee.

Shanghai free-trade zone will hit Hong Kong quicker than expected, says Li Ka-shing | South China Morning Post

Why only ask and give to Taiwan and Hong Kong people. Do better policies cover different laws and treatment by PRC.

Three complete differene cases. You should see their respective historical context.

The state of affairs with Tibet, Hong Kong and Taiwan are contemporary in nature and have to be dealt by PRC ultimately. The date 2017 and 2018 would be major for PRC. Because Hong Kong and Taiwan will be reaching landmark self-determination dates.

Are you expressly saying that the state of affairs with Tibet, Hong Kong and Taiwan is a concluded matter for PRC and everyone can forget about them.

Government isnt neccesary the same as people. At least when we talk about Hongkong and PRC.Share with us how the basic law of Hongkong become

I am shocked to see you expressly say that Peoples Republic of China is not the same as people.

You made me go and read about Hong Kong basic law. I ask you how did Hong Kong basic law come into place.

- Did the people of hong kong have no role in it.
- Were there any people from PRC and were there any people from hong kong.
- Why were PRC people and Hong kong people there.
- Why did PRC people give hong kong people such articles like above mentioned (freedom of speech, freedom to assemble and demonstrate, strike, freedom of conscience, principle of democratic procedures with ultimate aim of universal suffrage.) that are not in the PRC constitution.

Why not to the people of Tibet, Shanghai, Beijing, Chengdu, Dalian, any province of PRC.

Exactly, India isnt a priority for China. Taiwan and North Korea is.

The best part is that you are ashamed to mention Pakistan. I am hearing more from PRC people and Chinese people that Pakistan is unreliable and not worthy. Tibetan people wont be able to do to India what Pakis can do to PRC.

The PRC and Pakistan relationship will be about trust. This truth is discharging more and more from PRC people and them wanting to deviate from anything Paki. Ask the Americans who will tell the PRC people that the contemporary American relationship with Pakistan is such they don't trust Pakistan and have also destroyed the myth about Pakistan sovereignty principles and have raided and killed OBL and also have not receded their drone strategy.

The Pakis will point out that Agha Yahya Khan ought to be worshipped by PRC people and given an equal status to Chairman Mao and Deng Xiaoping. PRC ought to hang a portrait of Agha Yahya Khan in all the factories of PRC. Since he was the catalyst for the recognition of PRC by USA and UN that enabled PRC to get a UNSC seat and also consequently the economic relationship with USA and the world. The Pakis will also point out how they have been used against India.

What have Pakistan received from PRC in return. That's the step in direction that the Pakis will make for PRC to change its behaviour.
The Pakis will keep asking and expecting and once they realise that PRC is not giving like the Pakis have given to PRC "¦

India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does.

The Chinese people are pragmatic and like you have earlier said India and China is a more natural alliance compare to China and Pakistan.

 

[ice berg]

Do you know what civil disobedience and non-violent civil disobedience is. Please explain it in your own words. Read about it before you answer because I suspect you don't.

Strange question, do you?

I also read an article in India Today where it said that transitions to democracy in over 70% of these the authoritarian regimes fell not because of an armed struggle but because of boycotts, strikes, fasts and other methods pioneered by a Indian thinker.

You think those actions are pioneered by an indian? hahahah.

Please share what you are knowing about Tibet, Hong Kong and Taiwan and its relationship with PRC under the "One Country" principle.

Please be more specific

If you go all the way into history and refer to Sun Yat Sen that would be enthusiastic at best. Please share other and previous examples of pioneers under the "One country" system. Please also share pioneers under PRC system. Like Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong are doing and pioneering in recent times.

How you define pioneer? In what field. Again be specific.

Time is relative. Its like India in 1960s without "One China principle". Taiwan people are voting and peacefully electing their leaders. The "freaking island" is under the "One Country" region like Tibet, Hong Kong and each of the provinces of PRC.

A good question to ask you what is Taiwan. Answer that with PRC region and PRC unitary system in mind. Make it simple and easy to read (if possible) and agreed by both Taiwan and PRC people.

Republic of China

You referred to it. You can explain.



Out of everything that you mention this is most important for this thread topic because it interjects into the recognition and legitimacy of a region and state. It would be good if you read about law and rule of law and its role in sovereignty and self-determination. When you mention nobody cares I would be careful for you to think like that.

Can you share with everyone how laws are changed in Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, PRC and One Country China. Also are laws important in PRC.

There is no ways I can answer that. That requires time that I dont have. That is like asking you how laws are changed in different indian states. How you gonna answer that exactly?

What is the difference between the legislature in Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, PRC and One Country China (some might not be existent yet).

There is none. PRC laws are lex superior to all of them exept Taiwan.

Also do you understand the meaning behind the laws stated from the Taiwan Constitution and Hong Kong Constitution and they are NOT in the PRC Constitution.

The Hongkong constitution exist within the framework of the chinese constitution. I have never claimed that regarding to Taiwan.

Because there is a preferential treatment and different paradigm of self-determination in the "One Country" and PRC region people will ask why Taiwan and Hong Kong deserve this. And it wont be the Tibetans that ask only. You can ask the people in Guangdong, Shanghai and Beijing. Ask them why you dont have what Taiwan had and what Hong Kong has. Hong Kong is treated the best by PRC but why. Are they better. I refer to a quote i read recently in reference to the Shanghai Free Trade Zone (what happened to that).

Simple. Hongkong is a showpiece. Especially regarding to the possible reunion between PRC and ROC

Shanghai free-trade zone will hit Hong Kong quicker than expected, says Li Ka-shing | South China Morning Post

Why only ask and give to Taiwan and Hong Kong people. Do better policies cover different laws and treatment by PRC.

What makes you think China dont get anything out of the deal?QUOTE]

The state of affairs with Tibet, Hong Kong and Taiwan are contemporary in nature and have to be dealt by PRC ultimately. The date 2017 and 2018 would be major for PRC. Because Hong Kong and Taiwan will be reaching landmark self-determination dates.

Exept Taiwan there is nothing much to deal with. They are settled.

Are you expressly saying that the state of affairs with Tibet, Hong Kong and Taiwan is a concluded matter for PRC and everyone can forget about them.

Regarding to Tibet and Hongkong? yes.

I am shocked to see you expressly say that Peoples Republic of China is not the same as people.

Why? State and people is not the same thing

You made me go and read about Hong Kong basic law. I ask you how did Hong Kong basic law come into place.

- Did the people of hong kong have no role in it.
- Were there any people from PRC and were there any people from hong kong.
- Why were PRC people and Hong kong people there.
- Why did PRC people give hong kong people such articles like above mentioned (freedom of speech, freedom to assemble and demonstrate, strike, freedom of conscience, principle of democratic procedures with ultimate aim of universal suffrage.) that are not in the PRC constitution.

See my earlier answer. A showpiece to demonstrate that it is possible with one country, two systems.

Why not to the people of Tibet, Shanghai, Beijing, Chengdu, Dalian, any province of PRC.

What have they done to deserve it?

The best part is that you are ashamed to mention Pakistan. I am hearing more from PRC people and Chinese people that Pakistan is unreliable and not worthy. Tibetan people wont be able to do to India what Pakis can do to PRC.

Hæ? Ashamed of what?

The PRC and Pakistan relationship will be about trust. This truth is discharging more and more from PRC people and them wanting to deviate from anything Paki. Ask the Americans who will tell the PRC people that the contemporary American relationship with Pakistan is such they don't trust Pakistan and have also destroyed the myth about Pakistan sovereignty principles and have raided and killed OBL and also have not receded their drone strategy.

The Pakis will point out that Agha Yahya Khan ought to be worshipped by PRC people and given an equal status to Chairman Mao and Deng Xiaoping. PRC ought to hang a portrait of Agha Yahya Khan in all the factories of PRC. Since he was the catalyst for the recognition of PRC by USA and UN that enabled PRC to get a UNSC seat and also consequently the economic relationship with USA and the world. The Pakis will also point out how they have been used against India.

LOL, what cartoons are you reading? PRC and US would be allies against USSR with or without Pakistan. Please make an effort to study the relevant history here. Pakistan? haha.

What have Pakistan received from PRC in return. That's the step in direction that the Pakis will make for PRC to change its behaviour.

Ehh, how about the economic, military and technical assistance to Pakistan. How did you miss that?

The Pakis will keep asking and expecting and once they realise that PRC is not giving like the Pakis have given to PRC "¦

Ehh, the sino-Pakistan relations goes back to the 50s. You tell me it can exist for so long without it benefit both? Seriously?

India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does.

The Chinese people are pragmatic and like you have earlier said India and China is a more natural alliance compare to China and Pakistan.

See my replies above.

 

[Compersion]

See my replies above.

Strange question, do you know?

Yes I do. Do not be shy. Go on please explain what civil disobedience and non-violent civil disobedience to you means.

You think those actions are pioneered by an indian? hahahah.

Yes. Non-violent civil disobedience. You also did not ask what about the remaining 30%. For that you can refer to:

Dissolution of the Soviet Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How you define pioneer? In what field. Again be specific.

You had earlier said "Pioneer in the history of China or PRC? You will be wrong on both accounts." Please mention the Pioneers in the history of PRC you refer to.

If you don't want to answer that's fine. If you don't have an answer that's fine. If you say one thing and don't have any sustenance and substance that looks juvenile.

Republic of China

You mean the whole Republic of China is agreed by both PRC people and Taiwan. Everything about Republic of China is agreed by PRC people. .

You are saying that the constitution of Republic of China is agreed by PRC people. Can the PRC people vote in the next Taiwan elections. The state of affairs between Taiwan and PRC is such that is convoluted and intricate. Also the "One China Principle" is different to Taiwan person and PRC person ( how do you define Tibet and Hong Kong person under One China Principle and using the term Republic of China).

Because there is "difference" between Taiwan people and PRC people on one china principle you can equate this to why the current state of affairs cannot be a permanent state of affairs.

Here is something i read recently by Jackie Chan:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/jackie-...-hong-kong-and-taiwanese-politicians-1.796040

"I'm not sure if it's good to have freedom or not," Chan told an audience of businesspeople in the Chinese province of Hainan on Saturday.

"I'm gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled. If we're not being controlled, we'll just do what we want," the star of hits such as Rush Hour and The Forbidden Kingdom stated.

He added that the freedoms in Hong Kong and Taiwan made those societies "chaotic."

Have you wonder what the people in the streets of PRC, Hong Kong and Taiwan ("freaking island") think.

The current state of affairs that is holding at present - people will evaluate and discuss for how long and with what variables in place it will continue in the future. The constitution of Taiwan has a two-term limit on its President. Self-determination is exercised and will be exercised by the people of Taiwan. Will the Taiwan people stretch the self-determination paradigm. How will the regions of PRC react. What about Hong Kong and the question of universal suffrage. More and more people from PRC visit Taiwan and Hong Kong.

It is absolute (100% perfect) that all PRC people that visit Taiwan and Hong Kong will not ask "why does Taiwan and Hong Kong deserve to have this" and "are PRC people undeserving".

There is no ways I can answer that. That requires time that I dont have. That is like asking you how laws are changed in different indian states. How you gonna answer that exactly?

I can refer you to one document that is the constitution of india. India is the governing authority of the union of 28 states and seven union territories, collectively called the Republic of India. The union and individual state governments all each consist of executive, legislative and judicial branches. The legal system as applicable to the federal and individual state governments is based on the English Common and Statutory Law. The Legislature and Executive branch of the government along with the Judiciary are important pillars in making and changing laws.

I ask you again how laws are changed in Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, PRC and One Country China.

Also are laws important in PRC. Remember you mention "As far as I know nobody really cares. Laws can be changed. It is not written in stone."

Why are laws and systems different for Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong and PRC under the "One Country" principle. Are you are saying that Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong and PRC are like a state of "One Country China". Who is the authority and leader of "One Country China".

There is none. PRC laws are lex superior to all of them exept Taiwan.

The legislature of Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, PRC and One Country China. Please refer to how one selects the participants of the legislature of Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, PRC and One Country China.

Because there are different methods and rules that on its own is stretching the self-determination paradigm. The people that get elected to legislature are different to people that get selected to legislature. Do you understand the difference in principle and its role in self-determination. people that get elected to legislature represent the people from the area they get elected.

The Hongkong constitution exist within the framework of the chinese constitution. I have never claimed that regarding to Taiwan.

We can take Hong Kong constitution. Why did PRC people give hong kong people such articles like above mentioned (freedom of speech, freedom to assemble and demonstrate, strike, freedom of conscience, principle of democratic procedures with ultimate aim of universal suffrage.) that are not in the PRC constitution.

Simple. Hongkong is a showpiece. Especially regarding to the possible reunion between PRC and ROC

Can you please mention that to the Hong Kong people and write it in the Hong Kong constitution because I cannot find anywhere in that document that says that Hong Kong is a "showpiece".

One Country Two Principles for Taiwan:

Why Taiwan Is Not Hong Kong: A Review of the PRC's One Country Two Systems Model for reunification with Taiwan.

http://digital.law.washington.edu/d...le/1773.1/895/6PacRimLPolyJ497.pdf?sequence=1

If you do not care about PRC region(s) and do not have time to read the above document you can read the conclusion.

What makes you think China dont get anything out of the deal?

Please elaborate what you are saying.

Exept Taiwan there is nothing much to deal with. They are settled.

Tibet and Hong Kong do not have anything to deal with. How about PRC talking to Dalai Lama representatives and PRC talking to people of Hong Kong about universal suffrage. If it is all settled please share what has been settled.

Like you said Taiwan. Please mention what has not been settled with Taiwan.

Why? State and people is not the same thing

The People Republic of China was created on what principle. You are the one that said "Government isnt neccesary the same as people. At least when we talk about Hongkong and PRC."

What have they done to deserve it?

Are the people of Tibet undeserving. Are the people of PRC undeserving. Why do people of Taiwan and Hong Kong deserve more.

Hæ? Ashamed of what?

Please elaborate why North Korea is treated better by PRC compared to Pakistan.

LOL, what cartoons are you reading? PRC and US would be allies against USSR with or without Pakistan. Please make an effort to study the relevant history here. Pakistan? haha.

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB106/NZ-2.pdf
Go to page 7.

Nixon and Zhou Enlai. (** Zhou Enlai is regarded with the most respect in PRC).

"Both of us owe something to Yahya "¦"
"He is a bridge"
Zhou Enlai says "When a man makes a contribution to the world, we should remember him".

Here is picture of Yahya Khan to hang on your wall in your home and factories in PRC:

The role of Pakistan (and Yahya Khan) were significant for the recognition of PRC by USA and UN that enabled PRC to get a UNSC seat and also consequently the economic relationship with USA and the world. The Pakis will also point out how they have been used against India. I am shocked that you say "with or without Pakistan". Why are you ashamed of Pakistan. They helped PRC a lot.

Also how is the USA-PRC alliance going against the Russians.

Ehh, how about the economic, military and technical assistance to Pakistan. How did you miss that?

Please mention what PRC has done for Pakistan in the past and will do in the future. Without reference to India (using Pakistan like a whore).

Ehh, the sino-Pakistan relations goes back to the 50s. You tell me it can exist for so long without it benefit both? Seriously?

The American-Pakistan relationship goes even longer and deeper. It existed for long and benefited both. But one day the Pakis started to ask and started to expect more from the Americans and once they realised that America was not giving like the Pakis had given to American (in their opinion) they reacted. The result not is the American-Pakistan relationship is different compared to before.

I repeat the Pakis will keep asking and expecting and once they realise that PRC is not giving like the Pakis have given to PRC.

They will also react when PRC tells the Pakis they had no role in PRC growth and refuse to hang Yahya Khan picture on factory walls and in textbooks like they do for Chairman Mao and Deng Xiaoping.

They will also not react well when they read comments by people like you who have said India and China are more natural alliance compare to China and Pakistan.

Will Paki make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.

Will Taiwan and Hong Kong make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.

When it comes to Tibet recognition India need not (have) to deal with the Tibet question because there are forthcoming authoritative issues and questions (like Taiwan, Hong Kong and relationship with Pakis) that PRC will have to face with that can have more greater impact.

India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does.

The Chinese people are pragmatic.

 

[t_co]

China does not want a nuclear NK or the refugees to swarm over when shits hit the fan. Their best armies the 38th and 39th are for Nk contingency. Defending Beijing isnt their only job.

Twice a year, the entire Shenyang MR and chunks of the Beijing MR go on simulated alert to prep for a NK crisis. The last iteration of such an alert involved the mobilization of an entire armored brigade to 'advance, pacify, and establish a cordon sanitaire'. Notably, their mission did not involve engaging hostile forces. It seems the entire mission profile was to race down the peninsula as fast as they could, and function as de facto peacekeepers between fleeing NK forces and US/ROK ground forces.