Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Border face-off: China and India each deploy 3,000 troops
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostThere's no real legal mechanism to stop the Chinese from building islands. However, there is legal mechanism saying those islands cannot be used for territorial claims.
What they were doing was grey area. Enough to send a message but low enough not to start a war.
So if building those islands was not legal then stopping them or interfering with the process should not be restricted.
But under Obama the line was the US does not take a position on territorial claims. They had a do not provoke, do not upset China mindset.
Scarborough shoal back in 2012 taught them they could get away with it. Some would go so far as to say the US turned its back on a treaty ally ie. the Phillipines and Duterte has said that as well.
Former director of intel and information operations for the US Pacific fleet, Captain Jim Fannell was reassigned in 2014 as he was a little too outspoken about the affair.
We seen this before, in Afghanistan, haven't we.
Conduz transfer back in 2004 comes to mind. The bad guys are being squirrelled out under your very nose and the orders from on high are to stand down (!)
The point is if China wants to pull off these grey zone tactics with us they will find India a more than even match. The local populace are expert at this sort of nonsense and city councils have to deal with it.
Laws & regulations say one thing but some how people manage to flout them and on a regular basis. The govt then has to resort to forced demolitions of illegal constructions, extensions and encroachments. If it wants to maintain its writ or allow them for also the same reason.
No land records or clear title ? The game is grabbers, keepers until challenged.
We managed it at Doklam. The challenge is we have to keep at it for a long time to come.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostAs an engineer, those islands need constant maintenance. I'm damned scare of underwater errosion that would decimate the foundation.Last edited by Double Edge; 01 Dec 20,, 18:53.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Oracle View PostDE is missing for a few days. Seems he is on some diplomatic mission.
No updates from that Chinese village in Bhutan ? AIM & Nitin have not said anything here.
Can we conclude the opposition news channel NDTV was up to their usual rumour mongeringLast edited by Double Edge; 01 Dec 20,, 18:45.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostSo if building those islands was not legal then stopping them or interfering with the process should not be restricted.
That being said, it is hard to tell someone to get out when he's holding an AK47 when all you have is a piece of water with the law on it and not even an eviction order at that.
Chimo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Oracle View PostHmmm, reluctantly agree.
It's trying to do what China already tried with air traffic and failed
Back in 2013 they declared they will setup an ADIZ in the east China sea so every commercial aircraft transiting the area would have to identify itself.
The process of doing so then gives them fine grain control over which countries assets they allow or disallow and screws up commercial interests who will not fight back. The same idea applies in the SCS. They can squeeze any country's supply chain that has interests in the region via ships.
Guess what. They couldn't do it because the volume of traffic in and out of China, into Korea, Japan and back to Europe was just too high. Millions of flights pass through that region in just a year.
ADIZ is for tracking hostile aircraft entering an area, for self defense.
Does not scale up to traffic control of commercial aircraft which is what the Chinese wanted.Last edited by Double Edge; 01 Dec 20,, 20:00.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostWe do that and they can cut the communications cable between North America and Asia.
Take what you said to its logical conclusion and we end up with the line to confront China is to invite war.
This was the thinking that i have to admit even i bought into during that era. By not making them an adversary and keeping things ambiguous we avoid a war.
When Reagan entered office they said he would start WW3 because of the manner in which he confronted the Soviets. Never happened.
The Trump administration had it in for China for over three years. We're still not closer to a war.
It's not that to have peace we have to go to war. It's the difference between surrender and standing up.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostAgain, it is not illegal for them to build nor is it illegal for them to house people there. What is illegal is for them to claim the waters and the man-made land as theirs.
That being said, it is hard to tell someone to get out when he's holding an AK47 when all you have is a piece of water with the law on it and not even an eviction order at that.
Not illegal for the Fillipinos to occupy the shoal either and that's what they did.
State dept tries to mediate between the two parties between Apr & Jun 2012 and the agreement reached is both sides will vacate on Jun 12.
PH did so, China stayed on and that is how they got the shoal.
Pertinent lesson for India there in this current standoff.
Better would have been for US to allow the Fillipinos to confront China on the spot while at the same time supporting them with public statements from time to time.
The will to do so & mindset of the Obama administration was clearly lacking.
Look at the difference with Taiwan now. Arms sales, statements and visits of support. That is the way.
Americans are doing the same with India as well.
Straight out of the cold war playbook.Last edited by Double Edge; 01 Dec 20,, 23:47.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostTake what you said to its logical conclusion and we end up with the line to confront China is to invite war.
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostWhen Reagan entered office they said he would start WW3 because of the manner in which he confronted the Soviets. Never happened.
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostThe Trump administration had it in for China for over three years. We're still not closer to a war.
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostIt's not that to have peace we have to go to war. It's the difference between surrender and standing up.
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostStraight out of the cold war playbook.Chimo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Oracle View PostIf war erupts, IOR region will be cut off for Chinese vessels (PLAN+trade). How long can China afford this blockade?
RE: The Tanker War which drew in the USN and the resulting Operation PRAYING MANTIS.Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 02 Dec 20,, 21:14.Chimo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostADIZ is for tracking hostile aircraft entering an area, for self defense.
Does not scale up to traffic control of commercial aircraft which is what the Chinese wanted.
Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 02 Dec 20,, 23:07.Chimo
Comment
-
Now why would the CCP get its knickers in a twist over a LEMOA style agreement between Australia & Japan ?
China warns Australia and Japan over new defence pact, pledges countermeasures | ABC (Australia) | Nov 18 2020
The defence pact, called the Reciprocal Access Agreement, was agreed to '"in principle" during Prime Minister Scott Morrison's state visit to Japan, but still has not been formally signed.
The agreement would pave the way for the Australian and Japanese militaries to have access to each other's bases, and would deepen cooperation between the two countries.
"You could describe the deal as a paramilitary agreement," said Shi Yinhong, a Professor at Renmin University in Beijing.
"Although it's not a promise to aide the other country if under attack, it is however a deal to place one's own military in the other country for joint exercises.
Comment
-
There's a few errors in this clip
India opposes the diamer basha dam because its building on disputed territory and not because it will force Indian farmers to relocate. The indus flows into Pakistan from India so daming up the Indus in PO J&K affects Pakistan
The part that has me confused is this 600 km tunnel to channel water into Xianjiang to turn it into California.
Where are they going to tap the water for that from. If they take it from the indus then it will affect India but also Pakistan so that's a non starter.
On the other side the Zangmu is already in operation, run of the river without reservoirs. Back in 2003 there were these grandiose plans to build many dams on the Yarlung, to date there is just the one with talk to build a couple extra.
http://tibet-edd.blogspot.com/2018/0...sion-plan.html
How feasible will this be ? the Yarlung is in spate in spring. Fast moving, dropping in altitude quickly as it enters India.
I've posted years back in this thread of natural dams that are caused by landslides in the Yarlung. Then the water pressure builds and bursts the natural dam leading to floods either in Himachal or Arunachal as happened in 2002.Last edited by Double Edge; 03 Dec 20,, 01:50.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostAgain, it is not illegal for them to build nor is it illegal for them to house people there. What is illegal is for them to claim the waters and the man-made land as theirs.
That being said, it is hard to tell someone to get out when he's holding an AK47 when all you have is a piece of water with the law on it and not even an eviction order at that.
Have to interfere with that building when its happening or cede the land. Non resistance is acquiescence.
Whatever legal counts for squat at that point.
They are in possession and it will be harder to evict them after they build anything.
What stopped the Fillipinos sending some soldiers there for a standoff ?Last edited by Double Edge; 03 Dec 20,, 02:08.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostIt does not scale up to Chinese capabilities but that doesn't mean the capabilities don't exist. 11 Sept - US DOT and Transport Canada grounded all civilian and not just commercial flights. NORAD was ready to shoot down any plane not responding to such an order. CF-18s and F-16s were scrambled to meet incoming flights who were unable to respond due to communications malfunctions and escourted to appropriate airfields.
They wanted every plane & ship declaring themselves and manifest and if unsatisfactory will either be boarded for cargo inspection or instructed to leave the air space.
Tell me how any one can pull off that kind of control over a space with millions of flights per year.
Chinese were shown up for their lack of understanding of what an ADIZ is for
When people go on about Malacca dilemma they are stating the same thing. How did that ever become an article of faith back in 2005.
There is no Malacca dilemma when it comes to trade for China unless its a years long war !!Last edited by Double Edge; 03 Dec 20,, 02:34.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostYou don't want to know how close we were. Operation ABLE ARCHER and the Soviet countpart Operation RyAN. The Soviets were so scared of Reagan that it was official policy to put their nukes on a hair trigger.
ACCIDENTAL NUCLEAR WAR: A Timeline of Close Calls
There you go. A compilation of 12 such misperceptions by both sides, some seem so ludicrous, courtesy of the "nukes deter squat" lobby
Documentary about Able archer
This is a good time to mention a topic that i missed earlier.
Modi reiterated NFU at the UNGA back in September. This means what Sundarji said about Indian Nuclear Doctrine back in the 90s still holds
Nothing has changed. "Warfighting is not deterrence" when it comes to India & China is still good.
I want to point out here in its reporting about Modi's address that the Indian media entirely neglected to mention it was the Defense minister back in 2016 that added an element of doubt about NFU.
It was about deterrence with the Paks that seems to have subsided since. Kargil to Balakote we'd hear on a regular basis how eager they were to nuke us, post Balakote that macho talk has evaporated.
Your view at the time was doctines aren't written in stone and need to evolve. Well, that is all well and good but this was going in a direction that increased crisis instability.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostPart of that playbook is to allow some semblance of maintaining a facade of negotiation, to allow the other side a bone. Deny them that bone like we did with Mao and Kruschev lead to decades of increased hostilities. In this case, let them thump their chest drown out our soft speech but let them see the big stick.
Much to the consternation of local commentators who think our actions aren't meaningful let alone act as any deterrent to similar future behaviour.
Have we showed them the big stick yet ? i don't know.
Talks mean no war. This bit nobody gets.
Instead it is misconstrued as playing for time when opportunities present for an attack. Why ?
Because why would they assemble so many at the border otherwise.
Nobody can explain this with any confidence.
How about some idiot in the CCP though it would be a good idea ? nah, this is too frivolousLast edited by Double Edge; 03 Dec 20,, 19:34.
Comment
Comment