Ceding Aksai Chin not an option for India

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
MUST READ by former ambassador Stobdan

Ceding Aksai Chin not an option for India
The Chinese may be making a smart move to let India, in the first step, forego its claim over 38,000 sq km (Aksai-Chin), thereby de-linking Ladakh or J&K sector from the overall boundary dispute.
By P Stobdan

CHINA'S "urgency" to "redouble" efforts to push for the boundary settlement is quite perplexing. It explains the motive behind the recent 19 km intrusion in Depsang. Why did China play such a trick? Nothing is clear whether Premier Li Keqiang, during his visit, will push for a boundary settlement only in the Ladakh sector or will he seek to resolve the entire boundary dispute?

The five tents that comprised the Chinese incursion across the LAC in Ladakh.

India may believe this would be limited to exchanging maps, clarifying the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and verifying troop positions. But this is not what the Chinese may have in their minds. They may push for a formal settlement along the LAC in Ladakh, where they have nothing to lose. And, to India's disappointment, it may not involve swapping India's claims over Aksai Chin for China's claims over Arunachal Pradesh, which many in India consider a pragmatic thing to accept.

The Chinese may be making a smart move to let India, in the first step, forego its claim over 38,000 sq km (Aksai-Chin), thereby de-link Ladakh or J&K sector from the overall boundary dispute. But, should that happen, India, by implication, will have to give up not only Aksai Chin, but also cede its notional claim over the 5,047 sq km (Skyasgam valley) and the Menser Enclave (five villages) near the Mansarowar lake.

Chinese checkers

The "urgency" also explains China's motivations linked to its domestic security agenda. Some of the Chinese border negotiation tactics displayed against three Central Asian states should be instructive.

Fearing its sensitive Xinjiang region becoming an object of external power play, Beijing since 1991 has applied all instruments of its power to quell the Uyghur unrest and simultaneously resolved borders with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The Chinese scheme blended 'incentives with coercion' — a varied mix of diplomacy, political support, economic allurement and military aid. The strategy was implemented within the crafty policy framework of domestic economic growth and peaceful periphery. The strategy finally worked in China's favour — acquiring heft and influence.

China gave concession to counterparts without actually losing an inch of territory. Beijing settled for a third of territories it claimed from Kazakhstan. Yet the Kazakhs had to admit they had gained. In addition to what it had lost, the Kazakh President had to denounce Uyghur separatism and curb anti-China activities. In a similar pattern, Kyrgyzstan had to cede 1,20,000 hectares in a dubious exchange for Chinese assistance. Tajikistan being the last was made to surrender 1,100 square miles in 2010. Here, China claimed some 28,000 sq km, but settled for 3.5 percent of it. The Tajiks had to cede land and yet made to feel the victor.

In essence, China ultimately gained a bit of land, nixed the Uyghur issue, and pushed its economic agenda by making Xinjiang a pivotal link to the Eurasian markets. The success gave birth to a self-serving SCO, lauded as an exemplary multilateral cooperation mechanism, essentially meant to blunt any US-led Asian alliance in Eurasia.

But, its growing trade ties with Asian neighbors haven't stopped China's increasing appetite for territorial expansion. Land and demographic encouragement continues in Russia's Far East. Weaker states are induced to let out agriculture and forest land to Chinese farmers. The borders and rivers are still being altered to meet China's new interests. A view popular now is that the early surrender to China was a mistake, which is bouncing back with huge implications. China's tactics are fuelling mounting tensions and resentments across Asia.

Internal agenda

What lessons do they hold for India? How is the boundary issue with India linked to China's internal agenda? The above Chinese strategy should provide enough clues about what China wants from India.

Firstly, China's new move can't be unrelated to China's internal agenda, possibly with a future trajectory in Tibet. In essence, Beijing's idea is to ward off threat at the periphery to achieve internal stability. Beijing, though, doubts India would ever play the Tibet card. But, it does suspect the US-Japan-India coalescing to encircle and subvert China internally. Therefore, a stronger assertion may be a euphemism for deterring India plus others harming China's core interests. Of course, China retains the option to offset the three by fronting Iran, North Korea and Pakistan.

We don't know whether any big-ticket deals are slated for Chinese Premier Li Keqiang's visit, but he is likely to convey three essential points: (a) intends to settle the boundary dispute on its terms, (b) intends to solve the Tibet problem internally; wants no Indian interference in the post-Dalai developments, and (c) to point out that a US-led Asia pivot process should not be encouraged.

Secondly, on the boundary issue, China still maintains Arunachal is 'South Tibet' and Tibet is incomplete without Arunachal. Remember, the Chinese are masters of the art of denial and deception. Once India falls for Chinese magnanimous position over Aksai Chin, Beijing will then shift the focus to Arunachal. where it hopes to gain from India. They would emphatically convey that India is occupying 90,000 sq km of Chinese territory, but Tawang is non-negotiable in a final settlement of the border issue. Such a 'minimal demand' had been aired by Beijing at an unofficial level through Chinese academics. This 'minimum demand' tactic was also applied with Central Asian states.

China's recent overt and overbearing postures are not only not reassuring but also disturbing. India should tread carefully on China policy. In any case, ceding Aksai Chin would fundamentally alter the status of J&K. By implication, India would have to forget about PoK as well. Is there a clear Indian strategy?

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20130519/pers.htm#3
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Ceding Aksai Chin is not an option? That's it?

Well, I think the first thing is to significantly boost the armed forces, and prepare for a war. India has to take Aksai Chin back by force. PRC ain't gonna had it over to us on a platter - is that clear to us yet?

I am tired of all these verbal declarations. It's time to start preparing, so that 10 years from now, we are really ready for a massive showdown!
 

arnabmit

Homo Communis Indus
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
6,242
Likes
7,522
Country flag
Dada, what's the use in banging our heads? In India, Election funds will always overshadow FOL funds & Scams will always overshadow defence acquisition.

Nothing will change ever. Get ready for UPAIII, give up AC & AP... we the mango people would be better poised to survive if we start learning Mandarin & Cantonese.

I feel sorry for our armed forces who have been reduced to the stature of elephant tusks by the nincompoops at the center. No logical reason, but still, I kinda got pissed at Bikram Singh's huge grin and flourish of salute to Premier Li today, standing next to Sell-Man...

Ceding Aksai Chin is not an option? That's it?

Well, I think the first thing is to significantly boost the armed forces, and prepare for a war. India has to take Aksai Chin back by force. PRC ain't gonna had it over to us on a platter - is that clear to us yet?

I am tired of all these verbal declarations. It's time to start preparing, so that 10 years from now, we are really ready for a massive showdown!
 
Last edited:

JBH22

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
6,478
Likes
17,797
The pace at which the government is considering "ceding" to the demands of Pakistan (Siachen Glacier), China (Aksai Chin-forego claims) its just mind boggling denying the very existence of India. But then I would guess that many of the pseudo sickular in CONgress believe that present India is just the creation of British
 

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,849
Escalating to a war is unlikely. What's needed is to maintain "Cold Peace" like I repeated.

Apart from arm race, increasing clout in the subcontinent is also imperative like in playing GO. The next battlefield shall be Afghanistan IMO for "eyes" and "liberty".

Go is an adversarial game with the objective of surrounding more territory than one's opponent.[3] As the game progresses, the board gets divided up into areas of territory, as outlined by groups of stones. These areas are then contested in local battles, which are often complicated, and may result in the expansion, reduction, or wholesale capture and loss of the contested area. It is often the case that a certain kind of "trade" goes on, where a player's loss in one part of the board can be compensated for or mitigated by a gain in another part of the board.

The four liberties (adjacent empty points) of a single black stone (A), as White reduces those liberties by one (B, C, and D). When Black has only one liberty left (D), that stone is "in atari".[10] White may capture that stone (remove from board) with a play on its last liberty (at D-1).

A basic principle of Go is that stones must have at least one "liberty" (Chinese: 氣) to remain on the board. "A liberty" is an open "point" (intersection) next to a stone.[5] An enclosed liberty (or liberties) is called an "eye" (眼), and a group of stones with at least two separate eyes is said to be unconditionally "alive".[11] Such groups cannot be captured, even if surrounded.[12] "Dead" stones are stones that are surrounded and in groups with poor shape (one or no eyes), and thus cannot resist eventual capture.[13]

The general strategy of Go is to expand one's territory where possible, attack the opponent's weak groups (groups that can possibly be killed), and always stay mindful of the "life status" of one's own groups.[14][15] The liberties of groups are countable. Situations where two opposing groups must capture the other to live are called capturing races (攻め合い, 'semeai' in Japanese).[16] In a capturing race, the group with more liberties (and/or better "shape") will ultimately be able to capture the opponent's stones.[16][17] Capturing races and questions of life and death are examples of what makes Go challenging.
 

CCTV

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
678
Likes
24
Ceding Aksai Chin is not an option? That's it?

Well, I think the first thing is to significantly boost the armed forces, and prepare for a war. India has to take Aksai Chin back by force. PRC ain't gonna had it over to us on a platter - is that clear to us yet?

I am tired of all these verbal declarations. It's time to start preparing, so that 10 years from now, we are really ready for a massive showdown!

Take AC back by force? When?
 

sayareakd

Mod
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
17,734
Likes
18,951
Country flag
I think we have to start with illegal occupation of Tibet by China first and then Aksai Chin.
 

sayareakd

Mod
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
17,734
Likes
18,951
Country flag
Your PM should talk it loud.
No need for that as citizen i can do it, you wont understand because you dont have that privileged. BTW having Tibet Govt in Exile means that we have not withdrawn support to them. Here told by our successive Govt.

 

CCTV

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
678
Likes
24
No need for that as citizen i can do it, you wont understand because you dont have that privileged. BTW having Tibet Govt in Exile means that we have not withdrawn support to them. Here told by our successive Govt.

Well, you know what is our answer to that.
 

Tianshan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2011
Messages
675
Likes
249
BTW having Tibet Govt in Exile means that we have not withdrawn support to them. Here told by our successive Govt.
thank you for admitting it.

now there is no point in crying about any of our retaliation, basically any actions we took against india after the 1950's. including support for pakistan and other such contentious issues.

you supported these guys, we supported others against you. since you started it first, what did you expect us to do.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
IIt might be fine for India to cede Aksai Chin so as to have 'peace at all costs'.

But if you are a Ladakhi, it would appear as traumatic as it was to the Assamese when Nehru stated during 1962, 'My hearts bleeds for Assam'.

Ladakh dur ast[/I and so the tremors are not felt by those in Delhi who chalks our destiny.

Yet, to the Ladakhis, it is as good as kissing them goodbye.

Aksai Chin is a part of Ladakh, if one goes through history.

Further, one must have some Strategic Vision (China has it and so it wants a quick solution in China's favour). If India has any strategic vision, it will realise that China's belligerent attitude is not one that has been brought out of a hat. It is a long term salami tactics that they have adopted to enlarge China at every border and sea to pursue her hegemonic mindset, and in the final analysis, word's sole superpower calling the shots.

Therefore, it is necessary to keep the access route to Tibet and Xinjiang open so that China is also kept on the backfoot. India may not actively participate, but then there are other international players who are more concerned about China's 'Peaceful Rise' than India.
 

CCTV

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
678
Likes
24
yeah yeah what to expect from Chinese.
Well, there are two more options

1. Occupy whole subcontinent.
Pro. Gain resource from the land
Con. Time, money wasting.

2. Nuke India
Pro. Time saving
Con. That area become waste land.


1 is what we will do after we gain west pacific.
2 is what we will do if India try to do something before we get west pacific.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Your PM should talk it loud.
He is so soft and polite that he can hardly be heard!

Speak softly, but carry a big stick.

The big stick should be in the making!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Well, there are two more options

1. Occupy whole subcontinent.
Pro. Gain resource from the land
Con. Time, money wasting.

2. Nuke India
Pro. Time saving
Con. That area become waste land.


1 is what we will do after we gain west pacific.
2 is what we will do if India try to do something before we get west pacific.
You must.

What's holding you back?
 

bose

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
4,921
Likes
5,961
Country flag
Well, there are two more options

1. Occupy whole subcontinent.
Pro. Gain resource from the land
Con. Time, money wasting.

You have to vacate from your illigal occupation on Tibet... Rescent incidents shows that you are very sensitive / panic mode in TIBET... people there hates you people... Take it and tell your country men...

2. Nuke India
Pro. Time saving
Con. That area become waste land.
The problem here is that first you have to defeat India comprehensively... that is beyond your capability...

BTW we will send you flowers on our Agni V / VI to your various cities...

1 is what we will do after we gain west pacific.
2 is what we will do if India try to do something before we get west pacific.
To summarize you will never be able to go out of South Chiba Sea... First learn to fight with Philipines & Vietnam [no dis respect meant to these great countries] then dream of going out of SCS...
 
Last edited:

bose

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
4,921
Likes
5,961
Country flag
Give some boom boom to Pakistan.
You have already done it before ... But Pakistan is a lost case Now !! struggling to save its very existence... One fine morning Uncle SAM will come and confiscate all those useless boom boom...

BTW what will happen of India gives some Boom Boom to Vietnam & Philipenes ?? They start disgracing you a big bully in front of whole world ?? That will be hurting...
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top