India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Printable Version

+- Forums (
+-- Forum: Indian Politics, Business & Economy (
+--- Forum: Strategic Security of India (
+--- Thread: India - China: Relations And Developments-2 (/showthread.php?tid=469)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Husky - 04-14-2008

<b>Please see Harshvardan's far more important post (previous page)</b>
Edited (cut). Misunderstood. (Glad Fernandez is still normal.) Though I wonder what game Margaret Roy is playing by two-timing her communist love China.

<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Apr 14 2008, 11:45 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Apr 14 2008, 11:45 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->The fact that Tibet has become an imperialist playground does not preclude legitimacy of Tibetan Resistance.[right][snapback]80643[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I thoroughly agree with this. For once I disagree with Sandhya Jain ("Roof rights of the world" posted by Mudy in #149). I understand the point Sandhya Jain is trying to make. But we wouldn't think it ok for China to take over India if it looked like US/UK had bigger plans with Bharatam than they already do. So why make an exception for Tibet? Doesn't its Dharma and population matter in the exact same way? (Meanwhile China does have serious designs on India. It's already encroached into Nepalese territory, and the masses of psecular Indians who imagine the Chinese army's only come there to practise for the winter olympics are sadly mistaken.)

Of course, the christo nations UK and USA have been planning lots of things with Tibet and even Nepal, Burma, Bhutan and India's own NE. (We're all honoured by their most kind condescending attention, I'm sure.) But that doesn't mean Tibetans or Indians have any reason to cheer Chinese communiterrorist occupation of Buddhist Tibet. Tibetans' choice is between christo UK/US or communist China - yech, what kind of choice is that. Is there even a difference between the two? Tibet deserves to be free of them both.

The sad thing is that there's probably going to be a nasty communiterrorist reprisal against Tibetan Buddhists after the olimpings are over. No one will care about the Buddhists then, least of all the red army.
Now is the time for sportspeople to take a stand and show that there are principles that matter more than the games they've trained for. Hit red china where it hurts: in the wallet and its pride. But, guess Tibetans don't matter to most sports(wo)men. Olimping around is clearly more important. Because, you know, you could get a shiny gold, silver or bronze thing. Ohhh, and hear your anthem being played - even though you never bother to hear it at other times - and go all sniffly at the thought. Yupp, truly moving stuff.
Look, it's a thing, a M-e-h-d-a-l! And it's shiny! Woohoo. Man, that's worth thousands of Buddhists at least, and toss in your grandma too.

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-14-2008

The only way to deter chinese agression against tibetans is to talk to it in the language china understands and that language is through the projection of power through strong nuclear deterence. Until the ATV get inducted into the forces through it the third strike capability comes online, we will have to wait patiently and not let emotions in the way of making critical foreign policy decisions.

Right now Tibetans should advocate the demand for free tibet peacefully as preached by dalai lama. Any violence at this juncture will only harm tibet's cause in the long run and no western power is willingly to intervene to protect tibetans. India will be in an position to protect tibetans in tibet only when an assured minimum credible nuclear deterence becomes opeartional. Until then patience is the key.

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-14-2008

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Chinese have entered Kalmadi's office

Sheela Bhatt in New Delhi

April 14, 2008 17:53 IST
Last Updated: April 14, 2008 17:55 IST

Suresh Kalmadi, president of the Indian Olympic Association, is working in tandem with the military attache of the Embassy of China to make the Olympic torch relay ceremony on April 17 a mishap-free event.

Tibetans living in India are expected to oppose the torch relay event in New Delhi.

Thousands of Tibetans living in Karnataka have moved to the north to protest on April 17. In view of their discontent, the government of India has ensured safe passage of the torch relay event to the Chinese government, which is very wary of the violent and embarrassing protests.

In London [Images], on April 6 when the torch arrived it was guarded by the London police and also Chinese security men disguised in blue and white tracksuits.

Lord Coe, chairman of Olympic committee, was so irritated by this that he called them, "thugs."

But in India, the chief of the Olympics [Images] committee himself is providing all courtesy to the Chinese security experts.

A senior staffer of the Chinese embassy along with 8 to 10 Chinese assistants are camping right inside Kalmadi's office in Nehru stadium.

The stadium is under repair and quite shabby. The Chinese are offered all the data of invitees and details of the security arrangement.

When some journalists wanted to know names of the Chinese officers camping in the meeting room of Kalmadi's office of the Commonwealth Games, they were asked to vacate the premises.

By having the Chinese right inside the office of the president of IOA, the government may be not taking any chances to take the blame alone in case of any breach of security at Vijaypath on April 17.

Not only has the 2.5 km road on Vijaypath been covered from all sides, it seems that common people may not be able to view the event. There is a strict procedure to be followed to obtain passes to cover the event.


India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-14-2008

<b>India is biggest counter to China, US adventurism</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Apr 14 2008
New Delhi

India has the biggest moral counter force to the militant adventurism advocated by China and US on the global stage, says Robert Thurman, leading scholar, writer and the first American to be ordained as a monk in Tibetan Buddhism during the 1960s.

"They (Chinese) are still caught up in militant adventurism, of which the US has been and is also been guilty," the 66-year-old Thurman said Sunday evening while delivering a speech on 'Tibet: Zone of Peace, Crucial for Humanity'.

"The answer to that is in India, the biggest counter to that kind of adventurism," he said.

Professor of Indo-Tibetan Buddhist studies at Columbia University, Thurman, who is also the father of Oscar nominated actress Uma Thurman, pointed out that India and Tibet have special historical links.

"If Tibet is declared a zone of peace and given autonomy, then you (Indians) could go and visit Kailash whenever you wanted. The entire Himalayas would be open to you. Your rivers will not be diverted, as the Chinese are doing to Brahmaputra by drilling through rocks with nuclear devices."

In another part of the speech, Thurman said he knew that the Indian government was 'under enormous pressure' but did not elaborate further.

Thurman said in his latest book 'Why the Dalai Lama Matters' he had laid out five modest steps for the Chinese leadership to keep Tibet and also present a more statesman-like face to the world.

"I can guarantee that Hu Jintao and his nine-member standing committee of the Communist party politburo will get the Nobel Prize if they follow the steps," he said jocularly.

The first step would be the reinstatement of the Tibet Autonomous Region, the second, the establishment of a real one country-two systems policy, the third to reassign the thousands of Chinese soldiers posted in the Tibetan heartland to the borders.

"The fourth step would be to mend relations with the Dalai Lama. And the last step would be to declare the Tibetan plateau as an environmental reserve," he said.

Thurman was convinced if the Chinese regime did give the Tibetans what they wanted, which was real autonomy, then the Dalai Lama would be a very influential goodwill ambassador for China with the rest of the world.

He also suggested that there should be a plebiscite for Tibetans to decide if they want to be with the Chinese. "Tibetans are incredibly pragmatic. They know it's not practical to be independent," said Thurman.

Further, he noted that it was wrong to think that the Chinese were not concerned about their image or about world opinion over Tibet. "Why are they bothering to hold the Olympics and spending $60 billion if they are not worried about their image?"

Thurman said that he was shocked and surprised by the riots and violence in Tibet last month.

"I know that Tibetans outside would have done something in the run-up to the elections, but nobody expected Tibetans inside Tibet to protest - as that is self-destructive," he said.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - dhu - 04-14-2008

they have long tern goal. Creating cultural wasteland is most important. they will even leverage Chinese response and reprisals towards this end, just as the known burmese response was leveraged to empty the monasteries. Intentions were clear as soon as Nepal was declared non-hindu and secular entity. There is no such thing as deal with India. India is the sacrificial victim, and in a bigger sense, Asia itself.

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-16-2008

This must be unprecedented..

<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Apr 14 2008, 06:15 AM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Apr 14 2008, 06:15 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->

<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Chinese have entered Kalmadi's office

Sheela Bhatt in New Delhi

More on the same line..

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Rajpath will be under hawk-eyed vigil with the security ring including Chinese commandos, for the event to avoid protests by Tibetans. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->R'Day-type security for Olympic torch run<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-17-2008

<b>200 arrests as 'fortress' New Delhi hosts torch relay</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Story Highlights
Protesters take part in a parallel torch relay
Some two dozen Tibetan exiles protest along a busy highway
Several forcibly detained by police and taken away in police vans
As India-China relations warm, New Delhi aims to avoid torch chaos<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Moron Singh in full swing kissing China's behind.

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - dhu - 04-18-2008

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->India gifts Nepal to China
Balbir Punj (Pioneer)

The UPA Government can now flaunt one more 'achievement' along with inflation, deceleration in rate of growth and industrial production, and minority appeasement. The latest addition to this list is the gift of Nepal on a platter to China. With Communist China under virtual global siege for its horrible record on human rights in Tibet, the success of armed Maoists in Nepal should come as a heart-warmer for China's President Hu Jintao. The Indian Communists who keep the UPA in power are, of course, delighted. Mr Sitaram Yechuri has hailed the Maoist victory even as his comrades in Nepal are preparing to assume office with an anti-India agenda, including the revision of the peace and friendship treaty.

The attack that Maoists mounted on an important railway station in Bihar and looted the armoury, killing six policemen, last weekend, even as Maoists in Nepal were celebrating their electoral victory, is a straw in the political wind. Mr Yechuri is trying to mislead us by claiming that the victory of Maoists in Nepal through the ballot box will send a message to Maoists in India to give up their insurgency and take to democratic methods. In reality, it will be the other way round.

Due to the UPA's dalliance with the Communists for retaining power -- and before that with Maoists during the 2004 elections to gain power -- Maoists have gained influence over the last four years. This finds expression in periodic attacks on security forces at key points along the 'Red Corridor' the Maoists have set up through the forested areas of Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand and Bihar up to India's border with Nepal. The attack on Jhajhar railway junction on the Patna-Howrah mainline is not the first such incident.

The path the Nepal Maoists, once they are in power, will follow is already well-known. The monarchy, which has served as an anchor for Nepali society, will be dismantled. Instead of being a Hindu kingdom, which gave that country its unique identity, Nepal will be made a 'secular republic'. The 'secular' character is likely to mean anti-Hindu (as in India) and a 'republic' under Maoist domination may turn out to be another Cambodia under Pol Pot or a North Korea. Not only will Nepal's links with Indian society, culture and history be snapped, the Maoists will demand the scrapping of existing treaties with India. They will try to force India into giving more concessions -- for instance, unrestricted transit of goods.

At the same time, we can expect the Maoists to cry on China's shoulders and accuse India of denying Nepal its basic needs. <b>China has already built a highway up to Kathmandu. </b><b>We have to view the Maoist political programme in Nepal in the context of China's own strengthening of its strategic capabilities in Tibet, the ethnic cleansing it has achieved in Lhasa and the claims Beijing has been making on Indian territories all along the Himalayas. </b>This will provide us with an idea of the serious situation that will now arise for the security of the country in the wake of the Maoist triumph at the political level and the withering of the Nepali state as we have known it for centuries.

Apologists of the UPA are now saying that the rout of the Nepali Congress was unexpected and that Government was all along strengthening its clout in Nepal -- by persuading King Gyanendra and the Maoists to end their confrontation and revive the political process. This may be true. But New Delhi's fatal mistake was to accept the Maoist demand to end the monarchy. It was a 'heads I win, tails you lose' situation for Maoist leader Prachanda who managed to keep Indian influence at an arm's length when it still mattered.

India could have helped the non-Communist political forces in Nepal to convert the absolute monarchy into constitutional monarchy. The demand of the Maoists to scrap Nepal's Hindu identity had shocked even their allies in the interim Government. But the Maoists were able to dictate terms, partly because the setting up of the constitutional machinery was not made incumbent on disarming the insurgents.

As a result, the Maoists retained their armed strength and threatened to withdraw from the interim Government every time their non-Communist allies in the interim Government stood up to them. Holding the election while armed Maoist cadre were freely moving about amounted to making a mockery of the democratic process. But New Delhi did nothing to raise this issue with the UN and other bodies that took on the task of overseeing the fairness of the election.

For a long time our security agencies have suspected that the flow of arms to Maoists in India had a Nepal link. Now the collaboration between Maoists in India and Nepal will become an open affair. Indian Maoists will draw inspiration from Prachanda's 'success' and the methods used by him to achieve this success.

This is not to say that the other actors in the political drama in Nepal are innocent victims of Communist machinations. The monarchy lost much of its sheen after the mysterious palace massacre in which King Birendra and his family were killed. King Gyanendra, who subsequently assumed the throne, could not connect with the restive people of his kingdom. The mainstream Nepali politicians proved to be a querulous bunch devoid of any larger vision, leave alone the ability to implement it. Mr GP Koirala, who became Prime Minister in the interim Government, was too ill to lead his party and fight an electoral battle against Maoist leaders much younger than him.

It is surprising that India, which had a stake in the outcome of the Constituent Assembly election, chose to turn a blind eye to these developments. It has now paid the price, both for its inaction and lack of imagination in its Nepal policy. Surprisingly, the Government showed great alacrity in persuading the King to climb down in 2006.

Some people in India are now hopeful that once in power, the Maoist leadership will appreciate the reality of Nepal's geographical and cultural links with India and the depth of its economy's dependence on this country. They forget that Nepal's politicians have mastered the art of playing the victim of 'Big Brother' India every time their unreasonable demands are rejected by New Delhi.

With Beijing finding an ideological brother in power in Kathmandu, what is needed in New Delhi is a Government that can be firm when required while being flexible to Nepal's reasonable demands. But what we have is a Government that is dictated to by India's Communists. These very Communists are also playing China's game as is witnessed in their reaction to what is happening in Tibet.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-18-2008

Oh I feel so much better already..

China thanks India for trouble-free torch relay

Raghavendra in Beijing

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - dhu - 04-19-2008

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why must India kow-tow to China?

Indian leaders are also perfectly aware that the Chinese, in a span of fifty years, have killed 1.2 million Tibetans, razed to the ground 6,254 monasteries, destroyed 60 per cent of religious, historical and cultural archives and that one Tibetan out of ten is still in jail.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - dhu - 04-20-2008

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> The fortified gauntlet of shame

Swapan Dasgupta

To call it farcical would be a perverse misreading. What was witnessed in the centre of Delhi last Thursday afternoon was an outrage. At the behest of a regime that increasingly resembles the hosts of the 1936 Berlin Olympiad, the Government of India played its role in defiling the Olympic movement. Qu Yingpu, the spokesman for the Olympics torch relay, was being entirely truthful when he boasted to Xinhua news agency that the Rajpath run would be an "unforgettable" day for the Indian torch bearers. For decades to come, many of these noble sportsmen and sponsor-driven filmstars will curse the day they were misled or bamboozled into running through the fortified Gauntlet of Shame. There was nothing remotely resembling the "Olympic spirit of peace, friendship and progress" in the 2.3 km stretch from Raisina Hill to India Gate. The Delhi run was a crude, flag-waving, propaganda exercise for China. In co-sponsoring it, India lowered itself to the level of Musharraf's Pakistan.   

For Beijing the transformation of Lutyens' Delhi into a Forbidden City was a political triumph it flaunted to its own people through its state-controlled media. But what did signify for India? It is one thing to honour a commitment and ensure that the Olympic torch was not violated, as happened in London and Paris. It is a separate matter to ensure "safe passage" (a quaint expression hitherto reserved for fugitives and terrorists) by re-enacting what the Rowlatt Act sought to do in Amritsar in 1919.

The entire 'torch zone' was declared a no-go area for Indians and, of course, Tibetans. The only ones - apart from security personnel, some pom-pom girls and three busloads of unfortunate schoolchildren - <b>allowed into the sanitised zone were the representatives of those who have acquired sole proprietary rights over the 2008 Olympics - six busloads of Chinese nationals. These special people (akin to the Europeans the Punjab administration exempted from crawling on their bellies) waved super-sized Red Flags with gusto and displayed posters denouncing the Dalai Lama, President Sarkozy and CNN. And while this grotesque assault on the Olympic spirit was being undertaken, Doordarshan ran a commentary that equated the event with the Republic Day parade.
There were two parallel displays of arrogance on Rajpath last Thursday. There was the triumphalist Chinese displaying a we-don't-give-a-damn-for-what-the-world-thinks sneer. And then there was Indian officialdom with its exemplary show of Vichy complicity.

After the Emergency, it was famously said of many Indian editors that "when asked to bend, they crawled". On Thursday, the Government of India demonstrated the same fawning, over-zealousness before the People's Republic of China. Somewhere in the nerve centres of the Middle Kingdom, they will be calculating what this show of Indian servility implies for China's hegemonic ambitions. In other parts of the world, they will be asking whether their faith in India becoming a counter-weight to China in Asia was based on fantasy.

There is only one formidable obstacle in the path of the Chinese steamroller in India: civil society. Last Thursday's Chinese overkill has ended up converting more people in India to the cause of the Dalai Lama than ever before. Unfortunately, worldwide concern for the plight of Tibetans in China has merely become a handle for Beijing to bolster Han arrogance and nationalism. Far from the Olympic protests being a mellowing influence, popular xenophobia may actually end up reinforcing Chinese intransigence.

Should the democratic world, therefore, try a different tack? Far from it. Tibet has become the symbol of global concern over China's reckless unconcern for the norms of decency that go hand in hand with economic progress. Thanks to the Dalai Lama, it is also a powerful moral symbol.

The Olympics are a sporting event but China is determined to make it an assertion of its political arrogance. It has to be resisted. And what better than for the world outside Beijing to fly the Tibetan flag proudly and ostentatiously throughout August? Even the Government of India can't dare stop that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - dhu - 04-20-2008

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Tibetan Dilemma
By M.V. Kamath

There are some things that India can do in the international sphere and some things that India cannot do and should not, and it should know the difference especially in the case of Tibet. China claims that Tibet has always been part of its territory, a claim that is debatable. In pre-industrial times when communication was difficult and China itself was fragmented Tibet had largely been left to itself. But when the Communists finally came to power in Beijing, one of the first things that the People’s Liberation Army did in 1950 was to occupy Tibet. India had become independent just three years earlier and its government was new to the job.

Nehru had claims to be an expert in international affairs—there was hardly any one in the Congress Party anyway, with any grounding in formation of foreign policy—and Nehru was beguiled. Despite Sardar Vallabbhai Patel’s stern warnings about China’s possible reneging on promises to his Prime Minister on November 7, 1950, India signed a Border Trade Agreement with the euphemestically called “The Tibet Region of China” on April 29, 1954 which conceded Chinese sovereignty over Tibet. Nehru’s understanding of China was idealistic, not based on realism. He was too naïve. He permitted himself to be misguided by his own Ambassador to China, Sardar K.M.Panicker who was sold on the new government in Beijing. Under the Agreement, India agreed to clear out of Lhasa, lock, stock and barrel and to hand over its infrastructure in the Tibetan capital to the new overlords. The argument then was that if it did not do so, it would have been forced to quit anyway. India took the easy way out.

Earlier, in 1951, the Tibetans, poor and unarmed had been forced to sign a seventeen point agreement that conceded Chinese sovereignty over their territory. If China had indeed been sovereign, surely no such agreement was needed. But China wanted to legalise its invasion. It got away with it. As far as international affairs were concerned, Nehru was a novice and his Adviser Panicker was better known as China’s ambassador to India than India’s then India’s ambassador to Beijing. And yet another ill-informed adviser to Nehru was V.K.Krishna Menon. China, as we now know, betrayed their faith in it by invading India to “teach Delhi a lesson” and thereby making a mockery of Nehru’s pro-Beijing policy. He was to die a broken-hearted man. China has thus shown that it cannot be trusted.

Under the 17-point Agreement China had given explicit assurance to Tibet’s leadership that it would not alter the political system under which Lhasa ruled. A pledge was also made that the political status, functions and powers of the Dalai Lama would not be tampered with. Furthermore, Beijing also promised not only to promote the development of Tibetan language and culture, but protect the income of monasteries and the freedom of religious beliefs as well. Words, words, words. Everyone of these pledges were to be broken in subsequent years. Beijing encouraged large-scale migration of Hun Chinese to Tibet to reduce Tibetans into a minority in their own land. The Tibetan language was given short shrift. Ethnic Chinese hold most of government jobs and worse, Tibetan civil servants got the message that they could be dismissed if, in their homes, they worshipped Buddha’s icon.

According to informed sources the Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1973 saw widespread destruction of monasteries and it is claimed that monks have been forced to undergo what is described as “patriotic education” by listening to Communist anti-religious propaganda. Currently, between 70 to 80 per cent of Lhasa’s approximately 27,000 population is Chinese. Tibetans have been reduced to a minority and resentment has been growing. In the circumstances, what can we do? The realistic answer is: Nothing. The United States and a few European powers have been making loud noises about restoration of Human Rights and Tibetans’ right for autonomy, but when it comes to dealing with their own interests, loud words are not translated into action. When it suited the United States, it has supported China. During the Bangladesh War, Washington even tried to persuade China to attack India; Beijing wisely declined to play America’s game.

On the Tibetan issue, India has to walk warily. It is sixty years since India willingly accepted China’s suzeraignty over Tibet and it cannot go back on the Agreement it signed. As long as China does not make any demands on Indian territory, we can keep our distance from the current scene in Tibet much as it hurts our sensibilities. India is not the United States. According to the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, “if freedom-loving people throughout the world do not speak out against China’s oppression in Tibet, we have lost moral authority to speak on Human Rights anywhere in the world”. Oh, really? The best way for the US to respond to Chinese oppression is for Washington to cut off trade relations with China, freeze American investment and warn Pakistan not to have any dealings with Beijing. Will the US do that? As for India, it must know its strengths and weaknesses. China has shown over the years that it is incapable of keeping its word. It is behaving exactly as the British and the French did in the nineteenth century, trying to enlarge and expand its sphere of influence beyond its natural borders.

Of course, some day it will get its come-uppance and meanwhile India has to be patient. History has its own way of punishing recalcitrant nations as life has its own way of dealing with recalcitrant individuals. The Tibetans cannot be indefinitely cowed down whether there is a Dalai Lama to lead them or not. Time will take its own course. Tibetans have rebelled in the past and one can rest assured that they will continue to rebel in the future and some day China will have to give in. But let us not have any illusions of Chinese friendship or about America’s professed dedication to moral values. Where were these values when the US started the Korean War in the 1950s, the Vietnam War in the 1970s and where are they now as American troops hold fort in Iraq? We do not need either to take on China or even trust it.

The naivettes and intellectual arrogance shown by Nehru and Krishna Menon placed India in great jeopardy. We don’t need to repeat their folly. Our philosophy should be: Trust no nation, remain wary and keep the powder dry. There are ways to send signals to Beijing as to where we stand without seeming offensive or accommodative. If we haven’t learnt that by now, we have learnt nothing. And the Dalai Lama would be wise to work with India than to be led by Washington, or any European nation. And India would be wise to fashion its own rules of the game to emerge the winner. It must work out plans of its own to put China in its place.

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - dhu - 04-20-2008

Tibet and China: Divergent routes to harmony
By Madhuri Santanam Sondhi

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-25-2008

<b>China's coal reserves down to just 12 days</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Beijing, April 24: China's booming economy, which relies on coal for 70 per cent of its electricity, could be running out of steam, with the country's coal reserves down to just 12 days.
China has just 12 days of coal stocks at most power stations, with some provinces bordering Beijing having less than a week's reserves, the state electricity regulatory commission revealed on Wednesday.

Even though Chinese coal production in the first quarter of this year was up almost 15 per cent on the same period last year, it has apparently not been enough to meet the rapidly growing demand for power from an economy that has been growing by 10 per cent a year for more than two decades, NewScientist online said.
couple of accident and here comes unrest. plus if you add high oil price and Bird flu and mad cow disease and couple or recalls. West can wrap them up pretty fast.

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-26-2008

<b>Sino-Indian ties: What the dragon won’t forget</b>

General (retd) JFR Jacob, a hero of the 1971 war which led to the birth of Bangladesh, is a keen student of military history. In this exclusive article for, he cites historical and strategic reasons to argue that China is turning into a potential security threat for India.

China has been in the news of late over the Tibetan issue, which also impacts India in a major way. To put Sino-Indian relations into perspective, it is necessary to look at from a historical as well as a strategic context. Let me begin from the Second Opium War in1860 in which Indian troops took part. Four brigades of British and Indian infantry (Sikh Regiment, Madras Regiment, Bombay Native Infantry and the Ludhiana Rifles) and one cavalry brigade, which included Probyn’s Horse, took part in these operations, in which the Summer Palace in Peking was sacked and looted. I recall a Chinese general telling me in 1957: “We, Chinese, will never forget that Indian troops took part in the sacking of the Summer Palace.”

In 1904, Indian troops were part of the Younghusband expedition that seized Lhasa. The Tibetans were forced to accept two trading posts, protected by Indian troops, in the Chumbi Valley. These were subsequently withdrawn after China moved into Tibet.

In 1913 / 1914, during the Shimla Conference, talks bogged down as the Chinese refused to accept the creation of an inner and outer Tibet. Ivan Chen ,the Chinese representative, declined to sign the McMahon map, and merely initialled it. From 1920 onwards the British started progressively moving into parts of what is now known as Arunachal Pradesh. In 1937, the first Survey of India map was published, showing the border as per the McMahon line. The previous Survey of India map of 1937 showed the inner line in Arunachal as the boundary. In 1938, the proceedings of the Shimla Convention were published at the insistence of British administrator Olaf Kirkpatrick Kruuse Caroe.

In 1949, the Communist Chinese forces moved into Tibet.

In April 1951, Major Bob Kathing with an armed detachment moved into Tawang and took over the administration of the district. In April 1954, the five principles of peace were formulated with the Chinese. Hindi Chini bhai bhai was the slogan of the day. (India’s ambassador to China, KM Panikkar, had erroneously conveyed to the Chinese that India recognises Chinese sovereignty over Tibet instead of suzerainty, saying he could not explain to them the difference between the two!) In 1959, there was unrest in Tibet, the Chinese cracked down and the Dalai Lama fled to India. In 1960, Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai proposed to India that China would retain the Aksai Chin region in the northwest and in return would accept the Mcmahon Line line in the east. This was rejected by India, and China claimed suzerainty over Bhutan. The Forward Policy was accelerated by India, and this was strongly objected to by the Chinese. On October 20, 1962, China invaded India.

On November 21, 1962, China withdrew from Arunachal but stayed on in Aksai Chin. During the 1965 India-Pakistan war, our troops withdrew some 700 yards from the Nathu La (under Chinese threats). In 1967, skirmishes took place at Nathu La. (September 4 with 18 Rajput and October 1 with the 7/11 Gurkha Rifles)

In 1975, I ordered the occupation of the heights east of the Nathu La in order to dominate the pass. From 1981 to 1987, there were 8 rounds of fruitless Indo-Chinese talks. In 1988, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi visited China, and signed agreements on cooperation in the fields of science and technology and civil aviation. In 2003, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee visited China. In July 2007, the Nathu La was reopened for inter-border trade. Strategically, China has built a railway line to Lhasa and is extending it to the Chumbi valley. China is rapidly developing the infrastructure in Tibet. New airfields and roads are being constructed in the vicinity of the Indian border. China dams the Sutlej River and talks of building a dam across the Tsang Po (Brahmaputra). China and Pakistan are widening the Karakoram Road and intend to connect it to Gwadar Port in the Gulf of Oman in order to give China access to the Arabian Sea. China is working for closer ties with Pakistan, as also with Bangladesh.

Presently, China is likely to increase its influence in Nepal after the Maoists assume power. China has obtained from Burma the use of naval bases in the Bay of Bengal. China has embarked on a large scale expansion and modernisation of its armed forces including its nuclear arsenal and their delivery means.

The ‘Han-isation’ of Tibet is proceeding rapidly, and there has been a ruthless crackdown on the native Tibetans. China is flexing its economic muscles. China is acquiring mineral, oil and commodity resources on a global basis to fuel its rapidly expanding industrial base. China's main import from India is iron ore, a commodity that is in demand internationally. In return, China exports consumer goods to India. China still occupies Aksai Chin and has persisted in its claims to Arunachal Pradesh. China also claims some 360 sq km of Bhutanese territory . (India has since 1949 unilaterally guaranteed its commitment to the defence of Bhutan .

<b>In conclusion, China is emerging as a potential security threat to India.</b>

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-26-2008

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In conclusion, China is emerging as a <b>potential security threat to India</b>. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not potential, but it is a major security threat. Nothing had changed, One should understand Chinese history before even 18 th centrury. Historically, China always believed in culture and power domination all over the world, they are moving pretty fast in this direction.
Indians don't have will or vision or strategy to defeat or check China, but I have more faith in west on this issue. They can check them.

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-26-2008

<!--QuoteBegin-"Mudy"+-->QUOTE("Mudy")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Indians don't have will or vision or strategy to defeat or check China, but I have more faith in west on this issue. They can check them.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Misplaced hope?

The same west which cant even recoginze the tibetan gov in exile or grant taiwan an UN seat. <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-27-2008

West is not interested in Tibet, they are more interested to keep more than 1.5 billion Chinese in check. Chinese rulers are always very ambitious and seek power at any cost.

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-27-2008

<!--QuoteBegin-"Mudy"+-->QUOTE("Mudy")<!--QuoteEBegin-->West is not interested in Tibet.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
IMHO your analysis is not correct. The challenge to West and Christian nations today come from two religions. first islam and second buddhism. The threat from islam is being fought through the war on terror and keeping islam in western societies under check is easy since muslims are being demonized by the west by quoting verses from the koran which permit and condone rape,pillage,murder and large scale violence by muslims.

But for the west fighting buddhism is not easy. Buddhism is fast gaining ground in west at a time when the christian populations are shrinking and church attendance levels are at an all time historic low.

For the west it is not possible to fight buddhism in the traditional way by invading buddhist countries or by trying to demonize buddhism. Therefore western powers are trying to supplant buddhism with christainity in traditional buddhist countries like tibet. South korea is an good example of how christanity slowly grew and became the dominant religion in an traditional buddhist nation.

<!--QuoteBegin-"Mudy"+-->QUOTE("Mudy")<!--QuoteEBegin-->they are more interested to keep more than 1.5 billion Chinese in check.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Even a casual glance at the present day chinese map shows that a large percent of it's territory is due to china's annexation of tibet. The western gameplan is to end or reduce chinese influence in tibet so that a large part of tibet becomes ungovernable thereby reducing china's landmass and power. This will open the way for christian missionaries for soul harvesting in both tibet and china.

<!--QuoteBegin-"Mudy"+-->QUOTE("Mudy")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Chinese rulers are always very ambitious and seek power at any cost.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Being ambitious is an good thing but trying to implement foolish things in the name of power is downright crazy. The chinese have an unique trait of shooting themselves in the foot by planning humongously impossible projects just to satisfy the amibition of their rulers. The chinese emperors started building the great wall of china to keep out invading tribes and make their names immortal in history. The constructon of the wall led to precious resources being wasted in its construction and huge loss of human lives due to forced labour.
And did the wall serve it purpose? No, on the contrary the high taxes imposed by the chinese emperor to raise money for the construction of the wall led to an peasant revolt. To put down the revolt one general guarding the gates of the wall let in an invading tribe which not only put down the revolt but also conquered china.

India - China: Relations And Developments-2 - Guest - 04-27-2008

Wars always fought for resources. West is more concerned about grain; water etc for its people/race. BZ or west strategic think-tank future strategy is to create war between India and China; war should be of maximum attrition, more the causality better future for west. Pressure of huge population of these two countries will be or already started showing sign on world resources and quality of life in west. Food shortage because Indians and Chinese are eating more, oil prices are high because they started consuming more.
For a state to get involved is not religion first but resources first and religion as a tool they use on other. Religion softens the cause and gives them less causality.