Page 32 of 32 FirstFirst ... 23242526272829303132
Results 466 to 479 of 479

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

  1. #466
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,095
    China Wants to See ‘Normal Relations’ Between India and Bhutan | The Wire | Nov 2 2017

    In other words let China in after their coercive efforts failed and have been failing since 1960

    Normal relations are all in China's hands
    Last edited by Double Edge; 04 Nov 17, at 00:08.

  2. #467
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,095
    How India has actually done a great job in dealing with the Dragon | HT | Nov 01 2017

    If recent news reports are to be believed, China is back on the Doklam plateau in a veritable redux of the 73-day standoff that began in June this year. For its part, the foreign ministry has denied any change in the status quo following the “mutual disengagement” in late August. Those now skeptical of the government’s apparent inability to tackle China fail to appreciate that Doklam was never just a “stand-off”. It is part of a continuum of geo-political struggles - the current one is only naked in its manifestation as an outright territorial brawl — between the heavyweight and revisionist China and the defender India. It will not be the last, either.

    Defusing the crisis at Doklam was never likely to reduce tensions across the 4,000 km border that India and China share. These border disputes are only symptoms of the Chinese determination to assert itself and claim pole position in an Asia that plays by Beijing’s rules. It was but a matter of time until China, rebuffed in its earlier attempt to needle India, decided to press New Delhi harder. By utilising its time-tested technique of ‘salami slicing’, and through the coercion of India’s smaller neighbours, China continues to seek to dent India’s credibility as a regional power.

    China’s perception of, and strategy towards, India is shaped by the gaping asymmetry of power between the two countries. At $11 trillion, China’s economy is roughly five times the size of India. Were China to grow 2% and add over $200 billion to its GDP, India will have to grow by 10% to remain at the same place. In real dollar terms it may well be a decade or more before India begins to close this gap. In terms of security capabilities, this gap is most visible in defence expenditure, with China’s being approximately four times larger at $215 billion, compared to India’s $55 billion.

    Even though the prognosis might appear grim, smaller countries have successfully deployed denial and deterrence strategies against larger opponents, for instance China against the U.S., in the past. Despite the power differential, India successfully raised the cost of China’s land grab activities at Doklam, a feat that even the U.S. has struggled to accomplish in East Asia. While China was relentless in the pursuit of its goals, and had the resources to spend, India managed to call its bluff, and simultaneously allayed Bhutan’s concerns.

    The lessons from this incident for India’s foreign policy establishment are seminal, and can help shape future responses to Chinese aggression.

    During a discussion in the US last month, a defence expert asked me if any other country has entered Chinese-claimed territory and stopped construction, as Beijing alleged, or intervened on behalf of a beleaguered third party as India claims. The subtext of the question was clear: India’s defiance of China was a unique moment. This is the first lesson: the spectre of an invincible, fire-breathing dragon must not awe India. New Delhi must, and can, stand up to China when its national interests are at stake and cleverly deployed political muscle will succeed in some instances.

    The second takeaway is that the benefits of low-key diplomacy must not be underestimated. By engaging China away from the media glare, much to the vexation of New Delhi’s foreign affairs press, the Indian government successfully arrived at a favourable compromise. That this diplomacy was backed by a resolute security posture on the ground only bolstered New Delhi’s credibility, both at the negotiating table, and among regional partners. Deft and quiet diplomacy works and should be pursued as the first option.

    Third, by participating in the BRICS summit in Xiamen shortly after the crisis, and investing in the future development of this group, India showcased the future direction of its relationship with China. For New Delhi, the lesson was that it is both possible, and necessary, to be politically assertive with China in some cases, while co-operating on others. Until the asymmetry between India and China is bridged, every Indian government will have to walk this tightrope.

    Finally, New Delhi must realise the significance of creating new normative principles to manage regional affairs to get around the asymmetry of power with its neighbour. While boycotting China’s Belt and Road Initiative Summit in May, India cogently argued that regional integration must be premised on sustainable infrastructure investment norms and respect for sovereignty. That the US the EU and Japan have endorsed India’s position underlines the importance of “norm-fare” in the years ahead as an expansionist China continues to pursue its own version of the Monroe doctrine.

    Samir Saran is vice president at the Observer Research Foundation
    Underlined bit is why we still don't know how this crisis got defused

  3. #468
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    China Wants to See ‘Normal Relations’ Between India and Bhutan | The Wire | Nov 2 2017

    In other words let China in after their coercive efforts failed and have been failing since 1960

    Normal relations are all in China's hands
    Agree.

    And the talks about water diversion by China doesn't matter. If India can hold the rainfall with dams and reservoirs in the NE, that is then more than enough.

  4. #469
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    /\/\/\ Testing the waters(?) and now denying.
    Or a card to use the next time we threaten to unilaterally withdraw from the Indus water treaty

  5. #470
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Or a card to use the next time we threaten to unilaterally withdraw from the Indus water treaty
    Some amount of noise in the public domain against China is necessary to maintain the tempo. But cooler heads in South Block know well that dams and reservoirs are the solution, not the rivers originating in Tibet. This should be a long term strategy. And Pak? We can flame weed them anytime we want. China won't be able to do jack.

  6. #471
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    But cooler heads in South Block know well that dams and reservoirs are the solution, not the rivers originating in Tibet. This should be a long term strategy. And Pak? We can flame weed them anytime we want. China won't be able to do jack.
    No dams can be built on the indus without the Paks consent, absolutely squat, those are the terms in the treaty

  7. #472
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    No dams can be built on the indus without the Paks consent, absolutely squat, those are the terms in the treaty
    I was talking about rivers originating in Tibet. And with WBs consent dams can be built on the Indian side of rivers that flow into Pak, provided those do not disrupt the flow.

  8. #473
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    I was talking about rivers originating in Tibet. And with WBs consent dams can be built on the Indian side of rivers that flow into Pak, provided those do not disrupt the flow.
    It's not WB that has to consent its the Paks and they refuse every time no matter what so nothing has been done to date on the Indian side or can be done here

    All the anti-india rhetoric that emanates from Pakistan on this subject has no grounds whatsoever. Under the present treaty their interests are pretty well looked after
    Last edited by Double Edge; 09 Nov 17, at 03:02.

  9. #474
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    It's not WB that has to consent its the Paks and they refuse every time no matter what so nothing has been done to date on the Indian side or can be done here

    All the anti-india rhetoric that emanates from Pakistan on this subject has no grounds whatsoever. Under the present treaty their interests are pretty well looked after
    Paks can object, but if the Indian side can convince the WB, then dams can be built on technicality. India can build dams to generate electricity and use 20% of the water. Everything else from both sides are rhetoric.

  10. #475
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Paks can object, but if the Indian side can convince the WB, then dams can be built on technicality. India can build dams to generate electricity and use 20% of the water. Everything else from both sides are rhetoric.
    You say again convince the WB, the WB is the arbitrator here. The question is if the Paks object as they have every time then what can the WB do ?

    Nothing unless this time india's arguments are somehow much more compelling than the previous time.

    Will that be the case or is it just empty talk from the indian side. It has coercive value though
    Last edited by Double Edge; 09 Nov 17, at 13:31.

  11. #476
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,095
    India gears up to host China for border talks | ET | Nov 09 2017

    By Dipanjan Roy Chaudhury

    India is preparing to host China's special representative in Delhi for talks over the boundary dispute at the level of Special Representative, signalling the two neighbours' desire to move beyond the Doklam face-off that pushed bilateral ties to a new low.

    The Chinese delegation at the 20th round of boundary talks will be led by state councillor and Special Representative Yang Jiechi, who was last month promoted to the decision-making politburo of the Communist Party of China.

    National Security Advisor Ajit Kumar Doval, who is also the special representative for talks with China, will lead the Indian team.

    The special representative (SR) dialogue has played a critical role in India-China ties, helping prevent a major flare up along the 4,057 km Line of Actual Control (LAC) since 2003. The entire LAC is disputed with both sides having different perceptions.

    Experts said the latest round is expected to focus on confidence-building measures to avoid recurrence of a Doklam-type episode. It will also discuss measures to prevent disputes on and along trijunction boundary points, besides key global and bilateral strategic issues, they said.

    Doval, who has been India's SR after Modi government came to power in May 2014, has held two rounds of talks with Yang so far - the 18th round in Delhi in 2015 and the 19th round in Beijing in 2016

    At the height of the Doklam crisis, Doval had met Yang informally on the sidelines of a BRICS NSA meeting in Beijing on July 28. That meeting, in many ways, set off the process to end the 75-day-long face-on August 28, officials said.

    Beijing, however, had conveyed to Delhi that the face-off at the Doklam plateau had been out of the purview of the special representatives appointed by China and India to negotiate a settlement of the disputed boundary. It had argued that since the boundary between the two neighbours at Sikkim sector had already been delimited by the 1890 convention between the UK and China, the bilateral mechanism led by the special representatives had no scope to discuss it.

    Delhi had disagreed and pointed it out that while the status of Sikkim as an integral part of India had been settled, India-China boundary in Sikkim sector had still remained unsettled and a matter of negotiation between the special representatives.


    Brajesh Mishra, who was NSA and principal secretary to then prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, was the first SR named by India. He was succeeded by J N Dixit, M K Narayanan and Shivshankar Menon between 2004 and 2014. Their counterpart was Dai Bingguo, who was Yang's predecessor in the office of the State Councillor of China.

    The SRs of the two sides reached an agreement in 2005 on the political parameters and guiding principles for settlement of the boundary dispute. They have since been engaged in talks on a framework for boundary settlement (second round), which will be followed by actual demarcation of the border (third round). Dai was the constant factor in 15 rounds of negotiations with successive SRs of India before retiring in 2013.

    In 2012, the two SRs had decided that all Sino-Indo boundary disputes at trijunction points (with Bhutan, Myanmar and Arunachal Pradesh) would be addressed in consultation with third parties. But China had tried to change the status quo at the Doklam trijunction with Bhutan bilaterally, a fact strongly opposed by India and reason for Indian troops deployment in Doklam.

    Yang was China's foreign minister from 2007 to 2013. He was appointed as State Councillor and China's Special Representative for boundary talks with India in 2013, succeeding Dai. He held the 16th and 17th rounds of negotiations with Menon in June 2013 and February 2014.
    The underlined bit is absolutely critical and the basis of this standoff. The arbitrary nature in which China interprets things whenever means you either do as they say or get ready to fight.

    Otherwise the rule of law is their law. Their problem is the present 'rule of law' isn't theirs.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 09 Nov 17, at 17:05.

  12. #477
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,443
    China to deal with Doklam-like issues more strongly: Chinese expert

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    You say again convince the WB, the WB is the arbitrator here. The question is if the Paks object as they have every time then what can the WB do ?

    Nothing unless this time india's arguments are somehow much more compelling than the previous time.

    Will that be the case or is it just empty talk from the indian side. It has coercive value though
    India permitted to construct Kishanganga, Ratle projects: World Bank

  13. #478
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,095
    There's still time for the CCP to come to its senses but the clock is ticking..

    A rediscovery of non-alignment | IE | Nov 14 2017

    Discarding the ambiguities inherited from the 1970s, Delhi now appears ready to expand cooperation with the West or East on the basis of enlightened self-interest.

    If the quad helps India improve its ability to defeat terrorism, improve regional connectivity and extend its its naval reach, Delhi is not going to thumb its nose.

    If China is ready to cooperate on terrorism and stop blocking India’s rise, Delhi will be happy explore the multiple possibilities with Beijing.

    If this is not non-alignment we really don’t know what is.
    We still have options

  14. #479
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,095
    Manoj has been active and helpful with his writing right through this standoff. Interesting discussion.



    China does not know how to deal with India. China worries about India but they doesn't know what to do about India.

    West - barbarians
    The rest - subordiinate

    India ???? not barbarian, not want to be subordinate, what is India

    One side says put India under pressure, hammer India good, another side says overdo it pushes India into the american camp.

    Attack. Not attack. Flip flop. Blow hot blow cold. Tension in their India policy.

    Trying to think what happened, how it started why it ended.

    Simplest reason. China does not have a clue what to do about India.

    China wouldn't be the first to have an "India dilemma"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

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,, 05:57
  2. China, India Sign Border Defense Pacts
    By Cactus in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 23 Nov 13,, 15:40
  3. China, India should settle border issues: Wen
    By Tronic in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 25 Jun 12,, 17:58
  4. India, China face-off in the Indian Ocean
    By CityOfNineGates in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 07 Feb 09,, 18:03
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07 Nov 03,, 01:06

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
  •