India-China Border conflict

[LETHALFORCE]

Chinese : anti ship ballistic missiles will make aircraft carriers obselete , we can sink any US aircraft carrier

also Chinese : we are going to have 6 aircraft carriers by 2035

Do you know the CEP for the chinese missiles?? Once they fire one and it misses they will be
hit by real more accurate missiles.

 

[Love Charger]

He lived in an India that hadn't been a democracy for 75 years unlike now, the time was a different one. What looks obvious to you now, wasn't to people back then. Even Indira Gandhi who had "won" the 1971 war was looking over her shoulders wondering whether Maneckshaw was going to overthrow her, imagine how it looked 20 years before that. Had Gen. T.N.Raina not ignored Sanjay Gandhi's outburst in 1977 , you might not have had much of a democracy now. The democracy we take for granted today was a product of some very great men (Nehru included) and loads of luck. Nehru gets a whole lot of bad press (some deserved) but without understanding the context of the time.

Tell me more about the sanjay Gandhi outburst and TN raina reaction in political thread please .

 

[Rudra7678]

Makes sense, but the people there will be an added security liability. I would rather nibble away at Baltistan, the portions that remain with them. You will recall that Turtuk came into our hands in 1971. It is preferable to the poisoned apple of POK.

A retired Indian army officer who served in J&K during the heydays of militancy, when veterans of Afghan war also came to fight for jihad in Kashmir, told me that in his experience, he could not find a single terrorist who was hailing from either Gilgit or Baltistan. Most of them were from south Kashmir, PoK or from other parts of Pakistan. So India could try to liberate these areas first than PoK.

Second, Aksai Chin should never have been a goal, and should not be a future goal. The security of Ladakh, if it can be secured by a proper treaty (there has only been one proper treaty in those parts), should be our goal; unfortunately, today, it is rather closely linked to Aksai Chin. On the east, we must get their recognition of our boundary lines.

I think India should agree with 1959 claim line in eastern Ladakh, provided PRC cedes claim on Arunachal Pradesh. Also, before going to liberate GB, India should tell the Chinese government that it will take part in CPEC, provided China does not interfere when India makes a move to liberate GB and annexing it within the Indian Union and India on the other hand will not vote against PRC for any act it commits in SCS and Taiwan. It is not as easy as it sounds but with the rumblings in SCS, Taiwan question and strained relationships with Japan and S. Korea on their plate, I think Chinese just might agree to a plan where we get something and in return they get something from us.

 

[ym888]

A retired Indian army officer who served in J&K during the heydays of militancy, when veterans of Afghan war also came to fight for jihad in Kashmir, told me that in his experience, he could not find a single terrorist who was hailing from either Gilgit or Baltistan. Most of them were from south Kashmir, PoK or from other parts of Pakistan. So India could try to liberate these areas first than PoK.

I think India should agree with 1959 claim line in eastern Ladakh, provided PRC cedes claim on Arunachal Pradesh. Also, before going to liberate GB, India should tell the Chinese government that it will take part in CPEC, provided China does not interfere when India makes a move to liberate GB and annexing it within the Indian Union and India on the other hand will not vote against PRC for any act it commits in SCS and Taiwan. It is not as easy as it sounds but with the rumblings in SCS, Taiwan question and strained relationships with Japan and S. Korea on their plate, I think Chinese just might agree to a plan where we get something and in return they get something from us.

I think the most pragmatic way would be for both sides to recognize the area of actual control and draw the border.



Will indians accept this plan?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Your useful post.

A retired Indian army officer who served in J&K during the heydays of militancy, when veterans of Afghan war also came to fight for jihad in Kashmir, told me that in his experience, he could not find a single terrorist who was hailing from either Gilgit or Baltistan. Most of them were from south Kashmir, PoK or from other parts of Pakistan. So India could try to liberate these areas first than PoK.

This relates directly to the history of the gradual building up of the old J&K princely state. From its core status as the fiefdom of the Raja of Jammu under the Sikh Kingdom, it expanded into Kishtwar and the hill provinces outside the Vale, then, leaving the Vale under the direct rule of the Lahore Durbar, the conquest of the-then independent kingdom of Ladakh, the conquest of Baltistan, and finally, the disastrous expedition into western Tibet where Zorawar Singh lost his life.

Gilgit never figured in this.

It was only after the humiliating experience of a British Army officer being ordered out of the principality of Chitral that the British took interest in the most outwardly part of the region, the Pamir principalities. The British and the J&K Maharaja's forces attacked these principalities jointly, and annexed them. Initially they were permitted to be annexed by the J&K State, but almost immediately, on the grounds that Russian exploring parties needed to be continuously monitored, Gilgit, constituting all the little valley principalities of the region, was leased by the Crown Colony from J&K.

The result is that there was never any connection between the Maharaja and these regions. When Independence came, they quickly revolted (soon after the Sudans of Poonch revolted in October 1947) and by November, had declared that they were free of Maharaja rule.

The people of Gilgit never felt any affiliation with the people of the Vale, who were in any case not in any situation to deal with other peoples in any circumstances of equality at that time. As a result, they feel no urge to get involved in the Kashmir movement.

 

[Joe Shearer]

About neutralising China:

I think India should agree with 1959 claim line in eastern Ladakh, provided PRC cedes claim on Arunachal Pradesh. Also, before going to liberate GB, India should tell the Chinese government that it will take part in CPEC, provided China does not interfere when India makes a move to liberate GB and annexing it within the Indian Union and India on the other hand will not vote against PRC for any act it commits in SCS and Taiwan. It is not as easy as it sounds but with the rumblings in SCS, Taiwan question and strained relationships with Japan and S. Korea on their plate, I think Chinese just might agree to a plan where we get something and in return they get something from us.

This is quite feasible, but will take deft footwork and diplomatic finesse to achieve.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I think the most pragmatic way would be for both sides to recognize the area of actual control and draw the border.
Will indians accept this plan?

It is the most practical way.

 

[Rudra7678]

I think the most pragmatic way would be for both sides to recognize the area of actual control and draw the border.



Will indians accept this plan?

It will be very difficult to convince parties in the parliament but I think general citizenry will be welcoming of any sound compromise provided that it results in long term peace on the border. It depends upon the will of the incumbent government that it can conceive a viable border restructuring plan and convince the citizens of the benefits of such a plan, so that it can concentrate on the other pressing issues.

Well, the Indian governments (including that of ABV) were willing to make LoC with Pakistan as international border. It has surprised me that while successive Indian governments have tried to negotiate borders with Pakistan, they have actually not taken any interest to reach a compromise with PRC. It is not that it is only PRC that is making claims on territory that is currently under Indian administration but the erstwhile government of Dalai Lama (or independent Tibet) also informed Indian government that they do not agree with certain border areas that are now within Indian territory.

 

[SavageKing456]

I think the most pragmatic way would be for both sides to recognize the area of actual control and draw the border.



Will indians accept this plan?

Trusting china with any kind of agreement will not be in our favor in the long term.

 

[Rudra7678]

Trusting china with any kind of agreement will not be in our favor in the long term.

Accepting a renegotiated border does not mean that parties go complacent and lower their guard. They just need to be ready to respond to any kind of aggression that threatens their territorial integrity. India-China military imbalance is not like US-Iraq imbalance. It will not be easy for PLA to just walk over IA.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It will be very difficult to convince parties in the parliament but I think general citizenry will be welcoming of any sound compromise provided that it results in long term peace on the border. It depends upon the will of the incumbent government that it can conceive a viable border restructuring plan and convince the citizens of the benefits of such a plan, so that it can concentrate on the other pressing issues.

Well, the Indian governments (including that of ABV) were willing to agree to mark LoC with Pakistan as international border. It has surprised me that while successive Indian governments have tried to negotiate borders with Pakistan, they have actually not taken any interest to reach a compromise with PRC. It is not that it is only PRC that is making claims on territory that is currently under Indian administration but the erstwhile government of Dalai Lama (or independent Tibet) also informed Indian government that they do not agree with certain border areas that are now within Indian territory.

Part of that reluctance of the Tibetan administration in Dharmsala might be due to the fact that Tawang was a fief of Xigatse, that was the seat of the Panchen Lama. Clearly, due to the Chinese having completely taken over the Panchen Lama's position, the Dalai Lama's administration is trying to strike out on a different line, showing the Tibetan population at large that they are not giving up the claims of the Tibetans simply because they have been sheltered by India.

I suppose, picking up from where you put it, it might be a good idea, while it is possible, while goodwill is retained, while the Dalai Lama is alive, to come to a suitable agreement with the Dharmsala government, so that it has a base-line from which to start talking to the Chinese.

 

[Joe Shearer]

A small modification.

India on the other hand will not vote against PRC for any act it commits in SCS and Taiwan.

Perhaps we should merely indicate a willingness to listen to the PRC argument without any further commitment.

BTW, is anyone aware of the projected NRR for PRC in 2030? This is a rhetorical question.

 

[SavageKing456]

Accepting a renegotiated border does not mean that parties go complacent and lower their guard. They just need to be ready to respond to any kind of aggression that threatens their territorial integrity. India-China military imbalance is not like US-Iraq imbalance. It will not be easy for PLA to just walk over IA.

China takes surprise element very seriously
So as long as we're aware
It's ok

 

[Cheepek]

"More than 70 per cent of the Maldives’ current debt is owned by China"

India remains first, won't allow China to 'grab' land, says ex-Maldives president Mohamed Nasheed

Nasheed, who is now Speaker of the Maldivian Parliament, warned against China’s ‘land grab and debt trap’ policy, adding that it put the island nation under massive debt burden.

theprint.in

 

[Cheepek]

I think the most pragmatic way would be for both sides to recognize the area of actual control and draw the border.



Will indians accept this plan?

Indians have been asking for that from years now. So you are clearly barking up the wrong tree.
I don't think you realise China is a bully, and bullies don't give up until they are given a nice bloody nose.

 

[Love Charger]

I think the most pragmatic way would be for both sides to recognize the area of actual control and draw the border.



Will indians accept this plan?

We are ready , but are you ready?

 

[Angel of War]

Oh this xutiya is shitting here and nobody is bothered. Mods wl allow defecation of every thread before giving a ban

Did he say anything mean or offensive here ? He's just having a practical discussion . Mind your own buisness eh . You can't control what someone posts here especially when it's actually informative

 

[Jimih]

The democracy we take for granted today was a product of some very great men (Nehru included) and loads of luck. Nehru gets a whole lot of bad press (some deserved) but without understanding the context of the time.

The irony is, the same members praising the "great man" Nehru for his greatness curse him on Russia-Ukraine thread for his Non-Alligned movement and will cry why India doesn't join any alliances.

 

[karn]

The irony is, the same members praising the "great man" Nehru for his greatness curse him on Russia-Ukraine thread for his Non-Alligned movement and will cry why India doesn't join any alliances.

The Ukraine thread is a concentric circle jerk .. with random updates at the center of the 2 circles.

 

[Jimih]

Also, before going to liberate GB, India should tell the Chinese government that it will take part in CPEC, provided China does not interfere when India makes a move to liberate GB and annexing it within the Indian Union and India.

CPEC will be safe with Pakistan controlling PoJK (GB) and China knows it.

So no beating around the bush and fantasising about the prospects.