India China LAC & International Border Discussions

[cereal killer]

Replying late.Had some urgent work. Yes, intelligence gathering can see improvement. I believe we have made an exponential leap in technical intelligence like satellite imagery. We have a constellation of remote sensing satellites. But in this case it was more a case of failure of human intelligence. We knew that the military exercise was on and probably had high resolution maps/pictures of the deployments. But we could not guess the intentions of the Chinese commanders. I believe this incident has underlined the crucial role played by human intelligence. All the high tech tools like satellites and reconnaissance planes cannot read the mind of the opponents commanders. I believe we need to seriously beef up our China desk. We should attempt to infiltrate Chinese society and the PLA. It is a herculean task. But look at Israel. Such a small country has a first rate external intelligence agency. They have infiltrated all of their much bigger neighbours. So having assets in the PLA at the tactical and strategic level is possible.
Having said the obvious there is no need to demoralise our intelligence setup. No country or its intelligence services have an 100% successful record. Failures will be there be it the CIA, KGB, MI5/MI6 or the Mossad. But we need to learn our lessons from our failures.

Yes, Doklam was an operation we can be proud of. But please keep in mind it was an defensive action as we stopped an Chinese incursion into Bhutan. We did not invade Chinese controlled Tibet. But the PLA was thoroughly outsmarted and humiliated. They could not go to war as we controlled the approaching heights on three sides and would have routed them. They lost face regionally and internationally. Without using air power they were doomed to failure.
China could be having her revenge in the present situation on the border.

I think we need a change in planning when constructing strategic border roads. We cannot have a situation where we construct and own the roads but lose control of the surrounding heights. If we want to ensure the security of the road then we need to occupy the surrounding heights also. Pakistan was able to threaten our key highway during the Kargil War by occupying surrounding heights and the Chinese are repeating the move. Why doesn't it occur to us that any mountain feature which can imperil the strategic road has to be first taken over and occupied. Capture the heights overlooking the road to ensure safety.

India is slowly matching the Chinese in Defence but the process should be speeded up. I agree there is no need to tolerate Chinese nonsense. Other countries like Vietnam will fight the Chinese irrespective of the state of their economy. May be we have chosen a more cautious approach.

Agree we are not economically suited to fight a long conflict anyway. But we can activate Non state actors within China. Pakistan does the same with us with a great effect. Even a fraction of these tactics can hurt China badly. All this good neighbor thing has given us nothing.
A offensive action against China is still far fetched as we seriously need to increase our capabilities. But we are preparing for a defensive war with them for a long time & can push them back whatever they throw at us. All we need is a strong will & bold moves to bring them in line.

 

[dumdumdum]

I got the whole blooo print but RAW Mudi & Mota Bhai has told me not to spill the beans in public or else plan would be compromised.

Mudi Sud Rejin

 

[Gautam Sarkar]

Myanmar pulls Swiss firm to scrutinize China’s BRI project


Integrity of China’s Three Gorges Dam Called Into Question


India's one China policy may not be permanent feature amid Beijing's aggression

 

[rock127]

This does happen in politics when a 10 Class pass man from a poor background, with criminal records and 14 years prison term shoots to be the PM of chaotic fledgling democracy... How much will be his price... in bidding the Chinese outbid the Indians... so simple..

But how did the Chinese manage the majority is the moot question..

Seems like he was not even interested in passing at least 12 years in school since he was in a hurry to be a Commi asap and paltu of Chini.

 

[Tridev123]

Yup and everyone here would have called the congress traitors etc....





The problem with that is it’s never going to be the right time and why would the Chinese allow you that time? Let’s hope? Why would the Chinese retreat without achieving their aims. Seems like they hold all the cards. You have to have some leverage over an adversary, can’t pin your hope on the adversaries goodwill.

Replying late. I believe that there is a consensus amongst the Indian strategic community that the China factor will be dealt with mostly diplomatically and armed action will be avoided as far as possible. That is why all Governments whether they are BJP or Congress are extremely cautious in responding to Chinese provacations. So please do not expect any change in the approach until there is a radical change in the larger strategic community thinking. Whether our approach is right or wrong is left open to question.

As regards your second point I agree that we cannot and should not condone Chinese aggression.. How long to wait?. Maybe the Government is looking at accelerated economic growth rates to even out the odds. If we manage to get plus 10% GDP growth then we would be inching close to the Chinese economy size in less than 15 years. So it is a question of what choices we make. Everybody knows that the era of 10% growth for the Chinese economy is over and they might probably grow at sustained rates of 5 - 6%.So a faster growing India will close the gap. Only the future will tell if we acted correctly.

Having real leverage would be when we aquire Chinese controlled Tibet territory to force the PLA to withdraw. Or we ready to do the needful. Go to war.

I propose that hereafter nobody will refer to Tibet as Chinese territory or land. Just as we call Pak Kashmir as Pak Occupied Kashmir the region comprising Tibet would be called China Occupied /Controlled Tibet or simply Tibet. The long term future is a Free Tibet.

 

[Raj Malhotra]

A What's up Forward:-

Do you know what STEC stands for?

It stands for Shanghai Tunnel Engineering Co. Ltd.

Yes, you guessed right.

It's a Chinese multinational civil construction firm.

Yesterday, it bagged the civil contract package 4 of Delhi-Meerut RRTS line.

They are now going to design and construct tunnels by TBM from near New Ashok Nagar DN Ramp to Sahibabad UP Ramp and One Under Ground Station at Anand Vihar by Cut & Cover Method on Delhi-Ghaziabad-Meerut RRTS Corridor.

This will Include:

1. Architectural Finishing and Design

2. Supply, installation, testing and commissioning of:

(a) Electrical and Mechanical Systems
(b) Fire detection & suppression Systems
(c) Hydraulic systems

Imagine!

A Chinese company working on our infrastructure at a time when things are so unsettled with China!

How risky this project can be in terms of the nation's security!

Indian company Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (L&T) couldn't bag this contract because it bid Rs 1,170 crore.

Tata Projects Ltd.- SKEC JV couldn't bag this project because it bid Rs 1,346 crore.

But Shanghai Tunnel Engineering Co. Ltd. (STEC) which bid Rs 1,126 crore, got it.

From the above figures we can see that L&T bid just 44 crore more than STEC.

Apparently, आत्मनिर्भरता comes cheap in India

Only 44 crores

And all that talk by Modiji about being "Vocal about Local" is just hot Air

 

[Tridev123]

I think to keep military intelligence out of it as they have neither the mandate nor resources for external intelligence.

The issue here is not related to The Chinese grabbing the land like thieves nor building over an area for last six months but right across the patrol points and in the vicinity of Indian posts. The Chinese openly building a force of 10000 troops in forwarding areas can hardly be hidden.



Preparations to meet the Chinese threat is under action and visible only in terms of building infrastructure that too due to the personal interest taken by the PM.

Otherwise, there is no preparation for taking on China seriously. The MCS remains stunted. There is no progress and urgency in procurement of armamnets. OFB is proceeding on strikes.. DRDO is busy in some fancy projects to materialise after sixty years.. MHA is busy raising more CAPF battalions.. Army is busy in restructuring and reducing manpower...
I do not see any readiness whatsoever.

During my numerous interactions with power that be I was amazed to hear arguments like " We are not going to fight any war ... there will be no war (as if that was a favour enemy was doing to them) but Police, you see. is required every day.." (of course they did not explain that poilice is required every day for their protection, for rigging polls, manipulating votes, booth capturing, putting their opponents behind bars, extortion, hafta, CBI cases, political espionage and almost all political and criminal activities so vital for the survival of all-powerful people)

But they do not know that the day there is a war - entire country and their empires will be at stake ... and that the war can only be averted if Defence Forces are strong capable of avoiding a war..

Replying late. I would beg to differ. We are not asking the Defence Intelligence Agency to gather intelligence from Beijing or Shanghai. The incident is quite close to the border. Collecting military intelligence closer to the border is a function of the Military Intelligence Directorate. We knew that a military exercise was on in Tibet. There was always a chance that China would use it as a smokescreen to redeploy forces quickly. Both R&AW and Military Intelligence could have performed better. I am not demoralising them. Suggesting improvements. Wasn't Kargil an Military Intelligence lapse.

Agree with most of your other suppositions. But I believe this country will progress in spite of various structural problems. Forget about the politicians and bureaucrats and put your faith in the youth and the educated middle class. They will propel us forward. We need to return to high economic growth. Our defence R & D is showing signs of a turnaround. You will see the private sector come into defence in a big way.

 

[hit&run]

Myanmar pulls Swiss firm to scrutinize China’s BRI project


Integrity of China’s Three Gorges Dam Called Into Question


India's one China policy may not be permanent feature amid Beijing's aggression

11 Ping is being ill advised. He need to fire his advisors.

 

[cereal killer]

A What's up Forward:-

Do you know what STEC stands for?

It stands for Shanghai Tunnel Engineering Co. Ltd.

Yes, you guessed right.

It's a Chinese multinational civil construction firm.

Yesterday, it bagged the civil contract package 4 of Delhi-Meerut RRTS line.

They are now going to design and construct tunnels by TBM from near New Ashok Nagar DN Ramp to Sahibabad UP Ramp and One Under Ground Station at Anand Vihar by Cut & Cover Method on Delhi-Ghaziabad-Meerut RRTS Corridor.

This will Include:

1. Architectural Finishing and Design

2. Supply, installation, testing and commissioning of:

(a) Electrical and Mechanical Systems
(b) Fire detection & suppression Systems
(c) Hydraulic systems

Imagine!

A Chinese company working on our infrastructure at a time when things are so unsettled with China!

How risky this project can be in terms of the nation's security!

Indian company Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (L&T) couldn't bag this contract because it bid Rs 1,170 crore.

Tata Projects Ltd.- SKEC JV couldn't bag this project because it bid Rs 1,346 crore.

But Shanghai Tunnel Engineering Co. Ltd. (STEC) which bid Rs 1,126 crore, got it.

From the above figures we can see that L&T bid just 44 crore more than STEC.

Apparently, आत्मनिर्भरता comes cheap in India

Only 44 crores

And all that talk by Modiji about being "Vocal about Local" is just hot Air

No its not about aatam nirbhar bharat it is about debunking that myth & that joke of banning everything that is Chinese. Even our govt doesn't take all this much seriously because they know it's not possible. There is always delusional janta who come up with these things without knowing that this doesn't effect China much. I think trade & investment are best kept separated from geopolitics. First thing we need to do is revoke "One China" stand. PM modi is a Gujarati guy I think he knows how cruicial business is. Not everything is Modi's fault.

 

[right wing]

No its not about aatam nirbhar bharat it is about debunking that myth & that joke of banning everything that is Chinese. Even our govt doesn't take all this much seriously because they know it's not possible. There is always delusional janta who come up with these things without knowing that this doesn't effect China much. I think trade & investment are best kept separated from geopolitics. First thing we need to do is revoke "One China" stand. PM modi is a Gujarati guy I think he knows how cruicial business is. Not everything is Modi's fault.

For projects funded by WB JICA AIIB ADB there are international well laid norms.
And the tender has not yet been awarded though...(most likely it will go to them still)

 

[fire starter]

well written article.

 

[tarunraju]

The reason Chini have let one of it's paltu called Oli to bark against India instead of firing any bullet.

Chini can then claim oh see these Indians are so aggressive that they "bully" even their hindu brother Nepal.

Then we must do exactly what chicoms don't expect us to do, and clog Nepal's oil and logistics route on national security pretense.

Every box of condoms heading to Nepal must be manually opened and inspected. With its map-redrawing gaandmasti, Kathmandu has given Delhi a legally tenable excuse.

The objective should be to throw the Nepalese economy off gear at such a scale that even chicoms have a hard time coming to their rescue in the short-term (2-3 months). By then Nepal will have bled billions, and unrest against Oli will only grow.

Let the aam-sherpa hate India. He is guaranteed to hate Oli more.

 

[ninja hattori]

A tweet from general VK singh,

The article shared in his tweet gives some insight about the situation.

 

[ninja hattori]

Indo-Pacific Charter gains support in India, US, Australia and Japan

​

The four countries that form the Quadrilateral Alliance would be the ideal initiators of such a move, just as the UK and the US were in the case of the Atlantic Charter.

​

​

New Delhi: On 14 August 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt of the United States and Prime Minister Winston S. Churchill issued the Atlantic Charter, which laid the foundations for Atlanticist primacy for over six decades and led to the tectonic shifts in global geopolitics that saw the United Nations get formed out of the Atlantic Charter-inspired Declaration of the United Nations on 1 January 1942 that was signed by KMT China, the USSR, the United Kingdom and the United States. On 15 August 1947, just six years after the Atlantic Charter was made public and despite Winston Churchill’s refusal to give colonised nations the rights of European countries overrun by Germany since 1938, India became free, followed by a procession of other countries in Asia and Africa. The Atlantic Charter changed the world, but from 1 July 1997, when Hong Kong was handed back to Beijing by London, it became clear that the Atlanticist world was giving way to the Indo-Pacific. The economies of Asia now outstrip those of Europe, while across the Pacific Ocean (or what this writer has long called the eastern segment of the Indo-Pacific, with the Indian Ocean forming the western segment), a new superpower arose that in brief years gave evidence of eclipsing the US as the primary economy and therefore power on the globe.

​

The rise of China got accelerated by the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1992, and by 2012, when Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping took over, most observers were not asking whether but when China would overtake the US. Enter Trump, Abe and Modi, with their own plans for a 21st century world order. In 2020, except for romantics lost in their perpetual fantasyland, it is clear that as when there was a Soviet bloc and a US-led bloc (ambitiously if inaccurate in view of some of its members, named the “Free World”), there is now a Sino-Russian bloc and an alternative bloc led by the US. Whether it be logistics matrices, supply chains or technology regimes, the two sides are now increasingly competing with each other rather than working in a cooperative and complementary fashion. India is not in the China bloc, nor in the US bloc, in that its most important defence supplier is Russia, and with the commissioning of the S-400 will remain so for at least a generation.

​

The S-400 is inter alia a superb intelligence-gathering mechanism of any object flying over the skies of the territories where it is located. Which is why the US shut down its proposed F-35 manufacturing base from Turkey, a country where the Russian-built system has become operational. Given the vulnerability to interception of performance parameters by a system which is reportedly soon getting replaced in Russia and perhaps in China by the S-500, it would be foolhardy of NATO to permit its high-performance assets to now even overfly its member, Turkey, now that the S-400 system has begun functioning with its complement of Russian crew and maintenance workers.

​

While the Lutyens Zone is still enamoured of “non-alignment” (which now, as in the past, means an alignment between Moscow and Delhi), more and more voices—including from within policymaking levels—are calling for a reset. Prime Minister Modi may need to balance the world view from within the Lutyens Zone with those of others concerned about India’s long-term security. The latter are looking towards an alternative strategy that would ensure (in Modi’s words), equal access to all in the waters of the new geopolitical pivot of the globe, the hinterland of the Indo-Pacific. Just as the security structures that came out of the Atlantic Alliance prevented another war in Europe, this time caused by the USSR seeking to expand the boundaries of the Warsaw Pact the way successive US administrations have done during the Gorbachev-Yeltsin period. President Vladimir V. Putin has halted further expansion by making it clear through action (as in the Ukraine, Georgia and Crimea) that any such outcome would result in an unbearable cost to the Atlanticist alliance. Had he been in charge during the Soviet 1979-88 Afghanistan occupation, it is certain that the theatre of conflict would have widened to include Pakistan, thereby shutting off the conduit which kept the fighters alive who bled the Soviet armies to defeat within a decade. In the Indo-Pacific world, which has replaced the Atlanticist world, what is essential for prosperity is the avoidance of a war between the US and China. Whether it be in the Korean Peninsula, the borders of India or Vietnam or the China seas, military conflict can only be ruled out if the balance of forces is such as to deter recourse to such kinetic methods.

​

An Indo-Pacific Charter, a concept first discussed on NewsX some months ago, is rapidly emerging as an option that is picking up adherents steadily, especially in the US, India, Australia and Japan. In all four countries, key policymakers are close to (or are already) informally examining the possibility of working on the proposed Indo-Pacific Charter. The four countries that form the Quadrilateral Alliance (Australia, Japan, the US and India) would be the ideal initiators of such a move, just as the UK and the US were in the case of the Atlantic Charter. The purpose of the Charter would not be war but its prevention, and this through the participation of countries in Asia determined to safeguard their territorial sovereignty from any effort at nibbling away at their boundaries. While the four Quad members are democracies, the proposed Charter could in time also include countries such as Vietnam, and Oman, besides South Africa, the only essentiality being that they should form part of the Indo-Pacific littoral and not be outside these waters. India could emerge as a key platform for the manufacture of advanced defence systems, such as the F-35 or nuclear-powered submarines, besides helping to perfect cyber and space defensive capabilities. This would hinge on a holistic policy of defence and security rather than the silo-based basket of sometimes conflicting policies that has long been a staple—including in procurement—in India. The emphasis will need to be on the creation of capacities to ensure “active defence” in a multi-front conflict, i.e. the ability to launch a punishing offensive against all aggressors. Only such a capability will deter future efforts at taking away bits and pieces of national territory.

​

The Lutyens Zone is a “tar baby”, which once embraced paralyses through its gluey hold on individuals and institutions. It is also a policy quicksand, where those who step into it find themselves drowning in a morass of objections one after the other to any innovative idea that offers genuine promise of the massive changes that this country has been hungering for since 1947. A visitor to China in the 1980s who returns to that country now would be astonished at the transformation, while the same is not usually said of India despite the wealth of brainpower and other human resources it has been blessed with. Over the coming months, it will become clear whether the country has escaped the long-term stasis that Ides of August planners are anticipating, or whether Prime Minster Modi will show his mettle get free of the policy quicksands of an official machinery obsessed not with growth and welfare but with control, and the more control the better. Even when that stifles and retards growth impulses. Effective security is significant in promoting a climate for growth, and an Indo-Pacific Charter could be an effective means towards ensuring that. Those who expect PM Modi to win three consecutive Lok Sabha elections in the manner he prevailed in three state Assembly polls are confident that massive and beneficial changes are on the horizon. The Indo-Pacific Charter is already engaging the attention of policymakers in Washington and Tokyo and possibly in Canberra as well, although such an innovative idea would be toxic to the Lutyens Zone, which is as good a reason as any why it should be actualised by dynamic diplomacy on the part of PM Modi.

 

[hit&run]

well written article.

This is what these tin pot experts are paid to do. Every time they open their disgraced mouths they make it difficult for India and Indians to defend. They become insider’s view when not even a stray dog comes to smell their filthy presence in reality.

It is now an open secret that Chinese and Pakistani agencies pay millions of dollars to these Dallals. The nuisance multiplies when simpletons take their word seriously and start searching merit in it.

Nice effort by good Sir in the article, BTW.

 

[Arihant]

Then we must do exactly what chicoms don't expect us to do, and clog Nepal's oil and logistics route on national security pretense.

Every box of condoms heading to Nepal must be manually opened and inspected. With its map-redrawing gaandmasti, Kathmandu has given Delhi a legally tenable excuse.

The objective should be to throw the Nepalese economy off gear at such a scale that even chicoms have a hard time coming to their rescue in the short-term (2-3 months). By then Nepal will have bled billions, and unrest against Oli will only grow.

Let the aam-sherpa hate India. He is guaranteed to hate Oli more.

On border area and well within Nepal large population is pro India. Blocking supply line on the basis of just few incidents you will sow the seeds of hate against India in those people's. Topple the Gov't with the help of public, this is the only option we have and public is already on road cursing oli. This govt will not survive as the govt have many fractions and due to Xi help they are here for some time but not for long.

 

[hit&run]

Indo-Pacific Charter gains support in India, US, Australia and Japan

The four countries that form the Quadrilateral Alliance would be the ideal initiators of such a move, just as the UK and the US were in the case of the Atlantic Charter.




New Delhi: On 14 August 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt of the United States and Prime Minister Winston S. Churchill issued the Atlantic Charter, which laid the foundations for Atlanticist primacy for over six decades and led to the tectonic shifts in global geopolitics that saw the United Nations get formed out of the Atlantic Charter-inspired Declaration of the United Nations on 1 January 1942 that was signed by KMT China, the USSR, the United Kingdom and the United States. On 15 August 1947, just six years after the Atlantic Charter was made public and despite Winston Churchill’s refusal to give colonised nations the rights of European countries overrun by Germany since 1938, India became free, followed by a procession of other countries in Asia and Africa. The Atlantic Charter changed the world, but from 1 July 1997, when Hong Kong was handed back to Beijing by London, it became clear that the Atlanticist world was giving way to the Indo-Pacific. The economies of Asia now outstrip those of Europe, while across the Pacific Ocean (or what this writer has long called the eastern segment of the Indo-Pacific, with the Indian Ocean forming the western segment), a new superpower arose that in brief years gave evidence of eclipsing the US as the primary economy and therefore power on the globe.

The rise of China got accelerated by the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1992, and by 2012, when Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping took over, most observers were not asking whether but when China would overtake the US. Enter Trump, Abe and Modi, with their own plans for a 21st century world order. In 2020, except for romantics lost in their perpetual fantasyland, it is clear that as when there was a Soviet bloc and a US-led bloc (ambitiously if inaccurate in view of some of its members, named the “Free World”), there is now a Sino-Russian bloc and an alternative bloc led by the US. Whether it be logistics matrices, supply chains or technology regimes, the two sides are now increasingly competing with each other rather than working in a cooperative and complementary fashion. India is not in the China bloc, nor in the US bloc, in that its most important defence supplier is Russia, and with the commissioning of the S-400 will remain so for at least a generation.

The S-400 is inter alia a superb intelligence-gathering mechanism of any object flying over the skies of the territories where it is located. Which is why the US shut down its proposed F-35 manufacturing base from Turkey, a country where the Russian-built system has become operational. Given the vulnerability to interception of performance parameters by a system which is reportedly soon getting replaced in Russia and perhaps in China by the S-500, it would be foolhardy of NATO to permit its high-performance assets to now even overfly its member, Turkey, now that the S-400 system has begun functioning with its complement of Russian crew and maintenance workers.

While the Lutyens Zone is still enamoured of “non-alignment” (which now, as in the past, means an alignment between Moscow and Delhi), more and more voices—including from within policymaking levels—are calling for a reset. Prime Minister Modi may need to balance the world view from within the Lutyens Zone with those of others concerned about India’s long-term security. The latter are looking towards an alternative strategy that would ensure (in Modi’s words), equal access to all in the waters of the new geopolitical pivot of the globe, the hinterland of the Indo-Pacific. Just as the security structures that came out of the Atlantic Alliance prevented another war in Europe, this time caused by the USSR seeking to expand the boundaries of the Warsaw Pact the way successive US administrations have done during the Gorbachev-Yeltsin period. President Vladimir V. Putin has halted further expansion by making it clear through action (as in the Ukraine, Georgia and Crimea) that any such outcome would result in an unbearable cost to the Atlanticist alliance. Had he been in charge during the Soviet 1979-88 Afghanistan occupation, it is certain that the theatre of conflict would have widened to include Pakistan, thereby shutting off the conduit which kept the fighters alive who bled the Soviet armies to defeat within a decade. In the Indo-Pacific world, which has replaced the Atlanticist world, what is essential for prosperity is the avoidance of a war between the US and China. Whether it be in the Korean Peninsula, the borders of India or Vietnam or the China seas, military conflict can only be ruled out if the balance of forces is such as to deter recourse to such kinetic methods.

An Indo-Pacific Charter, a concept first discussed on NewsX some months ago, is rapidly emerging as an option that is picking up adherents steadily, especially in the US, India, Australia and Japan. In all four countries, key policymakers are close to (or are already) informally examining the possibility of working on the proposed Indo-Pacific Charter. The four countries that form the Quadrilateral Alliance (Australia, Japan, the US and India) would be the ideal initiators of such a move, just as the UK and the US were in the case of the Atlantic Charter. The purpose of the Charter would not be war but its prevention, and this through the participation of countries in Asia determined to safeguard their territorial sovereignty from any effort at nibbling away at their boundaries. While the four Quad members are democracies, the proposed Charter could in time also include countries such as Vietnam, and Oman, besides South Africa, the only essentiality being that they should form part of the Indo-Pacific littoral and not be outside these waters. India could emerge as a key platform for the manufacture of advanced defence systems, such as the F-35 or nuclear-powered submarines, besides helping to perfect cyber and space defensive capabilities. This would hinge on a holistic policy of defence and security rather than the silo-based basket of sometimes conflicting policies that has long been a staple—including in procurement—in India. The emphasis will need to be on the creation of capacities to ensure “active defence” in a multi-front conflict, i.e. the ability to launch a punishing offensive against all aggressors. Only such a capability will deter future efforts at taking away bits and pieces of national territory.

The Lutyens Zone is a “tar baby”, which once embraced paralyses through its gluey hold on individuals and institutions. It is also a policy quicksand, where those who step into it find themselves drowning in a morass of objections one after the other to any innovative idea that offers genuine promise of the massive changes that this country has been hungering for since 1947. A visitor to China in the 1980s who returns to that country now would be astonished at the transformation, while the same is not usually said of India despite the wealth of brainpower and other human resources it has been blessed with. Over the coming months, it will become clear whether the country has escaped the long-term stasis that Ides of August planners are anticipating, or whether Prime Minster Modi will show his mettle get free of the policy quicksands of an official machinery obsessed not with growth and welfare but with control, and the more control the better. Even when that stifles and retards growth impulses. Effective security is significant in promoting a climate for growth, and an Indo-Pacific Charter could be an effective means towards ensuring that. Those who expect PM Modi to win three consecutive Lok Sabha elections in the manner he prevailed in three state Assembly polls are confident that massive and beneficial changes are on the horizon. The Indo-Pacific Charter is already engaging the attention of policymakers in Washington and Tokyo and possibly in Canberra as well, although such an innovative idea would be toxic to the Lutyens Zone, which is as good a reason as any why it should be actualised by dynamic diplomacy on the part of PM Modi.

Fake emperor will be tamed and humiliated. He has messed with wrong people.

 

[garg_bharat]

A What's up Forward:-

Do you know what STEC stands for?

It stands for Shanghai Tunnel Engineering Co. Ltd.

Yes, you guessed right.

It's a Chinese multinational civil construction firm.

Yesterday, it bagged the civil contract package 4 of Delhi-Meerut RRTS line.

They are now going to design and construct tunnels by TBM from near New Ashok Nagar DN Ramp to Sahibabad UP Ramp and One Under Ground Station at Anand Vihar by Cut & Cover Method on Delhi-Ghaziabad-Meerut RRTS Corridor.

This will Include:

1. Architectural Finishing and Design

2. Supply, installation, testing and commissioning of:

(a) Electrical and Mechanical Systems
(b) Fire detection & suppression Systems
(c) Hydraulic systems

Imagine!

A Chinese company working on our infrastructure at a time when things are so unsettled with China!

How risky this project can be in terms of the nation's security!

Indian company Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (L&T) couldn't bag this contract because it bid Rs 1,170 crore.

Tata Projects Ltd.- SKEC JV couldn't bag this project because it bid Rs 1,346 crore.

But Shanghai Tunnel Engineering Co. Ltd. (STEC) which bid Rs 1,126 crore, got it.

From the above figures we can see that L&T bid just 44 crore more than STEC.

Apparently, आत्मनिर्भरता comes cheap in India

Only 44 crores

And all that talk by Modiji about being "Vocal about Local" is just hot Air

Why is a Chinese company even allowed to bid for a civil infra project? Beats me. It proves that 90% of security problems are of our own making.

 

[Arihant]

Why is a Chinese company even allowed to bid for a civil infra project? Beats me. It proves that 90% of security problems are of our own making.

Problem is our bidding system which allows the winner on the basis of lowest bid. I don't know how it helps project.

 

[abhay rajput]

Why is a Chinese company even allowed to bid for a civil infra project? Beats me. It proves that 90% of security problems are of our own making.

You are asking the wrong questions here. Why are we even allowing Chinese companies to do business in India and giving our enemy every years billions of dollars in return. Yeah it will make electronic equipments much costlier buy hey govt. Can create state of the art fabrication lab under 10 bullion dollar's. It seems we haven't learnt anything from our history. Our priorities are misplaced and the sad part is that we will not take any step in that direction even after this standoff judging by our history .