China and India should and will be friends

Virendra

Ambassador
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
4,697
Likes
3,041
Country flag
All out attack in present scenario? Is foolish. But doesn't means we lose on a negotiation table. As already said, can't trade among two of our own things.
It is a physical "Status Quo" and good diplomacy is required to make the situation better without any compromise on the ground zero.

What I see in China's recent adventures at POK is an effort to open a second mouth in Indian Ocean to reduce the dependence on Straits of Malacca. Moreover, they can't get a better shortcut for African resources, which are the biggest "yet to be realised" jackpot of this century. They're here to stay and that adds more complication to the J & K puzzle. It also disturbs the emotional impulse domestically on Kashmir's future and the Govt.'s position.
Next couple of years would see more of these twist n turns.
 
Last edited:

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,572
What are your suggestions?

Will China abandon what it has gained?
For starters, I think India and China should try to achieve the four points that I listed in Post #9.

If China is unwilling to compromise, it means that they are not interested in peace and stability in South Asia, and we will have to continue the status quo.
 

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,572
We should be prepared to fight for what is ours otherwise we should disband army. We should take back pok...pakistan wouldn't be able to do shit.
then warn china about aksai chin and that we will not put up with this nonsense any longer..they will get message when they see us take back pok.
I don't think that taking back POK is feasible in present scenario. But even if we do take back POK, why would that convince China to hand back Aksai Chin?
 

kickok1975

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,539
Likes
350
What are u talking abt?
Pakistan is helpless?

1948 just after the independence, Pakistani backed terrorist attack Kashmir region in thousands, Indian soon secured the occupied zone by tangos, If we want we could overrun ill equipped Pakistani force but we didn't, this Action only shows our scene of responsibility as a greater nation..

1965 Pakistan launch a massive attack in Kashmir plains with Tanks and Aircraft, IA trooper with a squadron of tanks hold their ground, the attack was repulsed..

1971 Pakistan army reputation made Bangladeshis to take a armed struggle throughout the east Pakistani, Taking the past experiences with Pakistan, Indian Gov helped in creation of Bangladesh..

1999 Pakistani Army with terrorist occupy mountain position inside Indian Kashmir, Resulted in Kargil war, 1000plus terrorist died with 550-600 Pakistani troopers..


How come u are saying they are helpless?
Beside US role inside Pakistan is well known..

If we are so Ambitious in occupying our neighbors we would never allowed Bangladesh creation but count it as our own land and Bhutan, Nepal Srilanka would be ours as they were in our map in past..
You might be right. I really don't know too much about Indo-Pak wars but a common impression we have is compare to India, Pakistan is relatively a smaller and weaker nation. How could a smaller nation provocatively attack a much stronger nation? What they want? Without telling me where they come from, I can hardly differentiate Indian and Pakistanis. And I thought you are in same nation before 1940. Why so much hate?

As for Indian people, I always think they are beautiful, smart and peaceful human beings. To some degree I even think they are more peaceful than Chinese
 

The Messiah

Bow Before Me!
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
10,809
Likes
4,619
Ofcourse they are not interested. They respect power and authority and our govt is spineless.

If i was chinese id want china to grab more from India while the iron is still hot.

It is not rocket science...if they wanted peace they could easily show couple of gestures. In reality chinese would be biggest idiots if they made any concessions to us because goi is spineless and lacks foresight.

Dear china holds all the cards and the only shitty card we have is the dalai lama who is himself seeking retirement because of old age....in short we have no bargaining chips.
 

The Messiah

Bow Before Me!
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
10,809
Likes
4,619
I don't think that taking back POK is feasible in present scenario. But even if we do take back POK, why would that convince China to hand back Aksai Chin?
Ofcourse it is feasible...it will cost lives and money. How exactly is it not feasible ?

I will tell you one thing if instead of India there was any other country in the world they would have taken pok long time back and not pussyfoot like we do.

If they dont sit in negotiating table and hand back aksai chin while we make some compromise then we should take it back by force aswell. GoI should have a firm foreign policy and not stand for all this rubbish.
 

kickok1975

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,539
Likes
350
Ofcourse they are not interested. They respect power and authority and our govt is spineless.

If i was chinese id want china to grab more from India while the iron is still hot.

It is not rocket science...if they wanted peace they could easily show couple of gestures. In reality chinese would be biggest idiots if they made any concessions to us because goi is spineless and lacks foresight.

Dear china holds all the cards and the only shitty card we have is the dalai lama who is himself seeking retirement because of old age....in short we have no bargaining chips.
Don't be so radical friend. You should have faith on your government because at least it is elected by Indian people and can be changed. For us we don't have such privilege. Our authoritarian government is self controlled without a leash hold by Chinese people. Even that I still believe they can make some prudent decisions based on China's interest as long as they don't go too far.

As for your drum beating war promotion, it will help nobody but leave many soldiers die in vain. It may take us 50 years to resolve all problems peacefully but if war happens during it, another 50 years may add on top of it. So keep cool and let both government figures out way to solve it.
 
Last edited:

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
You might be right. ( Iam Right ) I really don't know too much about Indo-Pak wars but a common impression we have is compare to India, Pakistan is relatively a smaller and weaker nation. How could a smaller nation provocatively attack a much stronger nation? What they want? Without telling me where they come from, I can hardly differentiate Indian and Pakistanis. And I thought you are in same nation before 1940. Why so much hate?

As for Indian people, I always think they are beautiful, smart and peaceful human beings. To some degree I even think they are more peaceful than Chinese


We all are human beings,Its the HUMAN thing to love and hate, Indian are very peaceful people like anyother on the globe but if some one hurt us and our image, Than we are no-longer peaceful to that entity..

Here Some details abt Indian-Pakistani relation and Wars..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_wars_and_conflicts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pak_relations
 

kickok1975

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,539
Likes
350
Pakistan cannot be overrun. Such theories that one sees on the Net are figments of jingoism.

Realities are different.

Even if for debate's sake, one takes your contention of this 'over running' as correct and feasible, there is no chance of India allowing the so called 'overrunned' area to become a terrorists haven.

India is fed up to its gills with this insane terrorism and will hardly allow anyone to promote it.

One bitten, twice shy; that is how the saying goes!

Therefore, Xinjiang will be safer and not dangerous as you fear!

It is Pakistan which uses terrorism as a 'strategic weapon'.

And that is possibly the Chinese fear of what can happen in case China does not play ball with Pakistan.
To me I think Pakistan is also a victim of Terrorism. I almost hear daily about bomb attack in Pakistan that kills many innocent people. Certain part of Pakistan is not controlled by government rather by radical Islamic tribes. Due to slow growth and scandals, Pakistan government is gradually losing its grip on power, which is not good news to India. A weaker, divided Pakistan may fall into hands of radical Islamism and poses greater threat to India than a normal, willing to negotiate and compromise Pakistani government. Committing big terrorist attack on India might be utmost goal for these radicals group to claim their legitimacy and ways to attract new members.
 
Last edited:

kickok1975

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,539
Likes
350
We all are human beings,Its the HUMAN thing to love and hate, Indian are very peaceful people like anyother on the globe but if some one hurt us and our image, Than we are no-longer peaceful to that entity..

Here Some details abt Indian-Pakistani relation and Wars..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_wars_and_conflicts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pak_relations
I would say the damn British Empire is root causes for a lot of troubles and conflicts in today's world.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
To me I think Pakistan is also a victim of Terrorism. I almost hear daily about bomb attack in Pakistan that kills many innocent people. Certain part of Pakistan is not controlled by government rather by radical Islamic tribes. Due to slow growth and scandals, Pakistan government is gradually losing its grip on power, which is not good news to India. A weaker, divided Pakistan may fall into hands of radical Islamism and poses greater threat to India than a normal, willing to negotiate and compromise Pakistani government. Committing big terrorist attack on India might be utmost goal for these radicals group to claim their legitimacy and attract new members.
This refrain 'Pakistan is also a victim of terrorism' is the most humorous statement I have heard being stated repeatedly by world leaders to justify Pakistani policy of using terror to further her strategic aims.

Why do I say so?

Now, if the world states China is a victim of Communism, would that not be laughable?

The environment in China before Communism was such that Mao Tse Dong, amongst other equally illustrious Chinese leaders, seized the opportunity and thus China became Communists.

Is the Chinese people 'victim of Communism'?

There has been quite a few protests to include Tienanmen Square and those in the rural areas or when the shanties were demolished for the Olympics or even protests by people like Liu Xiabo. Does it mean that China has been a 'victim of Communism'? I have not found such a feeling amongst the Chinese posters in forums.

Thus, while Communism indeed rules China and it may not be liked by some and the rest of the world, it does not mean that China is a 'victim of Communism'.

Likewise, Pakistan wilfully embraced terrorism and embraced, trained and exported terrorism. Therefore it is their creation. They did so out of greed because it would mean that US money, arms and patronage would pour into Pakistan as it was being used to fight the Soviets. So, the created, encouraged and nurtured these terrorists.

The Soviets left Afghanistan.

These terrorists became unemployed. It is another canard that the US abandoned them. The US did not. They only stopped the direct involvement at Pakistan's behest (Zia had formulated destroying India by a thousand cuts') as it would serve the US purpose wherein India could be kept under control, if only, indirectly through activating the Kashmir front.

Musharraf has openly admitted that the terrorist is Pakistan's strategic asset and we can see its proof in Kashmir as also in Afghanistan, where Pakistan claims that they are not supporting and yet the terrorists are thriving!! If indeed Pakistan was serious about battling terrorism, could they not do what China does? Do we hear of Uighur unrest any more? Why not? Because China crushed them with a heavy hand which need not be correct as per international human rights standards and more so, China is not a democracy. Pakistan is also not a democracy since it is no secret that the Army and the ISI dictate terms. On the role of the Army in politics and governing Pakistan and ordering their democratic govt, Musharraf has been categorical in his book, 'In the Line of Fire'.

Therefore, continues to nurture the terrorists and the ISI protects them and allows them a free hand to become a centre of gravity of power, then the lament that Pakistan is a victim of terrorism is false and misplaced.

It is like the American parents, who allow a free hand to allow their children to 'grow' and then the lament that their children are victims of the drug cartels!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
In so far as Pakistan is concerned, they should read the book by Mary Shelly - FRANKENSTEIN aka The Modern Prometheus.

Maybe they should remember what the Bible said:

As Ye Sow, so Shall Ye Reap!!

They are now reaping the harvest!

Hardly any grounds for anyone's sympathy!!
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
To say Pakistan is a victim of terrorism is a non sequitur and akin to saying a Suicide bomber is also a victim of terrorism.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
Realistic deal with PRC over Border Disputes!

@kickok1975

Thank you for starting this thread. I have always been an advocate of closer Sino-Indian relations, and I'm glad there are some Chinese netizens with similar views. However, I am also a realist and know that the road ahead will be very bumpy, even if it is heading in the right direction.
I like that. Treat your friends, rivals, enemies with respect. Even I thank kickok1975 for starting this thread. Despite being diametrically opposite to his country's position, I respect him, and you as well.


Let's be realistic here. Aksai Chin is a barren, inhospitable wasteland with no value for us, but for China it has considerable strategic value because of the Tibet-Xinjiang Highway that passes through Aksai Chin.
True. Just that we want what is ours back. Period.

This is a vital piece of infrastructure for China's western frontier, and China won't be willing to give it up.
True. PRC won't give it up. Fine. We can maintain status quo and at the opportune moment, take it back. We should never give up our claims. Eventually, this land must be under Indian control. Period.

I like what Ernesto said:
Never! what is ours is ours....we cannot negotiate it away that too over baseless claims by chinese.
...
...
Even if one piece of land is shit i will still love it because it is Indian land.


As for Shaksgam Valley, it is located deep in POK and does not border any Indian parts of Kashmir iirc, so it would not be wise for us to get back that piece of land either.
Kashmir is not equal to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. POK is far far away from Shaksgam Valley. Shaksgam Valley is a part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, but is nowhere near Kashmir. Check out the image below:

This is not a map of Kashmir. This is the map of the State of Jammu and Kashmir that legally acceded into the Indian Union. Kashmir (shown in brown border) is but a small portion of this state, part of which is illegally occupied by Pakistan, which is called POK (although some people refer to all parts of the State of Jammu and Kashmir under Pakistani control as POK, which is probably what you meant). Shaksgam is far away from Kashmir. The other part is Gilgit-Baltistan, which, is indeed a part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir (thus legally Indian territory), but is not a part of Kashmir.

It will be wise to get (actually snatch) this back from PRC at the correct time, just not right now.

On another thread, I posted a list of four criteria that I think should be reached before China and India can be considered "friends". I will repost that list here:

1. Withdrawal of Chinese claims over Arunachal Pradesh, in exchange for withdrawal of Indian claims over Aksai Chin.
2. Acknowldegement of the permanent nature of the Sino-Indian border.
3. Gradual withdrawal of Chinese support for Pakistan. If China still supports Pakistan by 2025 in a way that threatens India, India should look to publicly supporting/arming Japan, Taiwan, and Vietnam on their disputes with China. Tit for tat.
4. Chinese recognition of Kashmir (excluding Chinese-controlled parts) as a dispute between India and Pakistan only, and withdrawal of support to Pakistan on the issue.

Until and unless these four fundamental points are achieved, I am afraid that China poses a threat to the Union of India.
Response to your 4 points:
  1. Disagree. Aksai Chin and Shaksgam should be with India.
  2. Agree. Border that allows Arunachal and the State and Jammu and Kashmir, including Shaksgam and Aksai Chin to be in India.
  3. Gradual? Hell no. Immediate withdrawal of support to Pakistan.
  4. Chinese recognition of the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir, including Aksai Chin and Shaksgam, Gilgit-Baltistan and POK as parts of India.
 
Last edited:

anoop_mig25

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,804
Likes
3,151
Country flag
Thank you. I hope more people like you with clear mind could bring more positive impact to Indo-Sino relationship.

You are right; our border issue need be resolved, sooner than later. But there are much pride involves and neither country wants to be considered by her citizens as the one who made concessions. So it needs some saving grace skill and requires rounds of negotiation. We just need be patient and watch what's going to happen. China already resolved land border issues with all her neighbors except India. I don't think leaders want to leave it to future generations.

As for China's support to Pakistan, it's really depending on Indo-Pak relationship. There is a theory that if China doesn't support Pakistan, India will easily declare war on her neighbor, overrun helpless Pakistan army and make there another Afghanistan. A terrorist heaven that will threaten China's Xinjiang area. Considering Chinese friendship to Pakistanese, it's a horrible story
we never created any Taliban it was Pakistan army (please i am talking about Taliban and not Mujahideen and yes i know about ltte but then we withdrew our support from them ,while Pakistan is still supporting covertly)

and that india would invade pakistan make pakistan a safe heaven for terrorist is false thinking because india doesnot have any money to carry out such a large scale invasion

why do u just accept the fact that our future lifeline is going to run through Pakistan and hence the support to them
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
No War, No Peace

For two years, India has been grappling with a heightened threat perception on its borders with China. VK SHASHIKUMAR on the complex preparations for a war that may not happen



>Experts say China is legitimising its new Kashmir policy by heavily investing in infrastructure projects in PoK and the Northern Areas
>China is trying to make J&K a tripartite issue. 'They'll keep pushing in the western sector,' says analyst Roy. This will add another layer to the complex dispute
>PLA patrols are regularly moving out of areas beyond the McMahon Line. Three Chinese spies were arrested in the past six months in Arunachal
>Indian suspicion of Chinese telecom firms has grown over the past three years because Beijing has pursued a strategy of electronic dominance

CHINESE PREMIER Wen Jiabao is to visit New Delhi in the middle of December. His visit would mark 60 years of a tense diplomatic relationship, one where India's elephantine firmness is increasingly matching China's assertive dominance. In November, India's foreign minister SM Krishna informed Parliament that the government is keeping "a constant watch on all developments having a bearing on India's security and is taking all necessary measures to safeguard it".

China's 'peaceful rise' is over and its new 'assertiveness' is bothering diplomats, politicians and military strategists. "The Chinese have incrementally taken over ground in the Western Sector near the Pangong Tso in Ladakh," says Bhaskar Roy, accomplished China-watcher and analyst, and a recently retired RAW officer. "Indian Army cartographers have informed the government that the Chinese are claiming more territory. India will have to strengthen its defences."

Nobody in the government will admit it, but the fact is that two years ago India's armed forces upgraded the threat perception from China from low to medium. Officially, China's defence budget is $70 billion, but Pentagon believes it is $150 billion. In comparison, India's defence spending is a fifth of the Pentagon estimates. Despite such colossal spending, however, it is not likely that nuclear India and China will go to war because neither would like to lose an opportunity to lead the world in the 21st century. There is too much at stake. Yet, Beijing and New Delhi are engaging in military posturing and preparing for a war they are not likely to fight in the Eastern Sector (Arunachal Pradesh) and Western Sector (Ladakh).

The border region in Ladakh resembles an inverted palm. Over the past four decades, China has occupied three of the finger points. "They (the PLA, People's Liberation Army of China) are advancing towards the fourth finger area, called the Trigonometric Heights or Trig Heights. Most PLA transgressions happen at Trig Heights," says Srikanth Kondapalli, a rare Mandarin-speaking academic privy to restricted information. Kondapalli is chairman, Centre for East Asian Studies, School of International Studies, in Delhi's Jawaharlal Nehru University.

TRIG HEIGHTS is south of the Chipchap River, comprising Points 5495 and 5459 (called Manshen Hill by the PLA). Southeast of Trig Heights is the Depsang Ridge, which it is trying to take under its domination. What Roy and Kondapalli say is important because South Block often seeks their inputs into policy-making.

For reasons best known to it, the UPA 2 government has not come clean on the extent of Chinese incursions in Ladakh, consistently playing them down. In September 2009, New Delhi and Srinagar were alarmed by reports of Chinese incursions in Zulung La in Chumar sector in the east of Leh, located at the junction of Ladakh, Spiti in Himachal Pradesh, and Tibet. While Chinese claims on Arunachal grab news space, it is in the Western Sector that Indian and Chinese troops are endlessly trying to outwit each other.

India has deployed elements of the Vikas Regiment of the Special Frontier Force (SFF) in the Ladakh part of the Western Sector. The secretive SFF reports to the Cabinet Secretariat. This regiment was formed by recruiting and training Tibetan settlers in India. They operate in an area where "not even a blade of grass grows" as Jawaharlal Nehru famously said. There is no habitation, only nomadic shepherds. China has used this to gradually advance on the Indian side of the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
"Two-thirds of Pangong Tso is in their control. There are reports that the Chinese have brought in the artillery and fast patrol boats. They are aggressively patrolling the lake, which is believed to be 50 to 300 metres deep in most parts. There are even reports in the Chinese media about the induction of a submarine," says Kondapalli. The Indian armed forces are outnumbered because there is no way they can effectively dominate the third of the lake under their control. "We cannot frequently go on patrols because our forces don't have patrol boats on the lake."

The PLA is gradually strengthening its claim over the Samar Lungpa area in the Western Sector. According to the Chinese, the LAC is south of Samar Lungpa, an area wedged between the Karakoram Pass and the Chipchap River. But it is business-as-usual when it comes to the official version. RK Bhatia, director-general of the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), addressed the media in the first week of November. "We have no report of any intrusion along the borders. The borders are peaceful," he said. What Bhatia didn't mention was that the ITBP sends out area domination patrols across the LAC north of Samar Lungpa, while the force is stationed south of it. This is just a minor instance of how successive governments in New Delhi have categorised even the most trivial China-related information as classified.

"None of the official documents related to China are in the public domain. Go and ask for a China-related document at the National Archives and all you get is silence," says Kondapalli. Under Indian law, restricted official documents can be declassified after 50 years, but documents related to China have not been declassified since 1914. These documents are from the 1914 Shimla Convention when representatives of Britain, China and Tibet met to resolve Tibet's status. During this convention, the McMahon Line was drawn delineating the India-China border. However, China does not accept this border.

Roy says the PLA's incursions and its incremental encroachment in Ladakh are designed to show that Beijing has shifted its stance on the Kashmir issue. "In the 1980s, the Chinese described the Kashmir issue as a bilateral dispute. Jammu & Kashmir was described as Indian-held Kashmir and the area held by Pakistan was described as Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Now they say Indian-held Kashmir is a disputed territory and that Pakistan-occupied Kashmir is Pakistan's sovereign territory." Kondapalli agrees there is "definitely a shift" in China's Kashmir policy. "The critical period was 2009 October-November when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visited Arunachal. This was followed by the Dalai Lama's visit to Tawang. These were massive heartburns for the Chinese."

This is a cloak-and-dagger game that requires fine understanding. "The Chinese don't speak directly," says Roy. But New Delhi is reading Beijing's language intently. China's dramatic shift on Kashmir was announced in a typically understated and indirect manner when it began issuing stapled visas on separate sheets to applicants from J&K and Arunachal. "There is no record of stapled visa to Kashmiris residing in PoK and Northern Areas. So this is a key signal of what Beijing wants India to know. That the areas of Kashmir under Pakistani control are not disputed anymore," says Kondapalli. In a back-handed way, therefore, the Chinese leadership has conveyed to India that it considers J&K a disputed territory.
IN AUGUST, the Chinese denied visa to Lt General BS Jaswal, Commander of the Northern Command, for an official visit. Beijing suggested that another General, presumably someone posted outside J&K and Arunachal, could be nominated in Jaswal's place instead of cancelling the visit. New Delhi promptly rejected the offer. This was followed by a report in The New York Times in September revealing the deployment of 11,000 Chinese soldiers in Gilgit and Baltistan in PoK. Then, China's foreign ministry recently declared that the Northern Areas, Gilgit and Baltistan are Pakistan's sovereign territories. India says they are part of undivided J&K.

China experts and official sources, who wish to remain unnamed, point out that China is legitimising its new Kashmir policy by heavily investing in infrastructure projects in PoK and the Northern Areas. Hu Jintao, General Secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC), told Xinhua in a 2009 interview that he was very happy with the ongoing infrastructure projects China has undertaken in PoK. According to Chinese protocol, Hu is the 'paramount' leader and is ranked higher than Premier Wen. Hu's statement, according to Kondapalli, was an indication that something is cooking.

Media reports in Pakistan and elsewhere peg the Chinese investment in hydro projects and road and railway construction at $30.14 billion. An important strategic project the Chinese have undertaken in PoK is the construction of a rail line between Khunjerab (4,693 metres), on the border of Xinjiang province, and the Northern Areas all the way to Havelian in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The plan is to extend this line to Gwadar port, which the Chinese are building. "The Chinese want to keep India and Pakistan permanently divided and the Pakistani Army is happy with this," says Kondapalli.

Curiously, in the ongoing winter session of Parliament, Krishna toned it down. "The government remains vigilant to all developments having a bearing on India's national interest and takes all necessary measures to safeguard it. The Chinese side expressed their inability to accept the visit of GOC-in-C Northern Command (Jaswal) to China as 'he commands a sensitive area and people from that region come with a special type of visa'. The government has taken up this matter with the Chinese side and has clearly conveyed that J&K is an integral part of India and that there should be no discrimination against visa applicants of Indian nationality on grounds of domicile and ethnicity. Visas issued on a separate sheet of paper stapled to passports are not considered valid for travel out of the country."

BUT NOTHING in this mild rebuke betrays the anger within India's security establishment. According to Roy, China is trying to make J&K a tripartite issue. "They will keep pushing in the Western Sector." This adds another layer to the already complex Kashmir issue. China has quietly changed the geo-political dimension, irrespective of India's position, and in spite of US President Barack Obama describing Kashmir as a bilateral issue between Pakistan and India. China's new online mapping service unveiled in the last week of October, and billed as a rival to Google Maps, shows Arunachal and Aksai Chin (a part of Ladakh) as Chinese territories.
The political landscape of the Himalayan region is unravelling in the 21st century, and the past is a good indicator in discerning patterns of change in the future. In the 19th century, there were five Himalayan Kingdoms, Tibet, Ladakh, Sikkim, Nepal and Bhutan. Things have changed in the 20th century. Ladakh and Sikkim merged with India. Bhutan and Nepal became independent. Though Bhutan chose to become a 'protectorate' of India, Nepal defined its relationship with India through the 1950 friendship treaty. Tibet came under Chinese control as the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR). "Twenty percent of 19th-century Kashmir land is with China and so technically it is part of the dispute. But Kashmiri separatists do not have the guts to ask Chinese to return the land because their Pakistani mentors won't allow them to," says Kondapalli.

In the mid-1950s, an Indian Army patrol sent to the uninhabited 38,000 sq km Aksai Chin, an area as large as Switzerland in the eastern-most part of J&K, discovered a Chinese-built road and Chinese activity in the region. This was one of the several escalatory reasons leading to the 1962 war. A year later, Pakistan ceded 5,189 sq km of the Shaksgam valley in the Northern Areas, which is part of PoK. The Chinese eventually built a 10-metre wide road linking Kashgar to Abbottabad. This road, popularly known as the Karakoram Highway (China's National Highway 219), is of tremendous strategic importance to China because it connects the Uyghur Muslim-dominated region of Xinjiang to Tibet. Now, under a bilateral agreement, China is widening the Karakoram Highway by 30 metres. "You can move military assets much more easily and smoothly. This will facilitate even the movement of trailermounted missiles," says Bharat Verma, strategic affairs analyst and editor of Indian Defence Review.

So, 63 years after the birth of the Kashmir problem, China has quietly nudged itself in as the 'Third Party' and has made it a trilateral issue. During the mid-November meeting of the foreign ministers of Russia, India and China in Wuhan, a city in central China, Krishna engaged in uncharacteristic plainspeak with his counterpart Yang Jiechi. Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao told journalists that Krishna "expressed the hope that China would be sensitive to J&K just as we have been to TAR and Taiwan". "This is definitely a departure from the past. It is the first time it's been said," says former foreign minister K Natwar Singh.

But such Indian hard talk cannot gloss over Chinese diplomatic doublespeak. On the one hand, Chinese foreign minister Yang reiterated that dialogue and negotiation between Pakistan and India is the only way to resolve the Kashmir problem.

Thirteen rounds of consultations and discussions have taken place between India and China to resolve the boundary disputes. "But the Western and Eastern sector maps have not been exchanged," says Roy. "Even in the middle sector, officially we have not exchanged maps. We have shown our version of maps. The Chinese have not," adds Kondapalli.

"Indian governments have been reluctant to put out China-related documentation in the public domain. Why can't we release it? I have written an insider account in my book, My China Diary 1956-88, published last year. The Chinese have always refused to share their boundary maps with us. Zhou Enlai told Nehru that the Chinese maps are old ones and of no use. Since then, the Chinese have always cited some reason or the other to avoid handing over their boundary maps," says Natwar Singh.
IN BORDER disputes, exchange of maps is crucial to determine ownership. "If maps are exchanged, it is understood that India and China have placed their versions on record. For easier understanding, let us suppose that there is a property dispute between us. Both have property deeds. The judge decides the ownership by studying the property deeds and finding whose claim is stronger," says Kondapalli. Military Intelligence (MI) sources have confirmed to TEHELKA that India might be taken by surprise if China decides to officially exchange maps during Wen's visit.

"The MI says they are surprised at developments since the 1980s. One way of demonstrating proof of property ownership and legal entitlement is to show payment of land taxes. If one can show collections of land tax and revenue tax from remote areas, then it can be established that whosoever is collecting taxes is legally entitled to ownership of that land," says Kondapalli.

"There are reports that MI has indeed told the government that since the 1980s the PLA has been collecting such documents from areas around the LAC. There are reports that people have migrated to the Chinese side taking with them their land documents. Even indirect tax is being collected and recorded by the PLA from nomadic shepherds," he adds.

This could explain the repeated incursions by small PLA teams in the Western and Eastern sectors over the past two decades, to collect land-related documents, and collect land and revenue tax. This also explains why the Chinese have been reluctant to display maps showing their version of the LAC. Over 20 years, China has been gradually building a convincing case for its claim over Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh. "Reports suggest the PLA has marched 11 km beyond the 1962 occupation. They have been collecting land records," says Kondapalli.

As China and Pakistan gang up against India on Kashmir, new layers will be added to the issue of unsettled borders left by the British colonial rulers. Chinese and Indian understanding of the border along Uttarakhand and Sikkim is settled and is aligned with the McMahon Line. The British colonial government drew the McMahon Line with a margin of error of 10 km on either side of the thick blob of ink delineating the border between Britishruled India and Tibet.

Historically the Chinese have refused to accept the McMahon Line. Their claim on the approximately 90,000 sq km Arunachal (called Zangnan by the Chinese) has been unwavering. If India and China go to war, it will be over Chinese land grab in Ladakh and Arunachal. A face-off between two of the largest military forces in the world, like the 1987 build-up in the Sumdorong Chu river valley (called Sangduoluo in Chinese), could spark a war. The then Indian Army Chief, General Krishnaswamy Sundarji, planned Operation Falcon in 1986-87 to thwart a PLA incursion.

Roy agrees with several Indian foreign policy experts that "Chinese aggression will not cross the border because there is too much at stake." In fact, Army Chief General VK Singh stressed "there is going to be no 1962." He was referring to the capitulation of the Indian Army as the Chinese army marched deep into Arunachal Pradesh in 1962, eight years after signing 'The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence' drafted by Nehru.

Says Bharat Verma, "China would attack India between now and 2012. After that the window of opportunity will start closing and after 2015 it will be almost impossible for any Chinese military adventure. Three imperatives for China to attack India are: a) Pakistan is descending into chaos, disintegrating and imploding. The Chinese have made heavy investments in Pakistan and PoK. To save Pakistan and unite the forces tearing it apart, China will attack India. b) From the Chinese point of view, the annexation of Tibet cannot be complete without taking over Arunachal. As long as Tawang (in Arunachal) is detached from Tibet, it will always keep Chinese insecure. c) India's defence forces are rapidly modernising under a five-year plan. By 2015 the Indian military machine would be state-of-the-art and would force China to think several times before contemplating an attack."
China is upgrading its military infrastructure along the 4,000 km LAC, by building roads and rail lines for fast and efficient mobilisation of troops. The Lhasa rail line is being extended to Xigaze on the China-Nepal border and would eventually link up with Kathmandu. More importantly, the Chinese are linking Lhasa to Nyingchi close to the Arunachal border. Beijing claims Arunachal is part of the Nyingchi prefecture. It is here on the Great Bend, where the mighty Brahmaputra turns its course into India, that the Chinese are building the world's largest dam.

Commenting on the flurry on building activities on the Chinese side of the LAC, General Singh said: "China is doing a great amount of infrastructure development, which it says is for locals of the area. But our problem is we are not very sure about the intentions." Taking a cue from the statement, former defence minister and Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav raised the issue of an impending Chinese attack on India in Parliament.

"China is an unreliable country and its design has always been to usurp territories from Ladakh to Himachal Pradesh and Sikkim to Arunachal. China is fully prepared but here in India, no instructions have been given to the army. I have been a defence minister and I know their intentions. I know their state of preparedness and that is why I ordered building of roads in the border areas. Our borders are not secure," Yadav told TEHELKA.

In Arunachal, while the Chinese side of the LAC offers relatively easier access, the Indian side is densely forested and mountainous. The Himalayan ranges along the northern borders are criss-crossed with mountain ranges running north-south. The state's topographical features have imposed geographical isolation by splitting it into five river valleys — Kameng, Subansiri, Siang, Lohit and Tirap. India's official strategy, though no one will admit, was to preserve this isolation.

Officials who want to remain anonymous have told TEHELKA that "till 2008 the strategic wisdom in North and South Block was that border areas in the East must not be developed. The Army shared this perception". Haunted by the humiliating withdrawal of 1962, India's military stalled plans for developing infrastructure fearing the Chinese would use the facilities in the event of war.

If India finds itself vulnerable now, successive governments and their military planners must be blamed for lack of foresight and strategic planning. Highly placed security officials say PLA patrols are regularly moving in and out of "areas beyond the McMahon Line". Three Chinese spies have been arrested in the past six months in Arunachal.

Only two years ago, the government finally decided to reverse its policy of geographical isolation of border areas. In 2008, the government began ground surveys for construction of high-altitude strategic border roads. Detailed Project Reports and statutory environmental clearances were obtained. Finally, it seems the government would begin connecting India's border areas along the LAC.

A 10 November press release issued by Minister of State for Home Affairs Mullappally Ramachandran stated the "government has decided to undertake phasewise construction of 27 roads totalling 804 km in the border areas along the India-China border in the states of J&K, Himachal, Uttarakhand, Sikkim and Arunachal to be constructed by the ministry for operational purposes of the ITBP." In the past two years, the government has spent Rs. 384 crore on road building near the LAC.

India has also increased its troop levels in the Northeast to more than 1,00,000 by raising two additional army mountain divisions. The Indian Air Force is stationing two squadrons of the newly acquired Sukhoi-30 MKI fighters in Tezpur. Three Airborne Warning and Control Systems complement this new deployment. India's Strategic Forces Command has deployed Agni-III missiles in the Northeast with a range of 3,500 km. Early next year, the highly road-mobile Agni-V, capable of striking Harbin, China's northernmost city, will be test fired.

The IAF has re-operationalised three forward landing airstrips on the LAC, including the world's highest airfield Daulat Beg Oldie (16,200 ft) on the easternmost point of the Karakoram Range just 9 km northwest of Aksai Chin, Fuk Che and Nyoma. The US is providing India strategic airlift capability by supplying C-130J Hercules transport aircraft. According to the aircraft manufacturer Lockheed Martin, the IAF requirement is for "special mission roles, precision low-level flying, airdrops, and landing in blackout conditions".
Clearly, the Americans are encouraging India to assume the role of a countervailing power to China. Obama's recent visit to India generated the momentum for the opening up of the Indian defence market for American companies, from artillery guns and missiles, to military transport aircrafts and fighter jets.

INDIAN STRATEGIC planners are realising they can't merely respond to Chinese assertiveness. The Chinese naval strategy is also bothersome. On 18 November, Sri Lanka inaugurated the Chinese-built Hambantota port. China is also enhancing the capacity of the Colombo port and building the Gwadar port in Pakistan. The Chinese navy has set up listening posts in Burma's Coco islands. It is furiously building a massive submarine fleet, which is intended to be the largest in the world. It is also setting up port facilities in Thailand, Cambodia and Bangladesh.

In response, India has announced plans to commission a fleet of aircraft carriers and submarines by 2020.

It is only in the past two decades that RAW has developed the capacity to gather electronic intelligence and monitor Chinese activities. "Now we have intelligence officers and diplomats who can speak Chinese," says Roy. Even India's National Security Adviser, Shiv Shankar Menon, is fluent in Mandarin. At the moment there are two scores of highly proficient Chinese speakers in RAW who are reportedly doing a fine job of sourcing information for policy-making. But until India's economy resizes to match that of China, its security will remain imperiled.

In August this year, China ran past Japan as the second largest economy in the world after the US. China's booming economy is dependent on exports. The Chinese consume 30 percent of what they produce and export the rest to all parts of the world through the Indian Ocean routes. Besides, 80 percent of its annual 200 million tonnes of oil requirement is brought through the Strait of Malacca. "India's integrated command base in the Andamans controls access to the Strait of Malacca. The Chinese are worried that in the event of a war, the Indian Navy can interdict and sink Chinese oil tankers. This could impair the export-driven economy of China," says Kondapalli.

THIS SCENARIO is making the Chinese deeply anxious. Its leadership is trying to find ways to maintain the economic surge to take it beyond the present $1.33 trillion economic output. The Chinese are desperate to overtake the US as the world's largest economy. With a $2 trillion treasure trove of foreign exchange reserves, opaque and globally unknown state-owned or state-backed Chinese firms are on an acquisition spree in America, Europe, Australia and Africa.

A globalised one-world economy is finding itself unable to resist the lure of cashdown Chinese takeovers. So the iconic Swedish Volvo, owned by US company Ford Motors, is now a proud possession of Geely Automobile Holdings Limited, a Chinese carmaker backed by cheap credit lines offered by Beijing. The collapse of Detroit as the car manufacturing capital and the bankruptcy or stinging losses of car manufacturers General Motors and Toyota have enabled unknown Chinese entrepreneurs like Li Shufu straddle the global stage with giant money rescue acts.

All of this adds to the mystique and mystery of hardcore communist entrepreneurs peddling unbelievable stories of their rags-to-riches billionaire status.

The Indian government believes that ZTE and Huawei, both Chinese telecom equipment manufacturers and vendors, are a threat to national security. Mobile telephony operators in India prefer lowcost Huawei products and services. China's low salaries, high investment in research and development, skilled, tech-savvy workforce and easy credit offered by its financial institutions have enabled firms like Huawei to edge out vendors such as Ericsson and Nokia Siemens Networks from emerging markets like India.

The Indian security establishment believes it is possible for governmentbacked firms like Huawei to embed electronic eavesdropping technology in the telecom equipment it supplies to Indian companies. Founded 22 years ago by Ren Zhengfei, a former PLA officer, the discomfiture among China watchers over Huawei is overwhelming. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, a public-sector unit, was instructed by the Department of Telecommunications last year to refrain from procuring Chinese equipment.
Indian suspicion of Chinese telecom companies has grown over the past three years because Beijing has relentlessly pursued a strategy of electronic dominance over India. Last year, heavy imports of cheap Chinese mobile handsets without International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) numbers had raised the hackles of security agencies. The fear was that terrorists could use such phones and evade electronic surveillance and tracking. Eventually the government banned the import of non-IMEI handsets. Between 2008 and 2009 Chinese cyber warriors hacked into the computers of the previous NSA (MK Narayanan), the Ministry of External Affairs and several Indian embassies. India is under a relentless 24/7 attack by Chinese hackers as they try to pry open sensitive databases. During the recent Commonwealth Games, they tried to immobilise ticketing operations, which could have led to a serious breach of security.

Irrespective of security anxieties, China's technological and manufacturing leap has numbed India. Its "call centre" low-tech economy, despite the inspiring charge towards 9 percent economic growth, appears doomed. It is already showing up in the trade imbalance figures. This year, the bilateral trade may zoom past Rs. 2.71 lakh crore from Rs. 1.63 lakh crore in 2008-2009. But what is worrying is the Rs. 72,288 crore trade deficit India has with China.

Wen will visit India riding on the confidence of his country's phenomenal economic growth. But it will be very un-Chinese for Wen to miss one fine detail. A month ahead of his visit, the Indian Army has inducted its first 'sons of the soil' Arunachal Scouts battalion. "The raising of Arunachal Scouts will help the country in defending its border," said Arunachal CM Dorjeee Khandu.

This 5,000-strong battalion drawn from ethnic Arunachalis will be trained for high-altitude combat. But will Wen checkmate India's grand counter-strategy by producing land records and taxation documents to justify Chinese claims over Aksai Chin and Arunachal? That's a surprise Delhi would not be looking forward to.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
I would say the damn British Empire is root causes for a lot of troubles and conflicts in today's world.
If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. At the moment, PRC does not seem to be the part of the solution. The British were in India, but they left it to us. You can criticize the British for having occupied our territory in the past. While you are at it, please, also criticize PRC for keeping our territory under their occupation as we speak. If you cannot, then leave the British alone. Don't be a pot that calls a kettle black!
 

johnee

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
3,473
Likes
499
Buddha gives a great analogy of how anger hurts most the one who harbors it. Buddha says that an angry person who holds his anger to unleash on another is akin to a person who holds hot embers in his hands in order to throw them on another. As soon as one holds the hot embers in one's hand, they get burnt whether you throw them on the other person or not. If we extend this to terrorism, a country that harbours terrorist is also akin to a person who holds hot embers in his hands. The country will suffer whether it succeeds in terrorising another nation or not. Thus, Pakistan suffers. But if it wants to stop suffering, then the solution is straight-forward: just stop hosting terrorists in your land, just as when hot embers are burning your hand, you just drop them.

As someone said, if Pakistan is a victim of terrorism, then every suicide bomber is a victim of terrorism. Just as suicide bomber is a malicious fool who is ready to kill himself just to be able to hurt others, Pakistan is malicious and foolish nation that is killing itself(and its people) willfully just to hurt India.

Hopefully, Pathans, Balochis, and Sindhis will see through the game of Pakjabis who are using these ethinic groups as cannon fodder in their obsession to match India by hurting India.
 
Last edited:

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,572
True. PRC won't give it up. Fine. We can maintain status quo and at the opportune moment, take it back. We should never give up our claims. Eventually, this land must be under Indian control. Period.
Why does it have to be under India's control no matter what? Yes, I understand that it used to be Indian territory, and trust me I am also an ardent patriot and would love to see Aksai Chin under Indian control again. But at the same time I will not let jingoism cloud the political reality. The reality is that we have almost no chance of getting back Aksai Chin, unless there is a massive political upheaval in China that greatly undermines the power of the CCP; we have better things to do than wait for something like that to happen.

Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and even Afghanistan were once part of the country called variously as Bharat, Aryavarsha, Hindustan, and India. Should we claim those as well? I would love to personally, but at the same time I am mature enough to understand the present political realities.


It will be wise to get (actually snatch) this back from PRC at the correct time, just not right now.
So should we wait 50-100 years for CCP to weaken, and squander all that time that we could have used to improve Sino-Indian relations?

This century belongs to India and China. I want to see Asia rise as an economic powerhouse and outpace the West. I want to see India and China cooperate and reclaim the historical status quo of the Asia-centric world economy. And yes, I daresay that I care more about that than a few rocks and sand. Feel free to disagree with me, just know that I am an ultimate realist and ardent follower of Chanakyan logic.


Response to your 4 points:

[*]Disagree. Aksai Chin and Shaksgam should be with India.
What are we going to offer China in exchange for Aksai Chin and Shaksgam? Diplomacy is not unilateral.

[*]Agree. Border that allows Arunachal and the State and Jammu and Kashmir, including Shaksgam and Aksai Chin to be in India.
Whatever it is, getting China and India to both agree to a permament border is crucial, because it will prevent future illegitimate claims.

[*]Gradual? Hell no. Immediate withdrawal of support to Pakistan.
Immediate withdrawal of support is desirable, but unlikely. In order to make the Chinese accept this, we should be willing to open the Sino-Indian border to trade, and allow Chinese products to travel to and from Indian Arabian Sea ports (again this is dependent on first resolving border disputes). If China gives up on Pakistan, they will lose their overland access to the Arabian Sea. India should be willing to compensate for this opportunity cost, and make it clear to China that India is a friendly nation with no intentions of undermining economic opportunites for China.

[*]Chinese recognition of the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir, including Aksai Chin and Shaksgam, Gilgit-Baltistan and POK as parts of India.
That would also be desirable, but that can only be achieved after Point 3 is achieved, and India makes its intentions of friendship clear to China.
 
Last edited:

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,572
It seems many people here think regaining long-lost land (with almost no value to India, I might add) is more important to India than improving Sino-Indian relations.

Well, I do not claim to be a geopolitical guru or military expert or anything of the sort, so I could be wrong. But to me, forgoing the chance to become allies with the country destined to become the world's largest economy in exchange for a few rocks does not seem like a sensible political decision.

In times of indecision like this, I usually refer to Chanakya. According to Chanakya, there are seven strategies to deal with neighbors:

1.Sanman - appeasement, non-aggression pact
2. Danda - punishment, use of strength
3. Dana - gifts, bribery
4. Bheda - support opposition and encourage division
5. Maya - illusion, deceit
6. Upeksha - ignore
7. Indrajala - fake military strength, threaten to use force

Which method should India use towards China? To use danda on a stronger enemy, as many of you are suggesting, is akin to a mouse attempting to defeat a cat. The clever mouse knows that he can never defeat the cat openly, so he must swallow his pride and use alternative methods in dealing with the cat. So too India should act in regards to China, at least as long as China remains more powerful than us.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top