China-Tibet Threads

  • Thread starter Thread starter Officer of Engineers
  • Start date Start date
I have actually read some crazy things about the treatment doled out to the tibetans by the chinese military in trustworthy news sources.

A knife for a knife and a gun for a gun, right?

But brute force projection of military, pointless clampdowns and humiliation as a counter against determination and will power? this doesn't make sense.

I was talking about nation building and the maintenance of territorial integrity without the need of military occupation.

The paks are illogical players but I see policy similarity between the way the paks and the chinese handle their ethnic territory. But if the chinese are logical players, I fail to see the machiavellianism here because if they keep this up, they're not only going to loose tibet(more quickly) in the long run but they're also going to turn them against itself.
 
I have actually read some crazy things about the treatment doled out to the tibetans by the chinese military in trustworthy news sources.

A knife for a knife and a gun for a gun, right?
And most of it is kung fu. Tibetan pole staff against police batons.

But brute force projection of military, pointless clampdowns and humiliation as a counter against determination and will power? this doesn't make sense.
Numbers don't make sense. 90% of Tibet's population is still ethnic Tibetan according to the last census and they control 90% of the territory. BTW, this incident is not even within Tibet itself but actual Chinese territory. This means that 90% of Tibet is not being watched by the PLA.
 
This means that 90% of Tibet is not being watched by the PLA.
I'm not sure because they try ridiculously hard to remove traces of the dalai lama or tibet. It's sometimes funny and sometimes very shocking too.

And most of it is kung fu.
That's what I was saying. These people are not your average insurgents with AKs and land mines. They are weapon-less yet the chinese are paranoid about them.

I think the chinese are fully aware of their position in tibet. They probably know exactly that they are on foreign territory. The question is, if they are not trying to win over tibetans hearts then what do they plan to do with tibet?

IMO, tibet is a buffer zone between india and china. What do you think?
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure because they try ridiculously hard to remove traces of the dalai lama or tibet. It's sometimes funny and sometimes very shocking too.
Only on the surface and they don't try that hard. To go to a temple. Walk through and if they see something obvious, they take it down but they don't go through every closet or lift every veil. The monks sees them coming, they put a veil over the DL's picture. They leave. They take off the veil. It's not like they ransack every nook and cranny. The cops know there are DL pics there. The monks know the cops know there are DL pics there. As long as everybody plays by the rules, nobody gets hurt. It's only when the monks are defiant and openly display the DL pics, whatever, that forces the cops to act.

That's what I was saying. These people are not your average insurgents with AKs and land mines. They are weapon-less yet the chinese are paranoid about them.
There is no paranoia. Otherwise, you will see APCs with fully loaded weapons on every corner. The rules are everybody sticks to kung fu. Swords are even forbidden. Pole staff against baton.

I think the chinese are fully aware of their position in tibet. They probably know exactly that they are on foreign territory. The question is, if they are not trying to win over tibetans hearts then what do they plan to do with tibet?
They're winning more than you know. I used to buy into the myth that Han and Hui are slowly displacing the local ethnic Tibetan population, ie outnumbering them. Then I read the census. 90% of Tibet's population are still Tibetans and most of the non-Tibetans are located in the two main cities. That means 90% of the Tibetans controlling 90% of Tibet don't really care for independence. They might not like Chinese rule and they might even like the idea of the DL returning to power but they're not doing anything about it.

The DL and his monks are full of shit. The numbers don't support him. Tibet should be a hell of a lot more unstable if Tibetans really wants independence.

IMO, tibet is a buffer zone between india and china. What do you think?
Four group armies in the Chengdu MR is what I think.
 
Q: Do you know how the paks lost the love from majority kashmiris and kashmir?
A: By turning kashmir into a warzone through insurgency

Muslim kashmir didn't have a common ground with hindu india until the paks began a blunder of a policy in the 90s which actually worked in indias favour.

India is a union consisting of more than 2 dozen ethnic and several racial groups. We have more secessionist groups operating in india than any other state in asia. Nation building(in this part of the world) is a 100+ year process. Our effort has been to keep history "uneventful" with the insurgents as much as possible. We've tried our luck by giving autonomy to secessionists but it has only managed to calm them down a bit but the demand for separate state still exists. We've organized ceasefires. We actually let these insurgents run wild in their own territory as long as they don't step outside their territory. Some of them run a virtual dictatorship(organized crime) by rigging polls though it has managed to keep history "uneventful" for india. Our hope is with the next generation of adults from these regions who have been travelling all across india and the world so we think it'll be more easy for us to talk to rather than their current fathers and grandfathers who had lived in a period where india had just started to understand nation building and our old politicians believed in fist rather than brain. Today's india has changed dramatically. We understand that we have to let some things run its course.

You see, our secessionists don't actually want autonomy. But we imposed autonomy on them anyway to make peace and buy more time. What they really want is a nation that they can call home. They want to feel that they truly belong to this nation. This is true nation building and it is not a 2 or 10 yr process. It takes generations.

What I'm trying to say is that china is several decades behind when it comes to "nation building" - ie incorporating tibets people into china. In fact, I don't see any desire. Pakistan is a nation in-exile so bengalis, balochis or pashtuns never mattered to them in the first place. But what about china? The history between china and tibet has been "eventful" and continues to be "eventful". I'm asking, has history been so "eventful" that it is no longer possible to incorporate tibet into china?

At this point, I look at tibet and china the way I look at pakistan and afghanistan.

Pakistan is in afghanistan because it thinks it will flip
Similarly, china is in tibet too because it thinks it will flip also

The difference is that pakistan controls afghanistan though proxies while china controls tibet through military occupation
 
Last edited:
The difference is that pakistan controls afghanistan though proxies while china controls tibet through military occupation
No, China controls Tibet by being Tibet's rice basket and economic life line.

Say what you want about the CCP but the quality of life, life expectancy, and economic future never looked brighter with them than ever under the monks.
 
Colonel, I'm trying to give you an evaluation of our experiments with dozen different secessionists. We did it for around 50 years. Economics, politics, autonomy etc we done 'em all. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANTED!! This realisation has forced us to make drastic(bizarre) changes in our policy.

The problem is that people have not stared at this map for long enough to accurately figure things out

MgdzL5d.png
 
Colonel, I'm trying to give you an evaluation of our experiments with dozen different secessionists. We did it for around 50 years. Economics, politics, autonomy etc we done 'em all. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANTED!! This realisation has forced us to make drastic(bizarre) changes in our policy.
Who cares what they want?

The problem is that people have not stared at this map for long enough to accurately figure things out
That's not the problem. The problem is are they going to do anything about it? So far, the Tibetans ain't doing shit all.
 
We actually let these insurgents run wild in their own territory as long as they don't step outside their territory. Some of them run a virtual dictatorship(organized crime) by rigging polls though it has managed to keep history "uneventful" for india.

To be fair, that's been more of an Indian central government's tactic. Kashmir elections in 1987 were rigged by the Indian government (which started the Kashmir insurgency in the first place). While, the Punjab government which came to power by over 60% turnout was deposed and in the re-elections held in 1992, the Congress party claimed to "sweep" Punjab's elections with a voter turnout of less than 10%, and the choice to elect only 1 party. :biggrin:

Only hinterland India's history has been "uneventful". Ask anyone living in the periphery states, from the North West to the North East; it's been anything but uneventful. ;)


The problem is that people have not stared at this map for long enough to accurately figure things out

MgdzL5d.png

What am I looking at?
 
To be fair, that's been more of an Indian central government's tactic. Kashmir elections in 1987 were rigged by the Indian government (which started the Kashmir insurgency in the first place).

That was bad on GoI's part.

While, the Punjab government which came to power by over 60% turnout was deposed

That was very bad on GoI's part, no doubt about it.

and in the re-elections held in 1992, the Congress party claimed to "sweep" Punjab's elections with a voter turnout of less than 10%, and the choice to elect only 1 party.

That worked, isn't it ?

That was great move by GoI. I will always like to see a government 'imposed' this way when hostility is high and boycott of the Union is prevalent. Those who were boycotting are sitting in LA and enjoying the power today. Back to normal.
 
Only hinterland India's history has been "uneventful". Ask anyone living in the periphery states, from the North West to the North East; it's been anything but uneventful. ;)
Yes the punjabi insurgency left behind very colourful events. I wonder if it has indeed ended.

The north-east looks like a mini-afghanistan to me with various ethnic groups prying for dominance. There are three entities here - the military, the dominant insurgent group and the splinter insurgent groups. The insurgents are lumped in ethnic portions. All three fight against each other and this makes the place very volatile and sensitive.

Our policy in these parts has been to talk to the dominant insurgent groups and let them run their territory their own way in lieu of ceasefire. This gives the military some space to neutralize the splinter groups. Progress has been made for eg: the nagaland govt is actually a front org of nscn(im), a dominant insurgent group who has joined politics which is a good start. The manipur govt was chosen over the insurgent groups even though it is a corrupt one. I'd say that it has been "eventful" but in the right direction.

What am I looking at?
The most unlikely candidates to experiment with for the creation of nation states
 
That was bad on GoI's part.


That was very bad on GoI's part, no doubt about it.


That worked, isn't it ?

That was great move by GoI. I will always like to see a government 'imposed' this way when hostility is high and boycott of the Union is prevalent. Those who were boycotting are sitting in LA and enjoying the power today. Back to normal.

Yes, the government corrected it's mistake by opening up the political space in Punjab again, but it's always important to take notice that those mistakes came at a very big cost; including erosion of the GoI's legitimacy in that state.

The intent of my original post was to check anil's assertion that, "china is several decades behind when it comes to "nation building", as he asserted that China's history with secessionists has seen more turbulence than India ("eventful" vs "uneventful"). India's political history too has been very volatile. Heck, India almost became a full dictatorship in the mid '70s.

One advantage I will hand to India over China is that it is a democracy, albeit with authoritarian tendencies, but still a democracy which gives space for dissenting voices to be heard. This allows an alternate channel for a lot of simmering tensions to be released.
 
Last edited:
Our policy in these parts has been to talk to the dominant insurgent groups and let them run their territory their own way in lieu of ceasefire. This gives the military some space to neutralize the splinter groups.

Which territories have been willingly ceded to insurgent groups?

Progress has been made for eg: the nagaland govt is actually a front org of nscn(im), a dominant insurgent group who has joined politics which is a good start. The manipur govt was chosen over the insurgent groups even though it is a corrupt one. I'd say that it has been "eventful" but in the right direction.

Insurgents are also political actors with political goals. Dropping the bullet to contest the ballot to achieve their political ends is always a positive development. Good for the Indian government to finally give them the space, and good for the dissenting parties to show trust in the GoI.
 
Which territories have been willingly ceded to insurgent groups?
Those areas with too many players. Back in the day there were few players but they weren't competent so talks were stalled. Today they have splintered into many so comprehensive talks are not possible. The nscn(im) is to delhi what the pashtuns are to pakistan. This article will help explain the situation:

Chasing a chimeric peace - The Hindu

Insurgents are also political actors with political goals. Dropping the bullet to contest the ballot to achieve their political ends is always a positive development. Good for the Indian government to finally give them the space, and good for the dissenting parties to show trust in the GoI.
They have joined politics but they have still not dropped their guns. The problem is external as well as internal(ethnic). That's why it'll take generations to solve.
 
Eurasian Economic Union Backs China

Eurasian Economic Union Backs China

chus.jpg

It's a well-known fact that Donald Trump and his loyalists even at the pre-election campaign stage didn't hide the desire to start a large-scale scandal with China related to a disproportion of external trade and an artificial decline in the Yuan provided by Beijing. Frankly speaking, the overwhelming majority of spectators considered Trump's policy to be a populist pre-election rhetoric reckoned on dull rednecks who often fall for populist xenophobic appeals. If a usual external political struggle grows into a full-scale trade war the losses of the United States will be enormous. The strike will be delivered to the traditional spheres of American export to China – high-tech industry (civil aircraft, smartphones, etc.) and agricultural sector (half of American soybeans falls on Chinese market). Also the price increase in American retail first of all will damage Trump's voters – the groups of disadvantaged Americans.

However, the life laughed again at all the wise theorists' calculations. Not only was it impossible to predict Donald Trump's activity on the basis of the common sense (it's enough to recall the missile attack of American cowboys against a Syrian water station, also the North Korean psycho juggling nuclear bombs poured oil into the fire. Due to the military games of fat and spoiled boy Kim, Beijing found itself in an awkward position. Uncle Donald exerts pressure on Uncle Xi exposing an ultimatum – China either imposes oil embargo to strangle North Korean economy, or gets involved into a trade war with the United States and observes a real war next door. It seems like Chinese "uncle" ups the ante. It's not that Chinese leader has tender feelings for the Pyongyangian overgrown child who plays with nuclear edge-tools, but every Chinese "mandarin" has a fear determined by the national mindset – the fear of losing public face. That's why it's virtually impossible to evade the conflict.

Who will win in a trade war? According to the quantity of the pro-Chinese articles, Beijing doesn't grudge the money to create an expression of its inevitable win in the infosphere. That propaganda uses, inter alia, the arguments put in the beginning of this article. However, the reality isn't as good as Chinese comrades wanted it to be. Apple and Boeing will lose a great trading area, but won't crash. American disadvantaged people will become more depleted. The middle-class will also suffer. However, people who are accustomed not to hang upon guiding party's lips but used to rely on themselves, people whose ancestors survived during the Great Depression will not consider a temporary drop in income as a catastrophe. The same can't be said for the Chinese people who have been getting over a paternalistic model of government since the childhood and who have grown fat for the last 10-15 years. The loss of such a richest market as the USA will lead to a real disaster for the economy of the Middle Kingdom. The fact is that the main thing for the global economy is not the industry, but the outlet area. American industrial facilities' mobilization to the overpopulated Southeast Asia region with lots of countries where people are desperating for money will be accepted with enthusiasm. Except for Asia, there's Mexico just steps from the US border with its great spare workforce capacity. It will be extremely difficult for China to search out broad markets for its products, especially if Washington threatens sanctions against global business related with the import from China.

And thus, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) goes out of the shadows to the forestage which member countries form a united market with a size of 180 million people. This storage facility of course won't replace totally the loss of the US market but it's capable to play a role of a safety cushion for Chinese economy. It's possible that namely the feeling of Eurasian togetherness gives Beijing a possibility to act from the position of strength even being under the sword of Damocles, which is economic war against America.
 
China cracks down on CPC officials in Tibet having religious beliefs, secret links to Dalai Lama

First all these islamic terrorists in Xinjiang, now these buddhist terrorists in Tibet. This is not a land of the Tibetans, this is ancestral Han land. How dare they?

Time for more concentration camps to be set-up and the terrorist Tibetans thrown into them for vocational training.

Erik Prince should be whipped.

Chinese version of genocide. Instead of death just wipe out their culture via brainwashing.
 
This should given the Tibetan movement a new lease of life


This is serious for the CCP now

However It does not mean as Palki suggests that the US is doing way with the one china policy though.
 
Last edited:
If the world wanted to better understand what the CCP was about then what they did in Tibet was the blueprint.

They then proceeded to replicate that model with the rest of their people and now its about making the world compliant with the CCP's designs.

That's it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top