India - China: Relations And Developments-2

[Arun_S]

[quote name='qubit' date='25 May 2011 - 01:14 PM' timestamp='1306308971' post='111690']

Arun,





You're giving gastric flatulance a bad name by comparing it with Indian military doctrine. The term MMS would be better. Gmail even has an emoticon for MMS (the "stuff" with flies hovering it). Can't this forum have a similar emoticon to visually describe the catamtite MMS?

[/quote]



You mean MMS == MMS of flies hovering around yellow sh1t = Indian military doctrine

[Arun_S]

July 24, 2011 01:59 IST | Updated: July 24, 2011 01:59 IST

[url="http://www.samachar.com/China-India-not-basically-adversaries-Lee-Kuan-Yew-lhycKpacddg.html"]China, India not basically adversaries: Lee Kuan Yew[/url]

P. S. Suryanarayana Singapore projected as springboard for South Asian diaspora



China is focussed on the United States and “just wants to keep the Indians at arm's length,” said Lee Kuan Yew, East Asia's elder statesman, at the two-day South Asian Diaspora Convention (SADC), which concluded here on Friday.



In dialogue with the delegates at the first-ever global event held under the SADC banner, Mr. Lee said he would “not see the two countries [India and China] as basically adversaries of each other.” In economic and military terms, China and India could not also be seen counter-balancing each other.



On a key concern of the South Asian diaspora, he drew attention to “the deep-seated suspicions” between India and Pakistan and their “ever-lingering fear that there could be another war.” Asked whether the Chinese diaspora offered any lessons for the South Asian, Mr. Lee said: “When they [the Indians and Pakistanis] are out of their local animosities and when they are a minority in the western countries, say in America or Europe, then their animosities disappear. But they are a minority and that's why they tend to glue together.



But, once they go back to India or go back to Pakistan, they are [again] trapped by animosities. That is not easy to resolve. China's diaspora speak the same language with different accents. Nonetheless, the closer you get to China, the closer are some of the provincial pulls.”



Declaring the SADC open on Thursday, Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong assured the 50 million people of the South Asian diaspora that the City-State “is well-positioned to be the springboard” for their engagement with the rest of Asia and the world.”



Mr. Lee said Singapore's Institute of South Asian Studies (ISAS), established to turn a laser-like focus on that region, was now tracking the global activities of South Asian diaspora.



He cited the South Asian Link, an ISAS website, and the Institute's newsletter, as the initiatives already undertaken to promote Singapore as the springboard for this diaspora's activities across the world.



The idea of SADC was first envisioned by Singapore President S.R. Nathan, a proactive leader of the South Asian diaspora. Honouring him during the convention, ISAS chairman Gopinath Pillai read out a citation tracing Mr. Nathan's long and distinguished public career. ISAS Director Tan Tai Yong praised the services of Mr. Nathan who would soon be retiring as Singapore's President after 12 successive years at the helm.





Book released

Another highlight of the convention was the release of a book, The Dancing Girl: A History of Early India. Launching the book, Mr. Nathan hailed the scholarship of the author, Singapore's late ethnic Indian leader, Balaji Sadasivan. The book traces the history of India as a civilisation from the period of Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa and through the eras of the Chola and the Vijayanagara empires.



K. Kesavapany, Director of the Singapore-based Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, praised the manner in which Balaji, a man of medicine, gathered a mass of historical information and wrote in lucid prose.



Balaji's ethnic-Chinese wife, Ma Swan Hoo, traced how she completed the book after her husband's demise last year.



Showcasing another aspect of inter-cultural awareness, the Singapore Chinese Opera Institute staged a Mandarin cameo on an episode from Ramayana.

[Guest]

A Chinese bullet train crashed into another high-speed train that had stalled after being struck by lightning Saturday in eastern China, causing four carriages to fall off a viaduct and killing at least 32 people and injuring 191 others, state media reported.The first train was traveling from the Zhejiang provincial capital of Hangzhou when it lost power in the lightning strike and was hit from behind by the second train in Wenzhou city at 8:27 p.m. (1230 GMT), the official Xinhua News Agency said.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVrRfFFninU&feature=player_embedded#at=40[/media]



Are they super power? Just watch rescue efforts, more or like India type of mess.

[Meluhhan]

[url="http://www.firstpost.com/bollywood/not-just-buddhism-bollywood-too-lures-the-dragon-196535.html"]Bollywood Movies Becoming Popular in China[/url]:

Not just Buddhism, Bollywood too lures the dragon



Jan 28, 2012



#Bollywood #Ch-India #China #Cinema of India #India #India-China Centre #Zhang Yan

Email Share

inShare1 1 Comment



Pune: If you think that the Bollywood movies, with their potential for transporting the audience into a dream world of fantasy, would not be welcome in the Communist China, you could be wrong.



It is just not Buddhism that ties the Chinese society with India but also the new breed of Bollywood movies that are playing a role in synthesising the cultural bonds between the two Asian giants and economic powers.



“Bollywood films are very popular in China. They can compete with the Hollywood hits. ‘3 Idiots’ particularly became very popular in our country,” said Chinese Ambassador Zhang Yan who interacted with an audience assembled at the opening of the first ‘India-China Centre’ in Pune this week.



Bollywood movies are playing a role in synthesising the cultural bonds between the two Asian giants.



Asked to describe the cultural bonds that unite the two neighbours, who have had the ups and downs in their relationship, the Ambassador was quick to respond.



“The Buddhist philosophy from India is a strong influence that has enriched and contributed to our culture. Then there is yoga from India which is also popular with the opening of training centres in the country. Another influence is the Bollywood films which are becoming very popular in China. Bollywood films are competing with the Hollywood hits,” said the Chinese envoy to India, smiling from ear to ear.



Highlighting the cultural harmony, Zhang said “My embassy staff too is undergoing training in yoga”, drawing an applause from the audience comprising academicians, social workers, businessmen and diplomats who included former Indian Ambassador to the US Ronen Sen.



The opening of the centre here was happening in 2012, being celebrated as the “Year of Dragon” in China, denoting good fortunes as per the Chinese zodiac, he noted.

[jim pam]

HELP! China invaded India. Help your contry in the largest massive online military/economic multiplayer game http://bit.ly/K8DK0N

[Meluhhan]

[quote name='pamj' date='18 May 2012 - 10:43 AM' timestamp='1337355357' post='114886']

HELP! China invaded India. Help your contry in the largest massive online military/economic multiplayer game http://bit.ly/K8DK0N

[/quote]



Somebody ban this nutjob.

[Husky]

independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-building-fake-islands-by-dumping-sand-on-coral-reefs-as-it-claims-south-china-sea-says-us-10149213.html

[Husky]

Anti-empire Pro-Russian site features a Sandhya Jain article.



thesaker.is/rise-of-a-multi-polar-asia-a-view-from-india/



The article is not what's interesting. It's the comments that I saw there (didn't read all the way down, but read enough to further confirm conclusions. Archiving the above link for its comments.





1. The overall purpose of the article and present Russia's vision is that there should be resistance to take on the fascist Empire that US is creating day by day. Russia has made close ties with China to ward off the threat - so would I if I were Russia (but not if I were India).

Russia plans to grow the resistance by recruiting India and Iran. And Pakistan gets to tag along.



Russians repeatedly express the entirely unrealistic wish (and vision) that China and India should get along and India and Pak too. The Russians even go so far imagining that the greater interest will pull all of them together (doubt it) to put aside their differences, since Russia imagines that the differences between genocidal maniac jihadi Pakiland and Unfinished Business=heathen India is minor.



Presumably the Russians think that India will just have to give up yet more land to China in order to keep the peace in this new resistance formation. Uh, fat chance. No unity on those terms.

Can have common economic policies but - though Russia and India are not enemies and neither are India and Iran - China and Pakistan are most certainly enemies of India. (I don't mean the non-commie Chinese population, though I do mean the islamic Paki population.) And I don't see why the Russians are plugging for Hezbollah either. Geez. And what's with the invitation to TSP? People need to stop feeding islam.



Russia - for the greater interest - may try to impose a common code, and choose to overlook Chinese and Paki aggression against India in view of this "greater good", and perhaps Indian political leaders who come hereafter will ignore islamic genocides of Hindus and more Chinese land theft in India in order to keep the "peace" and maintain their place in the circle of resisting "friends". But India will only lose and lose again from the way Russia envisions the future of how this should play out.



Again: Ganging up economically against the US is one thing, but no aggression from CN and TSP should be tolerated - India need not look to Russia for dispute mediation in such a case (which is the role the US is currently playing and which India never benefited by either).



Except for Russia, the others on Russia's wishlist are useless. (India wants SE Asian nations included, which neither the Russians nor the Chinese think are useful. To India, they are of course very useful as friends.)



Russia and China WILL get along. They are both equally matched so will not threaten each other (though Russia may make some concessions throughout). While Indian soldiers are not cowards, our country and army is at present at a disadvantage w.r.t. China, which is on the offence (while India is on the defence), since China has deployed its armies on India's boundaries. Note that China's living space is in the east of China (with only 3 major cities in the centre), while most of China's central and almost all its western reaches are essentially wild. So China has made its army cross beyond that, to be deployed in/at India's boundaries. Contrary to Sandhya Jain's naive views (and the comments at the link show how naive she is), China is very much interested in prime real estate. It has too little agricultural land and wants/needs more.





2. Despite Sandhya in her article having totally undermined India's own interests by having totally underplayed* the actual situation of Chinese territorial aggression into Indian space*, the Chinese commenters at the link still pass off India as the aggressor AND still proclaim that they will settle their land disputes with India (next).

Look how the Chinese commenters give no inch (and keep their position), though Sandhya walked a mile in their direction (without anyone asking her to). The Chinese comments - clearly communists and brainwashed Chinese nationalists, since most Chinese don't care about acquiring yet more territory and the heathens certainly don't - the Chinese commenting there will merely take Sandhya's extreme concessions as proof that "even Indians admitted that 'it is all disputed -> it is all a matter of POV -> therefore India has no legitimate claims'". Whereas the Chinese side will hold strong to their position that Arunachal Pradesh "belongs to them" (and eventually they will publicly advance their claims on J&K too), and the Russians - who are understandably ignorant and disinterested (despite trying to be interested for "unity's sake") - and others will merely conclude that the Chinese claim must be more valid since they're more vocal about it while Indians (like Sandhya, but not exclusively) rolled over on their stance.



Very dangerous and foolish.



* Indians should learn Never to give an inch, but way too many Indians wanting to play with China always sell all our interests. And I'm not at all just talking about Sandhya Jain here.





3. Then there are of course the other commenters: the Pakistanis, rearing their ugly heads and lying as usual against history, to pretend their rewritten version is also a valid "POV". Russia will NOT care and will try to keep all happy/expect equally from all to fall in line. = More proof that a close interaction - beyond joint economic cooperation with Russia and China and Iran (not TSP) to limit the US/western hegemony - is Not in India's interest.



It's like that battle in was it Chanakya were the phrase "the friend of my friend is my enemy" is to have derived from.

I only came across a snippet about its origins, but the situation in Chanakya's scenario was way more complicated. It was about a king who is surrounded by multiple enemy kings. And if he wants to win, he will have to play them against each other. While Russia is no threat, being neutral to India (though under Chinese influence from the close Sino-Russian cooperation that has started, that may change), and Iran is not a neighbour and has enemies closer to home, China and TSP are indeed enemies. And if India won't play enemies against each other, it need not fear that China will be equally considerate: China is already using TSP against India.





4. Most interesting is to hear the communists, christians and pakis interact.



A faithful Paki regularly invoking islam/caliphate theories promised greater fealty to Russia than to China: he said that Pakistan and Russia were natural allies compared to Pakistan and China, on account of Russia's christianism being closer to TSP's islam and because of the great distance between China's Taoism and Buddhism, which he said islam didn't have commonality with.



Not too long after that, some Chinese communist caved - desperate to ensure Paki loyalty - by declaring that "Not true, Buddhism and Taoism have at least as much in common with islam" by quoting some E Asian islamic (?) inculturationist on Chinese Confucianism IIRC (I'm not aware of islamic inculturation on Buddhism and Taoism. In China, islam has repeatedly tried to hijack Confucianism as a precursor form of islam.) In any case, the point was, the Chinese communists will readily cave to islam on insistences concerning religion: Chinese atheists/'cultural' Chinese (as some communists doing lipservice to govt-hijacked Confucianism are) are not interested in religion and hence will make concessions to TSP/islam in this area to secure the greater prize for them: the use of TSP in its own plans and as a buffer against India/to undermine India with.*



In reciprocation, the Paki islamaniac inched towards the Chinese capitulation by saying that he didn't meant to totally dismiss them, but reaffirmed that muslims' friends/brothers are only christians and muslims will love only christians (and invoked some islamic prediction or other from the koran about this).



Nothing Indians there mentioned TSP helping Uighurs against Chinese or islamics killing Chinese engineers in TSP itself made a dent: the Chinese communists commenting - and they mirror their govt's position in this - are steadfast in their interest in maintaining their close ties (not natural, entirely opportunistic but hence definitely useful to China) with Pakistan.



+ Chinese are not under any delusions about Pakis being an islamic threat, but it is not one that is directed at itself (yet), so can be totally tolerated, even nurtured for all they care. [*Though feeding islam is a bad idea on China's part, as it is the greater threat to China. Recall islam destroying both the E Roman empire/Byzantinium and Persia, who were both too busy warring each other to measure up the enemy islam properly. China undermining India - via islamic TSP - will strengthen islam and this can easily backfire on China Tomorrow even if not Today.]

+ The Paki will speak honestly from his faith in declaring who his real friends are (christians), the Chinese communists will twist the Taoism and Buddhism (and Confucianism) of their land and civilisation to suit the moment if it will serve the purpose. The Chinese communists vocalising are not guided by any of these religions after all, and merely use them as a means to an end: that of securing Pakistan's loyalty, preferably over and above TSP's loyalty - pledged here by a Paki commenting - to Russia (in return for Paki's request that Russia adopt TSP in its plans and to its bosom too).



Russians, despite knowing jihad well, do not equate Pakistan with the Al-Qaeda that is ISI-controlled. I think the Russians are blinkered about this detail, and probably reason that a jihadi state of Pakistan is not the same as the Taliban they fought in Afghanistan or the Chechnyans within its borders. They probably reason about Pakistan as they do about Hezbollah. (Iran has the edge in civility being less belligerent, possibly/probably because all its neighbours are dar-ul-islams already.)





5. Except for the Russians commenting at that link - who were neutral towards India - and a Chinese American (citizen, i.e. not an activist), who was too far removed from China to know whether she needed to take an anti-Indian position (the day may come when we all have to stand by our own people/country, I fear)

Again: except for the Russians being neutral, everyone else commenting - the Chinese communist contingent who are always sent out on such occasions and islamic Pakis who always invite themselves into such discussions - were merely banging on India and trying to strengthen Chinese-TSP ties by mouthing off against their common enemy together. (So much for Sandhya meeting China more than half way in her article; which the Russians took as the Indian POV, whereas it is a 'concessionist' POV.)



^ BTW, that above configuration - neutral Russia and extremely inimical closely-tied China-Pak combine w.r.t. India (silent/absent Iran? just kidding) - is a perfect summary of how the interactions will be on the large scale of Russia-China-India-TSP (and Iran) relations when all are stuck together in the plans Russia has for the region. Russian plans for cooperation may benefit them, but by their expecting India to make peace with belligerent China and TSP, no benefits can be foreseen for India.





6. Russian commenters were not interested

+ in the plight of Balochis, who were briefly brought up. (Russia is looking for long term interests. That islam genocides Balochis does not concern the Russians, so - unlike the US, which will feign sympathy if it will serve its own foreign policy purposes - Russia naturally remains disinterested/apathetic.)



In contrast, Balochis - despite being islamic - are not inimical to Indian interests, since they are not neighbouring us and are a useful leverage on TSP. The way India is sandwiched by TSP and China, and China makes ties with TSP despite it being islamic.

Of course, Balochis may be temporary allies: being islamic any number of them may eventually fall for/get swept up by the caliphate. So Indians can't dream of a certain/eternal friendship with them while they are islamic and haven't reverted to ancestral heathenism.



+ Russians were similarly not interested in SE Asian countries, as mentioned before, whereas Sandhya did put forth the Indian govt's deep interest in pursuing a relationship with the non-belligerent SE Asian nations, which are natural allies (though I wouldn't include Malaysia which is jihadising fast).



Russians are not favourable because these SE Asian countries are not considered powerful and hence not considered meaningful. China is of immense value to Russia. China sees the use of Russia in jointly containing US. Everyone else is just a useful extension for them.





7. I think besides forging the Russia-China-India-Iran-(TSP) relationship to whatever extent will further India without sacrificing any of India and Hindus' interests, India must pursue forming deep ties with SE Asian unsaved heathen nations and Japan (as India is already doing)* and in the west pursue ties with Baloch and either Iran OR Israel. Don't know much about Azerbaijan and Tajikistan, but both have Zoroastrian communities and Mazdeanism is/was growing stronger there, so some deeper mutually-beneficial relationships may be forged there on the principle of being natural allies.



Both Israel and Iran can be problematic (and can't befriend both at the same time since they're sworn enemies; it's like Russia unrealistically wanting to befriend India AND China, and Indian AND Pakistan all in one big "happy" family - won't work). Reasons of why Iran and Israel can be problematic:



+ Israel is west-aligned and the west is not good for India. Close relationships with Israel will bring India under the ambit of US interests. Of course army workouts with the US can be useful as a deterrent against China: always a good thing to use one enemy to keep other enemies checkmated, and everyone else is already playing this game.



+ Iran is - while not as crazy as salafists - still extremely islamic, and helping Iran will be the same as helping islam. However, Iran is still better than many other islamic nations since Iran is not wahabi/sunni. And Iran is slowly being made an island of Shia islam by US machinations via ISIS, so they are in no condition to pick and choose friends. It is possible that a sense of belonging to islam is more powerful, except that Sunnis don't recognise Shias as muslim AND Shiitism is being attacked at present by Sunnis so the old enmities are burning strong again.



* Russia is ignoring Japan because despite JP being rich and economically powerful (but so is Russia, so Russia won't need JP for its wealth), JP is not numerically great or vast in land/resources, and no longer a nation with a large standing army, i.e. manpower for war. (In the past, the historical JP armies used to be 1 JP soldier=100 or even 1000 lions. That's not an exaggeration. But the US/west totally neutered JP into an impotent militantly-pacifist nation [until Abe], not at all for ethical reasons over WWII - which was only a small part of the history of JP's armed forces - but because JP was a huge Asian power, with an army to back it up and was a giant killer that all the west put together could not ignore. So the west destroyed JP and declawed it and allowed it to become an "economical superpower", i.e. a country that can't protect its wealth or territory without US "interventions", forcing it into vassal status.)







The news was:



Anti-empire Pro-Russian site features a Sandhya Jain article.



thesaker.is/rise-of-a-multi-polar-asia-a-view-from-india/



The article is not what's interesting. It's the comments that I saw there (didn't read all the way down, but read enough to know it confirmed a larger picture that Indians are already familiar with/would already have worked out).

[ravish]

India China border dispute is a legacy of our colonial past. We accept the border as it was drawn by the British . At that time the British Empire was at its zenith and the Chinese were in no position to take any stand on the issue.They had to sign on the dotted lines.

Unfortunately, after independence the Indian Government continued to claim that the border demarcation made by the British was the real border between the two countries. The Chinese on the other hand disputed the border demarcation and pointed out that the British had dictated the border as per their own sweet will. The successive Governments of India have been feeding to the ears of the general public that the present border is the correct one. Today the situation has become such that no Indian Government will have the political courage to renegotiate the entire border demarcation with a open mind and free hand. Therefore, the present stalemate and confusion is expected to continue.

[Husky]

^Ravish knows little of India and more about everyone else('s line). He's actually anti-Hindu and anti-Indian, and he thinks psecularism is progressive and that one-way compromise is nationalism and he would advocate cowardice as diplomacy. He's wasted on nationalist sites and belongs on countercurrents (commie conclave).





Archiving. Seems related to the links in post 468 above.



rajeev2004.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/fwd-reports-from-bangladeshcontroversy.html

7. Russia loses its strategic sheen with India 8.6.15 by dr subhash kapila

southasiaanalysis.org/node/1791

Better than sacrificing India's interests or making them subordinate to other people's 'greater cause'.



southasiaanalysis.org/node/1791

Russia Loses its Strategic Sheen with India:



Paper No. 5948 Dated 8-June-2015



By Dr Subhash Kapila



Russia in 2015 has lost its strategic sheen and strategic utility to India after more than four decades of being the sheet-anchor of India’s security. The onus of this Indian perception gaining ground lies on Russia squarely for switching to China as sheet-anchor of Russia’s foreign policy.



[...]

Surely, even today Russia is capable of standing up to the United States and the West and does not require ‘Made in China’ crutches.

(Apparently Russia doesn't think so. Or China has convinced them that it is not so.)

[...]



More disturbing has been the Russian petulance in attempting to signal to India that it is now moving closer to Pakistan by striking a defence and arms supply relationship. This again spells out clearly that it does not seem to be an independent Russian initiative, but Russia acting under Chinese pressure to further Chinese strategic interests in South Asia through its Pakistan-proxy.



What is then India expected to make and discern from an erstwhile staunch and tested strategic partner like Russia indulging in strategic dalliance with “India’s major military threat countries”, namely China and Pakistan?

[...]

Hope it's true that India will be backing off from being a groupie in any joint Russia-China-TSP conglomeration.

Of course China will put in a favour for TSP to be included in the friend-list, and of course this is the Chinese hint to India to bow out.

And of course India will have to bow out. Russia is free to decide and so is India. Except Russia's new 'friends' are far from reliable. TSP=the Taliban that kicked them out of Afghanistan and is a big supporter of Chechnyan and other violence. And China will get far more out of the deal - out of Russia - than the Russians will. But that's their lookout.



Russia ought to have been able to hold its own against all of the west even in the modern era. Interesting that they themselves don't think they can. Which probably means they can't, and that I've over-estimated Russia. Admittedly they were far more clever and had greater insight in the past - true for many countries - but I didn't know they were quite so desperate as to enter into a deal with China that will reduce them and not take away from any advantages China has. Not to mention getting stuck with jihad-central TSP, which is US' lapdog (AmeriKKKa won't let Russia pry away its strategic asset in "South Asia" and TSP at most will become a double agent).



India far better off without, than stuck in that company. Even alone is better than being stuck with interests inimical to the nation. They just weight down.

Fortunately, India has been re-forming closer ties with natural allies (and historical friends/relatives) in SE Asia like significantly-heathen Vietnam. Aren't the Vietnamese famous for vanquishing China historically? Japan was the last great (in terms of on the world stage) Asian worldpower, before the current [projected] rise of China. Never underestimate "small" Asian countries.

[Sounds a bit like Vizzini saying: "Never get into a landwar in Asia." Which is also true.]

[ravish]

The outcome of the just concluded Brics Summit at Goa has not been very favourable for India. Despite persistent efforts it has not been possible to get JeM and LeT mentioned in the Goa declaration. The Chinese reservation in naming JeM and LeT was on expected lines as they had no intention of displeasing Pakistan. However, India had not expected that Russia would not come out in support of India.

It is quite possible that Russia wanted to send a message to India that our increasing closeness to the United States, particularly in military and strategic matters has not been to the liking of the Russians. Russia in its global balancing act against the United States wants China by its side. So it can be said that a new balance of power in the Asia Pacific region is being worked out. Russia’s recent military exercise with Pakistan needs to be viewed keeping this aspect in mind.