India-China Relations

[johnee]

A very good article by Brahma Chellany, he poses some very valid questions that beg to be answered by our "all-options-are-open" MEA and "trust-but-verify" intellectual PM.


To China's delight, India reins in its media

To China's delight, India reins in its media
October 08, 2009 09:08 IST

The Indian government doesn't deny recurrent Chinese cross-frontier border incursions, yet it has unfairly accused the media of overplaying such border provocations, says Brahma Chellaney.

At a time when border tensions with China have risen, the Indian government has tried to pull the veil over the Himalayan-frontier situation by targeting the media for allegedly overplaying Chinese cross-border incursions. Note: No one in the government has denied such incursions are occurring. Yet the media is being accused of hyping such incursions, even as a tight-lipped government remains reluctant to come clean on the actual extent and frequency of the Chinese intrusions.

To the delight of the autocrats in Beijing , who tightly control the flow of information in their country, including through online censors, New Delhi has reined in its home media. In response to the governmental intervention at the highest level, Indian news organisations essentially have clamped down on further reporting of the Chinese incursions.

The message this sends to Beijing, however inadvertently, is that when the world's biggest autocracy builds up pressure, the world's largest democracy is willing to tame its media coverage, even if it entails dispensing half-truths and flogging distortions.

Beijing is sure to be emboldened by the precedent that has been set. Next time when it is unhappy with Indian media coverage of another issue sensitive to its interests, it simply will issue a diplomatic demarche to New Delhi to discipline its media the way it did on the border tensions.

Given Beijing's growing hardline stance towards India since 2006, New Delhi's attempt to sweep serious issues under the rug is baffling. The facts, even if unpalatable, should be allowed to speak for themselves. New Delhi's oft-repeated line in recent weeks has been that Chinese incursions are at last year's level, so there is no need to worry.

But 2008 brought a record number of incursions, with the Indian defence establishment reporting that the number of such intrusions went from 140 in 2007 to 270 last year, or almost double.

In addition, there were 2,285 reported instances of 'aggressive border patrolling' by Chinese forces in 2008. This summer, as the army chief publicly said, there were '21 incursions in June, 20 in July and 24 in August.'

The key point to note is that China has opened pressure points against India across the Himalayas, with border incidents occurring in all the four sectors -- Ladakh, Uttarakhand-Himachal, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh. Yet, such is the Indian government's continuing opacity that it is loath to clarify the actual border situation, even as it conveniently blames the media for overplaying the incursions, although the information about them has been coming from official channels.

If the threat from an increasingly assertive and ambitious China is to be contained, India must have an honest and open debate on its diplomatic and military options, including how gaps in its defences can be plugged and what it will take to build a credible deterrent.

The media has a crucial role to play in such a debate, both by bringing out the facts and providing a platform for discussion. Still, New Delhi has sought to make its home media the scapegoat. Even more odd is that it has taken its cue from Beijing. It was the Chinese foreign ministry which first accused Indian media of stirring up tensions. 'I have noted that some Indian media are releasing inaccurate information; I wonder what their aim is,' spokeswoman Jiang Yu had said.

Soon thereafter, Beijing discreetly began exerting diplomatic pressure on New Delhi to domesticate its media.

In response, Indian government functionaries have rushed, one by one, to make light of the Chinese incursions, although the Chinese leadership has studiously kept mum on border-related developments. Not a word has come from any Chinese leader. By contrast, the almost entire Indian security leadership from the prime minister down has gone public -- not to clarify what is happening along the border, but to claim there is no cause for alarm. But by being disturbingly opaque, New Delhi only adds to the public unease.

The Indian public indeed has been offered mostly one-line statements from government functionaries. Here's a sample:

* In September's first week, the neophyte external affairs minister offered this one-liner: 'Let me go on record to say that this has been one of the most peaceful boundaries that we have had as compared to boundary lines with other countries.' From the Maurya Sheraton's presidential suite, where S M Krishna was ensconced for more than 100 days, everything looks 'most peaceful,' not just the India-China border.
* In the following week, the foreign secretary claimed there has been 'no significant increase' in Chinese incursions. That suggests the incursions have increased but not significantly. But who is to judge whether any increase is significant or insignificant if those in authority divulge no information?
* The foreign secretary was followed by the prime minister, who laconically indicated he was in touch with the 'highest levels' of the Chinese government while implicitly acknowledging that a better flow of government information was necessary to improve media reporting.
* A day later, the army chief was asked to speak up. 'The prime minister has just made a statement that there has not been any more incursions or transgressions as compared to last year. They are at the same level. So there is no cause of worry or concern,' General Deepak Kapoor declared on September 19. If the level of intrusions remains at last year's level, that should be a cause for concern because it shows China is keeping India under unremitting pressure.
* Then came the national security adviser, who was loquacious but not enlightening in a television interview. 'Almost all the so-called incursions which have taken place have taken place in areas which in a sense are viewed as being disputed by one side or the other,' said M K Narayanan. Really?

What about Sikkim, whose border with Tibet is formally recognised by China? And what about Uttarakhand ] -- the middle sector -- where the Line of Control was clarified through an exchange of maps with China in 2001?

More fundamentally, why should New Delhi offer explanations or justifications for the Chinese incursions? If such intrusions really are due to differing perceptions about the line of control, let the Chinese say that. But note: Beijing hasn't proffered that excuse.

Significantly, the NSA admitted the Chinese have started intruding a 'little deeper' than before, even as he maintained the government's now-familiar line that there has been 'hardly any increase' in Chinese cross-frontier forays. He went on to say, 'China certainly sees us as a rival. They wish to be numero uno in this part of the world.' Yet he complacently concluded, 'I don't think there is any reason for us to feel particularly concerned as to what's happening.' Didn't such smugness bring the surprise 1962 invasion?

Unfortunately, even while denying any media report, New Delhi tends to be so economical with words that it leaves questions hanging. For example, the government has yet to categorically deny that Chinese forces opened fire across the settled Sikkim border in late August. It merely described as 'factually inaccurate' a September 15 newspaper report that two Indo-Tibetan Border Police soldiers were wounded in such firing. But another national newspaper had earlier front-paged on August 28 the trading of cross-border fire in the same Sikkim area -- Kerang.

If New Delhi wants to ensure Himalayan peace, pulling the wool on public eyes is certainly not the way. It is the government's responsibility to keep the public informed through media of new security threats and the steps it is taking to effectively defend the borders.

Journalists seeking information from the government on the Himalayan frontier complain they get the runaround. Rather than stonewall or obfuscate, the government ought to readily disseminate information. Not all information released in the public domain can be venomous to diplomacy.

Good public diplomacy, at home and abroad, indeed can complement official diplomacy and defense preparedness. Indian opacity on Chinese-triggered border incidents only helps bolster China's projection of its 'peaceful rise.'

By trying to mask the actual border situation, New Delhi seriously risks playing into Beijing's hands and spurring on greater Chinese belligerence.

Brahma Chellaney, professor of strategic studies at the independent, privately funded Centre for Policy Research, is the author, most recently, of Asian Juggernaut: The Rise of China, India and Japan .
Brahma Chellaney

 

[prabhuksnp]

China has grown lot of strides, india is growing slowly , but needs to do a lot. We have problem on border. First let me remind chinese friends , if they think AP is their part , historically they accepted border without any problem along with tibet government , though there was differences from early 1920's. Suddenly this picked during 1940's when PLA was in the process and tibet's succession to china. They made dalai lama to run in to india. As peace loving nation , people who came to india were given place to lead their life. That is the case with lot of bangaladeshis , srilankan tamils. On the other hand AP was mentioned even old books of india history , birtish had their government. When they left it is automatically indian terriorty . As china was not slave to brtish. Then war came thinking india forward policy. It was not forward policy as they think , it was due to fears that china may attack over border dispute. It was misunderstood and war broke out. Even today there is lot of mistrust , though some efforts have taken place. China should not worry about India, as we are not comparable to them.But on the other hand china attacks india , in any break out and leading to full scale war , there will great distratous for both the nations , but outcome will be very different, India will emerge much stronger than ever before. When british left they believed india cannot stand as united country for 10 years , but it had passed the test and standing united. Today it is complex , it is more unique in the world , united with different identites , 4000 languages differnet races , yet indian , No where in the world you can find this.

 

[no smoking]

China has grown lot of strides, india is growing slowly , but needs to do a lot. We have problem on border. First let me remind chinese friends , if they think AP is their part , historically they accepted border without any problem along with tibet government , though there was differences from early 1920's. Suddenly this picked during 1940's when PLA was in the process and tibet's succession to china. They made dalai lama to run in to india. As peace loving nation , people who came to india were given place to lead their life. That is the case with lot of bangaladeshis , srilankan tamils. On the other hand AP was mentioned even old books of india history , birtish had their government. When they left it is automatically indian terriorty . As china was not slave to brtish. Then war came thinking india forward policy. It was not forward policy as they think , it was due to fears that china may attack over border dispute. It was misunderstood and war broke out. Even today there is lot of mistrust , though some efforts have taken place. China should not worry about India, as we are not comparable to them.But on the other hand china attacks india , in any break out and leading to full scale war , there will great distratous for both the nations , but outcome will be very different, India will emerge much stronger than ever before. When british left they believed india cannot stand as united country for 10 years , but it had passed the test and standing united. Today it is complex , it is more unique in the world , united with different identites , 4000 languages differnet races , yet indian , No where in the world you can find this.

Or, god, how many times do we have to discuss this 1914 treaty? Please provide an evidence supporting that ROC gov was happy about this treay from 1914 until 1949. Please check the map of ROC gov, you can find they have never accepted this MacMahon line, neither the independence of tibet.

 

[roma]

Or, god, how many times do we have to discuss this 1914 treaty? Please provide an evidence supporting that ROC gov was happy about this treay from 1914 until 1949. Please check the map of ROC gov, you can find they have never accepted this MacMahon line, neither the independence of tibet.

Happy or not is not the issue :India may not be so happy about partition but we accept it as a fact and prefer to avoid war then to keep bringing up the matter again and again. China is huge but so small minded that it want the border EXACTLY according to some old map they pulled out of the attic.

Why cant prc grow up , be satisfied with the huge land mass they have and learn to live in today's reality as so many other countries are doing. They want everything exactly fit to measure to their liking ?

Is that being a mature civilization ?

 

[no smoking]

Happy or not is not the issue :India may not be so happy about partition but we accept it as a fact and prefer to avoid war then to keep bringing up the matter again and again. China is huge but so small minded that it want the border EXACTLY according to some old map they pulled out of the attic.

Why cant prc grow up , be satisfied with the huge land ass the have and learn to live in today's reality as so many other countries are doing. They want everything exactly fit to measure to their liking ?

Is that being a mature civilization ?

Land size is not the issue. According to your logic, India should've give up Kashmir because India is larger country. But India didn't. Instead, the land size has never been a factor in any border negotiation of India. [mod] No need to get personal [/mod]

The issue is what is the basis to settle our dispute. India can use the culture, history or even blood evidences to support its argument, just don't use the treaty, which has never been accepted by any Chinese gov.

 

[Daredevil]

Wen it's time to talk...

Wen it's time to talk...

The undefined situation on the LAC contains the potential for an armed clash, something that would inflame current tensions

Ajai Shukla / New Delhi October 20, 2009, 0:37 IST

Indian policymakers have always been better at formulating strategy than at moving on after it has served its purpose. In so many of our engagements — non-alignment, nuclear non-proliferation, trade talks and climate change, for example — our intellectually and morally grounded positions have been policy rocks that withstood decades of pressure from competing interests. But, when changed times demanded changed strategies, Indian policymakers — entranced perhaps by the beauty of their creations — remained leaden-footed in responding to new realities.

Nobody would advocate a continually shifting policy framework, and the role of parliamentary resolutions in immobilising Indian policy is well understood. Despite that, New Delhi must wonder at its flat-footedness in seizing fleeting strategic opportunities.

One such opportunity will again arise on Friday, when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh meets Chinese Premier, Wen Jiabao, at the ASEAN summit in Thailand. The meeting, requested by Chinese officials, will almost certainly focus on the escalating rhetoric between India and China and the need to cool tempers. Dr Manmohan Singh has two clear choices: on the one hand, he could repeat India’s oft-repeated position that Arunachal is an integral part of India; that the Dalai Lama is a religious head who is free to travel anywhere in India without engaging in political activity; and that peace and tranquillity should be maintained on the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

That would constitute a missed opportunity. A more pro-active strategy would use this opportunity to persuade China to cooperate with India in defining the LAC.

The present undefined situation on the LAC contains the potential for an armed clash, something that would dramatically inflame current tensions. Despite the “Peace and Tranquillity Agreement” of 1993, and the “Confidence Building Measures” of 1996, patrols from both sides routinely “intrude” into each other’s territory in nine separate hotspots where India and China disagree about where the LAC lies. Since 1988, Indian officials in the Expert-Level Sub-Group of the Sino-Indian Joint Working Group (JWG) have argued for clearly delineating the LAC. Only then would the potential for patrol clashes be eliminated.

For twelve years, Beijing resisted that Indian argument, believing that by leaving the LAC ambiguous, China would retain the potential for extending its holding later. Only in 2000 did China agree to a “sector-by-sector” exchange of maps, with each country marking its perception of the LAC. Negotiations were to follow to agree upon a common LAC, aimed at ending “patrol intrusions” by creating for both armies a line that they could not cross.

In the 8th JWG meeting, in late 2000, India and China exchanged maps of the relatively inconsequential central sector (on the Uttaranchal-Tibet border), marked with the respective perceptions of the LAC. But, even for the central sector, no “agreed LAC” has yet been negotiated. And China remains unwilling to exchange maps of the western sector (the Ladakh-Tibet border) or the eastern sector (the Arunachal-Tibet border).

Influencing China into delineating the LAC, important as it is, requires a major mental shift amongst Indian negotiators. Over decades, beginning with the 1962 conflict, skilful Chinese manipulation has induced the Pavlovian mindset amongst Indian interlocutors that raising issues forcefully with Beijing would invoke some form of diplomatic punishment. On the other hand, relatively anodyne statements and actions from New Delhi would ensure the relationship remained “on track”.

Consequently, until last year, China never faced “destabilising” political visits to Tawang, Indian troop increases in Arunachal, the refurbishment of border infrastructure, or even a modicum of political freedom to Tibetan refugees. This self-imposed Indian restraint has inhibited the timely resolution of problems; instead, issues fester until a breaking point is reached.

As New Delhi acts more vigorously to assimilate Arunachal, its diplomacy must acquire a matching assertiveness. Beijing must be frankly told — not through the media, but face-to-face — that raising the rhetoric will invoke a robust diplomatic response from New Delhi, not the back-pedalling that China is used to. And Beijing must be certain that an armed patrol clash, stemming perhaps from an undefined LAC, would greatly inflame Indian public opinion.

Such a shift in India’s engagement with China requires skilful diplomacy. National Security Advisor, MK Narayanan, who is sufficiently preoccupied with internal security, cannot realistically continue as India’s special representative in the flagging political dialogue to resolve the border issue. Since 2005, this political initiative has only gone backwards; the recent discussions in New Delhi eulogised China’s “shared vision” with India and the “strategic and cooperative partnership”. But, for a dialogue mechanism set up to negotiate a breakthrough on the border dispute, little was said about the border.

 

[RPK]

China, India Stoke 21st-Century Rivalry

LEH, India -- In the brewing discord between two giant, ambitious nations, even a remote meadow in the Himalayas is worth fighting over.

Some two-dozen Chinese soldiers converged earlier this year on a family of nomads who wouldn't budge from a winter grazing ground that locals say Indian herders had used for generations. China claims the pasture is part of Tibet, not northern India. The soldiers tore up the family's tent and tried to push them back toward the Indian border town of Demchok, Indian authorities say.

Increasing Friction

View Interactive

Comparing China and India's most crucial statistics.
Chering Dorjay, the chairman of India's Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council, says he arrived on the scene with a new tent and Indian intelligence officers and urged the herders to stay put. "The Chinese, it seems, are gradually taking our territory," he says. "We will feel very insecure unless India strengthens its defenses."

Dueling territorial claims along this heavily militarized mountain border, coupled with economic tensions between the two nations, are kindling a 21st-century rivalry. The budding distrust has created a dilemma for the U.S. about how to court one nation without angering the other.

China and India cooperate occasionally. But in recent years, they have competed vigorously over trade, energy investments, even a race to land a man on the moon. Some Indians want their nation to move closer to the U.S. as a hedge against a rising China -- a strategic shift that's likely to complicate ties among all three.

"China is trying to become No. 1," says Brajesh Mishra, a former national-security adviser for India. "This is the seed of conflict between China, India and the U.S."

The prime ministers of India and China are expected to meet this weekend at a summit of Asian leaders in Bangkok, following several weeks in which their nations traded barbs over trade and disputed territory. "Both sides will exchange views on issues of mutual concern," China's assistant foreign minister, Hu Zhengyao, told reporters Wednesday.

Next month, after a planned visit to China, President Barack Obama will host a U.S. visit by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, a meeting meant to highlight what the White House says is a "growing strategic partnership." Commercial and military ties between the two countries have been getting stronger. Last year, the U.S. loosened restrictions to allow India to buy sensitive technology and nuclear equipment for civilian use. Soldiers from both countries are participating this month in a joint defense exercise.

Indian defense analysts say India needs closer U.S. ties to hedge against potential hostilities with China. "If China's rise is peaceful, and it integrates into the global economy, everything should be fine," says retired Indian Brig. Gen. Gurmeet Kanwal, director of the Center for Land Warfare Studies, an army think tank. "Should China implode, it's better to have a friend like the U.S."

In addition to the defense concerns, trade friction is growing between India and China. India leads all members of the World Trade Organization in antidumping cases against China. India has banned imports of Chinese toys, milk and chocolate, citing safety concerns, and has launched investigations into export surges of Chinese truck tires and chemicals, among other products.

On Oct. 15, Indian heavy-industries minister Vilasrao Deshmukh asked the finance ministry to impose taxes on imports of inexpensive Chinese power equipment. "We don't want India to be turned into a dumping ground," he told reporters.

At the moment, the biggest threat to India-China relations may be their competing claims for big swaths of territory along their border. In recent years, China has settled border disputes with a host of nations, including Russia, as part of what it calls its "good neighbor policy." But China and India have made little progress, despite 13 rounds of meetings since 2003.

China says the eastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh is historically part of southern Tibet. India wants China to hand back territory it calls Aksai Chin, desolate high-altitude salt flats that residents of Ladakh claim as part of its ancient Buddhist kingdom. India's discovery of a Chinese-built road in the region helped spark a border war in 1962.

Earlier this month, China objected to a visit by Indian Prime Minister Singh to Arunachal Pradesh to campaign for local elections, saying it was disputed territory. "We request India to pay great attention to China's solemn concerns, and not stir up incidents in the areas of dispute," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu told reporters.

India's foreign minister countered that Arunachal Pradesh is Indian territory, and demanded that China stop investing in infrastructure-related projects in the Pakistan-controlled part of Kashmir. Both India and Pakistan claim the whole of Kashmir.

The 1962 border war, which India lost, complicated the boundary between the two countries. These days, Chinese and Indian forces in some border areas have agreed to go out on different days to patrol contested territory. "We want to avoid an eyeball-to-eyeball conflict," says Gopal Pillai, India's secretary for the home ministry, which oversees the border police.

India and China are intent on turning fast economic growth into national strength. When their interests have converged, they have proven a powerful combination. On Wednesday, they announced plans to cooperate at December's climate-change talks in Copenhagen, a pact likely to see both fighting carbon-emission caps proposed by industrialized nations. During global-trade talks, they both resisted Western pressure to open farm markets.

"China's economic and military growth is not a threat to India. And India's shouldn't be a threat to China," says Cheng Ruisheng, a former Chinese ambassador to India. "We should be an opportunity to one another."

But many Chinese resent any comparison with India, still a largely poor agrarian nation with only about one-third of China's per-capita income. And they're generally wary of India's warming ties with the U.S.

Indians, for their part, bristle over the flood of Chinese imports and China's increasingly cozy ties with India's neighbors, including Nepal, Sri Lanka and arch-rival Pakistan. In a speech last November, Indian Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, then its foreign minister, identified an expansionist China as one of India's top challenges. "Today's China seeks to further her interests more aggressively than in the past," he told the National Defense College in New Delhi

The Indian government has closely scrutinized proposals by Chinese companies to invest in India. It recently demanded that thousands of Chinese citizens in India convert short-term business visas into employment visas -- a move that effectively boots unskilled Chinese workers from the country.

The Chinese government has objected to a proposed Asian Development Bank program that India hoped would help fund a water project in the disputed territory of Arunachal Pradesh. This year, the Chinese embassy began issuing visas to residents of Arunachal Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir in a manner that Indian officials say leaves China with a way to later claim that it isn't recognizing the visa recipients as Indian citizens. A spokeswoman for the Chinese embassy in New Delhi says "every country has the right" to set its own visa policies.

U.S. defense contractors could benefit from India's desire to modernize its military. While the U.S. has banned weapons sales to China, it has ramped up such sales to India. Lockheed Martin Corp. and Boeing Co. are among the defense contractors competing to supply India's air force a new fleet of jet fighters -- a deal that could be valued at $10.4 billion.

Some Chinese analysts say friction between India and China are playing into what they say is a U.S. wish to contain China. "If border tensions between India and China continue to simmer, I can't say the U.S. will be displeased," says Shi Yinhong, a specialist in Sino-U.S. ties at People's University in Beijing.

The contested territory in northern India lies in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The region abutting China, known as Ladakh, consists largely of rocky mountain terrain with isolated green pastures grazed by yaks, goats and horses. Many of the herders and traders living on both sides of the blurred border share the same Tibetan heritage and Buddhist faith. The main town on the Indian side, Leh, was an ancient caravan stop.

Today, the area crawls with Indian soldiers. Indian border police tightly regulate visitors traveling east toward China.

The Indian army has accelerated a road-building program in the region.

The roads, which run beside Indian army camps and over a pass above 17,000 feet, are dotted with offbeat signs: "I'm curvaceous, be slow," warns one. "I like you darling, but not so fast," says another.

India intends to use the new mountain roads in part to move military supplies. In September, an Indian cargo plane landed at a new high-altitude airstrip near the border.

Indian villagers near the border have been caught in the middle of the conflict. When villagers were constructing an irrigation canal a few years ago, Chinese soldiers tried to wave them off, says Rigzin Spalbar, chairman at the time of the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council.

The villagers hurled abuse at the soldiers, but were angry at Indian soldiers for doing nothing, he says. The Chinese "are pestering us to test India's reaction," he says.

Indian residents of the area claim Chinese soldiers have painted Chinese characters on rocks in territory that India claims as its own. The residents say the border has never been as tightly patrolled as it is now.

Konchok Gurmet, 70 years old, lives in Spangmik, a village ringed with Tibetan prayer flags on Panggong Lake, beside the border with China.

He says that until a few years ago he was able to smuggle horses and wool across the border in exchange for Chinese crockery, clothes and thermos bottles.

These days, locals say, border forces on both sides turn smugglers back. After violent protests in Tibet last year, China has been sensitive about who crosses over. Indian police worry that herders and smugglers may be offering the Chinese information on military positions and infrastructure projects, locals say.

According to Mr. Pillai, the Indian home secretary, infrastructure development on both sides of the border has heightened interest in establishing an exact line.

The confrontation between the Indian goatherds and Chinese soldiers, which occurred in January, began after the herders crossed a river to reach a pasture they'd used for generations, Mr. Pillai says.

The Chinese viewed the river as the border line. Indian security forces haven't pressed the claim, he says, because the pasture now is encircled by Chinese sentry posts. "We'd find it difficult tactically to hold that land," he says.

China's ministry of defense declined to comment on the incident, and the Chinese foreign ministry has denied any incursions into Indian territory. "China's border patrol is always conducted in strict accordance with rules," said a foreign ministry spokeswoman last month.

Mr. Pillai says more troops are moving to the border with China, which he describes as a "gradual" buildup of "defensive positions."

Some residents of Arunachal Pradesh -- the Indian state that China claims -- say it's about time.

"India needs to wake up. China is going to flex its muscles," says Kiren Rijiju, a former member of parliament from Arunachal Pradesh. "Being one of its largest neighbors, we are a soft target."

—Vibhuti Agarwal in New Delhi and Sue Feng in Beijing contributed to this article.

China, India Border Stokes Rivalry - WSJ.com

 

[RPK]

A Rivalry on the Roof of the World

Every cold war has its proxies. In a swath of Himalayan mountains wedged between the northeast Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh and China, they can take the shape of things as mundane as the empty beer bottles and cigarette butts left behind by soldiers on patrol. Up in the mountains, the Indian and Chinese armies monitor a boundary whose line the two countries don't agree on. In certain parts of that murky borderland, the soldiers on night patrols often leave behind evidence of their presence. When relations between the two countries are good, it's litter; when the situation is tense, the detritus is marked in the official record as evidence of "aggressive border-patrolling." Without any direct military confrontation, the tension between Asia's two aspiring superpowers is ratcheting up.

India and China have never been close, but of late they have become engaged in increasingly sharp rounds of diplomatic thrust and parry. In September, India signaled its approval of a planned visit by the Dalai Lama to the border town of Tawang, the site of a famous Tibetan Buddhist monastery — a move that China interpreted as a provocation. Beijing then objected to a visit by Manmohan Singh, the Indian Prime Minister, to Arunachal Pradesh, claiming it was part of Tibet, which belongs to China. Outraged that China presumed to tell an Indian leader not to go to territory legally recognized as India's, New Delhi then objected to a new power plant that China is building in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir, territory that India claims. Almost no one expects this year's harsh words to escalate into military action, but the hostility is real. "China is trying to see how far India can be pushed," says Pushpita Das of the Institute for Defense Studies & Security Analyses in New Delhi.

China and India share a border 2,175 miles (3,500 km) long. On the Indian side, it runs from states in the northeast that are plagued by insurgency to the glaciers of Ladakh, on the edge of Kashmir. On the Chinese side, the region is just as troubled, encompassing Tibet and Xinjiang, home of the Uighurs, some of whom clashed violently with Chinese earlier this year. India and China fought a brief war in 1962, when China captured territory in — for India — a mortifyingly rapid incursion. They skirmished again in 1967, but since 1993 the two countries have coexisted more or less peacefully along an undemarcated border. What's at stake now isn't territory so much as influence and global status. China is an economic powerhouse, but ever since last year's signing of a civilian nuclear agreement between the U.S. and India, Beijing has become increasingly uneasy with India's growing clout. "It's a competition between two systems: chaotic, undergoverned India and orderly, overgoverned China," says Mohan Guruswamy, an Indian and a co-author of Chasing the Dragon, a new book about the two countries' economic rivalry. That competition continues, with the U.S. trying to keep close ties to both sides in a difficult balancing act that may turn out to be the most important geopolitical challenge facing Washington this century.

The tiny Indian hill-station town of Tawang is the unlikely center of the current confrontation. It was there that Chinese troops entered India during the 1962 war, and ever since, Tawang has been the headquarters of an Indian-army brigade. The soldiers are hard to miss because they are so numerous — 15,000 among a population of 80,000 in Tawang and the surrounding countryside. Chombay Kee, a youth activist in Tawang, says the army is a boon to local businesses. "When they go home on leave," he says, "they take back gifts from here."

A Rivalry on the Roof of the World - TIME

 

[nitesh]

Google µØͼ China

Google Maps India

Google Maps World

 

[tarunraju]

India, China avoid Arunachal in talks

India and China on Saturday pledged not to let their differences derail bilateral relations as Prime Ministers Manmohan Singh and Wen Jiabao held a much-awaited meeting in Hua Hin amid strained ties.

At a nearly hour-long meeting, both leaders avoided the most contentious issues - Arunachal Pradesh and the Dalai Lama's proposed November visit to the northeastern state that China opposes - as they discussed ways to build a relationship marred by a lingering border dispute.

"We have reached important consensus on promoting bilateral ties, and I believe that our two countries maintain a good relationship in the future, which conforms with the interests of the two countries," Wen said at the beginning of the talks.

Both Manmohan Singh and Wen agreed that differences between them on a range of issues should not be allowed to act as impediments.

According to N Ravi, Secretary (East) in the External Affairs Ministry, Manmohan Singh said that both sides should take measures at the political and diplomatic level to foster better understanding and trust "so that our relationship remained strong and robust".

"Neither side should allow differences to act as impediment in the growth of functioning cooperation," he said.

The Indian and Chinese leaders met on the sidelines of the ASEAN and East Asia summits in this Thai resort.

Ravi said the Wen-Manmohan talks were held "in a warm and friendly atmosphere".

Wen underlined that India and China, which fought a border war in 1962 and still claim each other's territory, should maintain peace and strengthen bilateral relationship.

He also concurred with Manmohan Singh's assessment that "our relations should be properly handled through discussions and should not become impediments in bilateral relationship".

Wen, who congratulated Manmohan Singh on his re-election as Prime Minister, added: "We want to have a healthy and steady relationship with India."

Manmohan Singh and Wen shook hands warmly at the start of their meeting, their first since they met in New York in October last year. "I am excited to see you," Manmohan Singh told Wen.

Hailing 60 years of the establishment of diplomatic relations between India and China, the Manmohan Singh said the Chinese people have had a number of achievements "and we share their sense of accomplishment".

Saturday's meeting has not resolved the dispute over Arunachal Pradesh, which has become a bone of contention, and China's bitter objection to the planned November visit to the state by the Dalai Lama, who has lived in India in self-exile since 1959.

Both Beijing and the official Chinese media have in recent times taken an unusually aggressive stance over Arunachal Pradesh.

New Delhi has in turn criticised Beijing's decision to undertake projects in Pakistani Kashmir, saying this would impact negatively on India-China relations. The Chinese military has also been accused of foraying into Indian border areas. This has been denied by Beijing.

Earlier on Saturday, an Indian official said there was political consensus in India on building better relations with China. But this had to be based on mutual self-respect, he emphasised.

Manmohan Singh has a packed programme on Saturday and Sunday.

Besides taking part in the seventh summit between India and the 10-member Association for Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) on Saturday and at the fourth East Asia Summit Sunday involving the ASEAN and six other countries, the Prime Minister will hold a string of bilateral meetings with leaders from the region.

He will hold discussions with the Prime Ministers of Cambodia and Thailand later Saturday. Sunday's bilateral meetings will include those with the prime ministers of Singapore, Vietnam and Indonesia.

Golly, Chinese avoided the issue too, so it goes on to show that they're not serious about their Arunachal claims either, and that either the fresh claims were to keep India off-balance, or to make sure HH Dalai Lama's Tawang visit doesn't undermine PRC control over the rest of Tibet.

 

[RAM]

50 new border outposts to come up along Sino-Indian frontier

New Delhi: With an aim to increase vigil along the Sino-Indian border, government is planning to set up 50 new Border Outposts (BOP) all along the icy frontier
The plan to establish more BOPs along the Sino-Indian border will allow troops of the Indo-Tibetan Border Police to undertake Short Range Patrols (SRP).
This will reduce the inter-BOP distance, which exceeds more than 50-kilometres, and the present Long Range Patrols (LRP) can be made effective by having more SRPs, official sources said.
Currently the ITBP, which guards the 3,500-km-long border, has more than 140 BOPs in the inhospitable terrain that are prone to frequent blizzards, avalanches, heavy snowfall and have temperatures as low as minus 20 to minus 40 degrees. The posts are located at heights ranging from 9,000 to 18,500 feet while 60% of them are not connected by roads.
Most of the BOPs are located on hills and almost 30% are maintained by helicopters. Communication between patrol parties and the base locations and posts is often disrupted by bad weather. Once the new posts come up, not only the patrols would be effective, they would be able to cover more areas qualitatively, the sources said.
Home minister P Chidambaram while addressing ITBP men on their 48th raising day on Friday had said, "We are considering an ITBP restructuring plan. The plan includes measures to strengthen border posts". The government has also decided to provide more than 100 satellite phones, all terrain vehicles and oxygen cylinders to ITBP troops on the border.
The troops deployed here will also have high-altitude clothing on par with army troops who are stationed at the Siachen glacier. The ministry of Home Affairs has also sanctioned computers, recovery vehicles, fibre-reinforced polymer huts, high-power snow cutters, deep-search mine metal detectors, hand grenade simulators and other surveillance devices for the ITBP troops.
ITBP director-general Vikram Srivastava had said the troops will also be provided with modern BOPs which will be equipped with solar power generating apparatus. "Every BOP will be provided with two 620 litres capacity oxygen cylinders. A number of such initiatives have been taken for the benefit of our troops posted at these difficult areas," Srivastava said.

courtesy

50 new border outposts to come up along Sino-Indian frontier - dnaindia.com

 

[NSG_Blackcats]

India quietly bolsters disputed China border​

TAWANG (Reuters) - The rutted mountain road to Tawang in India's remote northeast, quiet and empty for years, is abuzz these days with heavy construction activity. Bulldozers are slowly turning the rickety road to the Chinese border into a double-lane highway. The construction is part of India's quiet military buildup in an eastern Himalayan region that is at the centre of a long festering border dispute with China. Military bases dot the countryside. At one camp, soldiers clean rows of field guns behind concertina wire fences. Army convoys hurtle along intermittently.

With ties between the two Asian giants strained by a flare-up over their disputed boundary, India is fortifying parts of its northeast, building new roads and bridges, deploying tens of thousands more soldiers and boosting air defences. "We are well prepared for any kind of threat," said Rajesh Kalia, an army colonel stationed close to Tawang which China overran during a brief but bloody war in 1962 before withdrawing.

But a 20-hour, 500-km (300-mile) rattling drive up to Tawang from the region's biggest city Guwahati provides proof of India's neglect of one of its most strategic border states. It still has no airport, power supply is erratic and telecommunications unreliable. The vital road, spiralling past folds of craggy mountains and streams, often crumbles into a dirt track, in sharp contrast to the modern infrastructure on the other side of the border. Many say China's five highways running to the border, backed by railway and modern telecommunications networks, have reinforced China's claim to the region.

Full Story

 

[johnq]

The reason why the 1914 treaty is important is because it provides evidence that Tibetans acknowledged the land south of McMahon line as not a part of Tibet. In 1914, China was not in control of Tibet, and that is the only reason why the Chinese official didn't sign it (since his signature at the time was irrelevant).

But again, the important thing here is that Tibetan officials themselves acknowledged the McMahon line as the dividing line between India and Tibet.

Now as far as Aksai Chin is concerned, there the Chinese have no historical evidence backing up their land-grab from India. But India has plenty of evidence to show that Aksai Chin was historically a part of the kingdom of Ladakh. The Chinese govt knows that their occupation of Aksai Chin is illegal, but they needed a road to Tibet, so they retained it after 62 war. But the Chinese backed away from Arunachal because they knew that they had no claim to the region.

In fact even the Chinese claim over Tibet is very weak (since it was NOT in direct control of Tibet until after the military invasion), and this is why China is not accepting the 1914 treaty: Since it proves that Tibet was an independent country that was making its own treaties at that time.

 

[RAM]

India strengthens border, irks China

India continues to beef up its defence along its border with China in Arunachal Pradesh, despite protests and warnings from Chinese analysts and the Chinese media. The Indian Air Force now plans to upgrade six air-strips near the border to make movement of troops and equipment to the region easier.

Hindustan Times had reported on Thursday that the Indian Army was planning to deploy a new 15,000-strong division in Arunachal within four weeks.On Friday, Zhao Gancheng, director of the South Asia Research Division of the Shanghai International Affairs Research Institute was quoted in the state-run Global Times, as saying: “Indian officials have tried to convince us the border is peaceful. But now the fact (of India’s reported border deployment) betrays the words.” China has for long claimed almost all of Arunachal Pradesh as its territory.

The six airstrips are all within 40 km of the border. Following the renovation, much bigger and heavier aircraft than before will be able to land there, defence sources said.
“Reactivating these airstrips is an integral part of the modernisation of Air Force infrastructure,” said an IAF official.The measures were taken to counter similar efforts by China on the other side of the border, defence sources added

India strengthens border, irks China- Hindustan Times

 

[Daredevil]

I don't understand China's assertiveness: PM

Washington: India's relation with Pakistan, China and the terror scourge is weighing heavily on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's mind as he get ready to meet US President Barack Obama as his first state guest in Washington on Tuesday.

Admitting that Sino-India relationship hit a new low especially after Tibetan spiritual leader Dalai Lama's trip to Arunachal Pradesh recently, Singh said he failed to understand the reason behind the assertiveness on the Chinese part.

"We want the world to prepare for the peaceful rise of China as a major power. So, engagement is the right strategy for India as well as for United States. We ourselves have tried very hard to engage China in the last five years and today China is one of our major trading partners. We also recognise that we have a long standing border problem with China. We are trying to resolve it through dialogue. In the meanwhile both our countries have agreed that pending the resolution of the border problem, peace and tranquility should be maintained in the border line. Having said tat I should say that I have received these assurances from Chinese leadership from the highest level. There is but a certain amount of assertiveness on the Chinese part. I don't fully understand the reasons for it," Singh said at the Council on Foreign Relations.

India had also rejected Obama's offer to China to assume the role of supercop in the region especially in Indo-Pak matters.

Singh also pointed out that China also has much to learn about human rights and rule of law.

"There is no doubt that Chinese growth performance is superior to Indian performance. But I have always believed that there are other values which are important than the growth of the gross domestic product. I think the respect for fundamental human rights, the respect for the rule of law, respect for multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious rights, I think those have values. So, even the Indian perforce with regard to the GDP might not be as good as the Chinese, certainly I would not like to choose the Chinese path," he added.

Singh on Monday outlined the progress made with respect to the peace process with Pakistan.

He also stressed for the need of an environment of peace, friendship and prosperity in South Asia. He also discussed the need for Pakistan to break away from the past and abjure terrorism.

"India has invested heavily in normalising relations with Pakistan. We are ready to pick up the threads of the dialogue including Jammu and Kashmir," said Singh.

Days before the first anniversary of 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks the Indian Prime Minister also said that the trauma still continued to haunt India.

"We are three days away from the first anniversary of Mumbai attacks. The trauma of 26/11 continues to haunt us," he said.

He also thanked the US for its fight against terror.

"We deeply appreciate US cooperation in the area of counter terrorism. We can do much more together and combat sophisticated terror networks," he said.

 

[Yusuf]

Unlike China, India has growth with values: PM Manmohan

WASHINGTON: Bull in a China shop is not an expression one would normally use to describe India’s mild-mannered Prime Minister, but at a Washington think-tank on Monday evening Manmohan Singh was anything but delicate on India’s newly nettlesome neighbor before an audience that is largely in thrall of the Middle Kingdom’s meteoric rise on the global stage.

In candid remarks that were keenly scrutinized in the context of New Delhi’s niggling troubles with Beijing and US overtures to the country, Dr Singh offered an Indian perspective on rising China that included an admission that lately, ''there is but a certain amount of assertiveness on the Chinese part. I don't fully understand the reasons for it."

Singh prefaced that comment by telling his audience that India recognized that it has a long standing border problem with China which it was trying to resolve it through dialogue. In the meanwhile both countries have agreed that pending the resolution of the border problem, peace and tranquility should be maintained in the border line. ''Having said that I should say that I have received these assurances from Chinese leadership from the highest level,'' he added, suggesting that Beijing was not entirely sticking to the script.

But for that one discordant, complaining note vis-à-vis Beijing, Singh indicated that India was on the same page as the rest of the world on China, wanting to prepare for its peaceful rise as a major power. ''So, engagement is the right strategy for India as well as for United States. We ourselves have tried very hard to engage China in the last five years and today China is one of our major trading partners,'' he said.

Singh remarks came against the backdrop of President Obama’s own visit to China last week in course of which some Indian analysts felt he (Obama) was sub-contracting or outsourcing oversight of South Asian peace and security to the East Asian giant and accepting it as a rising if not equal partner, to the detriment of India. That episode came on the heels of India’s renewed tensions with China on the border issue, and over the travels of Dalai Lama to regions Beijing regards as disputed.

Singh was also unexpectedly tetchy about comparisons between Indian and Chinese economic growth, saying while there is no doubt that Chinese performance is superior to India's, ''there are other values which are important than the growth of Gross Domestic Product.''

''I think the respect for fundamental human rights, the respect for the rule of law, respect for multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious rights, I think those have values. So, even the Indian perforce with regard to the GDP might not be as good as the Chinese, certainly I would not like to choose the Chinese path," he said in unusually blunt remarks that constituted a criticism of the Chinese model.

Singh’s candid public statements on China, Pakistan (no purposeful talks till it abjures terrorism and acts on 26/11), and Afghanistan (insisting India will stay the course against Taliban and asking US and international community to do the same militarily) set the stage for his meeting with US President Barack Obama on Tuesday following a ceremonial state welcome on the South Lawns of the White House.

Something that we always talk on forums about when it comes to comparing the Chinese path and Indian path to growth. Our PM makes it official. Ever since he has landed in the US, he has been coming up with these references to China.

 

[qilaotou]

China is everything that bitterly minded Indians want to catch, to beat and to become. Giving a speech on China in such an important state visit for bilateral relation demonstrated how desperate Indian politicians are. India's engagement with China is really a weightless and tasteless joke.

 

[ajtr]

"There is no doubt that Chinese growth performance is superior to Indian performance. But I have always believed that there are other values which are important than the growth of the gross domestic product. I think the respect for fundamental human rights, the respect for the rule of law, respect for multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious rights, I think those have values. So, even the Indian perforce with regard to the GDP might not be as good as the Chinese, certainly I would not like to choose the Chinese path,"

This is pure BS coming from a PM of the so called world's largest sham democracy called india.If MMS care so much about democracy and values etc then heshould stand in Loksabha election and get the mandate from people for PMship and then only he gets the right to preach morality of democracy to china and world.Isn't it an irony that in a democracy like india our PM manmohan singh is selected not elected PM.

Although if china is autocratic communist country and they say it boldly without any pretensions like india.

There is famous saying in india in hindi: Sau main se ninyave beimaan fir bhi mera bharat mahan(ie out of 100, ninety nine are dishonest then also my India is great).So our PM is typical case of a person who is intellectually dishonest and hypocrite in preaching china about values of democracy.

 

[ppgj]

This is pure BS coming from a PM of the so called world's largest sham democracy called india.

wonderful!!! wow!!!
well. the world does not seem to beleive that, as are indian people.

If MMS care so much about democracy and values etc then heshould stand in Loksabha election and get the mandate from people for PMship and then only he gets the right to preach morality of democracy to china and world.

what has that got to do with being PM?
even a rajya sabha MP is also people's representative!!
it is the british style of democracy we practice. the parties are mandated not individuals.

Isn't it an irony that in a democracy like india our PM manmohan singh is selected not elected PM.

it is the prerogative of the mandated party to choose its leader.

Although if china is autocratic communist country and they say it boldly without any pretensions like india.

PM was only talking of achieving gdp growth. not giving sermons or virtues of democracy.

So our PM is typical case of a person who is intellectually dishonest and hypocrite in preaching china about values of democracy.

same as above.
don't interpret it to suit yourself.

 

[nimo_cn]

China is everything that bitterly minded Indians want to catch, to beat and to become. Giving a speech on China in such an important state visit for bilateral relation demonstrated how desperate Indian politicians are. India's engagement with China is really a weightless and tasteless joke.

You are right, they are desperate, and now they just show their desperation to people in the rest of the world by bragging about the only thing left for them, the cheap democracy!