China seething after India issues visa to Uyghur freedom fighters

Levina

A feminist who is a Doval fan
Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
146
Likes
290
Country flag
But I believe that some sort of understanding has been reached.
And most prolly you're right.
I might have missed this bit of news earlier, that Isa had demanded an assurance from Indian authorities that he would not be arrested upon his arrival in India.
Going by India's policy, we dont differentiate between the good and bad terrorists, ergo India could claim a high moral ground from which to point fingers at Pakistan and China. So India was in mood to let this man land but gave him visa to test china's patience. India finally flexing its pecs? @Navnit Kundu !
 

Syama Ayas

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2015
Messages
178
Likes
1,114
Country flag
Did you forget the same BJP was back stabbed in Kargil?
BJP occasionally flexes its pecs otherwise it's as good as UPA 3.0.


Khair...


@Syama Ayas @AnantS
Now some credible journos and their sources say this could be the reason >>>


My conclusion
1) India knew about the red corner notice, yet gave this guy a visa to add some fuel to fire- a tit for tat strategy vis-a-vis Masood Azhar issue.

2) It was a technical glitch!
Oops! If this is true, India has embarrassed itself... yet again, and we received zilch in bargain.
Indian Govt would have been aware of this, before issuing visa. Interpol red corner list has been issued by China since 2003 on this man and he had traveled to USA with Chinese whining about to US Govt which didn't give a damn

http://www.uyghurcongress.org/en/?p=28400

Isa, a German national who is part of the World Uyghur Congress, has blamed China for the sudden withdrawal of the visa by India. Reports have suggested the development was linked to Beijing pointing out there was an Interpol red corner notice against the activist.

However, the Interpol red corner notice has never been enforced though Isa has been on a Chinese list of wanted terrorists since 2003. In March this year, Isa travelled to Washington at the same time as President Xi Jinping and received an award from the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation.


The Chinese were understandably angry and served a demarche to the US state department for allowing Isa into the country.
The move was more likely to give the Chinese a trailer larger than full picture.

But on the whole this is a blunderous move by our Govt, given Chinese are no way going to do a u-turn on Masood unless they burn read bad.

Inviting Isa was one way many initial ways to do so.
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
And most prolly you're right.
I might have missed this bit of news earlier, that Isa had demanded an assurance from Indian authorities that he would not be arrested upon his arrival in India.
Going by India's policy, we dont differentiate between the good and bad terrorists, ergo India could claim a high moral ground from which to point fingers at Pakistan and China. So India was in mood to let this man land but gave him visa to test china's patience. India finally flexing its pecs? @Navnit Kundu !
There is a chapter in sun Tzu's art of war about maneuver dominance. It deals with adjusting your own posturing to make the enemy adjust his. We seem to have forgotten that essence in our maneuvering. We maneuver in such a way that the enemy doesn't even have to consider counter-maneuvering. They can simply ignore us and things will be back to normal. This is a historical genetic defect that Indian strategic thinking carries. We do a Bhangra and a somersault and the net effect of this muscle flexing is what? nil.

It's true not just in this case but there are innumerable examples, across various Indian governments. US says they will sell F16 to Pakistan, our diplomatic office says "we disagree", the US says "well, we disagree with you too", has our maneuvering helped bring out the required change in status quo? no, the sale still goes through.

SC says "what about Kohinoor", Govt says "it's not ours", after uproar, it says "well, we'll try to get it", then what was the point of your first maneuver?

China says "we will protect Masood", India says "we will invite Isa", China says "we disagree", India cancels invite and claims "technical glitch", Bhakts say "Hoora! Chanakya strategy. We've done a somersault, nothing has changed, but Chanakya strategy, bro". What's the point of all this? once someone has crossed your red lines, give them a nice whack, not every disagreement escalates to a nuclear war, and if you weren't serious about your threats then don't give empty threats in the first place because it makes your future threats lose credibility.



Flexing is useless unless it generates the desired change in the status quo. Don't take rash decisions, be firm, be decisive on your moves, or don't declare intent if there is no intent. Think everything through before you move otherwise ALL our moves end up like Op Parakram.
 

aliyah

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2015
Messages
698
Likes
843
we didnt wanted to make things worst.we just wanted to give them warning that we did very successfully. news channels only talks craps as allways.
 

Screambowl

Ghanta Senior Member?
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2015
Messages
7,950
Likes
7,908
Country flag
That's the biggest problem with this government. They want people to have blind faith in them while they execute their covert plans without taking the public into confidence or even keeping the public abreast of the happenings. The previous government was incompetent and was doing nothing, be that as it may, at least there was 100% transparency because they admitted to doing nothing. The current government and their fanboys want to garner praise for themselves without showing results or even telling people what's going on. The only thing we are expected to do is clap.

Clap as they appoint known Marxists to positions of significance, clap as talks are cancelled, the clap again when talks are restarted due to Ufa, then clap again when talks are cancelled after Pakistan insists on meeting Hurriyat, then clap again when Sushma Swaraj announces comprehensive bilateral dialogue, clap as they allow ISI SIT to visit Pathankot airbase, clap as our students are beaten in NIT and their ministers call it 'mild lathicharge', clap as Gurdaspur is attack with impunity, clap as the US sells Harpoon and F16s to Pakistan, clap as China protects Masood Azhar. See? That's all we ought to do, clap, not think, just clap. Their fanboys will have you believe that everything is happening covertly and you are too stupid and too unwise to grasp the gravity of what's happening. Do you know? everyday Modi wakes up, covertly breaths in oxygen and covertly breaths out carbon-di-oxide, it's significant for national security, clearly us mere mortals don't understand its significance. It's all happening covertly, I bet you didn't even know that!

I don't say that whatever they are doing getting us the results. What I say is, you cannot act openly with Pakis. Because there is already a lot of ISI presence
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
@Kshatriya87 Yeh milk wala mamla thoda complicated hai. Maybe @Sakal Gharelu Ustad can move this to Chit Chat threat or Politics thread if it is not relevant to the thread.

Earlier I used to think it has to do with economics, apparently it has to do with biology and chemistry. There is some type of milk with a long molecular structure, colloquially denoted as A1 which is produced by desi cows, this is the best quality natural milk which causes no cancer. Then there is milk produced by genetically modified Jersy cows which again has some different molecular structure, it's called A2 (beta-casein protein) , this has proven carcinogenic elements in it. So the dilemma is that desi cow which gives healthy but less quantity of milk or imported cow which gives a lot of milk with the risk of cancer. That's why we are even banning import of foreign cows, and those foreign studs. In fact, this is linked with Jallikattu. In order for the desi cow breeds to maintain a pure genetic blood line, they are allowed to mate only with desi studs and in order to maintain top quality studs you cannot allow these studs to do heavy labor in farms. So how to generate revenue from them? that's why they play Jallikattu to retain their importance. The revenue from Jalikattu sustains all expenses for the individual stud owners and the top stud who wins the competition becomes a celebrity. This Vicky donor stud is then taken all around the state to impregnate desi cows so that the evolutionary advantage can be retained. Each impregnation fetches somewhere between 20,000 rupees to 5 lakh rupees. This is why it was important to keep Jallikattu alive to keep this tradition of healthy cows alive. It was purposely banned by western vested interests because they want to export their own Jersy cows to India and on the contrary they are importing our desi cows and studs to their farms to get good quality milk. In 30 years, India will have all Jersy cows (or mized breed or polluted breed) and US will have all Indian cows. Not to mention, the west gets to sell expensive cancer medicine.

If anyone is interested in deeper study of the chemistry of A1 vs A2 milk they can do a google search. I just gave a the basic gist to be used in online debates in favor of Jallikattu. It's upsetting that the mainstream presstitutes deliberately suppressed these facts and gave it a 'animal rights' angle to ban Jallikattu. Indian bulls are special bulls with humps, no other bull has this.


( Indian Jallikattu bull at 3:33 in American petting zoo ). How convenient? If Indians keep show animals for revenue then we are supposedly indulging in animal rights violation but when the US does it, there's no violation?

If we ourselves don't take interest in our own internal matters seriously then we will continue to be dictated by foreigners. Colonization is not just about foreign boots on ground. The ban on Jallikattu is a form of colonization as well, or as the kool kids call it these days "Lawfare". Therefore, I welcome the ban on Chinese milk. I hope they also put a ban on English murgi eggs, these are artificial eggs grown by injecting estrogen (without fertilization), this estrogen enters our body and gives us manboobs.



Probably desi body builder @OneGrimPilgrim knows more about these dietary issues.
 

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,114
Likes
7,761
@Kshatriya87 Yeh milk wala mamla thoda complicated hai. Maybe @Sakal Gharelu Ustad can move this to Chit Chat threat or Politics thread if it is not relevant to the thread.

Earlier I used to think it has to do with economics, apparently it has to do with biology and chemistry. There is some type of milk with a long molecular structure, colloquially denoted as A1 which is produced by desi cows, this is the best quality natural milk which causes no cancer. Then there is milk produced by genetically modified Jersy cows which again has some different molecular structure, it's called A2 (beta-casein protein) , this has proven carcinogenic elements in it. So the dilemma is that desi cow which gives healthy but less quantity of milk or imported cow which gives a lot of milk with the risk of cancer. That's why we are even banning import of foreign cows, and those foreign studs. In fact, this is linked with Jallikattu. In order for the desi cow breeds to maintain a pure genetic blood line, they are allowed to mate only with desi studs and in order to maintain top quality studs you cannot allow these studs to do heavy labor in farms. So how to generate revenue from them? that's why they play Jallikattu to retain their importance. The revenue from Jalikattu sustains all expenses for the individual stud owners and the top stud who wins the competition becomes a celebrity. This Vicky donor stud is then taken all around the state to impregnate desi cows so that the evolutionary advantage can be retained. Each impregnation fetches somewhere between 20,000 rupees to 5 lakh rupees. This is why it was important to keep Jallikattu alive to keep this tradition of healthy cows alive. It was purposely banned by western vested interests because they want to export their own Jersy cows to India and on the contrary they are importing our desi cows and studs to their farms to get good quality milk. In 30 years, India will have all Jersy cows (or mized breed or polluted breed) and US will have all Indian cows. Not to mention, the west gets to sell expensive cancer medicine.

If anyone is interested in deeper study of the chemistry of A1 vs A2 milk they can do a google search. I just gave a the basic gist to be used in online debates in favor of Jallikattu. It's upsetting that the mainstream presstitutes deliberately suppressed these facts and gave it a 'animal rights' angle to ban Jallikattu. Indian bulls are special bulls with humps, no other bull has this.


( Indian Jallikattu bull at 3:33 in American petting zoo ). How convenient? If Indians keep show animals for revenue then we are supposedly indulging in animal rights violation but when the US does it, there's no violation?

If we ourselves don't take interest in our own internal matters seriously then we will continue to be dictated by foreigners. Colonization is not just about foreign boots on ground. The ban on Jallikattu is a form of colonization as well, or as the kool kids call it these days "Lawfare". Therefore, I welcome the ban on Chinese milk. I hope they also put a ban on English murgi eggs, these are artificial eggs grown by injecting estrogen (without fertilization), this estrogen enters our body and gives us manboobs.



Probably desi body builder @OneGrimPilgrim knows more about these dietary issues.
Check Reality Check India's blog on it. He has a lot of detail on breeding of Jallikattu.
 

OneGrimPilgrim

Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
5,243
Likes
6,810
Country flag
@Kshatriya87 Yeh milk wala mamla thoda complicated hai. Maybe @Sakal Gharelu Ustad can move this to Chit Chat threat or Politics thread if it is not relevant to the thread.

Earlier I used to think it has to do with economics, apparently it has to do with biology and chemistry. There is some type of milk with a long molecular structure, colloquially denoted as A1 which is produced by desi cows, this is the best quality natural milk which causes no cancer. Then there is milk produced by genetically modified Jersy cows which again has some different molecular structure, it's called A2 (beta-casein protein) , this has proven carcinogenic elements in it. So the dilemma is that desi cow which gives healthy but less quantity of milk or imported cow which gives a lot of milk with the risk of cancer. That's why we are even banning import of foreign cows, and those foreign studs. In fact, this is linked with Jallikattu. In order for the desi cow breeds to maintain a pure genetic blood line, they are allowed to mate only with desi studs and in order to maintain top quality studs you cannot allow these studs to do heavy labor in farms. So how to generate revenue from them? that's why they play Jallikattu to retain their importance. The revenue from Jalikattu sustains all expenses for the individual stud owners and the top stud who wins the competition becomes a celebrity. This Vicky donor stud is then taken all around the state to impregnate desi cows so that the evolutionary advantage can be retained. Each impregnation fetches somewhere between 20,000 rupees to 5 lakh rupees. This is why it was important to keep Jallikattu alive to keep this tradition of healthy cows alive. It was purposely banned by western vested interests because they want to export their own Jersy cows to India and on the contrary they are importing our desi cows and studs to their farms to get good quality milk. In 30 years, India will have all Jersy cows (or mized breed or polluted breed) and US will have all Indian cows. Not to mention, the west gets to sell expensive cancer medicine.

If anyone is interested in deeper study of the chemistry of A1 vs A2 milk they can do a google search. I just gave a the basic gist to be used in online debates in favor of Jallikattu. It's upsetting that the mainstream presstitutes deliberately suppressed these facts and gave it a 'animal rights' angle to ban Jallikattu. Indian bulls are special bulls with humps, no other bull has this.


( Indian Jallikattu bull at 3:33 in American petting zoo ). How convenient? If Indians keep show animals for revenue then we are supposedly indulging in animal rights violation but when the US does it, there's no violation?

If we ourselves don't take interest in our own internal matters seriously then we will continue to be dictated by foreigners. Colonization is not just about foreign boots on ground. The ban on Jallikattu is a form of colonization as well, or as the kool kids call it these days "Lawfare". Therefore, I welcome the ban on Chinese milk. I hope they also put a ban on English murgi eggs, these are artificial eggs grown by injecting estrogen (without fertilization), this estrogen enters our body and gives us manboobs.



Probably desi body builder @OneGrimPilgrim knows more about these dietary issues.
this was one prime reason why some were fighting FOR Jallikattu. a lady (forgetting her name; a muslima) of a desi NGO or something was one of those at the forefront of this. she had explained well why some phoren NGOs were after the festival, citing similar reasons.

P.S. - even the GoI's deptt. of animal husbandy laments the fact of the mindless indiscriminate interbreeding of desi & phoren cows that was undertaken some decades back & how it has so ruined our cattle.
 

OneGrimPilgrim

Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
5,243
Likes
6,810
Country flag
Has it been India’s Sun Tzu moment?

Observers were of the view that by denying visa to Dolkun Isa, the Modi sarkar retreated before China. But it may not be the case. Beijing has got the message: India can do it again and next time, with ‘conference visas'

In November 1949, the Tibetan Cabinet in Lhasa wrote to the American Secretary of State, requesting the US’ support for Tibet’s admission to the UN: “As Tibet being an independent state, we have no dangers from other foreign countries but in view of the spread of communism and their successes in China, there is now an imminent danger of communist aggression towards Tibet.”

Lhasa was advised by the Americans not to ‘rock the boat’. Later, an officer of the Ministry of External Affairs told Loy Henderson, the US Ambassador to India: “(India) feels that making issue of Tibetan question at present might precipitate communist decision invade pursuant their declared intention liberating country.”

Around the same time, a cable from Henderson to Dean Acheson, the US Secretary of State stated, “During the conversation, Graves (of the UK High Commission in Delhi) showed me a Hansard report (verbatim report of proceedings of the British Houses) of December 14, 1949, “to which was attached a 1943 memorandum mentioning the British position with respect to Tibet; the memorandum stated that Tibet was a ‘de facto independent’ country.”

However, the British too did not want to rock the boat. This came back to mind, when the controversy erupted regarding the cancellation of a ‘tourist visa’ for Dolkun Isa, executive chairman of the Munich-based World Uyghur Congress. Isa was to attend a ‘conference’ at Dharamsala in Himachal Pradesh. The media immediately took up the issue: Why was the visa suddenly revoked without reason? Soon the Modi sarkar was accused of behaving like its predecessors.

Most observers saw a retaliation against China’s decision to put on hold India’s request to add Masood Azhar, head of the Pakistani-based group Jaish-e-Mohammed, to the UN’s blacklist.

On the Isa issue, China was quick to respond: The Chinese Foreign Ministry said that the Uyghur leader was under a ‘red-corner’ Interpol notice and should be arrested as he was a terrorist. The restive Province of Xinjiang is an extremely sensitive issue for China, as Beijing believes that Islamist militants and Uyghur dissidents are colluding to establish an independent state, eastern Turkestan.

Though the Ministry of External Affairs was apparently not aware of the conference and the visa given to Isa, most observers first thought that Prime Minister Narendra Modi finally decided to ‘rock the boat’. It may not be that simple.

First, could Isa have attended the ‘conference’ on a tourist visa (or e-visa)? Whoever organised this type of event in India, knows that foreign participants need a ‘conference visa’ which is not easy to obtain. Further, the Dharamsala ‘conference’ was bound to be controversial; it was organised by the US-based Citizen Power for China, a group led by Yang Jianli, one of the protagonists of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests (incidentally Yang was present in Dharamsala).

Granting Isa an electronic visa made it easier to cancel the permission to visit Dharamsala at short notice. The Ministry of External Affairs could show its ignorance of the event. Cancelling the visa while still holding the meet, even in camera, indicates that the Indian Government was keen to convey the message to Beijing, ‘don’t play with fire concerning terrorism’, and at the same time, allowed Delhi a strategic retreat.

Delhi wanted to ‘rock the boat’ to a certain extent only. It is why visas granted to other Chinese dissidents like Lu Jinghua and Ray Wong were also cancelled.

Lu, also a participant in the Tiananmen protests, figures on a Chinese list of ‘major criminals’. She learnt of the withdrawal of her visa only after reaching John F Kennedy International Airport to enplane for India on April 25. The visa for Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Ray was also reportedly withdrawn around the same time.

Delhi later said that Lu’s visa was withdrawn because her documents were ‘ineligible’ and there was an ‘inconsistency’ about the purpose of her visit. Obviously, she was not going to Himachal for ‘tourism’.

According to the Chinese website Radio Free Asia, several other activists were banned from the meet, in particular five individuals associated with the World Uyghur Congress. Hong Kong activist Alex Chow, who co-organised the pro-democracy Umbrella Movement in 2014, told Quartz that he too was denied a visa. But it is not the point; the important point is that the gathering took place.

One may well ask: Has Delhi become an adept of Sun Tzu’s Art of War? The Chinese master in one of the 13 chapters of the book, writes about ‘variations and adaptability’, emphasising on flexibility during a conflict.

Mao himself explained: “People may ask if there is contradiction to abandon a territory gained by heroic battle. This is to put the wrong question. Does one eat to no purpose simply because he relieves himself later?”

Delhi needed to use flexibility after the high profile visits of Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval to China (and before President Prabab Mukherjee’s trip to Beijing later this month).

To cancel a ‘tourist visa’ was abandoning a bit of territory, but the main ‘battle’ was won; the ‘conference’ was held, though informally and amidst media blackout. And before that, 60 participants were granted a two-hour audience with the Dalai Lama to discuss …China and democracy.

Edward Leung Tin-kei of Hong Kong Indigenous was one of them. Hong Kong radical activist described the encounter with the Tibetan leader as a ‘rare opportunity’: “I never thought I could meet Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader. This doesn’t happen every day”, Leung told The South China Morning Post.

Chow Hang-tung, working for an alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements in China was another Hongkonger attending the closed-door meet. “It was very inspiring”, Chow said.

Ursula Gauthier, the French correspondent of L’Obs, who was recently expelled from China for questioning China’s interpretation of ‘terrorism’ and Anastasia Lin, Miss World Canada, were also present. In the meantime, Beijing is nervous about the democratisation of the Tibetan society.

The Global Timescommented on the recent Tibetan elections for a Prime Minister and Deputies: “Although the (Tibetans) resorted to ‘democratisation’ after fleeing, this did not mean they would give up their original characteristics. …After all, feudal serfdom under theocracy has long been abandoned by Western countries.”

Who takes this Cold War language seriously today? Participating in the fifth Moscow Conference on International Security, China’s Defence Minister Chang Wanquan also lectured on terrorism: “a comprehensive approach should be taken through political, diplomatic, economic and cultural means in order to eliminate the root of terror.”

General Chang obviously forgot ‘democratic means’ in his list. Though the perception in India was that the Modi sarkar had retreated, it may not be the case. Beijing has got the message loud and clear: India can do it again and the next time, with proper ‘conference visas’. Beijing knows this.
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
Has it been India’s Sun Tzu moment?

Observers were of the view that by denying visa to Dolkun Isa, the Modi sarkar retreated before China. But it may not be the case. Beijing has got the message: India can do it again and next time, with ‘conference visas'

In November 1949, the Tibetan Cabinet in Lhasa wrote to the American Secretary of State, requesting the US’ support for Tibet’s admission to the UN: “As Tibet being an independent state, we have no dangers from other foreign countries but in view of the spread of communism and their successes in China, there is now an imminent danger of communist aggression towards Tibet.”

Lhasa was advised by the Americans not to ‘rock the boat’. Later, an officer of the Ministry of External Affairs told Loy Henderson, the US Ambassador to India: “(India) feels that making issue of Tibetan question at present might precipitate communist decision invade pursuant their declared intention liberating country.”

Around the same time, a cable from Henderson to Dean Acheson, the US Secretary of State stated, “During the conversation, Graves (of the UK High Commission in Delhi) showed me a Hansard report (verbatim report of proceedings of the British Houses) of December 14, 1949, “to which was attached a 1943 memorandum mentioning the British position with respect to Tibet; the memorandum stated that Tibet was a ‘de facto independent’ country.”

However, the British too did not want to rock the boat. This came back to mind, when the controversy erupted regarding the cancellation of a ‘tourist visa’ for Dolkun Isa, executive chairman of the Munich-based World Uyghur Congress. Isa was to attend a ‘conference’ at Dharamsala in Himachal Pradesh. The media immediately took up the issue: Why was the visa suddenly revoked without reason? Soon the Modi sarkar was accused of behaving like its predecessors.

Most observers saw a retaliation against China’s decision to put on hold India’s request to add Masood Azhar, head of the Pakistani-based group Jaish-e-Mohammed, to the UN’s blacklist.

On the Isa issue, China was quick to respond: The Chinese Foreign Ministry said that the Uyghur leader was under a ‘red-corner’ Interpol notice and should be arrested as he was a terrorist. The restive Province of Xinjiang is an extremely sensitive issue for China, as Beijing believes that Islamist militants and Uyghur dissidents are colluding to establish an independent state, eastern Turkestan.

Though the Ministry of External Affairs was apparently not aware of the conference and the visa given to Isa, most observers first thought that Prime Minister Narendra Modi finally decided to ‘rock the boat’. It may not be that simple.

First, could Isa have attended the ‘conference’ on a tourist visa (or e-visa)? Whoever organised this type of event in India, knows that foreign participants need a ‘conference visa’ which is not easy to obtain. Further, the Dharamsala ‘conference’ was bound to be controversial; it was organised by the US-based Citizen Power for China, a group led by Yang Jianli, one of the protagonists of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests (incidentally Yang was present in Dharamsala).

Granting Isa an electronic visa made it easier to cancel the permission to visit Dharamsala at short notice. The Ministry of External Affairs could show its ignorance of the event. Cancelling the visa while still holding the meet, even in camera, indicates that the Indian Government was keen to convey the message to Beijing, ‘don’t play with fire concerning terrorism’, and at the same time, allowed Delhi a strategic retreat.

Delhi wanted to ‘rock the boat’ to a certain extent only. It is why visas granted to other Chinese dissidents like Lu Jinghua and Ray Wong were also cancelled.

Lu, also a participant in the Tiananmen protests, figures on a Chinese list of ‘major criminals’. She learnt of the withdrawal of her visa only after reaching John F Kennedy International Airport to enplane for India on April 25. The visa for Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Ray was also reportedly withdrawn around the same time.

Delhi later said that Lu’s visa was withdrawn because her documents were ‘ineligible’ and there was an ‘inconsistency’ about the purpose of her visit. Obviously, she was not going to Himachal for ‘tourism’.

According to the Chinese website Radio Free Asia, several other activists were banned from the meet, in particular five individuals associated with the World Uyghur Congress. Hong Kong activist Alex Chow, who co-organised the pro-democracy Umbrella Movement in 2014, told Quartz that he too was denied a visa. But it is not the point; the important point is that the gathering took place.

One may well ask: Has Delhi become an adept of Sun Tzu’s Art of War? The Chinese master in one of the 13 chapters of the book, writes about ‘variations and adaptability’, emphasising on flexibility during a conflict.

Mao himself explained: “People may ask if there is contradiction to abandon a territory gained by heroic battle. This is to put the wrong question. Does one eat to no purpose simply because he relieves himself later?”

Delhi needed to use flexibility after the high profile visits of Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval to China (and before President Prabab Mukherjee’s trip to Beijing later this month).

To cancel a ‘tourist visa’ was abandoning a bit of territory, but the main ‘battle’ was won; the ‘conference’ was held, though informally and amidst media blackout. And before that, 60 participants were granted a two-hour audience with the Dalai Lama to discuss …China and democracy.

Edward Leung Tin-kei of Hong Kong Indigenous was one of them. Hong Kong radical activist described the encounter with the Tibetan leader as a ‘rare opportunity’: “I never thought I could meet Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader. This doesn’t happen every day”, Leung told The South China Morning Post.

Chow Hang-tung, working for an alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements in China was another Hongkonger attending the closed-door meet. “It was very inspiring”, Chow said.

Ursula Gauthier, the French correspondent of L’Obs, who was recently expelled from China for questioning China’s interpretation of ‘terrorism’ and Anastasia Lin, Miss World Canada, were also present. In the meantime, Beijing is nervous about the democratisation of the Tibetan society.

The Global Timescommented on the recent Tibetan elections for a Prime Minister and Deputies: “Although the (Tibetans) resorted to ‘democratisation’ after fleeing, this did not mean they would give up their original characteristics. …After all, feudal serfdom under theocracy has long been abandoned by Western countries.”

Who takes this Cold War language seriously today? Participating in the fifth Moscow Conference on International Security, China’s Defence Minister Chang Wanquan also lectured on terrorism: “a comprehensive approach should be taken through political, diplomatic, economic and cultural means in order to eliminate the root of terror.”

General Chang obviously forgot ‘democratic means’ in his list. Though the perception in India was that the Modi sarkar had retreated, it may not be the case. Beijing has got the message loud and clear: India can do it again and the next time, with proper ‘conference visas’. Beijing knows this.
India threw a half-baked awkward punch which didn't land its target, now Dailypioneer is busy playing cheerleader, trying to placate the government's moves.

If the whole point of the exercise was sending a message, there was a good way to do it behind the scenes without letting the public know ESPECIALLY since the government knew in their hearts that this was a bluff and we were going to withdraw the visa anyway. Suhshma Swaraj was meeting with Chinese and Russian foreign office in Moscow, Doval was meeting with Chinese NSA and Parrikar was meeting with Chinese defense minister, all at the same time. There were enough ways to convey our message and yet we chose the media to do it. This was the worst weapon the government could choose, simply because unlike the US, Russia, UK or China, our media is not under our control so it is not a weapon you can firmly grip and maneuver as you want. A slight slip and it will end up cutting you, that's what happened here. Within 24 hours, the visa was cancelled and the media was back to mocking Indian foreign policy flip-flops. China scored a diplomatic win without even making a move. They got India to unilaterally back down from its aggressive stance and revert to a status quo which favors Chinese worldview, without even so much as assuaging Indian concerns.

There's no way we could call this a success, we showed them our teeth without biting them, now they will be prepared next time and bite us elsewhere. The government should have seen this conference through; There was broad national and international support for it. Also, since it wasn't a military move, no one could've blamed GOI of having taken an extreme step. The worst that would have happened is that China would have invited Hurriyat, we had the stomach to digest it.

The government has good intentions but there's no denying that they are making novice mistakes due to their उतावलापन. Unfortunately the BJP's 'Muslim strategy' seems to be working on the same paradigm. They seem to believe that there is a set of goodwill measures, which, when taken, the Muslims will magically turn into soft, fluffy bunnies and stop antagonizing the majority and the nation state at large and everyone will live happily ever after. Not gonna happen. This needs tough love.

This is how it went, where's the Sun Tzu moment here?

India : If you don't stop helping Masood, we will invite Isa.
China : We disagree with you.
India : Visa cancelled.

Bhakt NEWS papers : Chanakya move bro, Sun Tzu move bro, covert bro, covert, Chanakya bro.

They did the same with the Jihadi problem. Modi invited a few Sufi clowns to a conference and pro-BJP news channels began projecting it as the end of the Jihadi threat to India. BJP has already declared victory.

"All Muslims have magically become non-violent and peaceful because Modi met half a dozen Sufi leaders, problem solved, there's no LeT, no JeM, no Indian Mujahadeen." - Bhakt Media

It is this flip flop and confused messaging which makes the resolve of the followers falter. BJP has the complacent tendency to celebrate too soon, even before they have won any victory, while our enemies are diligently working very hard to undermine the nation's interests without rest or celebration. BJP tries to make even cosmetic actions look like some huge strategic victory.

@Kshatriya87
 
Last edited:

OneGrimPilgrim

Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
5,243
Likes
6,810
Country flag
India threw a half-baked awkward punch which didn't land its target, now Dailypioneer is busy playing cheerleader, trying to placate the government's moves.

If the whole point of the exercise was sending a message, there was a good way to do it behind the scenes without letting the public know ESPECIALLY since the government knew in their hearts that this was a bluff and we were going to withdraw the visa anyway. Suhshma Swaraj was meeting with Chinese and Russian foreign office in Moscow, Doval was meeting with Chinese NSA and Parrikar was meeting with Chinese defense minister, all at the same time. There were enough ways to convey our message and yet we chose the media to do it. This was the worst weapon the government could choose, simply because unlike the US, Russia, UK or China, our media is not under our control so it is not a weapon you can firmly grip and maneuver as you want. A slight slip and it will end up cutting you, that's what happened here. Within 24 hours, the visa was cancelled and the media was back to mocking Indian foreign policy flip-flops. China scored a diplomatic win without even making a move. They got India to unilaterally back down from its aggressive stance and revert to a status quo which favors Chinese worldview, without even so much as assuaging Indian concerns.

There's no way we could call this a success, we showed them our teeth without biting them, now they will be prepared next time and bite us elsewhere. The government should have seen this conference through; There was broad national and international support for it. Also, since it wasn't a military move, no one could've blamed GOI of having taken an extreme step. The worst that would have happened is that China would have invited Hurriyat, we had the stomach to digest it.

The government has good intentions but there's no denying that they are making novice mistakes due to their उतावलापन. Unfortunately the BJP's 'Muslim strategy' seems to be working on the same paradigm. They seem to believe that there is a set of goodwill measures, which, when taken, the Muslims will magically turn into soft, fluffy bunnies and stop antagonizing the majority and the nation state at large and everyone will live happily ever after. Not gonna happen. This needs tough love.

This is how it went, where's the Sun Tzu moment here?

India : If you don't stop helping Masood, we will invite Isa.
China : We disagree with you.
India : Visa cancelled.

Bhakt NEWS papers : Chanakya move bro, Sun Tzu move bro, covert bro, covert, Chanakya bro.

They did the same with the Jihadi problem. Modi invited a few Sufi clowns to a conference and pro-BJP news channels began projecting it as the end of the Jihadi threat to India. BJP has already declared victory.

"All Muslims have magically become non-violent and peaceful because Modi met half a dozen Sufi leaders, problem solved, there's no LeT, no JeM, no Indian Mujahadeen." - Bhakt Media

It is this flip flop and confused messaging which makes the resolve of the followers falter. BJP has the complacent tendency to celebrate too soon, even before they have won any victory, while our enemies are diligently working very hard to undermine the nation's interests without rest or celebration. BJP tries to make even cosmetic actions look like some huge strategic victory.

@Kshatriya87
India's self-contradictory actions.......

Part-I

it seems that while India's (GoI's) priorities may be correct, but not SET correctly nor aligned with the real-time needs-of-the-hour; for it appears that they probably care two hoots about this country's media and how it projects the country on the int'l platform. its historical track-record regarding this has been abysmal (if not criminal), probably why, supposing that there was a calculated move behind granting-denying visa to isa, the Govt. didn't care what or how the media-bhaands would play it out publicly......like this:

Dolkun Isa episode is a self-inflicted humiliation. Mercifully, wiser heads prevailed, not prickly & immature new warriors of our diplomacy

— Shekhar Gupta (@ShekharGupta) April 25, 2016

Dolkun Isa given visa by our government to prove a point to China. Mr.Doval, surely a red corner notice on him could have been checked.

— Rana Ayyub (@RanaAyyub) April 25, 2016

What an embarrassing botch-up by Indian govt on Chinese Uyghur rebel Dolkun Isa's visa. Clueless or spineless?

— Abhijit Majumder (@abhijitmajumder) April 25, 2016

Modi Ji is ending his 2 years as India's PM with some more egg on his face. His U-turns have made a mockery of India.https://t.co/buuER0fKAP

— Sanjay Jha (@JhaSanjay) April 25, 2016

http://www.dailyo.in/politics/dolku...l-red-corner-narendra-modi/story/1/10270.html
what probably the authors missed and jumped the gun too early:

Now, India denies visa to Chinese dissident Lu Jinguh, activist Ra Wong

After cancelling Chinese dissident Dolkun Isa's visa, India has denied visas to another Chinese dissident Lu Jinguh and activist Ra Wong who were coming to attend a conference in Dharamshala on democracy and China.

"As fas as Lu Jinghua's visa is concerned, her documents were illegible and there was inconsistency with the purpose of her visit. Insofar as Ray Wong is concerned, there was data inconsistency in his documents. As such visas were not issued to both these individuals so question of revocation does not arise," a government source said here.

Lu is a well-known Tiananmen activist, while Ra is a Hong Kong-based activist.
According to reports, Lu claimed that she was told that her visa was cancelled and was stopped from boarding an Air India flight from New York. She also claimed that she had received am email confirmation for an electronic visa.

Earlier this week, the visa to Isa, a leader of World Uyghur Congress (WUC) who lives in Germany and had been invited for the conference this week being organised by US-based 'Initiatives for China', was cancelled. The Indian action was seen by many as buckling under Chinese pressure.

Meanwhile, India defended its decision to revoke the visa of Dolkun Isa, saying that he had "suppressed" facts while obtaining it but admitted that China had made its position clear to New Delhi that it should honour the Interpol Red Corner notice against him.

"Isa applied for a tourist visa under the electronic travel authorisation system. He was accordingly granted the visa. After obtaining the visa, Isa stated publicly that he was coming to attend a conference in India. A fact which was suppressed in the visa form and something that a tourist visa does not permit.

"Further more it came to the notice of authorities that Isa was subject of a Interpol Red Corner notice," external affairs ministry spokesperson Vikas Swarup said.
supposing that India knew it would be hurting its own interest in getting an RCN enforced against azhar if it doesn't itself honour the RCN against isa & hence denied & then retracted, then why the other two? Why did it choose to toe China’s line and revoke isa's e-visa when the american example of inviting isa makes the case for countries to ignore RN if the person was not known to be involved in violent crime or terrorism? and esp. when the RCN against isa is not enforced since 2003! even then, we need not take the US precedent, but need to look at china's precedent and that too against us. interpol has issued an RCN against paresh barua and we know he lives in yunan close to the myanmar border. yet, china did not arrest and extradite him! also, why permit such an anti-beijing conference to take place on Indian soil at all if isa and others were so un-kosher? unless the following has (or is meant to have) any real bearing, it all seems ridiculous:

Want to resolve boundary dispute early, China tells India

China has conveyed to India that it wants to resolve its boundary dispute as early as possible, the way it claimed to have done with 12 of its other neighbours.

This was conveyed to National Security Advisor Ajit Doval by his Chinese counterpart Yang Jiechi when they met in Beijing last week during the annual 19th round of boundary talks.

The Chinese side has said that they have resolved their boundary dispute with 12 countries and they were keen to settle all differences with India once for all and as early as possible, sources privy to the discussion said.

The Chinese side was very assertive in their approach and they were very categorical in the meeting, the sources said.


After the April 20-21 meeting, the Chinese foreign ministry had said that China and India should "meet each other halfway" to reach a "fair and reasonable" political solution to the border dispute acceptable to both sides, an indication of Beijing's willingness to make concessions on the vexed issue.

China has rarely publicly talked about meeting India "half way" on the vexed boundary dispute.

The reference to both the countries to stay on track for a political settlement is seen as significant as officials on both side say negotiations have reached a stage for the political leadership on both sides to take a decision to reach a solution.

Doval and Yang had an "extensive, deep and candid" discussion on the 3,488 km-long Line of Actual Control (LAC), which remains undemarcated resulting in tensions between the two sides.

Doval's predecessor, Shivshankar Menon, who represented India in several rounds of the border talks, had said in 2014 that all the technical work has been done and it is for the leaders of both the countries to take a call.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

F.Fwd. to...Part-II

in the end

India allows Uyghur, 8 Chinese dissidents to attend Dharamsala meeting



Contrary to the perception that the Narendra Modi-led government denied visas to Chinese dissidents under pressure from Beijing, no less than eight Chinese activists and a prominent Uyghur leader are participating in the Dharamsala conference.

The three-day conference on ‘Strengthening Our Alliance to Advance the People’s Dream: Freedom, Justice, Equality and Peace’ has been organised by US-based Chinese dissident Yang Jiamil without formal sanction either being sought or given by the Indian government.

Almost all the 69 foreign delegates, including president of the Uyghur American Association Ilshat Hasan, have travelled on tourist visas.

The conference has been organised at Norbu House in McLeodganj, which is owned by Wangdu Tsewang, an Indian national of Tibetan origin and is part of the Dalai Lama’s set-up.

Top government sources confirmed to Hindustan Times that delegates met the Dalai Lama on April 28.

While the Dalai Lama spoke about secularism, ethics, compassion and harmony, Yang, head of the NGO Initiatives of China, talked about freedom from “Chinese tyranny and oppression”.

While the Indian government has been accused of bending before Beijing by cancelling the e-visa granted to Dolkun Isa, the Germany-based head of World Uyghur Congress, has documentary proof which reveals the action had nothing to do with India’s China policy.

The e-visa was erroneously issued to Isa on April 6 by the department of immigration as an Interpol red corner notice issued against him in 1998 did not show up in official records.

Intelligence Bureau director Dineshwar Sharma severely upbraided the immigration department for its mistake and directed that all records be reconciled with those of agencies such as the CBI and Enforcement Directorate, sources said. The facts of the case were shared with the Prime Minister’s Office.

The denial of tourist visas to two other Chinese dissidents, Lu Jinghua and Wong Toi Yeung, was on procedurals grounds.

Lu’s application for an e-tourist visa was processed and rejected as the copy of the uploaded passport was not legible.

In case of 22-year-old Wong, a Hong Kong resident who had applied for an e-tourist visa on April 21, discrepancies related to the uploaded passport were noticed in the application.

“When the visa applications were processed, the immigration department did not even know they were dissident Chinese activists. These applications were processed and rejected as any other,” said a senior North Block official.

so an uyghur as well as maoist oppressed chinese invited in the end!


what is walking?! kya chal raha hai?! :rofl:
as they say, 'fogg' chal raha hai! :laugh:
 
Last edited:

OneGrimPilgrim

Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
5,243
Likes
6,810
Country flag
BTW, on the involvement of the rednecks in the whole thing:


The other side of the visa story

There is more than what meets the eye of the recent controversy on the issuance and withdrawal of visas to Dolkun Isa and Omar Kanat of the World Uyghur Congress (WUC). Things are not entirely what they seem. The visas were given despite or because of the antecedents of all the parties concerned.

The WUC describes itself as an international organisation that represents the collective interest of the Uyghur people both in East Turkestan and abroad. The main objective of the WUC is to promote the right of the Uyghur people to use peaceful, non-violent and democratic means to determine the political future of East Turkestan.

The WUC is Washington based. It also has a large presence in Germany and Rebiya Kadeer heads it. A successful businesswoman, Ms Kadeer was at one time one of the five richest people in China.

Ms Kadeer was not always at odds with the government and was once a delegate to the National People’s Congress. She was also an official People’s Republic of China representative to the Fourth UN World Conference for Women in 1995. She left China in 1996, to fight for the rights of the Uyghur people. She is clearly a woman of substance as well as means.

The other organisation that was at the centre of the recent events is a somewhat lesser known outfit called Initiatives for China (IFC). The IFC describes itself as a grassroots movement dedicated to advancing a peaceful transition to democracy in China. It was ostensibly the IFC which organised Sixth Interethnic/Interfaith Leadership Conference to bring together various ethnic and religious groups from China. This conference series is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which in turn is funded by the US Congress.

The NED’s aim is to support groups abroad “who are working for freedom and human rights, often in obscurity and isolation”. Clearly it aims to use aspirations for democracy and self-determination to pry open otherwise closed or highly centralised regimes, but very selectively. The NED is not concerned about the situation within many US allies like Saudi Arabia or Israel, but very concerned about what goes on in rivals like China or Russia. It has a clear agenda, which is to further the US interests. It operates in close coordination with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which also reports from time to time to the US Congress.

The other US think tank sponsoring this conference at Dharamsala is the US Institute for Peace (USIP), which is entirely funded by the US state department. It acts as the instrument to advance the US agenda and has in recent times been closely associated with two Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh-affiliated think tanks.

What is interesting is that the Interethnic/Interfaith Leadership Conference was taking place in India. All such conferences need Government of India permission. Did the Indian government grant it permission? The roles of some “think tanks” which have come into some prominence after the regime change in New Delhi are being spoken about in this connection. National security adviser Ajit Doval is, by past association and present relationship, at the apex of two of Delhi’s busiest and most well-funded think tanks. The better-known one is the Vivekananda International Foundation (VIF) that

Mr Doval headed till he joined the government, and the other is India First Foundation, headed by his son, Shaurya Doval. Both these outfits have risen up the food chain due to the munificence of Western agencies and other organisations that have increasingly kept them sleek and well-fed with conference partnerships and research grants from several top US-based think tanks like Atlantic Council, Heritage Foundation, USIP, German Marshall Fund (GMFUS) and Brookings. Little of this money is for free. The advancement of agendas never lets up. Besides, Rightist think tanks the world over usually think alike and act in concert.

Under the National Democratic Alliance dispensation, US think tanks like Brookings and Carnegie Foundation set up shop in New Delhi to influence, if not make policies.

The raking up the Uyghur issue is not without reasons. Along with Tibet, Xinjiang is a perceived weak link in the post-1949 Chinese empire. Both regions are also across India’s frontier with China. Xinjiang or East Turkestan abuts the Ladakh district of Jammu and Kashmir.

Like Tibet, Xinjiang also had a troubled relationship with China. Chinese dominance waxed and waned with the ebbs and tides of imperial power in Beijing. After 1912, when Sun Yat-sen proclaimed a republic, by now enfeebled China for all practical purposes lost all authority in Tibet and Xinjiang. Chinese garrisons were driven out and local leaderships assumed complete authority.

While Tibet was securely under the control of the Buddhist theocracy, Xinjiang came under the sway of several warlords till 1941, when a renegade Kuomintang (KMT) general-turned-warlord, Sheng Shicai, established a Soviet Republic under the close guidance of the Comintern in Moscow. The Russians now moved in. They took over all international relations and trade.

It had consequences in India, because it caused the British to extend Ladakh’s border outwards by incorporating Aksai Chin to create a buffer. In 1949, Joseph Stalin handed over Xinjiang to the newly-established People’s Republic of China of Mao Zedong. It was during the process of occupying Tibet and Xinjiang that China occupied Aksai Chin.

In 1949, the population of Xinjiang was comprised almost entirely of various Turkic nationalities of which the Uyghurs were the largest. Han Chinese only accounted for six per cent. Thanks to a continuous migration sanctioned and blessed by the authorities in Beijing, that proportion has now gone up to almost 48 per cent. Much of this is centered in Ürümqi, Xinjiang’s capital, which is over 80 per cent Han. The Uyghurs are still the majority in the region below the Khotan and Kashgar line. This is the region that abuts India.

The gas and oil finds in the immediate region have given impetus to the development of the area. But, unfortunately, the gains have not been equally shared. The Uyghurs continue to be less well off and deprived. The feeling that it is their national resources that are being exploited by the Chinese authorities to mostly benefit the Han migrants is quite pervasive.

When I last visited Ürümqi, shopkeepers in the bustling ancient marketplace were quite open and vocal about their sentiments. Many Uyghurs speak a bit of Urdu due to the relationship developed with Pakistan after the construction of the Karakoram Highway. Ürümqi has several restaurants that advertise themselves as serving Pakistani food.

There is also another unintended but nevertheless burgeoning Pakistan connection. Well known Pakistani institutions like the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba and the Jamaat-ud-Dawa have trained no less then 4,000 Uyghurs to wage a jihad in their homeland. The ISI connection of these outfits is well known to the Chinese. Ostensibly keeping the lid on them helps the Pakistanis keep the Chinese obliged to them.
 

DingDong

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
3,085
Likes
7,790
Country flag
Thanks @OneGrimPilgrim Perhaps this is exactly what happened. VISA was denied to people who are basically nothing more than western puppets, they don't care about the cause or the people they claim to represent.

I had actually raised similar apprehension in one of my posts in this thread about the credentials and real allegiance of these so-called "dissidents".

The Presstitutes in our country decided to make a huge issue out of the VISA denial episode to make the government look bad, but failed to report that the congregation actually took place.
 

Navnit Kundu

Pika Hu Akbarrr!!
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2016
Messages
1,395
Likes
3,098
Thanks @OneGrimPilgrim Perhaps this is exactly what happened. VISA was denied to people who are basically nothing more than western puppets, they don't care about the cause or the people they claim to represent.

I had actually raised similar apprehension in one of my posts in this thread about the credentials and real allegiance of these so-called "dissidents".

The Presstitutes in our country decided to make a huge issue out of the VISA denial episode to make the government look bad, but failed to report that the congregation actually took place.
I am a news connoisseur and even I didn't find out that the meeting took place! Fuck this paid media! But still, the wisdom about the dissidents being western puppets should have dawned upon the government before announcing their invitation in public. Something was really off in the way they handled this, even if you isolate the media's role. Despite all of this, I have no idea why top BJP cabinet leaders and Army leaders keep going and giving exclusive 2 hour long interviews in conclaves if the hostile media is not ready to oblige them one bit. Remember this?







Makes me wonder if nationalism has become a card for the BJP just like secularism is for the Congress and we are the analogous equivalent of the pissfool seculars.
 

OneGrimPilgrim

Senior Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
5,243
Likes
6,810
Country flag
I am a news connoisseur and even I didn't find out that the meeting took place! Fuck this paid media! But still, the wisdom about the dissidents being western puppets should have dawned upon the government before announcing their invitation in public. Something was really off in the way they handled this, even if you isolate the media's role. Despite all of this, I have no idea why top BJP cabinet leaders and Army leaders keep going and giving exclusive 2 hour long interviews in conclaves if the hostile media is not ready to oblige them one bit. Remember this?







Makes me wonder if nationalism has become a card for the BJP just like secularism is for the Congress and we are the analogous equivalent of the pissfool seculars.
sabke saath, sabka nikaas.
sabke saath to dikh rahe hi hain, par in sabki nikaasi kaise kab tak hogi pata nahi.

--------------------------------------------------------------

BTW that bit about the meeting was published in haraami times :biggrin2:
now that bobby ghosh has been appointed as the new editor, ab shaayad itna bhi na aaye.
 

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,849
Oh, this fuss hasn't been put to rest yet?

Indians have to reset their skewed attention. Isa Dolkun is a German national, and many others American citizens (WUC -Washington based). Denying their entry on tourist visa (or conference visa?) shall be quite a faux pas. It's frivolous and damaging to India's image to revoke them after visas had been granted in the first place. There's no case of Modi's muscle-flexing to Chinese, since China is irrelevant.

Also China is no India - the difference is like btwn Mars and Venus. Even the westmost province Xinjiang is modernized, meaning less frenzies prone to be fooled by extremism.

Ürümqi



Kashgar



And Xinjiang's neighbours have been much secularized resulting in a positive environment in combating bigotry as envisaged by SCO.

Tajikistan: No Hajj, No Hijab, and Shave Your Beard
It's disheartening to some commentators :biggrin2: but indeed for their own good.

Everyone aspires to be in the ranks of the advanced like Europe and US, not sliding to the backwards.
 
Last edited:

Sachin Bajaj

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2016
Messages
10
Likes
1
India people have a great respect for freedom fighters of India. Visit online to discover more things of freedom fighters.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top