What's new

Why China can bark but can't bite?

Chinese fake dragon bubble have been brusted hard after 100 of fake warning.
They already know next war with India will bring Freedom to Tibet, Urghystan, & our mighty Navy will Hop out Hong Kong from China & bring Democracy all over newly independent countries.
No one will stand beside communist except proxy states Pakistan & NK
 
China maintains good economic relations with countries it has disputes e.g. Japan, Vietnam, South Korea etc. US is apparently very concerned about SCS but Trump and Xi just pledged to further enhance mutual economic relations(also remember Jack Ma promising a million jobs?). Chinese spin a complex web and are always dangling a carrot. We in sub-continent are charged-up people and like to go all out. So although China has its fair share of fights it manages them well.
Read M K Bhadrakumar's article on strategic-culture dot org (can't post links yet) on the border dispute. the question then is: Is this all worth the trouble for India?

Let us see who is making the trouble. If China is such a peace loving country why build all those roads leading to the Indian border. Bhutan is puny market with less than one million people. I will let you figure out.
 
Trolling can be satisfying. But what is India's long term strategy here? Read here China's understanding of long-term US strategy of Dollar domination and China's counter-strategy - thesaker.is/pla-strategist-the-u-s-uses-its-dollar-to-dominate-the-world/. It shows Chinese long-term planning and is brilliant.
India set a bad precedent by acting on behalf of Bhutan. I think we will soon see Chinese-Bhutan contacts increasing. Then Indians will watch Bhutan slip out of their orbit like Nepal. OBOR is tempting after-all.

You know why India was so afraid that China to built road close to Bhutan access point, because it was so scare that Bhutan to be a second Nepal, when China has the road link to Bhutan, this country will be able to play China card and won't be afraid that India will cut their cooking oil or gas because China can equally provide Bhutan for all they need. the more tighter India want to hold Bhutan the more it will lost it to China.

Up until now, all UN P5 countries don't have diplomatic relation with Bhutan, this country has been sealed and isolated by India, China will be the first to establish relation with Bhutan whether India like or not, we certainly don't need India permission for that.
 
Let us see who is making the trouble. If China is such a peace loving country why build all those roads leading to the Indian border. Bhutan is puny market with less than one million people. I will let you figure out.
Another thing worth figuring out is why India chose to get involved in SCS dispute, it has nothing to do in that part of the world....
 
HO INDIANS TUM BERY BE WAQOOF HO. CHINA NE TOO TUM KO SIKKEM MAIN TRAP KER LIEYA HAI . AUB TUM KUMBEL CHORNA CHAHETY HO LAKIN CHOR NAHIN PA REHY. AUR CHINA HER DOSEREY DIN NAYA STATEMENT DEY KER TUMARA MAZAQ BANA REHA HAI. WO CHINA TUM KO MAREY GA NAHIN LAKIN ZALEEL KHUB KERY GA. JAISEY K KER REHA HAI.
 
Let us see who is making the trouble. If China is such a peace loving country why build all those roads leading to the Indian border. Bhutan is puny market with less than one million people. I will let you figure out.
'Sikkim is the only segment of the border with China where India enjoys military superiority', so may be they are trying to neutralize it. May they want to develop that region and give an option to Bhutan to link up and end sole dependence on India; Bhutanese like any other nation would want maximum sovereignty (their position is not enviable though). There have been twenty or so rounds of boundary talks between China and Bhutan and they seem to have gone well. The bottom line is that if Bhutan ends up having a balanced relationship with India and China it will be a loss for India.
 
Funny topic and easy answer... Dragon will never bite, she swallows..."bark and bite" suits you indian puppies well but not for China:)
 
Chinese fake dragon bubble have been brusted hard after 100 of fake warning.
They already know next war with India will bring Freedom to Tibet, Urghystan, & our mighty Navy will Hop out Hong Kong from China & bring Democracy all over newly independent countries.
No one will stand beside communist except proxy states Pakistan & NK

that's funny, because everyone knows India waging war with china will mean India will be broken into 100 pieces like it should be and freedom will be brought to Kashimr, South Tibet, Sikkim, Northeast India... Chinese building a road near Bhutan is already scaring the Indian shitless, Indian think India will probably be gone and get destroyed if that road is complete and china chokes off Indian. No wonder even Pakistan is giving India a good beating.
 
A Sino-Indian armed conflict: Why China can bark but can't bite?

Defence Minister Arun Jaitley's recent riposte to the Chinese bullying over Doklam standoff and the response it evoked from China sum up the new reality of Sino-Indian relations: Jaitley said India was no longer the India of 1962 (when it was defeated by China in a war) and China replied it was also not the China of 1962.

Even though both meant something else, the fact is the two countries have come a long way from just being inimical neighbours. Bilateral and global contexts have completely changed from 1962. China may be a bigger military and economic power than India, but it can hardly afford a military conflict today.

China's global ambitions
During the past few years, Chinese President Xi Jinping has unleashed a grand propaganda for image makeover of the country. China does not want to be perceived as a bigger, richer and more powerful North Korea. In his first speech to the World Economic Forum at Davos in January, Xi surprised the world by defending economic globalisation and speaking against emerging protectionist trends all over the world.

Since there are signs of the US backing off from its position of the global leader, China is eyeing that role. But for that it needs to shed the image of a bellicose dictatorship and an unreliable trader. That's why China is increasingly presenting itself as a responsible power to the world.

China's global dream is best exemplified by its One Belt One Belt (OBOR) initiative where it tried to portray itself as a responsible global economic force which is willing to work for greater economic good of all.

Bullying and belligerence run counter to China's ambition to replace the US as global leader or at least its rhetoric of emerging as a responsible world power and a reliable, open economy. In the Doklam standoff, China has stooped to a new low of threatening to encourage separatism in Sikkim while it had started with a threat of armed conflict. Such posturing will hardly evoke confidence in innumerable small countries in Asia and Africa with whom China seeks economic partnership.

Regional challenges
China's efforts for supremacy in Asia are often challenged by India. A recent example is Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). It is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA) between the 10 member-states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand.
For China, it means a lot as it will account for about 40 per cent of world trade. RCEP will provide much-needed markets for Chinese goods.

But, as Foreign Policy has reported, the China-backed trade deal meant to cement the Beijing’s dominance in Asia has veered off course because India is hesitant to open its borders to cheap Chinese goods. Though the RCEP is likely to be finalised by the year-end, it may not be exactly in the form China would like.

China's ambition to set the rules of the game, at least in Asia, is often frustrated by India. India's boycott of OBOR is a good example. An armed conflict with India will certainly put an end to China's dream of an overarching role in Asia. China can fulfill that dream only by engaging India positively.

The trade dependence
China-India trade cooperation has deepened over the years and the bilateral trade has grown 24 times in 15 years, from $2.9 billion in 2000 to $70.8 billion in 2016. China has emerged as one of the fastest-growing sources of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) into India. It was 17th largest in 2016, up from the 28th rank in 2014 and 35th in 2011. A number of Chinese companies are setting up manufacturing units in India. It is India that depends on China in the trade equation—India's trade deficit with China has risen to $46.56 billion. China's exports to India account for only 2 per cent of its total exports.

Yet, no one can deny India offers China a promising market. An armed conflict will threaten trade ties. Maybe that's why China stopped Indian pilgrims from visiting Mansarovar but not trade through Nathu-la. China stopping the trade route might have invited a similar Indian response.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...n-bark-but-cant-bite/articleshow/59471122.cms
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/real...na-dare-not-attack-india.506866/#post-9668794
 
Here indian lie exposed by none other than veteran indian diplomat and general. Looks like india took a policy decision to back track from its chest thumping and trap it created for itself.

Link will be provide based on reaction.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

A ‘consensus’ was reached at a meeting in New Delhi over the weekend between the government and leaders of India’s opposition parties that the five-week long military standoff with China in the Sikkim region should be resolved peacefully.

The headlines have begun moving away from the topic as if an unseen hand is guiding. The standoff could be inching its way toward denouement.


‘De-escalation’ is the new mantra. The good part is that the clamor for war with China by hotheads in India does not reflect the official thinking (anymore).



China probably widening road in Doklam
Meanwhile, there is much greater clarity about what really happened on the ground.

First, contrary to what India media claimed, there has been no Chinese ‘intrusion’ on to India’s sacred soil. On the contrary, Indian military moved into Doklam on the China-Bhutan border, which has been under Chinese control all along.

Second, reports projected that a standoff ensued as China started building a road in Doklam. But there is evidence now that a road was already in existence for over a decade at least and China was probably widening it.

Third, India claimed that its intervention was at the request of Bhutan. China disputed the claim. Significantly, after a visit to Thimphu by the spouse of the Chinese ambassador in Delhi and her meeting with the Bhutanese king last week, Beijing maintains that Bhutan did not seek Indian military intervention.

Fourth, and most importantly, China maintains that it is within its sovereign right to build roads in an area under its control. Whereas, Indian reports sensed a ‘mission creep’ with a hidden Chinese agenda to eventually threaten the Siliguri corridor, a hundred kilometers to the south, which connects India’s restive northeast with the hinterland.

However, this ‘threat perception’ appears to be based on an exaggerated notion since the Chumbi Valley in Tibet which leads toward the Indian border itself is a narrow corridor flanked by steep mountains, which India dominates. A former Indian corps commander Lt Gen KJ Singh put it this way:

‘‘Treacherous mountainous jungle terrain and (a) total absence of connectivity limits application of force levels and will reduce it to a slogging crawl. (Any) such offensives need logistic sustenance, (as the) narrow Chumbi valley, dominated on both flanks, with limited deployment spaces and acclimatization challenges is a virtual death trap. While granting credit to (the) Chinese for favorable force ratios, its actual efficacy has to be discounted as force multipliers have severe limitation in application due to weather and terrain.’’

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

By
M.K. Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for over 29 years, with postings including India’s ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-1998) and to Turkey (1998-2001).
 
Here indian lie exposed by none other than veteran indian diplomat and general. Looks like india took a policy decision to back track from its chest thumping and trap it created for itself.

Link will be provide based on reaction.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

A ‘consensus’ was reached at a meeting in New Delhi over the weekend between the government and leaders of India’s opposition parties that the five-week long military standoff with China in the Sikkim region should be resolved peacefully.

The headlines have begun moving away from the topic as if an unseen hand is guiding. The standoff could be inching its way toward denouement.


‘De-escalation’ is the new mantra. The good part is that the clamor for war with China by hotheads in India does not reflect the official thinking (anymore).



China probably widening road in Doklam
Meanwhile, there is much greater clarity about what really happened on the ground.


First, contrary to what India media claimed, there has been no Chinese ‘intrusion’ on to India’s sacred soil. On the contrary, Indian military moved into Doklam on the China-Bhutan border, which has been under Chinese control all along.

Second, reports projected that a standoff ensued as China started building a road in Doklam. But there is evidence now that a road was already in existence for over a decade at least and China was probably widening it.

Third, India claimed that its intervention was at the request of Bhutan. China disputed the claim. Significantly, after a visit to Thimphu by the spouse of the Chinese ambassador in Delhi and her meeting with the Bhutanese king last week, Beijing maintains that Bhutan did not seek Indian military intervention.

Fourth, and most importantly, China maintains that it is within its sovereign right to build roads in an area under its control. Whereas, Indian reports sensed a ‘mission creep’ with a hidden Chinese agenda to eventually threaten the Siliguri corridor, a hundred kilometers to the south, which connects India’s restive northeast with the hinterland.

However, this ‘threat perception’ appears to be based on an exaggerated notion since the Chumbi Valley in Tibet which leads toward the Indian border itself is a narrow corridor flanked by steep mountains, which India dominates. A former Indian corps commander Lt Gen KJ Singh put it this way:

‘‘Treacherous mountainous jungle terrain and (a) total absence of connectivity limits application of force levels and will reduce it to a slogging crawl. (Any) such offensives need logistic sustenance, (as the) narrow Chumbi valley, dominated on both flanks, with limited deployment spaces and acclimatization challenges is a virtual death trap. While granting credit to (the) Chinese for favorable force ratios, its actual efficacy has to be discounted as force multipliers have severe limitation in application due to weather and terrain.’’

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

By
M.K. Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for over 29 years, with postings including India’s ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-1998) and to Turkey (1998-2001).

The road is already there for a long, long time. If you've seen the satellite photo of the road & it's proximity to the border you'll probably have a smile on your face... More interesting is Bhutan did not officially support India's position in this event. Remember, there is NO official security pact between India & Bhutan...

But let's wait & see what the Indian peace team in Beijing will offer. :-)
 
They already bited u 153 haramis dead don't talk above your level u get this than
 
At the very beginning of this indian chauvinism, I said indian chest thumping was for 15 minutes. Now honuman army going back tail between legs. It is becoming even more shameful than 1962.
 
Back
Top Bottom