As I mentioned...there is a POSSIBILITY( A possibility of playing definitive role) of India being able to play a lead role and with technology it will be a bit easy. I mentioned we see a pro activeness,a follow up on diplomatic dialogue with real world action in political will.
chinese access is a different thing and chinese action is a whole different thing+chinese did create terrorists organizations in these regions of which many act against India. So its vital for Indian interest to keep a good check on them and do what it can, be it raids or otherwise to tackle it.
Whatever be the flavor of nation and its rules, when all these nations have a common threat which their mil. cant handle(Which is on the rise) India CAN play a lead role. In times of disasters India has played a vital, responsible and key role in the region despite borders.
A lot of these recent visits at high levels points to "working together" to counter terrorism with terrorism being the center focus of many such visits.
We never expected Myanmar to support Indian counter terror ops till it happened.
.
Have we seen china take any initiative in counter terrorism else where other than the "proclaimed" East Turkestan muscle flexing?chinas double stand on terrorism is well known in this world.
For china its more economical, they would try to freeload on whatever they can after India or other nation saturates the situation.
china is well known in these nation to use terrorism as a state policy for political gains many of which are hurting the very existence of the host nations.
Isnt the strong trust deficit for china well known in this region with democracies and sovereign nations questioning the chinese intent.
China's Counter terrorism Pledge Highly Questionable:
Uighur separatists who have adopted violent measures to take on the mighty Chinese state, and the Tibetan peaceful pro-autonomy movement, though unorganized, are China’s only problem with terrorism, separatism and religious extremism, described by Beijing as the “three evils.”
China has another strategy, however, for the three evils active against other countries. It is the old strategy of Mao Zedong, getting together a united front of such groups and elements.
In the early 1980s, China’s supreme leader Deng Xiaoping admitted that the past strategy of supporting such insurgent groups and forming communist revolutionary parties was wrong. China had formed the Communist Party of Burma and parties in Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia. Some of their leaders were shown attending China’s national day celebrations. The Communist Party of Indonesia staged an uprising in 1965, but was defeated. These South East Asian countries broke off diplomatic relations with China.(These relations were restored much later- Indonesia was the last one to do so).Deng promised this policy would not recur. But support to Indian insurgent groups (IIGs) was quietly revived-these included the Nagas (NSCN),People’s Liberation Army of Manipur PLA(M),which were started in the 1960s.Later the United Liberation Front of Assam(ULFA)was added to the list. These insurgents were given training in China’s Yunan province, bordering Myanmar, from where arms were clandestinely transferred to them.
When these IIGs were welcomed in Bangladesh under the BNP-Jamaat government, arms came through Bangladesh’s Chittagong port. In 2004 ten truckloads of arms from China were accidentally interdicted in Chittagong port. ULFA Commander -in -Chief Paresh Barua, who lived in Dhaka openly, was in Chittagong that day to receive the weapons and explosives. Paresh Barua and Antony Shimray of the NSCN(I/M)who lived in Bangladesh, had Chinese visas.
Although some of the IIGs have split, ULFA leader Paresh Barua now operates from the Yunan - Myanmar border. The Naga split faction led by Myanmarese Naga leader Khaplang lives in Myanmar and is active in anti-India insurgency. The PLA (M) camps are based in Myanmar. According to latest reports from Myanmar, China is trying to form these groups into a united front for action in India’s North East. The Chinese intelligence interacts with them through cut-outs, maintaining room for deniability. Anthony Shimray, who is in Indian custody now, has confessed to Chinese assistance. It can, therefore, be fairly concluded that China continues to press India both from the west and the east.
When China supports terrorists and insurgents, Beijing’s much declared position against international terrorism becomes highly questionable. Their focus remains only on the Uighurs. China is going against international efforts to combat terrorism.
This brings to question China’s position on terrorism in Afghanistan and Central Asia. China has given no public statement on the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU). The IMU and Chechen rebels have declared their agenda in Central Asia and Russia.
Despite the new bonhomie between China and Russia, the two are now competing for dominant influence in Central Asia. Moscow considers this region as its legitimate backyard and area of influence. Yet Russia’s economic and political interest forces it to abstain from raising such issues with China. Will Beijing use these terrorists against Russia as it is doing with India?
http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/node/1808
