# Did Pakistan Cede the Territory of Shaksgam to China?



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

*






Did Pakistan cede Kashmiri Territory of Shaksgam valley to China?
Debunking propaganda from a laymen's perspective
*
Myth: Pakistan ceded the Trans-Karakoram tract or Shaksgam valley to China in the Trans-Karakoram pact thus showing utter disregard for Kashmiri sovereignty or its own sovereignty.

Fact: Pakistan did not ‘gift’ any Kashmiri land to China. In reality, it actually gained 1942 square kilometres (750 square miles) from the Chinese in the 1963 Sino-Pakistan boundary agreement. In fact, the Trans-Karakoram Tract, that Delhi claims has been ‘gifted’ by Islamabad to Beijing, was never under Pakistani control that they could have vacated it and given it to China. The Pakistan-China Treaty is in the public domain, as are the resulting maps with demarcated boundaries that clearly illustrate Pakistan gaining the aforementioned amount of area and adding it to Gilgit-Baltistan rather than the other way around.

So let's get to the root of the issue and understand how it all started.

The original territorial demarcation issue was between China and British India, which arose as a result of 1846 Amritsar treaty that left the border with China unmarked. British authorities assigned W.H. Johnson, a survey officer, to propose a line which was to be sent to the Chinese government for negotiations. Authors Christopher Snedden and Alastair Lamb state that Mr. Johnson was unhappy with the working conditions under the East India Company and sought to join the court of the Maharaja of Kashmir instead. To impress the Maharaja, he increased the size of the state of Kashmir in the map he created by including Aksai Chin and Shaksgam Valley in Kashmir, both of which were under Chinese control at that point in time.

British authorities in Calcutta were annoyed by the decision to demarcate the border in a manner that showed Chinese controlled territory as being a part of British India and Johnson was disciplined by his superiors and his map rejected. The Maharaja, however, thought that Johnson had magically increased his territory by drawing a few lines on the map and thus, as a reward, he was offered a job by the Maharaja and appointed Wazir or Governor of Ladakh in 1872.

The line he created is called the Johnson Line and, as mentioned above, was rejected by British India, let alone accepted by China. The East India Company then appointed Sir Claude MacDonald to create the new official British line which he did. The new demarcation by Sir Claude MacDonald did not include the Chinese areas that W.H Johnson had included in his demarcation to curry favor with the Maharajah. The British sent it to the Chinese on 14th March 1899 with the following proposal:

1. China will withdraw all claims to Hunza valley
2. British India will withdraw all claims to Shaksgam/Raskam and Taghdumbash

This is the McDonald Line. The Chinese did not respond, prompting the British to inform them that their silence was taken as assent and Britain would act accordingly, which Britain did.

Fast forward, Partition happens, Pakistan and India become free, fight a war and divide Kashmir. But this is where the problem starts. Instead of taking up the McDonald line, the Indian government officially adopted the Johnson line because the increased land (Or rather lines on a paper) impressed Nehru as much as it had impressed the Maharaja. India made it official in 1954 on their published map.

Pakistan obviously did not have to tow Mr. Nehru's ridiculous line. Pakistan recognized the McDonald Line......And that's all.

Actually, that's not all. When Pakistan cited historical evidence and the historical connection of Gilgit-Baltistan to regions in Hunza, the Karakoram watershed, K-2 (Half), Shimshal Pass etc, Zhou EnLai (the then premier of the Peoples Republic of China) acknowledged the validity of those arguments and Pakistan obtained those territories from China and made them part of Gilgit-Baltistan.

Pakistan further asserted that traditional grazing grounds of the Hunza people be made part of Gligit-Baltistan because their loss would cause the people of the region huge distress, given the impact on their traditional way of life. The Chinese Premier, after reviewing the proposal with Xinjiang province and getting the assent of the Uyghur in China, agreed with the Pakistani proposal on making these lands a part of Gilgit Baltistan.

All this area combined totaled 1942 square kilometres (750 square miles).

And that's not all, Pakistan also took care to add a provision to secure Kashmiri sovereignty in the future, pending a resolution of the dispute. Article 6 of the treaty between China & Pakistan states:

_"The two parties have agreed that after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India, the sovereign authority concerned will reopen negotiations with the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the boundary as described in Article. Two of the present agreement, so as to sign a formal boundary treaty to replace the present agreement, provided that in the event of the sovereign authority being Pakistan, the provisions of the present agreement and of the aforesaid protocol shall be maintained in the formal boundary treaty to be signed between the People’s Republic of China and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan"_

If you still don't understand how groundbreaking this deal was, imagine this. China went to all out war against India for this line which they absolutely refused to change. Whereas for Pakistan and Kashmir, China ceded 750 square miles and also recognized that a future sovereign Kashmiri government could renegotiate this border when they were free.

Noted Indian Lawyer and Author on Kashmir, AG Noorani Noted this in his article, aptly named "Map Fetish".

https://web.archive.org/web/2020050...e.thehindu.com/the-nation/article30164084.ece





Anwar H Syed in in China and Pakistan: Diplomacy of an Entente Cordiale wrote:




George L. Singleton reconfirmed Pakistan’s claim as shown in the excerpt below:




Pakistani FM, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto also wiped the floor with the Indian delegation when they raised this issue in UN Security Council dated 26 March 1963:




So, in conclusion. The Indian argument that Pakistan violated the UNSC Resolutions on the Disputed Territory of Jammu & Kashmir or that it betrayed/sold out the Kashmiris by 'giving away their land to China' is invalid and baseless.

For more details and references used, please see below:

Question #13 by Kashmiri Academic Dr. Makhdomi




https://web.archive.org/save/https://www.greaterkashmir.com/news/opinion/question-number-13/

Map Fetish by AG Noorani
https://web.archive.org/web/2020050...e.thehindu.com/the-nation/article30164084.ece

Facing the truth by AG Noorani
https://web.archive.org/web/2020050...hehindu.com/world-affairs/article30211220.ece

Who Ceded Land by Dr. Ahmad Rashid Malik Director of the China-Pakistan Study Centre (CPSC) at the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad
https://web.archive.org/save/https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2016/06/26/who-ceded-the-land/
=========================================================

*Disclaimer:* This is a compilation of a series of tweets by @DerArschloch reproduced with his permission. I've only done some minor formatting. 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258186885857456128

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
7 | Like Like:
64


----------



## Areesh

abcxyz0000 said:


> Pakistan can never do anything wrong. Pakistan is perfect. Pakistan is God.
> 
> - PRTP GWD



True. Except the God part

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Nefarious

Thanks sharing. All cleared up

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xeuss

I think the disagreement arises on how both parties view the transaction.

India considers the whole of Jammu & Kashmir as its own, based on the claims of the erstwhile Raja, who acceded to India. The Raja claimed the borders as depicted by current state of J&K in India, even though he never actually held possession or control of certain territories, including Shaksgam Valley and Aksai Chin.

Pakistan on the other hand, made no such claim. For it, the northern areas ended at the claim of the Mir of Hunza valley. If I recall correctly, the Shaksgam Valley was part of the claim of the Mir of Hunza but never officially demarcated with the Chinese, and therefore likely controlled by China.

Therefore, when Pakistan and China demarcated they border in the Northern Areas, the valley ended up with Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

xeuss said:


> I think the disagreement arises on how both parties view the transaction.
> 
> India considers the whole of Jammu & Kashmir as its own, based on the claims of the erstwhile Raja, who acceded to India. The Raja claimed the borders as depicted by current state of J&K in India, even though he never actually held possession or control of certain territories, including Shaksgam Valley and Aksai Chin.
> 
> Pakistan on the other hand, made no such claim. For it, the northern areas ended at the claim of the Mir of Hunza valley. If I recall correctly, the Shaksgam Valley was part of the claim of the Mir of Hunza but never officially demarcated with the Chinese, and therefore likely controlled by China.
> 
> Therefore, when Pakistan and China demarcated they border in the Northern Areas, the valley ended up with Pakistan.


Legally, demarcation agreements by the British supersede anything the local rulers (Maharaja's etc) accepted, given that the British were the primary authority in British India. The point being made here is that the Johnson Line, which India & the Maharaja accepted is superseded by the McDonald line, which was the official demarcation of the border in this region between British India and China.

India can claim Aksai Chin all it wants, but that should be treated separately from the J&K dispute with Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Green Arrow

I think there was very good old thread on this topic on PDF which explain this whole issue beautifully. It was started by @Chakbamu few years back.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

@Chak Bamu 

Do you have a link to the thread being referred to? Maybe combine the two?


----------



## xeuss

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> Legally, demarcation agreements by the British supersede anything the local rulers (Maharaja's etc) accepted, given that the British were the primary authority in British India. The point being made here is that the Johnson Line, which India & the Maharaja accepted is superseded by the McDonald line, which was the official demarcation of the border in this region between British India and China.
> 
> India can claim Aksai Chin all it wants, but that should be treated separately from the J&K dispute with Pakistan.



True, but that is pretty much how the issue is viewed in India.

The situation is further complicated by the role of the Mir of Hunza. Hunza was considered a vassal of the Raja of J&K, even though he never paid any tribute, but at the same time, had independently entered into an agreement with the British for protection against the Russians and Chinese. 

So the Raja of J&K considered Hunza under its rule, and that is what India bases its claim on.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

xeuss said:


> True, but that is pretty much how the issue is viewed in India.
> 
> The situation is further complicated by the role of the Mir of Hunza. Hunza was considered a vassal of the Raja of J&K, even though he never paid any tribute, but at the same time, had independently entered into an agreement with the British for protection against the Russians and Chinese.
> 
> So the Raja of J&K considered Hunza under its rule, and that is what India bases its claim on.


India bases its claims on a lot of things. What we're discussing is whether Indian claims have any validity.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## FOOLS_NIGHTMARE

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> India bases its claims on a lot of things


Recently their SC jumped into the bandwagon.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1554482/f...egarding-sc-allowing-govt-to-hold-polls-in-gb


Green Arrow said:


> I think there was very good old thread on this topic on PDF which explain this whole issue beautifully. It was started by @Chakbamu few years back.


Are you talking about this one!!!
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/indias-claims-of-pakistan-ceding-territory-in-1963-are-false.45349/


----------



## beijingwalker

中巴边界条约具有临时性质，第六条规定：双方同意，在巴基斯坦和印度关于克什米尔的争议获得解决以后，有关的主权当局将就本协定第二条所述的边界，同中国政府重新进行谈判，以签订一个正式的边界条约来代替本协定，该主权当局如系巴基斯坦，则在中国和巴基斯坦将签订的正式边界条约中，应该保持本协定和上述议定书中的规定。因此也不排除如果将来巴国失势，印度要控制克什米尔的时候，中国会利用这条公路出兵克什米尔，占领部分地区后再和印度重新划界。
The treaty on China's border with Kashmir is tentative, the clause 6 stipuates if the part of Kashmir which borders China always belongs to Pakistan, China will remain bounded by this treaty and won't seek change of the border, but if the ownership of the land and the border changed, China will no longer recognize the treaty and the border needs to be redrawn.

Basically it means that if Pakistan lost its part of Kashmir to India, the border treaty will automatically become invalid and China will demand her part of Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## xeuss

beijingwalker said:


> 中巴边界条约具有临时性质，第六条规定：双方同意，在巴基斯坦和印度关于克什米尔的争议获得解决以后，有关的主权当局将就本协定第二条所述的边界，同中国政府重新进行谈判，以签订一个正式的边界条约来代替本协定，该主权当局如系巴基斯坦，则在中国和巴基斯坦将签订的正式边界条约中，应该保持本协定和上述议定书中的规定。因此也不排除如果将来巴国失势，印度要控制克什米尔的时候，中国会利用这条公路出兵克什米尔，占领部分地区后再和印度重新划界。
> The treaty on China's border with Kashmir is tentative, the clause 6 stipuates if the part of Kashmir which borders China always belongs to Pakistan, China will remain bounded by this treaty and won't seek change of the border, but if the ownership of the land and the border changed, China will no longer recognize the treaty and the border needs to be redrawn.
> 
> Basically it means that if Pakistan lost its part of Kashmir to India, the border treaty will automatically become invalid and China will demand her part of Kashmir.



I was aware of this clause, and it is easily understandable if Pakistan was to lose its part of Kashmir. But what would happen to the LAC with India in the event Pakistan were to take over Kashmir. Would the LAC no longer be valid and China would withdraw from the area it controls?


----------



## beijingwalker

xeuss said:


> I was aware of this clause, and it is easily understandable if Pakistan was to lose its part of Kashmir. But what would happen to the LAC with India in the event Pakistan were to take over Kashmir. Would the LAC no longer be valid and China would withdraw from the area it controls?


That part of the border has nothing to do with the one with Pakistan, China used to have some historical claim over Hunza Valley and later China relinquished the claim, many in Chinese social media say that was because China wanted to maintain a good relationship with Pakistan.

*Hunza (princely state)*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunza_(princely_state)

Hunza ruler acceded the valley to Pakistan, not India, so if India took over Kashmir, China , as the former suzerain state , will at least take Hunza valley if not more, India can never get the whole Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Areesh

xeuss said:


> I think the disagreement arises on how both parties view the transaction.
> 
> India considers the whole of Jammu & Kashmir as its own, based on the claims of the erstwhile Raja, who acceded to India. The Raja claimed the borders as depicted by current state of J&K in India, even though he never actually held possession or control of certain territories, including Shaksgam Valley and Aksai Chin.
> 
> Pakistan on the other hand, made no such claim. For it, the northern areas ended at the claim of the Mir of Hunza valley. If I recall correctly, the Shaksgam Valley was part of the claim of the Mir of Hunza but never officially demarcated with the Chinese, and therefore likely controlled by China.
> 
> Therefore, when Pakistan and China demarcated they border in the Northern Areas, the valley ended up with Pakistan.



The point of this thread to expose the lie or fallacy that India has feed to its people

The fallacy is that Pakistan gave up land of erstwhile Kashmir state that was under its control to China without utter regard or consultation with people of Kashmir hence Pakistani claims on Kashmir shouldn't be taken seriously

This is nothing but a lie and that is the point of this thread basically

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Lincoln

I actually never knew about the details of this. Thanks for the share.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arjunk

Someone fix Wikipedia with this, the amount of residents of the gangeteic lands who use Wikipedia as a source like its Quran will get a good slap on their face.


----------



## khail007

Areesh said:


> The point of this thread to expose the lie or fallacy that India has feed to its people
> 
> The fallacy is that Pakistan gave up land of erstwhile Kashmir state that was under its control to China without utter regard or consultation with people of Kashmir hence Pakistani claims on Kashmir shouldn't be taken seriously
> 
> This is nothing but a lie and that is the point of this thread basically



In reference to Kashmir, Indian government feeds it people only the lies and fallacy and that is also true in international relation.
So in brief just say India and we know that lies and fallacy is there - no arguments needed to explain.


----------



## beijingwalker

Border disputes don't always have to be solved by wars.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Rafi

beijingwalker said:


> Border disputes don't always have to be solved by wars.



You have to be reasonable like China and Pakistan and not unreasonable like india

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Joe Shearer

beijingwalker said:


> Border disputes don't always have to be solved by wars.



Quite right.

Will you help me with an experiment? Hold out your right hand and clap with it, and send me a recording.



AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> Legally, demarcation agreements by the British supersede anything the local rulers (Maharaja's etc) accepted, given that the British were the primary authority in British India. The point being made here is that the Johnson Line, which India & the Maharaja accepted is superseded by the McDonald line, which was the official demarcation of the border in this region between British India and China.
> 
> India can claim Aksai Chin all it wants, but that should be treated separately from the J&K dispute with Pakistan.



An excellent article, but the subsequent comments took the gloss off it - for me.



xeuss said:


> I think the disagreement arises on how both parties view the transaction.
> 
> India considers the whole of Jammu & Kashmir as its own, based on the claims of the erstwhile Raja, who acceded to India. The Raja claimed the borders as depicted by current state of J&K in India, even though he never actually held possession or control of certain territories, including Shaksgam Valley and Aksai Chin.
> 
> Pakistan on the other hand, made no such claim. For it, the northern areas ended at the claim of the Mir of Hunza valley. If I recall correctly, the Shaksgam Valley was part of the claim of the Mir of Hunza but never officially demarcated with the Chinese, and therefore likely controlled by China.
> 
> Therefore, when Pakistan and China demarcated they border in the Northern Areas, the valley ended up with Pakistan.





AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> Legally, demarcation agreements by the British supersede anything the local rulers (Maharaja's etc) accepted, given that the British were the primary authority in British India. The point being made here is that the Johnson Line, which India & the Maharaja accepted is superseded by the McDonald line, which was the official demarcation of the border in this region between British India and China.
> 
> India can claim Aksai Chin all it wants, but that should be treated separately from the J&K dispute with Pakistan.



You might recall that there was a brief war fought over some months in 1842, between Zorawar Singh on the one hand, initially, until his death, and the Tibetans. The war ended with the Treaty of Chushul. The British authority over these territories and over these rulers began several years later. Their decisions taken in ignorance of previous engagements and treaties can hardly be binding backwards in history for all time.


----------



## Jugger

This article states that Pakistan does not conform with the Johnson line hence she will cede other areas of Kashmir like aksai chin to China if it get suzerainty over all of Kashmir. This is fare enough..!
But if India gets suzerainty over all of Kashmir then by our own acceptance of Johnson line, we could assert ourselves to regain shaksgam valley. 
Again fair enough...!


----------



## Imran Khan

if you talk nicely china is good country .

but if you bark like india they will have rods and sticks

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Mohsin A

According to Brig. Samson, The Agreement between Pakistan & China included the giving and taking of land. Overall, Pakistan gained 50km. Watch from 10:10 onwards as what he says is extremely interesting!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## W.11

China has border disputes with each and every nation bordering it, Pakistan solved the border dispute with china (great) but besides indians, there are many countries china still has not settled its land disputes esp, central asia.

secondly the OP assumes that johnson line had no legitimacy, this is a controversial subject, but then again junagarh was ceded to pakistan by its maharaja and yet india didn't accept that claim even though it uses the same principle to claim entire kashmir state including gilgit baltistan. Pakistan didn't claim junagarh back even though legally it ceded to pakistan.

it seems to appear even though china ''gave'' pakistan near 2000 km, the onus was always on china, it seems ayub khan nearly begged chinese to give certain areas to pakistan and rest hand over to china, as in the artic.le it is written that china agreed on merit to give certain areas to pakistan. onus was always on china and pakistan rightly calculated that doing panga with china was not a wise thing to do (even india cannot take panga with china, how could pakistan?). Pakistan handed over the lands to china and got back few of those areas and voted china in the UN for permanent membership, who got the better deal?

simple question is, if pakistan didn't accept johnson line, why it pleaded china to give certain areas on ''merit'' which didn't belong to pakistan in the first place?, it seems to suggest thse territories were gifted by china that werent legally pakistan's territory (argument used by OP), or the equation maybe turned, that pakistan gifted territories to china and got few of them back as compensation.

regards


----------



## beijingwalker

W.11 said:


> China has border disputes with each and every nation bordering it


China has 14 land neighors, the most in the world, India is the only nation which China has border issues with out of 14. So don't let ignorance get better of you.



W.11 said:


> Pakistan solved the border dispute with china (great) but besides indians, there are many countries china still has not settled its land disputes esp, central asia.


Which one in central Asia? Ignorance knows no boundaries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tameem

Jugger said:


> This article states that Pakistan does not conform with the Johnson line hence she will cede other areas of Kashmir like aksai chin to China if it get suzerainty over all of Kashmir. This is fare enough..!
> But if India gets suzerainty over all of Kashmir then by our own acceptance of Johnson line, we could assert ourselves to regain shaksgam valley.
> Again fair enough...!



You pretends like Pakistan did a grave mistake by not towing the fictional Johson line like India and thus loose a great region which India *will* enjoys in her life of hereafter...LOL.

In fact here lies the contrast differences of India and Pakistan as nation states more acutely.
By going with Johnson line (Which contrary to actual Hold Position of China and British India at that time and rightly superseded by Macmohan line correctly by British Indian Officials) India proves she believes in Lies, Cheats, False Bravado and Arrogance as long as it takes her to anywhere but reality. This False Bravado and False Arrogance are move visible and put to test in 2020 when India out-rightly denies any incursion by China despite it happens on her perceived Johnson line. While on the other hand a pragmatic Pakistan replies India in the same tone within 24 hours of its incursion in Pakistan held areas on 27 Feb, 2019 by targetting Indian held position and assets in the Air. Bcz Pakistan Believes not in False bravado and arrogance but pragmatism and reality, which gaves him enough courage to stand against the bully 7 times larger of itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## W.11

beijingwalker said:


> China has 14 land neighors, the most in the world, India is the only nation which China has border issues with out of 14. So don't let ignorance get better of you.
> 
> 
> Which one in central Asia? Ignorance knows no boundaries.



4:30 onwards






regards



Tameem said:


> You pretends like Pakistan did a grave mistake by not towing the fictional Johson line like India and thus loose a great region which India *will* enjoys in her life of hereafter...LOL.
> 
> In fact here lies the contrast differences of India and Pakistan as nation states more acutely.
> By going with Johnson line (Which contrary to actual Hold Position of China and British India at that time and rightly superseded by Macmohan line correctly by British Indian Officials) India proves she believes in Lies, Cheats, False Bravado and Arrogance as long as it takes her to anywhere but reality. This False Bravado and False Arrogance are move visible and put to test in 2020 when India out-rightly denies any incursion by China despite it happens on her perceived Johnson line. While on the other hand a pragmatic Pakistan replies India in the same tone within 24 hours of its incursion in Pakistan held areas on 27 Feb, 2019 by targetting Indian held position and assets in the Air. Bcz Pakistan Believes not in False bravado and arrogance but pragmatism and reality, which gaves him enough courage to stand against the bully 7 times larger of itself.



what china claim are we talking about here in the first place? xinjiang came under foreign manchurean qing rule which was not even chinese, when the line was drawn, china didn't even have any control on the lands it claims as its own, when the line was drawn even then manchurean qing china was so busy, it had no time to settle border regions on its west, now china claims a land, and pakistan and other weak countries should be obliged to give it to the rightful owner.

Pakistanis are pretending here that china had all the universal rights of shaksam valley and the rests of the chinese claims.

regards


----------



## beijingwalker

W.11 said:


> xinjiang came under foreign manchurean qing rule which was not even chinese


If Qing was not Chinese, what country did they belong to? Britain?



W.11 said:


>


The video can't play, just a simple question, which central Asian countries have border disputes with China?



W.11 said:


> when the line was drawn, china didn't even have any control on the lands it claims as its own, when the line was drawn even then manchurean qing china was so busy, it had no time to settle border regions on its west, now china claims a land


Ignorance has no boundaries..


After Qing dynasty's fall and before 1949, Xinjiang was under the rule of the Republic of China
Kuomintang_Party_in_Xinjiang_1942
The Chinese charaters in the photos mean " Love the country, loyal to the party (KMT Chinese nationalist party)"






US state department documentary, 1944. The Battle of China


----------



## W.11

beijingwalker said:


>



Nepal was also part of china? 

regards


----------



## beijingwalker

W.11 said:


> Nepal was also part of china?
> 
> regards


It's US state department map, it's not very clearly defined in every small section, go to them for clarification,but Mongolia was part of China back then.


----------



## Areesh

W.11 said:


> Nepal was also part of china?
> 
> regards



Pakistan did the right deal with china 

What is your problem with that?



W.11 said:


> Nepal was also part of china?
> 
> regards



Pakistan did the right deal with china 

What is your problem with that?


----------



## Tameem

I would like to Add the comments and admission of some more shocking facts of our famous Indian Mr. @Joe Shearer on this subject to clear Pakistan position as the most of the foreign members wants to hear a neutral perspectives apart from Pakistanis.

This is for the records....



Joe Shearer said:


> Well, technically, but as many Indians know, first, the Aksai Chin region was included in J&K due to a crooked British geographer named Johnson, who profoundly impressed the then Maharaja with how powerful the Maharaja really was. That delineation that you see on Indian maps is the Johnson Line (the rogue's name was Johnson). The British themselves set the line back where it belonged, without Aksai Chin, through the instrumentality of one of their top administrators, a man named McDonald. That was the proper line, that the Chinese might well have agreed to (they didn't, so the British wrote to them saying that they considered silence to be assent).
> 
> Nehru did something quite shockingly unethical; he ordered the ministry to dump the McDonald line maps and re-draw it as the Johnson Line showed.
> 
> What you are saying is, or should be - the road construction, deployment of PLA on the east of the LAC, etc., are all NOT legit.



Joe, I place your words where it should actually belongs.....You r Welcom

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/after-modis-ghastly-admission-indians-back-tracking.672292/


----------



## Joe Shearer

Tameem said:


> I would like to Add the comments and admission of some more shocking facts of our famous Indian Mr. @Joe Shearer on this subject to clear Pakistan position as the most of the foreign members wants to hear a neutral perspectives apart from Pakistanis.
> 
> This is for the records....
> 
> 
> 
> Joe, I place your words where it should actually belongs.....You r Welcom
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/after-modis-ghastly-admission-indians-back-tracking.672292/



LOL.

My dear Sir, these are not shocking facts, these are just the facts. 

What IS shocking is that PRC offered, not once, but several times, a compromise solution, whereby India would cede Aksai Chin to the PRC, to the extent needed to cover their strategic highway from Xinjiang to Xijang to a satisfactory distance, and in exchange, the PRC, through its Autonomous Region, Xijang (Tibet to us lesser mortals), would cede us the tributary monastery of Tawang, severing it from the control of Shigatse (or Xigatse, as the Chinese prefer to spell it). 

I have no comment on the refusal to agree to this. A Line of Actual Control in the form of a border, then, would have given us comfortable lines of communication between Daulat Beg Oldi in the extreme north to Chushul and from there to Manali via the passes. No comment because my English language skills are simply not up to the task.


----------



## Tameem

Joe Shearer said:


> LOL.
> 
> My dear Sir, these are not shocking facts, these are just the facts.
> 
> What IS shocking is that PRC offered, not once, but several times, a compromise solution, whereby India would cede Aksai Chin to the PRC, to the extent needed to cover their strategic highway from Xinjiang to Xijang to a satisfactory distance, and in exchange, the PRC, through its Autonomous Region, Xijang (Tibet to us lesser mortals), would cede us the tributary monastery of Tawang, severing it from the control of Shigatse (or Xigatse, as the Chinese prefer to spell it).
> 
> I have no comment on the refusal to agree to this. A Line of Actual Control in the form of a border, then, would have given us comfortable lines of communication between Daulat Beg Oldi in the extreme north to Chushul and from there to Manali via the passes. No comment because my English language skills are simply not up to the task.


Thanks for your explanation again. "shocking" as you described what Nehru (The Indian PM) did on the documents related to Macmohan Line... Destroyed. 

It was indeed shocking.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Tameem said:


> Thanks for your explanation again. "shocking" as you described what Nehru (The Indian PM) did on the documents related to Macmohan Line... Destroyed.
> 
> It was indeed shocking.



Some misunderstanding here. No documents were destroyed. The Johnson Line was adopted and the McDonald Line was abandoned.


----------



## shanlung

Imran Khan said:


> if you talk nicely china is good country .
> 
> but if you bark like india they will have rods and sticks



And if that not enough, China got











*China Conducts Test Of Massive Suicide Drone Swarm Launched From A Box On A Truck*
China shows off its ability to rapidly launch 48 weaponized drones from the back of a truck, as well as from helicopters.


And together with drones, China got





Will new Chinese artillery rival US weapons?


Will new Chinese artillery rival US weapons? China may be arming its forces along the Indian border with its new lightweight, digitized, vehicle-mounted 155mm Howitzer weapon. US ARMY Published 6 hours ago The People’s Liberation Army may be arming its forces along the Indian border with its...



defence.pk































From the table above, it can be concluded that in terms of overall design, or in particular, the range, intensity, power, survivability and maneuverability, the PHL03 MLRS has a series of major breakthroughs compared with traditional rockets. Some of its aspects meet or even exceed the world's advanced level.

The service of the PHL03 Multiple Launch Rocket System has greatly enhanced the capability of remote fire support of the Chinese military. The operational performance of the system will continue to improve with the development of China's rocket shell technology. And it will become an indispensable remote firepower for the Chinese military.

























*China’s new PCL191 multiple launch rocket system casts shadow over Taiwan Strait*



The ‘mystery’ hardware that appeared without a name at the National Day parade in October is the PLA’s most powerful MLRS ever, experts say
System capable of firing eight 370mm rockets 350km or two 750mm ballistic missiles 500km







So any time India want to rock & roll.


----------

