The Rise of China : Strategic Implications.

[LETHALFORCE]

China's India policy: Murder with borrowed knives

China's India policy: Murder with borrowed knives- Politics/Nation-News-The Economic Times

NEW DELHI: Fears that China could employ a strategy of “murdering with borrowed knives” against India does not seem totally unfounded. A leading Chinese think-tank , whose views count with the Beijing’s Communist administration, has put forward an outrageous suggestion that China should break India into 20-30 independent states with the help of “friendly countries” like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan.

The article, written by Zhan Lue and titled “If China takes a little action , the so-called Great Indian Federation can be broken up,” has aroused strong sentiments in India where many see this as a reflection of the hardline thinking in Beijing.

Published on the website of a think tank that advises Beijing on global and strategic issues, the article makes a series of preposterous suggestions saying that a fragmented India would be in China’s interests and also lead to prosperity in the region. Responding to the inflammatory nature of the suggestions, India issued a warning and a word of caution.

“We continue to maintain that opinions and assessment on the state of India-China relations should be expressed after careful judgment based on the long-term interests of building a stable relationship between the two countries,’’ MEA official spokesperson Vishnu Prakash said.

Giving the benefit of doubt to Beijing, MEA said the article “appears to be the expression of individual opinion and does not accord with the officially stated position of China on India-China relations” , conveyed to India on several occasions most recently by the State Councilor Dai Bingguo during border talks last week.

Nevertheless, the reaction suggests that the article is not being taken lightly by New Delhi. China watchers point out that an article of this nature would have been vetted by the Chinese government. The article, which is published on the website of the China International Institute for Strategic Studies (CIISS), suggests that China should work towards breaking up India into 20-30 nation-states like Europe so that social reforms in South Asia can be achieved, the caste system can be eradicated and the region can march towards prosperity.

Asking the Communist party to exploit regional sentiments in India, the article says that China can seek support of friendly countries including Pakistan, Nepal and Bhutan to further this strategy. The article terms India as “Hindu religious state” that is based on caste exploitation which is coming in the way of modernisation.

It further argues that China in its own interest and the progress of whole of Asia should join forces with “different nationalities” like Assamese, Tamils and Kashmiris and support them in establishing independent nation states of their own. The article further said Beijing should support the United Liberation Front of Asom to help achieve independence for Assam from India.

Yet another suggestion is that China give political support to Bangladesh to encourage ethnic Bengalis in India get rid of “Indian control” and join Bangladesh as one Bengali nation. The strategist contends that if that is not possible then China should encourage the creation of a Bengali nation state for the aim of weakening India’s expansion and then recover the 90,000 sq km territory in Arunachal Pradesh, which Beijing claims as its own.

The publication of the article has coincided with the 13th round of India-China border talks, which both sides have termed as positive. But pressure points have remained in Sino-Indian ties which have continued to flare up at regular intervals.

This includes the recent attempt by China to block an ADB loan to Arunachal Pradesh. Strategic experts here see it as a reflection of the growing hardline approach in China towards India. `This is part and parcel of hardline approach of think tanks (in China). They are trying to take advantage of India’s pliability,’’ said Mr Brahma Chellaney.

 

[Jeypore]

johnee

The reality is that a united India would have been a great threat to dominance of any world power. And here I refer to all those parts that were under british in sub-continent or Indian kings when I say united India.

That statement is completly false, India's influence only rose in early 90's based on economic reforms. For last 50 years or so, India even united would had no chance in competing with the big boys!!

Once, India was broken, it took India many years to move on, infact, even today the greatest hindarences to India's development are those parts that were broken at that time(Pakistan and Bangladesh). So, if it worked once, then it can work again.

Blame where Blame is due. Blaming UK for partitioning kepted India back is completly false. It is more of our governance that kepts us back!!!

Now, India must do exactly the opposite of what Chinese strategist wants. India must stay united. Not just that but regain all those parts that were divided by British to keep India crippled. That would mean taking over Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Afghanistan. Now, this thought may seem really absurd to some. But regaining our lost ground must be a long term strategy. Perhaps for next half-century, we can try and achieve this goal. This would be beneficial for all. Right now the existance of states like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Afghanistan, etc help no one. Not even their people. The only people who benefit are those who rule these places and those who use these to control India.
Throughout the history, once India lost control of Kandahar, then delhi was threatened.

Absurd indeed!!!! I agree with Flint, it is a load of a Crap!!! Think of it this way Mr. Johnee, first India needs to grow itself to 1 world the way it is before thinking about how other provence would have helped it to grow. And the other aspect is why do we need other provence, there ideology is so different from ours?

 

[Daredevil]

Credit tightening threatens China's 'giant Ponzi scheme'

China's loan growth plunged in July while exports fell 23pc from a year ago after grinding lower for nine months as consumers in the West tighten their belts further.

By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Published: 7:17PM BST 11 Aug 2009

Can the world rely on China's growth miracle to power recovery?
The data raise fresh doubts about the strength of global trade and whether the world can rely on China's growth miracle to power recovery.
Separately, the Baltic Dry Index – measuring freight rates for bulk goods – has tipped over, dropping 25pc since late July. The shipping figures buttress reports that China has stopped building up stocks of metals and other commodities after a spate of frantic buying over the early summer.

China's central bank said loan growth fell to $52bn (£31bn) from $248bn a month earlier, although it is too early to tell whether Beijing has begun to rein in credit after the explosion of bank loans in the first half of the year.
The loan figures are being watched closely by analysts and traders in the City. Excess liquidity in China has been a key driver of global markets since the rally began in March.

Beijing is walking a tightrope by trying to offset the collapse in exports – almost 40pc of GDP – with an investment blitz in roads, railways, and industry through state-owned companies.

The real economy cannot absorb the money, so it is leaking into asset speculation. The central bank estimates that 20pc of fresh credit has ended up in equity markets. The Shanghai index is up 80pc this year, though profits have fallen by almost a third. The pattern echoes the final phase of Japan's Nikkei bubble in 1989.

"China is a big fat tail risk for world markets," said Hans Redeker, currency chief at BNP Paribas. "Shanghai equities have reached the same extreme as in late 2007. The country will have to cut credit growth, and when this happens, Shanghai equities and commodities will suffer. That is what could bring this global rally to a halt."

China Construction Bank, the number two lender, is cutting loans by 70pc over the second half of the year. "We noticed that some loans didn't go into the real economy. Housing prices are rising too fast," said the bank's president, Zhang Jianguo.

Andy Xie, a leading consultant, said China's boom was a "giant Ponzi scheme" that was likely to "bring very bad consequences" for the country.
"The stock market is in a final frenzy again. The most ignorant retail investors are being sucked in by rising momentum," he said. Equities are overvalued by 50pc to 100pc.

Mr Xie, who wrote his doctoral thesis on Japan's bubble in the 1980s, said China's ratio of property prices to incomes is seven times higher than in the US. It costs three months' salary per square meter of space – arguably the highest in the world – though tower blocks are sitting empty. Prices are being propped up by state enterprises, abetted by local Communist bosses.
Mr Xie said Chinese booms and busts follow a political rythmn. There is a deeply-rooted belief that the authorities can keep the game going – the "Panda put", China's answer to the "Greenspan Put" – and that the Communist Party will not let the rally fizzle before the 60th anniversary of the revolution on October 1. This belief is self-fulfilling, for a while.

Mr Xie expects China's rally to falter around October, followed by fresh shots of liquidity before the economy falls into a deeper slump by 2012. "Property prices could drop like Japan's in the last two decades, which would destroy the banking system," he said.

Mr Xie said China's asset boom is the flip-side of the weak US dollar. US monetary stimulus is in effect leaking across the Pacific. Bust will follow when the dollar rallies, draining liquidity again. If the Fed tightens abruptly as it did under Paul Volcker in the early 1980s, the denouement could be painful for China.

Beijing deserves praise for trying to switch reliance from exports towards the domestic economy. It has had some success. Retail sales have risen 15pc over the last year. But Professor Michael Pettis from Beijing University said it is proving very hard to induce the Chinese to alter their spending habits. The cultural barriers will take years to overcome.

Instead, the stimulus is feeding more industrial investment, leading to more excess capacity worldwide. While Chinese GDP continues to grow near 8pc, this is based on output. In the West, GDP growth is based on spending. These two definitions are chalk and cheese.

The underlying story has not changed. The East-West imbalances that lay behind the Great Recession of 2008-2009 are getting worse, not better.

 

[Antimony]

The East-West imbalances that lay behind the Great Recession of 2008-2009 are getting worse, not better.

this particular statement gives me some misgivings about the author's credibility. How is the East West imbalance responsible for the Recession?

 

[Fighter]

Some of you have not accepted pakistan as a independent country.

 

[Daredevil]

this particular statement gives me some misgivings about the author's credibility. How is the East West imbalance responsible for the Recession?

East(China) West (US& Europe) imbalance might mean the trade surplus that china has maintained with respect to western countries and fueling the cheap credit in US by buying US treasury bonds which led to sub-prime crisis and the consequent recession. That's what I understood. I might also be wrong here.

 

[IBRIS]

Imports fell 14.9 per cent from a year earlier, compared with a 13.2 per cent decline the previous month, the customs agency reported. That was despite a rise in Chinese investment and consumer spending amid a massive government stimulus that is driving demand for imported raw materials and components.

 

[IBRIS]

China's market will fall 25% taking down S&P.

 

[thakur_ritesh]

When was India based purely on religion, isn’t it even today that when we enter the 63rd year of our independence India boasts of more muslims than Pakistan or Bangladesh or any other country in the world other than Indonesia. The whole analogy of India a hindu rashtra is a wrong concept, and if we were like that the only political outfits to be winning elections would have been the hindu right wing parties, probably secularism is an alien concept for most out side India, but then how can one aspect a commie to understand that where their way of dealing with differences is to only create a strangle hold on the issue, but probably he does not realise that more tightly one holds the sand, one only ends up loosing more of it.

This article does raise questions on the very basic fabric of the nation which divides the nation and the author has specifically pointed those out to us namely religious divide, region divide, caste divide, north east where most of mainlanders do not associate with them and if the policy of the government is to be followed then it seems there is an attempt to make these dividing lines a little more prominent and if we are the culprits ourselves then we have no right to be out raged at someone who has suggested at exploiting these divides, aren’t they supposed to do the same, don’t we talk on same lines about Pakistan. If anything, this article should come across as a wake up call to our policy makers of how wrong they have been in dealing with domestic issues and they need to come up with solutions where these divides are eradicated. Imagine he has yet not spoken of a gender divide and well our parliament is already working towards that divide, aren’t we just too smart at further dividing our own!

Cant agree with the author on a lot of aspects, probably because I am an Indian, but then this kind of stuff is not new and its not as if this has been spoken for the first time ever. During the cold war time, this was a good pass time habit of the west and now that the prc sees us as an emerging challenge to their supremacy in times to come, they are bound to talk and suggest that, and well that is how the world works.

I am happy at least someone thinks of India as an upcoming challenge to their supremacy in the prc, unlike our certain Chinese posters who live in an air of their own.

 

[Jeypore]

In fact,most people were drived by the media,they don't have the ability of seeing and ejecting.Most are too stupid or too uneducated(or due to lack of knowlege) to distinguish the truth and false appearance.e.g.your naval commander recently said "Indian navy is no much with PLAN".Maybe,he just want to get more fund from your parliament.What is the truth,may be only he hnows.

Why would that be bad, does that not apply to all the western countries also!!! You have polarization of the media based on political views, and people have the freedom to choose. Stupid, highly doubt it, Biased on one sided view, very likely. There is a freedom of information there, rest is personal choices. Now unlike China there is no alternative point of view, and that makes the population more biased and surpressed on a single view. Where would the stupidity of the people end!!!

Let take your example, if China's think tank suggest that India is dividedable, the population will only views will be, yes it dividedable. There is no alternate recourse, and that's were zombism and stupidy rein.

 

[johnee]

johnee


That statement is completly false, India's influence only rose in early 90's based on economic reforms. For last 50 years or so, India even united would had no chance in competing with the big boys!!

Since the partition, India and Pakistan have been pitted against each other(and support has been coming from two superpowers of cold war era). Had India been undivided, IMO, India could have been saved from using large amount of its resources for wars and conflicts. Instead, these funds could have gone in developing India. A country such as India(undivided India) with such large resources(including human resource) and strategic location and huge market could have quickly come to be a challenger to the powers that be(atleast regionally). IMO, the British empire around the world was fueled by India(undivided India). If British could have done it, then Independent India(undivided India) could have done it as well.

That doesnt mean India(undivided) would have been an immediate threat, but surely a long term one(in about three/four decades from Independence).

Blame where Blame is due. Blaming UK for partitioning kepted India back is completly false. It is more of our governance that kepts us back!!!

Partitioning and largescale population migration, I believe, had great affect on India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. The subsequent wars and arms race was an additional burden on a newly independent country(that was plundered by a foreign occupation for about three centuries). So, the blame does fall on British(though nothing better is expected of them). But that doesnt mean our politicians are exempt from blame.

Absurd indeed!!!! I agree with Flint, it is a load of a Crap!!! Think of it this way Mr. Johnee, first India needs to grow itself to 1 world the way it is before thinking about how other provence would have helped it to grow. And the other aspect is why do we need other provence, there ideology is so different from ours?

Hmm....no. IMO, India cant grow as it is beyond a certain limit. There is a glass ceiling in this situation. The lands and people which were once part of India are now being used for anti-Indian activities like weakening the economy through peddling fake currency, terrorism and eventually to break India further. While one may be tempted to believe that India could simply tighten its vigilance, I believe, the only permanent solution is to address the root and not the symptoms. The root, IMHO, is the existance of artificial nations(with no unique tradition, language, culture or ancestory other than India) around India that are used forever by foreign powers. Divide and rule at its best.

 

[Vinod2070]

Some of you have not accepted pakistan as a independent country.

Shame on you.

Care to explain? We have discussed this earlier.

 

[AkhandBharat]

Some of you have not accepted pakistan as a independent country.

Everyone has the right to express their opinion. If it doesn't match yours, that doesn't mean that that person's thoughts are low. Refrain from personal attacks.

If East Germany and West Germany would've accepted the fact that they are different countries, they would never have come together. They were divided on ideology alone. Their ethnicity was the same, hence they united later on. We have to unite the subcontinent that way too. Pakistan's people are suffering under their rabid, out of control feudal government who sole existence is to create a torn in India's foot. Had they been peaceful, Indians themselves would've accepted the partition, but its not the case as history has proven in the last 60 years. India has been under constant attack of religious extremism, ever since 1000 A.D. The product of that extremism is the result is that it has lost its territory in the east and the west.

And countries that are competing against India are utilizing this very aspect of religious extremism against it. So hell no, we will not accept the fact that our own people are pit against each other for some silly idea as religion. Indian muslims feel that they are better off in India than pakistan. So the whole concept of creating pakistan and bangladesh was flawed in the first place. You coming from a democratic country should understand better! Or are you one of those individuals who like watching the show of brothers fighting against each other for the benefit of a third nation?

 

[hengheng516]

Chinese website denies being govt think-tank

BEIJING: The Chinese website, which published the controversial article about splitting India into 20-30 parts, today claimed it did not represent
the views of any government think-tank. The site’s owner-editor said he ran the Internet publication on his own without any government backing.

Kang Lingyi, the founding editor of the ÖйúÕ½ÂÔÍø_´ÓÓ°ÏìÖйú¿ªÊ¼£¬¸Ä±äÊÀ½ç, said the article was actually a web posting by an anonymous Internet user. He did not think it necessary to verify the identity and credential of the author before publishing the article, Kang said.

"It is simply a piece written by an ordinary netizen. The Indian scholar said it is a study by a government-run think-tank. This is ridiculous," Kang told TNN in an exclusive interview. The website today published a clafirication saying it represented no government body. Kang said he has also sent a fax with the clarification to the Indian embassy.

D S Rajan, the head of Chennai Centre for Chinese Studies, who circulated an English translation of the article, wrote that the Chinese article, was published in ÖйúÕ½ÂÔÍø_´ÓÓ°ÏìÖйú¿ªÊ¼£¬¸Ä±äÊÀ½ç. "The authoritative host site is located in Beijing and is the new edition of one, which so far represented the China International Institute for Strategic Studies (www.chinaiiss.org)," he wrote. Rajan's views were interpreted in the Indian media to mean that the two sites were linked to each other.

But Kang claimed he runs a separate research body, which has a similar name in Chinese as the CIISS, but has no relationship with the official think-tank.

Rajan told TNN the site, which published the article, must be enjoying some sort of government backing.

"This website must have some sort of official blessing. Otherwise, it would not be possible for it to publish such an article," he said.

Kang confirmed he has not been questioned by the foreign ministry or the government censors for publishing the article on August 8. Chinese censors routinely block Internet sites and investigate their writers and editors whenever an article is not liked by the government. This has not happened in the case of Kang’s since the piece was published on August 8. Beijing's silence even after Indian foreign ministry reacted to the article is significant.

The article caused a lot of surprise among Chinese foreign policy experts as well.

"No responsible scholar in China will say such things," Wang Chungui, vice president of the Association of Foreign Diplomats of China, told this reporter. Zhou Gang, a former Chinese ambassador to India and a special consultant to the ministry of foreign affairs in Beijing, reacted with surprise.

"This is nonsense. This is not the thinking in China," Zhou said when told about the content of the article.

"Everyone has a right to publish his post on website. We cannot possibly get to know the details of each netizen," Kang said. He said the article, which talked about China involving Pakistan and Bangladesh in a grand plan to split up India, was first circulated over the Internet in 2006.

The article has since been refined by different Internet users and it now sounds like a study by a research organization instead of being the opinion of an individual, Kang said. Phrases like "I think" and "I believe" that appeared in the 2006 article has been removed in the new version that he published, he said.

Kang said he was running his website, ÖйúÕ½ÂÔÍø_´ÓÓ°ÏìÖйú¿ªÊ¼£¬¸Ä±äÊÀ½ç without any government funding since 2002. "It is a coincidence that the Chinese name of my website is similar to the official think-tank, the China International Institute for Strategic Studies. He recently changed the English name of his organization to China Center for International and Strategic Studies to avoid confusion, Kang said.

His website is registered with the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and bears the registration number ICP09053180, he said.

 

[Fighter]

Everyone has the right to express their opinion. If it doesn't match yours, that doesn't mean that that person's thoughts are low. Refrain from personal attacks.

I was just saying shame on them. Of course everyone has the right to express their opinion. Completely agree with you.

If East Germany and West Germany would've accepted the fact that they are different countries, they would never have come together. They were divided on ideology alone. Their ethnicity was the same, hence they united later on. We have to unite the subcontinent that way too. Pakistan's people are suffering under their rabid, out of control feudal government who sole existence is to create a torn in India's foot. Had they been peaceful, Indians themselves would've accepted the partition, but its not the case as history has proven in the last 60 years. India has been under constant attack of religious extremism, ever since 1000 A.D. The product of that extremism is the result is that it has lost its territory in the east and the west.

You are so wrong. I will explain to you why.

First of all dont compare Germany with the situation in India.
Germany was divided against their will. They have no say in this because they lost ww2. The people always wanted to stay undivided.
It was a peaceful reunion. Remember the pictures of the wall falling.

Pakistan dont want to join india. So it doesnt matter what India want.
It can only be possible if both countries want to join.
Its that simple.

And countries that are competing against India are utilizing this very aspect of religious extremism against it. So hell no, we will not accept the fact that our own people are pit against each other for some silly idea as religion. Indian muslims feel that they are better off in India than pakistan. So the whole concept of creating pakistan and bangladesh was flawed in the first place. You coming from a democratic country should understand better! Or are you one of those individuals who like watching the show of brothers fighting against each other for the benefit of a third nation?

As i have told you, there is nothing you can do.
Your opinion are very undemocratic and you are asking me to understand better.
Please educate yourself a little better on what democratic values are.
Afterall India is the worlds biggest Democracy. Respect for that.

 

[AkhandBharat]

I was just saying shame on them. Of course everyone has the right to express their opinion. Completely agree with you.

Shame on who? On people who think about the unification of the subcontinent? Why so? They can think the way they want. Why is their opinion low, just because they think different?

You are so wrong. I will explain to you why.

First of all dont compare Germany with the situation in India.
Germany was divided against their will. They have no say in this because they lost ww2. The people always wanted to stay undivided.
It was a peaceful reunion. Remember the pictures of the wall falling.

Pakistan dont want to join india. So it doesnt matter what India want.
It can only be possible if both countries want to join.
Its that simple.

The situation in Germany was exactly the same. Read up on your history. The people on both side of the wall hated each other. The political bureau then bought the two sides together for reconciliation. Similar situation exists for India's satellite nations. So India has to ensure that it integrates these satellite nations both for historical reasons and strategic reasons.

As i have told you, there is nothing you can do.
Your opinion are very undemocratic and you are asking me to understand better.
Please educate yourself a little better on what democratic values are.
Afterall India is the worlds biggest Democracy. Respect for that.

Seems like someone needs to be educated on what democracy is. A democratic country doesn't mean it has to fulfill the wishes of politics of other nations. It means to ensure that their people voice needs to be heard and this is India's voice. The majority believes in the integration of the subcontinent. US is a 'democratic' country, but it doesn't mean it doesn't do covert operations in countries that it considers a threat to either its ideology or otherwise. Pakistan was given a choice to either be with them or against them in the war against taliban. So no, dont feed me bullcrap that a democratic country means it has to be inherently peaceful. Peaceful means is the first option. if it works, good. If it doesn't then the country has to resort to other options to ensure its progress is unhindered. The satellite nations are an obstacle to India's growth and the west in the past and China now in the east is fully utilizing them against it. So India, as a democratic nation, has to ensure that it doesn't happen. The only was is to integrate them.

 

[Ray]

BEIJING: The Chinese website, which published the controversial article about splitting India into 20-30 parts, today claimed it did not represent
the views of any government think-tank. The site’s owner-editor said he ran the Internet publication on his own without any government backing.

Kang Lingyi, the founding editor of the ÖйúÕ½ÂÔÍø_´ÓÓ°ÏìÖйú¿ªÊ¼£¬¸Ä±äÊÀ½ç, said the article was actually a web posting by an anonymous Internet user. He did not think it necessary to verify the identity and credential of the author before publishing the article, Kang said.

"It is simply a piece written by an ordinary netizen. The Indian scholar said it is a study by a government-run think-tank. This is ridiculous," Kang told TNN in an exclusive interview. The website today published a clafirication saying it represented no government body. Kang said he has also sent a fax with the clarification to the Indian embassy.

D S Rajan, the head of Chennai Centre for Chinese Studies, who circulated an English translation of the article, wrote that the Chinese article, was published in ÖйúÕ½ÂÔÍø_´ÓÓ°ÏìÖйú¿ªÊ¼£¬¸Ä±äÊÀ½ç. "The authoritative host site is located in Beijing and is the new edition of one, which so far represented the China International Institute for Strategic Studies (www.chinaiiss.org)," he wrote. Rajan's views were interpreted in the Indian media to mean that the two sites were linked to each other.

But Kang claimed he runs a separate research body, which has a similar name in Chinese as the CIISS, but has no relationship with the official think-tank.

Rajan told TNN the site, which published the article, must be enjoying some sort of government backing.

"This website must have some sort of official blessing. Otherwise, it would not be possible for it to publish such an article," he said.

Kang confirmed he has not been questioned by the foreign ministry or the government censors for publishing the article on August 8. Chinese censors routinely block Internet sites and investigate their writers and editors whenever an article is not liked by the government. This has not happened in the case of Kang’s since the piece was published on August 8. Beijing's silence even after Indian foreign ministry reacted to the article is significant.

The article caused a lot of surprise among Chinese foreign policy experts as well.

"No responsible scholar in China will say such things," Wang Chungui, vice president of the Association of Foreign Diplomats of China, told this reporter. Zhou Gang, a former Chinese ambassador to India and a special consultant to the ministry of foreign affairs in Beijing, reacted with surprise.

"This is nonsense. This is not the thinking in China," Zhou said when told about the content of the article.

"Everyone has a right to publish his post on website. We cannot possibly get to know the details of each netizen," Kang said. He said the article, which talked about China involving Pakistan and Bangladesh in a grand plan to split up India, was first circulated over the Internet in 2006.

The article has since been refined by different Internet users and it now sounds like a study by a research organization instead of being the opinion of an individual, Kang said. Phrases like "I think" and "I believe" that appeared in the 2006 article has been removed in the new version that he published, he said.

Kang said he was running his website, ÖйúÕ½ÂÔÍø_´ÓÓ°ÏìÖйú¿ªÊ¼£¬¸Ä±äÊÀ½ç without any government funding since 2002. "It is a coincidence that the Chinese name of my website is similar to the official think-tank, the China International Institute for Strategic Studies. He recently changed the English name of his organization to China Center for International and Strategic Studies to avoid confusion, Kang said.

His website is registered with the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and bears the registration number ICP09053180, he said.

Why has he to ask the govt for clearance for what he writes, even if harebrained?

There are enough posters here who are harebrained and they don't ask the govt to clear their views!

 

[thakur_ritesh]

The majority believes in the integration of the subcontinent.

AB,

I doubt majority of the Indians want reunification of the subcontinent with India, is there any statistical proof to state that, if yes, please share with us and I doubt the GoI would have ever said that. Heck we do not even talk about pok/cok, the only talk about pok/cok in the open was when the parliament passed a resolution backing the joining of the occupied kashmir with the union of India, and since then that issue has been left buried in a cold storage by successive governments.

Johnee,

I would like to listen out to the plan/strategy you have in your mind where you intend to get all those countries in our fold. Mind you when we set out to do that we might face a very hostile neighbourhood, and even more hostile world powers who all might get together to form a front to confront to our invasion as per them and then might come a point where we might have no option but to come blow for a blow and there we might risk complete disintegration of India, also the economic cost to sustain such a kind of endeavour would be massive by any stretch of imagination, so please present a plan considering all these aspects for each and every country and what would be the timelines you would like follow in each case.

 

[hengheng516]

BEIJING: The Chinese website, which published the controversial article about splitting India into 20-30 parts, today claimed it did not represent
the views of any government think-tank. The site’s owner-editor said he ran the Internet publication on his own without any government backing.

Kang Lingyi, the founding editor of the ÖйúÕ½ÂÔÍø_´ÓÓ°ÏìÖйú¿ªÊ¼£¬¸Ä±äÊÀ½ç, said the article was actually a web posting by an anonymous Internet user. He did not think it necessary to verify the identity and credential of the author before publishing the article, Kang said.

"It is simply a piece written by an ordinary netizen. The Indian scholar said it is a study by a government-run think-tank. This is ridiculous," Kang told TNN in an exclusive interview. The website today published a clafirication saying it represented no government body. Kang said he has also sent a fax with the clarification to the Indian embassy.

D S Rajan, the head of Chennai Centre for Chinese Studies, who circulated an English translation of the article, wrote that the Chinese article, was published in ÖйúÕ½ÂÔÍø_´ÓÓ°ÏìÖйú¿ªÊ¼£¬¸Ä±äÊÀ½ç. "The authoritative host site is located in Beijing and is the new edition of one, which so far represented the China International Institute for Strategic Studies (www.chinaiiss.org)," he wrote. Rajan's views were interpreted in the Indian media to mean that the two sites were linked to each other.

But Kang claimed he runs a separate research body, which has a similar name in Chinese as the CIISS, but has no relationship with the official think-tank.

Rajan told TNN the site, which published the article, must be enjoying some sort of government backing.

"This website must have some sort of official blessing. Otherwise, it would not be possible for it to publish such an article," he said.

Kang confirmed he has not been questioned by the foreign ministry or the government censors for publishing the article on August 8. Chinese censors routinely block Internet sites and investigate their writers and editors whenever an article is not liked by the government. This has not happened in the case of Kang’s since the piece was published on August 8. Beijing's silence even after Indian foreign ministry reacted to the article is significant.

The article caused a lot of surprise among Chinese foreign policy experts as well.

"No responsible scholar in China will say such things," Wang Chungui, vice president of the Association of Foreign Diplomats of China, told this reporter. Zhou Gang, a former Chinese ambassador to India and a special consultant to the ministry of foreign affairs in Beijing, reacted with surprise.

"This is nonsense. This is not the thinking in China," Zhou said when told about the content of the article.

"Everyone has a right to publish his post on website. We cannot possibly get to know the details of each netizen," Kang said. He said the article, which talked about China involving Pakistan and Bangladesh in a grand plan to split up India, was first circulated over the Internet in 2006.

The article has since been refined by different Internet users and it now sounds like a study by a research organization instead of being the opinion of an individual, Kang said. Phrases like "I think" and "I believe" that appeared in the 2006 article has been removed in the new version that he published, he said.

Kang said he was running his website, http://www.chinaiiss.org without any government funding since 2002. "It is a coincidence that the Chinese name of my website is similar to the official think-tank, the China International Institute for Strategic Studies. He recently changed the English name of his organization to China Center for International and Strategic Studies to avoid confusion, Kang said.

His website is registered with the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and bears the registration number ICP09053180, he said.

 

[Jeypore]

Hmm....no. IMO, India cant grow as it is beyond a certain limit. There is a glass ceiling in this situation. The lands and people which were once part of India are now being used for anti-Indian activities like weakening the economy through peddling fake currency, terrorism and eventually to break India further.

I am a believer of not complaining by blaming others. Here that is what you are doing. Is there a plot to disrupt India in large scale, thru terrorism, narcotics, fake currency, YES!!!

But who should we blame, ofcourse us!!! We should have been vigilant on Homeland security matters. We should have done better controlling our borders and not but least We should have grown economially and military right after our independence.

See the problem is that reform came very late, but it shows that we as a people are capable and competitive enough to stand eye to eye to any country.

The other interesting argument of yours is one big India would have been better. I completly disagree. One just need to see the problems in Pakistan, bangladesh, and Afganistan. The breeding of Islamic fundamentalist is a cancer that these countries will have hard time to errdicate. Which by the way is costing them lots of money as well as there growth. I would have not like India being in that position. Our nation should be proud that even though we have a high population of muslims in our country, but the idealogy of Islamic fundamentalist has any grounds to stand on. So overall, I am glad of the partition!!!!