Countering Chinese influence in the Subcontinent

[1.44]

China's usage of Pakistan will last as long as their useful nothing further.All this talk of being an all-weather ally is BS

 

[shotgunner]

China's usage of Pakistan will last as long as their useful nothing further.All this talk of being an all-weather ally is BS

Something's usefulness lasts as long as it is useful ... what a self-repeating BS statement is this?

And on interpersonal frienship ... Do you have friends that are of no use to you?

 

[amitkriit]

China cannot be trusted. They have a reputation of supporting dictators and rough regimes across the globe. China even supported apartheid regime of South Africa for economic benifit (Chinese were given "Honorary White" status by SA). But being in Chinese clutch also means being isolated globally. Recent activities in Sri Lanka/Bangladesh/Myanmar and Vietnam suggests that our good neighbours know this fact very well; they took Chinese help when they needed it, but now they are trying to distance themselves from China by courting India and USA. Our neighbours know that: "India is a necessary [menace] in Indian Ocean region". A weak India will only lead to Chinese empire in this region.

 

[shotgunner]

China cannot be trusted. They have a reputation of supporting dictators and rough regimes across the globe. China even supported apartheid regime of South Africa for economic benifit (Chinese were given "Honorary White" status by SA). But being in Chinese clutch also means being isolated globally. Recent activities in Sri Lanka/Bangladesh/Myanmar and Vietnam suggests that our good neighbours know this fact very well; they took Chinese help when they needed it, but now they are trying to distance themselves from China by courting India and USA. Our neighbours know that: "India is a necessary [menace] in Indian Ocean region". A weak India will only lead to Chinese empire in this region.

Chinese "empire" in the region is nothing but a brainwashing slogan. Gives this title to the Anglo-Saxons please who had built exactly that on your soil! Empires colonize, forcibly invade, rob resources, kill & slave indigenous people. Did we do that in the region? If not then why we are the best candidate for future "empire"?

Who is the biggest supporter of dictators in the world? The championship goes to ... almightly CIA, of the US of A! How embarrassing for China to take away this crown.

SA was a democracy, not a dictatorship. Japanese were also "Honorary White", was Japan not trust-worthy then? Any other "white" nation supported them? Sure not only China.

About "rogue states", definition set by ... USA. When Iranian dictatorship was in US camp, it was a "friend", but if a democratic version of it dares go against US, it's a "rogue" nation! NK, how "rogue" could it be? Not to mention Saddam Hussein being CIA's sweet buddy during the Iraq-Iran war. Ah ha, almost forget about S America, Taliban, Nigeria, ...

Trade, business, don't mess with other's politics. That's China's diplomatic doctrine. China bought minerals from African dictators & Australia, sold products to EU/US/Japan, build gas fields in the Gulf, contruct railways for 3rd world, all strictly business.

"Courting" India? Normalization of bilateral relationships is a good trend, that helps to bring peace & prosperity. But "courting", what do you mean?

A weak India is no good for regional stability, investment, trade & tourism. No one wants that other than a small group of Anglo-Saxon banksters. Wish India good luck in fighting those rogues!

 

[Ray]

The Chinese withdrew from NEFA in 1962 was not because of any high morality, but because it was a tactical necessity. Since there were no roads (Lines of Communication in military parlance), it impeded logistics support and moving up of artillery pieces, which are essential to support operations.

In contrast, the Chinese continue to hold on to the territories that they captured opposite Ladakh. This is because maintenance is not problematic and the guns having moved forward can support future operations.

Now that the lines of communication have improved in the Eastern sector, they are adopting an aggressive stance. The Tibetan railway has also boosted China mobilisation capabilities since it is believed that 12 trains can be sustained on these tracks per day. In 1962 and till the Tibetan railway came into being, China’s mobilisation profile was not adequate to maintain large scale operations.

Notwithstanding, China’s better mobilisation profile and stocking of war materiel and rations, in a conventional war, she cannot do a 1962. In 1962, the Chinese tactics was basically attack by infiltration. The IA troops, not being familiar with the Chinese modus operandi, were under the impression of being isolated and hence would be without support. Further, the total confusion of the political heads added to a lack of military direction. Much has changed since those days and the Indian Army is, in letter and spirit, capable of repulsing any Chinese overtures, big or small.

To sustain an operation, lines of communication are essential so that logistics and artillery can come forward and support the operation as it progresses. The lines of communication on the Indian side have been carefully progressed, wherein it is advantageous to India, but not to the Chinese in case they plan to invade. Therefore, it would be an alarmist thought that China can do a 1962. If they could, then they would have done it long ago.

Crossing 5000m heights or mountains is not problematic for any Army. But to capture such heights, when held, is a herculean problem and more so maintain such captured area if there is no lines of communications from the side of invader. In such a case, roads and tracks will have to be constructed and that takes time and effort even if the engineers and plant are catered for in the plans. Mountains or High Altitude favours the defender. Hence, in mountain warfare, one just cannot clamber on to mountain tops, and instead have to so plan the battle that lines of communications are available or can be constructed with least problem.

There is much discussion about the Chinese Airborne Corps. Paratroopers can operate behind enemy lines, but they have to have a link up to undertake sustained operations. Thus, one of the primary tasks for the Chinese airborne would be to capture an airfield and have an airhead so that air-landed operations can commence and sustenance is feasible. The issue is, such operation has to overcome the IAF gauntlet and the IAF is capable of thwarting such ingress. The PLAAF would be operating from High Altitude airfields of Tibet, while the IAF would be operating from the plains and hence would have the advantage of payloads.

The Chinese has also two distinct disadvantages – the unrest in Xingjian and Tibet. These people will act as great impediments to any Chinese misadventure against India.

 

[advaita]

Something's usefulness lasts as long as it is useful ... what a self-repeating BS statement is this?

And on interpersonal frienship ... Do you have friends that are of no use to you?

Remark off on a tangent

 

[Ray]

Chinese "empire" in the region is nothing but a brainwashing slogan. Gives this title to the Anglo-Saxons please who had built exactly that on your soil! Empires colonize, forcibly invade, rob resources, kill & slave indigenous people. Did we do that in the region? If not then why we are the best candidate for future "empire"?

Who is the biggest supporter of dictators in the world? The championship goes to ... almightly CIA, of the US of A! How embarrassing for China to take away this crown.

SA was a democracy, not a dictatorship. Japanese were also "Honorary White", was Japan not trust-worthy then? Any other "white" nation supported them? Sure not only China.

About "rogue states", definition set by ... USA. When Iranian dictatorship was in US camp, it was a "friend", but if a democratic version of it dares go against US, it's a "rogue" nation! NK, how "rogue" could it be? Not to mention Saddam Hussein being CIA's sweet buddy during the Iraq-Iran war. Ah ha, almost forget about S America, Taliban, Nigeria, ...

Trade, business, don't mess with other's politics. That's China's diplomatic doctrine. China bought minerals from African dictators & Australia, sold products to EU/US/Japan, build gas fields in the Gulf, contruct railways for 3rd world, all strictly business.

"Courting" India? Normalization of bilateral relationships is a good trend, that helps to bring peace & prosperity. But "courting", what do you mean?

A weak India is no good for regional stability, investment, trade & tourism. No one wants that other than a small group of Anglo-Saxon banksters. Wish India good luck in fighting those rogues!

This may interest you:

The Rise of the Chinese Empire
Frontier, Immigration, and Empire in Han China, 130 B.C.-A.D.157

Chun-shu Chang

The second and first centuries B.C. were a critical period in Chinese history—they saw the birth and development of the new Chinese empire and its earliest expansion and acquisition of frontier territories. But for almost two thousand years, because of gaps in the available records, this essential chapter in the history was missing. Fortunately, with the discovery during the last century of about sixty thousand Han-period documents in Central Asia and western China preserved on strips of wood and bamboo, scholars have been able, for the first time, to put together many of the missing pieces.

In this second volume of his monumental history, Chun-shu Chang provides the first systematic reconstruction of the history of the acquisitions and colonization undertaken by the Chinese empire. In never before seen detail, Chang discusses the actions taken by the Chinese empire to develop the Han frontier: the government promoted massive immigration to the newly conquered virgin land; an innovative and complex garrison system was created; and civil institutions and a land system, as well as a regular imperial administration, were established over the region. Chang investigates the long and massive campaigns of the Han territorial expansion movement, considers the impact of early nation-building, and explores the formation and growth of the Chinese empire and its changing national identity. Chang's comprehensive reconstruction of ancient and early Imperial Chinese history, based on literary, archaeological, and recently discovered ancient texts and classics, reveals the process and mechanics of the Han frontier development through an innovative and complex system of colonization, the core mechanics of the Han empire-building enterprise.

Chun-shu Chang is Professor of History at the University of Michigan and is the author, with Shelley Hsueh-lun Chang, of Crisis and Transformation in Seventeenth-Century China, which was named a 1998 Choice Outstanding Academic Title of the Year, and Redefining History: Ghosts, Spirits, and Human Society in P'u Sung-ling's World, 1640 - 1715.

 

[Ray]

Further, the Uyghur, Mongols, Manchus, Miaos, Utsuls, and Zhuang, Hui, Tibetan, Tujia, Yi, Buyei, Dong, Yao, Korean, Bai, Hani, Kazakh, Li, and Dai are Hans?

What about the Yues and the Wus (in fact all the original inhabitants south of the Yangtse) even if they have been Sinicized?

One must honestly analyse historical events.

Therefore, does this not indicate that Chinese have assiduously built an Empire?

China also supports dictatorial regimes, repressive regimes and military rulers. Pakistan, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Sudan etc.

 

[advaita]

This may interest you:

The Rise of the Chinese Empire
Frontier, Immigration, and Empire in Han China, 130 B.C.-A.D.157

Chun-shu Chang

The second and first centuries B.C. were a critical period in Chinese history—they saw the birth and development of the new Chinese empire and its earliest expansion and acquisition of frontier territories. But for almost two thousand years, because of gaps in the available records, this essential chapter in the history was missing. Fortunately, with the discovery during the last century of about sixty thousand Han-period documents in Central Asia and western China preserved on strips of wood and bamboo, scholars have been able, for the first time, to put together many of the missing pieces.

In this second volume of his monumental history, Chun-shu Chang provides the first systematic reconstruction of the history of the acquisitions and colonization undertaken by the Chinese empire. In never before seen detail, Chang discusses the actions taken by the Chinese empire to develop the Han frontier: the government promoted massive immigration to the newly conquered virgin land; an innovative and complex garrison system was created; and civil institutions and a land system, as well as a regular imperial administration, were established over the region. Chang investigates the long and massive campaigns of the Han territorial expansion movement, considers the impact of early nation-building, and explores the formation and growth of the Chinese empire and its changing national identity. Chang's comprehensive reconstruction of ancient and early Imperial Chinese history, based on literary, archaeological, and recently discovered ancient texts and classics, reveals the process and mechanics of the Han frontier development through an innovative and complex system of colonization, the core mechanics of the Han empire-building enterprise.

Chun-shu Chang is Professor of History at the University of Michigan and is the author, with Shelley Hsueh-lun Chang, of Crisis and Transformation in Seventeenth-Century China, which was named a 1998 Choice Outstanding Academic Title of the Year, and Redefining History: Ghosts, Spirits, and Human Society in P'u Sung-ling's World, 1640 - 1715.

Absolutely nothing has changed since. Indians would do well to recognise the truth of this civilization. Uighurs and Tibet and 62 are a living reminder left by god, for us to mend our ways.

Strong economy+Strong society+Strong Defence is the way forward for us.

Ray sir thanks for the direction. I think you should have brought up the OUTSIDERS VIEW on the subject.

"An extraordinary survey of the political and administrative history of early imperial China, which makes available a body of evidence and scholarship otherwise inaccessible to English-readers. The underpinning of research is truly stupendous."
—Ray Van Dam, Professor, Department of History, University of Michigan

"Powerfully argues from literary and archaeological records that empire, modeled on Han paradigms, has largely defined Chinese civilization ever since."
—Joanna Waley-Cohen, Professor, Department of History, New York University

 

[Ray]

I think you should have brought up the OUTSIDERS VIEW on the subject.

I avoid it since it would be declared as 'propaganda'.

 

[badguy2000]

Further, the Uyghur, Mongols, Manchus, Miaos, Utsuls, and Zhuang, Hui, Tibetan, Tujia, Yi, Buyei, Dong, Yao, Korean, Bai, Hani, Kazakh, Li, and Dai are Hans?

What about the Yues and the Wus (in fact all the original inhabitants south of the Yangtse) even if they have been Sinicized?

One must honestly analyse historical events.

Therefore, does this not indicate that Chinese have assiduously built an Empire?

China also supports dictatorial regimes, repressive regimes and military rulers. Pakistan, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Sudan etc.

China has 55 minority ethnics .

however, maybe about 50 of the 55 minority ethnics are serously Hanized.
Some of them ,such as Manchus,Tujia,She,Zhuang, are completely Hanized.

In fact, only several minorities like Uyghurs,Uyghur and Tibetan are still not hanized.

 

[Ray]

China has 55 minority ethnics .

however, maybe about 50 of the 55 minority ethnics are serously Hanized.
Some of them ,such as Manchus,Tujia,She,Zhuang, are completely Hanized.

In fact, only several minorities like Uyghurs,Uyghur and Tibetan are still not hanized.

I am aware of the same.

I was answering only to show that indeed Chinese have built an Empire over the span of history.


The very issue that there are words like nei ren, wei ren, Hanhua in Chinese, it indicates that it is all about Empire building.

The utsuls are descendants of the Cham.

The Miaos are still not quite Hanised since they speak a language that is of Hmong origin.

 

[badguy2000]

I am aware of the same.

I was answering only to show that indeed Chinese have built an Empire over the span of history.


The very issue that there are words like nei ren, wei ren, Hanhua in Chinese, it indicates that it is all about Empire building.

The utsuls are descendants of the Cham.

The Miaos are still not quite Hanised since they speak a language that is of Hmong origin.

Miao is a story different from Uyghurs and tibetan.

Miao has been under the rule of Han Regime or Hanized Regime for thousands of years and never built their own states.

most of Miao are also Hanized .

only some of Miao in very lonely moutainous areas still keep their traditonal old life-style . those Miao who keep traditional life-style become the favorable of tourists.

 

[Ray]

Miao has been under the rule of Han Regime or Hanized Regime for thousands of years and never built their own states.

So you agree that Tongzhi Shotgun is wrong when he claims that Chinese did not build any Empire.

What is Hanisation but capturing areas and converting them to Hans something in the lines of MacCaulay, except the British did not hang around and our intentions to remain Indians was stronger.

Are the Yues and Wus actually Hans or where they Hanised?

What about others south of the Yangtse?

 

[badguy2000]

So you agree that Tongzhi Shotgun is wrong when he claims that Chinese did not build any Empire.

What is Hanisation but capturing areas and converting them to Hans something in the lines of MacCaulay, except the British did not hang around and our intentions to remain Indians was stronger.

Are the Yues and Wus actually Hans or where they Hanised?

What about others south of the Yangtse?

Wu and Yue were both the vassals of the King of Zhou dynasty( about 1046BC-221BC)

the lords of Wu were Marquis while the lords of Yue were dukes

From the start,the rulers of Wu and Yue were all Han nobles .
the founder of WU was the uncle of the first King of Zhou dynasty.
the Dukes of Yue were the offsprings of the first King of Xia dyansty( about 2000BC-1600BC, the first dynasty of CHina)


However, most people of WU and Yue were "barbarians" at first. but During 770BC-476BC,Wu and Yue became Hanized , when Han as a ethnic was still not formed formally.

During waring-states period(475BC-221BC), Wu and Yue were completely Hanized and became one of the core areas of chinese civilization

So ,generally speaking, Wu and Yue can be looked on as a part of Han's ancestors.

 

[Ray]

Wu and Yue were both the vassals of the King of Zhou dynasty( about 1046BC-221BC)

the lords of Wu were Marquis while the lords of Yue were dukes

From the start,the rulers of Wu and Yue were all Han nobles .
the founder of WU was the uncle of the first King of Zhou dynasty.
the Dukes of Yue were the offsprings of the first King of Xia dyansty( about 2000BC-1600BC, the first dynasty of CHina)


However, most people of WU and Yue were "barbarians" at first. but During 770BC-476BC,Wu and Yue became Hanized , when Han as a ethnic was still not formed formally.

During waring-states period(475BC-221BC), Wu and Yue were completely Hanized and became one of the core areas of chinese civilization

So ,generally speaking, Wu and Yue can be looked on as a part of Han's ancestors.

Yes, I know all that.

The feudal Zhou Dynasty eventually broke apart into individual city states, creating the Warring States period. In 221 BCE, Qin Shi Huang united the various warring kingdoms and created the first Chinese empire.

The 'raw' barbarians (shengfan) have to be 'cooked' (shufan) by Chinese civilization. This conscious assimilationism allows the emergence of an empire that progresses as much by cultural contagion as by colonization and military conquest.

For instance, the Li from Hainan were classified as shengfan (the ones who refused to be Hanised) and the Shufan, the Li of the coastal region who were timid and were ready to subjugate themselves to the Hans.

That is what the Chinese are attempting in Tibet and Xinjiang where they are 'raw' and are refusing to be Hanised and thus 'cooked'. Empire building by obliterating the past heritage, history, lineage, culture, language etc.

 

[badguy2000]

Yes, I know all that.

The feudal Zhou Dynasty eventually broke apart into individual city states, creating the Warring States period. In 221 BCE, Qin Shi Huang united the various warring kingdoms and created the first Chinese empire.

The 'raw' barbarians (shengfan) have to be 'cooked' (shufan) by Chinese civilization. This conscious assimilationism allows the emergence of an empire that progresses as much by cultural contagion as by colonization and military conquest.

For instance, the Li from Hainan were classified as shengfan (the ones who refused to be Hanised) and the Shufan, the Li of the coastal region who were timid and were ready to subjugate themselves to the Hans.

That is what the Chinese are attempting in Tibet and Xinjiang where they are 'raw' and are refusing to be Hanised and thus 'cooked'. Empire building by obliterating the past heritage, history, lineage, culture, language etc.

you simplify the case too much.


the more advanced one civilization is , the more attrative it is to the backward ethnic. as we see, Yankee's life-style is very attractive and charmful,becauce USA represent the most advanced civilization in the world today.

Before Industrializaton era, the life-style of Han always represented the most advanced civilization in the sinic world( PRC,Taiwan,Mongolia,Vietnam,Korea , Japan and a part of center Asia and southeast Asia). sinic civilizaiton had powerful soft power to attract backward ethnic around to adopt Hanized life-style.

For example,

Japanese,Korean,Vietnamese,Manchus, Khitans,Southern Huns,Hsien-pei all volunteered in adopting Chinese-scripts and Confucious

 

[Ray]

you simplify the case too much.


the more advanced one civilization is , the more attrative it is to the backward ethnic. as we see, Yankee's life-style is very attractive and charmful,becauce USA represent the most advanced civilization in the world today.

Before Industrializaton era, the life-style of Han always represented the most advanced civilization in the sinic world( PRC,Taiwan,Mongolia,Vietnam,Korea , Japan and a part of center Asia and southeast Asia). sinic civilizaiton had powerful soft power to attract backward ethnic around to adopt Hanized life-style.

For example,

Japanese,Korean,Vietnamese,Manchus, Khitans,Southern Huns,Hsien-pei all volunteered in adopting Chinese-scripts and Confucious

It is a misconception of yours that the US has a civilisation.

It does not!

Money and power does not make a civilisation. History and heritage does.

The Americans lack both, compared to the other ancient civilisations.

Well, China and all adopted Buddhism and Buddha attained his knowledge and nirvana in Bodh Gaya, India under the peepul tree!

In other words, by your logic, India is the sole fountainhead of emancipation, knowledge and civilising the uncivilised?

The issue is, so what?

India is great? If this is what makes India great, then what can one say?

Let us not stretch imagination beyond the elasticity of rationale!!

 

[kuku]

Well sir, considering the PRC citizens here were posting about droping armoured divisions deep into india, this seems(or seemed) logical enough.....

 

[badguy2000]

It is a misconception of yours that the US has a civilisation.

It does not!

Money and power does not make a civilisation. History and heritage does.

The Americans lack both, compared to the other ancient civilisations.

Well, China and all adopted Buddhism and Buddha attained his knowledge and nirvana in Bodh Gaya, India under the peepul tree!

In other words, by your logic, India is the sole fountainhead of emancipation, knowledge and civilising the uncivilised?

The issue is, so what?

India is great? If this is what makes India great, then what can one say?

Let us not stretch imagination beyond the elasticity of rationale!!

what makes India great is its antique civilization, not its current civilization.it is very shameful for modern Indian to have nothing proud,except the glory of their ascenstors.


west civilization has been the most advanced civilization since 1500. USA is just the representation of west civilization.


the economy is the base of one civilization,all others like science,tech ,artists and philosophy are all the upper buildings on base.