Page 5 of 24 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 350

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

  1. #61
    Regular
    Join Date
    24 Jan 17
    Location
    currently posted to auckland nz
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    MEA statement makes clear why India moved. China's actions threaten India. All the legal reasons put forth are moot. In any case they only apply to everybody else other than China isn't it. Well India can play that game too.

    What is China's intent with building that road. None of India's business will be the reply. Heh, think again.

    There is more going on here than meets the eye. One article i was reading questioned whether this was even about the border or trying to show that India makes a poor partner to challenge China. This idea uses timing for justification, just so happens Modi was in Washington. Convenient.

    But it clearly is a battle of perceptions, China will make everybody submit, including India. India is subordinate to China or will be.

    South of the border they disagree : D


    Govt won' talk about it.

    https://youtu.be/M9t8BPnChpY

    Hilariious to listen to both opposition and ruling party switch roles. Before election opposition wants the report made public, ruling says no. opposition wins and is now ruling, so present opposition aka previous govt says make it public
    You might take a look at my above posting of an OP By M.K. BHADRAKUMAR

  2. #62
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Funtastic View Post
    You might take a look at my above posting of an OP By M.K. BHADRAKUMAR
    heh, MEA supercedes what Badra says

    https://thewire.in/155766/current-st...shankar-menon/

    Menon, who has been involved in negotiations during earlier border incidents, believes that there seems to be a fundamental difference in the attitude of the Chinese. “This time, they don’t seem to be willing to go back. The rhetoric is much more heated. They have asked us to withdraw first, before talking,” he said.

    “During the 2013 intrusion in Depsang, we had asked the Chinese to withdraw and restore the status quo. In earlier incidents – Depsang, Chumar – both sides were talking to each other and returned back to earlier positions restoring the status quo,” said Menon.

    Menon, who was India’s special representative in 2012, confirmed this. “In 2012 the SRs had a broad understanding that tri-junctions will be finalised in consultation with the third country concerned. This latest incident and statements saying this is Chinese territory are contrary to that understanding,” he said.
    That's the former NSA

    https://thewire.in/154449/expert-gya...-china-bhutan/

    Will drag on till winter...according to stobdan

    Was a major border incident between India and China expected?

    China just ‘tried her luck’ and started building a road on a territory which is disputed, thinking that India would not defend Bhutan. It was a wrong judgment from Beijing’s part.

    Why has China roped Bhutan into its border dispute with India?

    It is not a border dispute with India. It is the dispute between Bhutan and China for which 24 rounds of talks have already been conducted. Joint surveys have been done. China broke her undertaking not to change the status quo.

    With Bhutan now part of the India-China stand-off, how should India protect Bhutanese sensitivities?

    What is the problem of Bhutan seeking India’s help to stop China to change the status quo? The entry of Indian troops was done in consultation with the Bhutanese government. For India, it had too important strategic implications to let go.
    Understand the Indian position now ?
    Last edited by Double Edge; 18 Jul 17, at 11:43.

  3. #63
    Contributor anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Sep 12
    Location
    Mumbai
    Posts
    727
    The Indian govt outright ignoring threats from the Chinese side to get ready for war is strange but funny. Meanwhile, the Chinese seem to grow more red each passing day.

  4. #64
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Funtastic View Post
    Indian military standoff with China was all about Bhutan

    All things taken into account, therefore, the current standoff is not so much about territory as the ‘great game’ over Bhutan.

    India has been treating Bhutan as its ‘protectorate’ ever since Great Britain left the subcontinent in 1947. But lately, through the past decade or so, China started nibbling away at Indian influence by working on fault lines that had begun appearing in India-Bhutan relations over time.

    India harbors a deep sense of disquiet about China’s direct dealings with Bhutan, especially on border disputes. By the military intervention in Doklam, India has inserted itself as the proverbial elephant in the room. This is one thing.

    ‘High-stakes’ election in Bhutan next year

    Interestingly, the current standoff is playing out in the run-up to a crucial parliamentary election in Bhutan, which is due in mid-2018.

    The forthcoming election will be a high stakes affair for New Delhi, which is keen that the present ‘pro-India’ Bhutanese prime minister Tshering Tobgay secures a renewed mandate. (He deposed his ‘pro-China’ predecessor Jigme Thinley in the 2013 election with some Indian manipulation from the back stage.)

    To be sure, a calibrated brinkmanship seems to characterize the current standoff – in both Indian and Chinese behavior. Bhutan says nothing much.
    Let's go with the Bhutan theory

    Bhutan must be aware of the great game by its two giant neighbors over its strategic autonomy. Sadly, it is caught up in a debt trap. According to the International Monetary Fund, Bhutan’s government debt now stands at 118% of GDP, with India by far the largest creditor, accounting for 64% of Bhutan’s total debt. Of course, much of India’s ‘aid’ effectively promoted project exports to Bhutan by Indian companies.

    If so, it must be the mother of all ironies because India is waging a relentless whispering campaign against the Belt and Road, warning that it leads to ‘debt trap’.
    Only 20% is required for state capture. Bhutan is more in India's pocket than Sri Lanka in this case. We're not going to lose Bhutan and need to add more countries to that list because China is adding more to theirs.

    As a former Indian ambassador and top expert on Himalayan affairs, P Stobdan wrote last week, India’s “colonial-style approach of buying loyalty through economic aid” may not work anymore. Do not be surprised if Bhutan views China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ as the salvation – following Nepal’s footfalls.
    Doesn't work for India then it won't work for China either.

    India’s Real Problem Lies in its Bhutan Policy, Not the Border | The Wire | Jul 14 2017


    Bhutanese nationalism and resentment of Indian ‘hegemony’, is, no doubt, a strong undercurrent, and Delhi cannot ignore it much longer.

    Intervention in neighboring countries to browbeat them is a grotesque foreign-policy legacy left behind by decades of successive Congress Party governments in India. It is an archaic mindset.

    On Sri Lanka, Prime Minister Narendra Modi brought in refreshingly new thinking to India’s policy and a tumultuous relationship (which tragically took the life of former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi) steadied almost overnight.

    A similar imaginative approach is needed vis-à-vis Bhutan.

    By M.K. BHADRAKUMAR JULY 17, 2017 5:17 PM (UTC+8)

    http://www.atimes.com/article/indian...-china-bhutan/
    Typical Badra and his paintings, talking about stuff that is over the pay grade of most people
    Last edited by Double Edge; 18 Jul 17, at 13:02.

  5. #65
    Contributor anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Sep 12
    Location
    Mumbai
    Posts
    727

    The Chicken’s Neck

    Delhi has kept a close watch and tight grip on the Sino-Bhutan border negotiations for the same reason it joined the fray at Doka La: Chinese control over the Doklam plateau would represent a grave strategic threat. The Chinese-controlled Chumbi valley bisecting Sikkim and Bhutan cuts toward the Siliguri Corridor, a narrow, strategically-vulnerable strip of territory connecting the main mass of the Indian subcontinent to its more remote northeastern provinces.

    A Chinese offensive into this “Chicken’s Neck” could sever India’s connection to the northeast, where China still claims up to 90,000 square kilometers in Arunachal Pradesh. China’s Global Times seemed to acknowledge as much, and further stoke Indian anxieties by arguing “northeast India might take the opportunity to become independent” if Delhi’s fears were realized and China launched an operation to “quickly separate mainland India from the northeast.”

    The topography of the region further elevates the strategic value of the Doklam plateau, and helps to explain how India bloodied China’s nose during the nearby skirmish at Nathu La in 1967. Whereas China holds a tactical advantage along the vast majority of the LAC, the Chumbi Valley is arguably the only position along the de facto border where China’s position is deeply compromised. As Indian analyst Nitin Gokhale observes:

    Chinese forces in the narrow Chumbi Valley are currently in the line of sight and fire of Indian forces poised on the ridges along the Sikkim-Tibet border. Aware of this vulnerability, the Chinese have been eyeing the Doklam plateau since any troops stationed there will be away from visible observation and beyond artillery range of Indian forces either based in North or north-east Sikkim.
    In other words, control over the Doklam plateau constitutes a “win-win” for the PLA; both a knife to India’s jugular and shield to blunt its sharpest spear. With existential stakes for Delhi, and Beijing posturing growing more uncompromising by the day, there’s no end in sight to the longest standoff at the China-India border in over three decades.
    https://warontherocks.com/2017/07/hi...ff-at-doka-la/

  6. #66
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Funtastic View Post
    A flukey win in a battle does not win a war. After reading the Chinese version of events, it seems the Indian claim of 400 Chinese killed seems highly inflated.
    The estimate is a Chinese one

    http://www.indiandefencereview.com/w...a-bloody-nose/

    Because of excellent domination and observation from Sebu La and Camel’s back, artillery fire was most effective and most of the Chinese bunkers on North shoulder and in depth were completely destroyed and Chinese suffered very heavy casualties which by their own estimates were over 400.
    Account of the battle of Nathu La by the officer present

  7. #67
    Senior Contributor kuku's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Feb 08
    Location
    New Delhi, India, India
    Posts
    980
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    War? really ? I've seen more dangerous drunken brawls than this.
    I have been in drunken brawls more dangerous than these, and with some Bhutanese boys...
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Let's go with the Bhutan theory
    Typical Badra and his paintings, talking about stuff that is over the pay grade of most people
    Should go to Bhutan and talk to its people. They are more pro Indian than some of our dear Kashmiri brothers.
    Last edited by kuku; 20 Jul 17, at 09:05.
    cheers

  8. #68
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Funtastic View Post
    One has to feel sorry for a country whose leaders "cant think outside the box" when after spending a tremendous amount of money show casing their country to the world.
    Don't be, India is doing quite well to feel sorry. And if you can't engage in a meaningful argument, keep out. There's no need to troll.

    Quote Originally Posted by Funtastic View Post
    an interesting take by retired Indian ambassador

    "A month-long India-China standoff in the tangled mountains of the Himalayas threatens to snowball into conflict. The circumstances are enveloped in thick fog endemic to those remote mountains at 10000 feet above sea level – and to the complicated India-China relationship.

    An analogy could be that China’s People’s Liberation Army units come down to the Siachen area, which is under India’s control, to advance Pakistan’s territorial claim, which Beijing also considers to be of strategic significance due to its proximity to Karakorum Highway and Xinjiang region. This needs some explanation.

    For a start, the location of the standoff is Doklam Plateau, which has been in China’s control on which Bhutan made a territorial claim only in 2000. (India drew Bhutan’s maps in the sixties, including the portion showing Doklam as Bhutanese territory.)

    The PLA has been undertaking infrastructure development in Dloklam but Indian military has chosen to contest the latest phase of road-building activity. Notionally, Delhi is acting at the request of Bhutan. (Bhutan says very little on the entire affair.)

    The Indian-establishment commentators have claimed that the road under construction in Doklam may improve PLA’s access to the ‘tri-junction’ that separates India’s state of Sikkim, Bhutan and China – in turn, bringing China’s military presence closer to the so-called Siliguri Corridor that connects India’s restive north-eastern states with the Indian ‘mainland’.

    There are sub-plots. The delimited border (demarcated with boundary pillars) between the Indian state of Sikkim and Tibet is the only settled segment of the 4000-kilometre long India-China border. Both countries accept the border defined under the Anglo-Chinese Convention of 1890.

    At this point, the fog thickens. The 1890 convention accurately depicts the ‘tri-junction’ between India (Sikkim), Bhutan and China, in terms of which the current arena of standoff (Doklam) comes under China. But then, Bhutan was not party to the 1890 convention.

    In sum, there is a China-Bhutan order dispute with regard to Doklam (on the basis of maps prepared in Delhi), and India has now intervened in the dispute physically to stop Chinese road construction activity in the region, apparently at Bhutan’s request.

    But India and Bhutan do not have a military pact. Their so-called Friendship Treaty (2007) no longer empowers India to guide Bhutan’s foreign policy and merely commits the two countries «to coordinate on issues relating to national interests».

    Suffice to say, India has militarily intervened in the China-Bhutan border dispute over Doklam.

    [B]Unsurprisingly, China alleges that by doing so, India has violated the 1890 convention. This is a can of worms, because if the 1890 convention is revisited, Sikkim’s settled border with Tibet may also get re-opened – and, alongside, India’s annexation of Sikkim in 1975 too (something which Beijing accepted grudgingly only in 2003 in the context of an improvement in the overall Sino-Indian ties at that time.)

    Beijing insists that any discussions to resolve the current standoff can take place only if India withdrew forces from the Chinese territory (Doklam). It [/B]contends that this standoff is fundamentally different because India has violated a key principle by violating an international border (between China and Sikkim under the 1890 agreement), which is not under dispute.

    Delhi, which typically resorts to megaphone diplomacy apropos India-China border tensions, is maintaining exemplary reticence. As the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu said once, those in Delhi who know do not speak, while those who speak either do not know or are dissimulating.

    There could be a range of motivations behind the Indian and Chinese calculus. Delhi could be calculating that:

    Sikkim is the only segment of the border with China where India enjoys military superiority, and PLA should not be allowed to neutralize it, no matter what it takes.
    A road link today and a railway line tomorrow – this could be ‘mission creep’ aimed at PLA gaining proximity to Siliguri Corridor.
    In political terms, Bhutan should remain anchored in Indian orbit. By inserting itself into the China-Bhutan border dispute, India becomes the elephant in the room.
    Bhutan has been the only South Asian country (other than India, of course), which has resisted the invidious charms of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, and it must remain so.
    China will blink in the face of India’s ‘muscular diplomacy’, since PLA cannot afford a military confrontation in Sikkim region where India enjoys decisive advantage geographically and militarily.
    China must reckon with new realities – ‘India today is not the India of 1962… Indian Army is prepared for a two and a half front war.’
    The standoff would have resonance within Tibet where security situation remains fragile. (Interestingly, last weekend, Indian authorities allowed the government-in-exile mentored by the Dalai Lama to defiantly post a Tibetan flag of independence in Ladakh region on Chinese border.)
    Strident nationalism works fine in India’s domestic politics. (The opposition parties anticipate a snap poll in 2018.)
    As regards Beijing’s motivations, apart from any ‘mission creep’ vis-à-vis Siliguri Corridor, the following leitmotifs may be discerned:

    First and foremost, the relations with India have perceptibly deteriorated in the past 2-3 years due to Delhi’s perceived pro-US ‘tilt’. Second, China has a sense of vulnerability vis-à-vis the security situation in Tibet. Doklam forms part of Chumbi Valley, which leads to Lhasa.

    Intrinsically, China focuses on the development of the Yadong region of Tibet, which is connected to Lhasa already via a highway and soon with a branch line of the China-Tibet railway. China consistently believed that Tibet’s (or Xinjiang’s) stabilization is best tackled through rapid economic development.

    Again, China is surely monitoring the delicate India-Bhutan diplomatic tango and is not willing to believe that there is no daylight possible between Delhi and Thimpu – even if Delhi projects it as an all-weather friendship.

    To be sure, if the India-China standoff in Doklam continues, how it would begin to impact Bhutanese national sensitivities remains to be seen. Finally, China factors in that India finds itself in an untenable position with regard to the Anglo-Chinese accord of 1890.

    All in all, the important thing today is to manage the narrative in a way that does not lead to war. India has an option to withdraw the troops in Doklam and begin discussions. This need not necessarily mean loss of face, because Beijing remains open to discussing India’s concerns.

    But the catch is that, quintessentially, India has to leave it to China and Bhutan to resolve their differences and disputes. India can leverage Bhutan’s stance but cannot assume a ‘hands-on’ role for all time, since the optics of Bhutan being a sovereign country come into play.

    China’s Belt and Road Initiative gives an added dimension, if Bhutan at some point chooses to follow Nepal’s footfalls. (Even a ‘regime change’ in Kathmandu failed to dissipate the Nepali elites’ fascination for the ‘Belt and Road’.)

    India’s best bet is that China will need time to build up forces in Doklam area. China can open other fronts where it may have vast superiority, but then, China’s preoccupations elsewhere may not allow that – North Korea, Japan, South Korea, South China Sea and the volatility in the China-US relations.

    However, India may be setting a precedent in regional security if it intervenes militarily in a dispute between two of its neighbours – on whatever pretext. In a longer term perspective, India-China relations have been severely damaged.

    The Modi government mishandled India’s relations with China. There have been a lot of missteps – such as hyping up public campaigns over contentious issues, prioritising inconsequential themes as centre piece of discourse, making Sino-Pakistan ties a litmus test of China’s intentions, trespassing on disputes in South China Sea, flaunting the ‘Dalai Lama’ card, and consorting with Obama administration’s ‘pivot to Asia’.

    A potential window of opportunity for the two strong leaderships in Delhi and Beijing to accelerate a border settlement has been slammed shut. And a relationship that was finely poised between competition and cooperation has turned adversarial.

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/ne...-security.html
    And, stop with the Chinese propaganda articles already.
    Last edited by Oracle; 20 Jul 17, at 13:31.

  9. #69
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,269
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Did you read the quote about India stealing the fast-growth crown from China?
    That's what it was about.
    Exactly.
    And you are an economist?

  10. #70

  11. #71
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,269
    Just rhetoric from the Chinese side, no additional troop movements, no stocking up on ammunition or food. Which leads me to think, the tone of articles coning out from China is for the domestic population. It's difficult for Xi Jingping to ask the PLA to withdraw, when he is trying to consolidate his position within the CPC and hold on to power for some more years. My guess is, both side will wait out for the harsh winter to arrive and then unilaterally withdraw. A face saver moment for Xi Jingping, and no escalation. I'm not discounting a skirmish just before winter is to set in, but a war seems unlikely at this point. Peace be upon us all.

  12. #72
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,853
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    And, stop with the Chinese propaganda articles already.
    Badra isn't chinese propaganda. He is a dissenting voice and his arguments are multi-dimensional. Been posting in Asia Times for over a decade now. Different take from the mainstream. Rich imagination. Exemplifies diplomat. Posted to central Asia where there is a game going on and is historically where the term comes from.

    He uses terms like 'great game'. Undeniably there is a great game going on but try unpacking it. So much can be said here or attributed that we lose sight of the big picture. Sources can be hard to come by here, credible ones that can pass muster.

    We are used to former diplomats being more plain and direct.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    And you are an economist?
    I understood he is a professor in the subject. Get your homework ready : )

    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Just rhetoric from the Chinese side, no additional troop movements, no stocking up on ammunition or food. Which leads me to think, the tone of articles coning out from China is for the domestic population.
    They are using psychological pressure (reading an account of the Nathu La incident the Chinese put up loudspeakers and were telling indian trops their officers were earning more s as to demoralise them). Then we did the same and starting blaring back at them in Mandarin : D

    The other two are legal and media pressure. Get the other side to settle, on the cheap. War is too costly.

    It's difficult for Xi Jingping to ask the PLA to withdraw, when he is trying to consolidate his position within the CPC and hold on to power for some more years. My guess is, both side will wait out for the harsh winter to arrive and then unilaterally withdraw. A face saver moment for Xi Jingping, and no escalation. I'm not discounting a skirmish just before winter is to set in, but a war seems unlikely at this point. Peace be upon us all.
    Now we're getting into CCP politics theory. Xi must look good against his critics & rivals for that all important 19th congress

    I too think this standoff (foreign secretary's words) not 'war like situation' or 'conflict' will continue till it gets too cold. Send hot beverages to the border, they will need it
    Last edited by Double Edge; 20 Jul 17, at 16:23.

  13. #73
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,364
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    And you are an economist?
    Yes, I am.

    Did you have an economic question?

  14. #74
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Badra isn't chinese propaganda. He is a dissenting voice and his arguments are multi-dimensional. Been posting in Asia Times for over a decade now. Different take from the mainstream. Rich imagination. Exemplifies diplomat. Posted to central Asia where there is a game going on and is historically where the term comes from.

    He uses terms like 'great game'. Undeniably there is a great game going on but try unpacking it. So much can be said here or attributed that we lose sight of the big picture. Sources can be hard to come by here, credible ones that can pass muster.

    We are used to former diplomats being more plain and direct.
    My words were directed @ strategic-culture.org, plus things we can talk in private. If you know analytics and associated stuff, you'd have known by now. I leave it at that.

    Moreover, in the last few years, I have sort of become a cynic of the left/liberal/communist/socialist crap. I look at both hard and soft power of my country, and don't value those articles.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Yes he is. I understood he is a professor in the subject. Get your homework ready : )
    That was rhetorical. Since he is an economist, he should put up a nice argument explaining every bit of what he writes. Just adding data is not enough. I can put up legacy data about an xyz mining company, but I should not expect ordinary folks to mine that data for information, and derive knowledge. Else there is no need to put up an argument.

    I have seen gold medalist professors who can't even explain basics of their chosen field of study.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    They are using psychological pressure (reading an account of the Nathu La incident the Chinese put up loudspeakers and were telling indian trops their officers were earning more s as to demoralise them). Then we did the same and starting blaring back at them in Mandarin : D

    The other two are legal and media pressure
    Media I can understand, what is legal pressure here?
    Although I understand that the articles are also aimed at Indian audience, but those clearly failed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Now we're getting into CCP politics theory. Xi must look good against his critics & rivals for that all important 19th congress

    I too think this standoff (foreign secretary's words) not 'war like situation' or 'conflict' will continue till it gets too cold. Send hot beverages to the border, they will need it
    I wanted to do an Oscar Schindler, but it seems I have to wait.
    Last edited by Oracle; 20 Jul 17, at 16:38.

  15. #75
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,269
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Yes, I am.

    Did you have an economic question?
    Replied. See above post.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 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,, 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
  •