Page 24 of 24 FirstFirst ... 15161718192021222324
Results 346 to 351 of 351

Thread: Border face-off: China and India each deploy 3,000 troops

  1. #346
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Lop Nor test for the Paks was 1990. It didn't cause a reaction in India. What pre-empted india was Clinton extending the NPT into perpetuity in 1995. Still have to get through Narasimha's book to understand the thinking after that Lop Nor test. I expect the thinking will be similar this time as well. Absent some additional catalyst, India isn't going to do a H test..
    What kind of catalyst will make India go for a H-bomb test? And do we really need it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    China realised it had two rivals (actually 3). Then set about suitably assisting other countries to act as foils. NK towards Japan. Pakistan towards India. Cambodia towards Vietnam.

    The Vietnamese decided they weren't going to have a rogue regime next door and invaded and then deposed the Khmer Rouge. They fought the KR in the country for many years and won. The Khmer Rouge never returned. At the time India voted at the UN in support of Vietnam against the US, China and many others. Does anybody really wish the khmer rouge were still in power today ? Does the world need another dsyfunctional regime like NK. Of course not, the Vietnamese were right, they paid a high price but the reality is they are better off today as a result.
    Agree. Wish the Indian politicians of that time had some grey cells in their head. But that was also the time of uncertainty, as US was supporting Pak, China.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    But two out of three ain't bad. The Paks helped the Norks with enrichment via AQ Khan and got missile tech. China signs NPT in 1992 and CTBT in 2004, they say we didn't do anything. heh yeah. The damage is already done. This is nothing new, similar pattern of proliferation went on during the cold war for the same balancing reasons.

    All depends on how the US plays this, will the alliance hold and whether China via proxy is able to damage that alliance beyond repair. If so, Japan, SK & Taiwan will go nuclear and rebalance any advantage China had.
    I think the bold part is the biggest worry for China now, especially w.r.t to Japan. How long will American assurances work? US influence seems to be eroding with Trumphs changing statements.

  2. #347
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,269
    DE, w.r.t your post # 345.
    Agree with his line of thinking. It's almost like what India thinks.

    This caught my eye -
    "I am a friend of both India and Pakistan. We must not do unnecessary harm against a potentially greater friend India. Instead the strategy should be to evolve mutual understanding and provide mutual concessions,”
    With time, I think more such voices will be heard. The long-term gains for China w.r.t. co-operation with India will be many times higher than what the Paks can offer.
    The people to people relations between India and China are much better, than say between India and Pak, which will get better in the future.

  3. #348
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,856
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    This caught my eye -

    With time, I think more such voices will be heard. The long-term gains for China w.r.t. co-operation with India will be many times higher than what the Paks can offer.
    The people to people relations between India and China are much better, than say between India and Pak, which will get better in the future.
    Same line of thinking is starting to dawn in China wrt to SK over NK. Both realise they will be left holding the bucket if anything bad happens in NK

  4. #349
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,856
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    What kind of catalyst will make India go for a H-bomb test? And do we really need it?
    The option of a test was always there should the need arise , we would put together some safeguards for whatever intl reactions come. Anything that adversely challenges our credibility on the subject would require a demonstration. It would take a lot to go down that path though so its quite unlikely.

    In contrast '74 and '98 were more fundamental in motivation. To be or not to be.


    I think the bold part is the biggest worry for China now, especially w.r.t to Japan. How long will American assurances work? US influence seems to be eroding with Trumps changing statements.
    China's goal is in weakening alliances all around. Divided they fall. They vie for influence in Central Asia to challenge Russia, same in our neighbourhood and towards the far east with the US treaty partners. Trump showed up yesterday, China's been at this game for much longer. Trump may say the wrong things from time to time but i can't see him doing as much damage alone.

    The problem with extended deterrence is the US isn't going to trade LA for Tokyo or Seoul. So the objective would be not to let things go so far where the question comes up.

    If China could get Japan, Taiwan & SK to end their alliance then the US goes away without having to fight the US. But the US leaving means those three arming and balancing out China. So the US leaving then isn't entirely in China's interest. And those three rearming isn't in the NPT ayatollahs interest either.

    China wants to keep things at the right temperature but things are getting too hot to handle right now where the allies start to turn into liabilities.

  5. #350
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,856
    So i would like a double of whatever these guys are having...

    President Xi emphasised that we should be each other’s development opportunities rather than be threats to each other — “dragon and elephant should dance together”.

    PM Modi shared the same idea and believes that the political effects of “making one plus one eleven” can be achieved in China-India relations.
    Turn the page to a new chapter | Hindu | Sept 22 2017

    Faced with similar development objectives and common challenges such as “anti-globalisation” and trade protectionism, China and India should work together.
    ; )

    Both sides should set long-term goals for the development of our bilateral relations. We can consider

    - negotiating the Treaty of Good-Neighbourliness and Friendly Cooperation between China and India,

    - restarting the negotiations of China-India Free Trade Agreement,

    - striving for early harvests on boundary issues, and

    - actively exploring the strategic synergy between China’s Belt and Road Initiative and India’s ‘Act East Policy’.
    Quite the to-do list ...
    Last edited by Double Edge; 22 Sep 17, at 22:42.

  6. #351
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,856
    More facts come out..

    Its interesting how all sides played it down all along, in other words the domestic political management

    Doklam faceoff: China deployed more, standoff began earlier | IE | Sept 25 2017

    Contrary to public perception that the border standoff between India and China at Doklam involved a small number of troops, the Chinese had posted more than 12,000 soldiers, 150 tanks and artillery guns opposite Sikkim at Phari Dzong in Chumbi Valley during the 73-day standoff, a new book has revealed.

    The book, Securing India The Modi Way: Pathankot, Surgical Strikes and More (Bloomsbury), written by Nitin A Gokhale, also contains Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) images of the site, which show that the standoff had actually started in the third week of May — it was made public by the Chinese on June 26.

    The book reveals that when tensions rose between the two sides, the Chinese had built up their presence to a size that exceeded a division opposite Sikkim. The Indian Army had also matched the build-up but did not feel the need to get troops close to the border due to the shorter distance, it says.

    The UAV images in the book show the cheek-by-jowl stationing of soldiers and visible signs of the Chinese presence at Dolam plateau in third week of May. On May 21, the local Chinese commander informed his Indian counterpart that they were going to undertake “infrastructure activities in the area”, says the book. The Indian officer, aware of earlier instances of the Chinese repairing and starting annual maintenance of the existing road, noted the input but did not feel alarmed, it says.

    The Chinese returned on May 24 in what was their first patrol of this summer to the area, says the book. They came up to the parking area, which marks the end of the existing road from Yatung to Doklam Plateau via Sinchela, and interacted with personnel of the Royal Bhutan Army (RBA) as Indian Army troops watched from their post at Doka La, 200 metres away.

    An Indian Army UAV captured the encounter between the two sides, which ended quickly with the Chinese and Bhutanese soldiers returning to their posts. The book says that the next encounter between the two sides took place on June 5, when another Chinese patrol came to the parking area. This time, the Chinese soldiers jostled with Bhutanese soldiers and forcibly “escorted” them to the RBA posts after threatening them, it says.

    The Indians later learnt from their Bhutanese counterparts that the Chinese had warned the RBA to not interfere with the road construction they were about to undertake, the book says. The Indian officer on the ground duly reported the matter up the chain. And, according to the book, the Army Headquarters in Delhi decided to deal with the situation as it evolved but increased the vigil on ground. Then, at 7.30 am on June 16, a PLA light vehicle and nine heavy vehicles, including road construction equipment, reached the parking area.

    An interaction between Indian and Chinese personnel took place at Contact Point from 7.50 to 10.10 am, says the book. Between 12.51 and 1.31 pm, a patrol of eight Bhutanese soldiers, which had come from Chela Post on the Jampheri Ridge, interacted with the Chinese in the parking area. The Chinese accompanied the Bhutanese patrol along the alignment of an under-construction track up to Jampheri Ridge, which was meant to be an extension of the existing road from Yatung to Dolam Plateau. The Chinese had taken four years to construct this road starting 1999.

    At 1.50 pm, the book says, Indian troops delivered a message through a loud-hailer from Doka La to stop construction but the Chinese did not pay heed. According to the book, a temporary construction camp was also established by the Chinese in the parking area. The next morning, JCBs commenced construction work following which the Indian troops interacted twice with the Chinese, repeatedly asking them to stop but in vain.

    The Chinese commenced work again on the morning of June 18, south of the parking area, says the book. The Indian officers on location carried out four interactions with the Chinese, and asked them to stop the construction activity. The matter was reported up the military hierarchy, the book reveals, and orders were issued from Delhi to stop the Chinese. At 7.52 am, the book says, a “human chain’ was formed by Indian troops to effectively block the Chinese. In response, by noon, another human chain was formed by 150 PLA troops opposite the Indian formation — this was effectively overwhelmed by more Indian troops.

    Two days later, the highest Military Commander-Level flag meeting between two Major Generals was held at Nathu La with both sides stating their stance. The book says cordial interactions subsequently took place at Doka La on a daily basis between the Commanding Officers of both sides. A thaw started taking place from August 14 as diplomatic activity picked up pace, eventually leading to a disengagement on August 28. On September 7, as first reported by The Indian Express, both sides moved away by 150 metres from the faceoff site as the first major step in the disengagement.
    Last edited by Double Edge; Today at 14:07.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 12 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 11 guests)

  1. Double Edge

Similar Threads

  1. PLA troops spotted near China-Vietnam border
    By Mithridates in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 137
    Last Post: 15 Jun 14,, 04:57
  2. China, India Sign Border Defense Pacts
    By Cactus in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 23 Nov 13,, 14:40
  3. China, India should settle border issues: Wen
    By Tronic in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 25 Jun 12,, 16:58
  4. India, China face-off in the Indian Ocean
    By CityOfNineGates in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 07 Feb 09,, 17:03
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07 Nov 03,, 00:06

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •