China’s border row with India has misfired, says regional security expert

[JSCh]

When Chinese say China is a nation since ancient time, one has to understand its meaning by looking at Chinese historical view.

China has this concept of mandate of heaven and the idea that the rightful state of being is that all people under the heaven(meaning China) has to be united under one nation or political/administrative unit. There is only one China/mandate of heaven. So when one dynasty falls, all the broken-up warlords/kings would compete for the orthodoxy of having the mandate of heaven. And they would fight each other until China is whole and united again. The winner would then establish the new dynasty. It is viewed more or less like the passing of generation in a family. Therefore even though the ruling family/dynasty has changed, but China is still China, that did not change. In that respect, in Chinese eye, China since millenniums ago is the same nation as it is today. This is similar to modern democratic nation when government and political party come and go but the nation stay the same.

Chinese historical view is taught since young in an orderly account of one dynasty to the next from prehistoric(meaning there are no preserved written continuous historical account) to historic to present day. Chinese has bother to made the effort of preserving historical account since 300B.C. Every new dynasty would record, collect and compiled the history of previous dynasties.

The end result is Chinese since ancient times has similar historical view of people of a modern nation. Chinese at all time would be able to recount China history in an orderly, continuous lineage and in a highly confident manner.

But true Chinese history is not without problem, there are a few discontinuous period in Chinese history that were ignored in order to maintain the clean, orthodox view of Chinese history. So in that sense, the Chinese orthodox historical view is also artificial as other historical view that other nation compiled to make a more modern and orderly view of their own history.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

When Chinese say China is a nation since ancient time, one has to understand its meaning by looking at Chinese historical view.

China has this concept of mandate of heaven and the idea that the rightful state of being is that all people under the heaven(meaning China) has to be united under one nation or political/administrative unit. There is only one China/mandate of heaven. So when one dynasty falls, all the broken-up warlords/kings would compete for the orthodoxy of having the mandate of heaven. And they would fight each other until China is whole and united again. The winner would then establish the new dynasty. It is viewed more or less like the passing of generation in a family. Therefore even though the ruling family/dynasty has changed, but China is still China, that did not change. In that respect, in Chinese eye, China since millenniums ago is the same nation as it is today. This is similar to modern democratic nation when government and political party come and go but the nation stay the same.

Nice post. The Old Europeans had a similar concept relating to sovereignty:

Divine right of kings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Though the "Mandate of Heaven" we used in East Asia is a much older concept.

What many people, including the Chinese, fail to appreciate is that the 'free media' is a misnomer, both in the West and in India.

In domestic matters, the 'free media' will hold the government's feet to the fire but, on matter of foreign policy, the media is an important part of the government's toolset, either through manipulation or tacit agreement. The media guys need to maintain a decent working relationship with government officials so both sides work together when 'national security' is at stake.

The 'free media' is used by the government, through 'leaks' or direct statements, to field trial balloons to gauge public reaction to policy decisions, and to mould public opinion if necessary.

If anything goes wrong, the government can deny involvement and put up their hands saying "hey, don't blame us, it's just the free media at work; it's part of democracy".

It's a far more clever way to run things, and to control the populace, than through state-controlled media.

Agreed.

 

[faithfulguy]

Pathetic cherrypicking as usual ,india was united first under mauryas for over 150 yrs.Under guptas too.
The concept of indian subcontinent as one nation is found is the term bharatvarsha,in the epic mahabharat[or great india].
The term uttarapath was known from vedic times denoting north india and dakshinapath for south india.
The emperors like harshavardhana who united N.india under their rule were titled 'sakal-uttarapathanatha'[lord of north india],pulakeshin 2,rajendra chola were often titled dakshinapathapati[lord of south india].

Emperors like mahapadma nanda or chandragupta maurya,samudragupta that held sway over whole of subcontinent took the title 'ekraat'[One emperor over all].You have very little knowledge or understanding of ndian history or culture and are ranting with a clear agenda as is the norm.

As for persia,again unknowledged rant...persia was a distinct identity from time of cyrus.
If that is your definition then china is a modern creation as well.It was ruled by manchu qings till 20th century.

And when the hasha rulers ruled north India, do they regard all other rulers within all India as rebels that must be absorbed. If not, than your post again prove my point that india was a geographical expression. So all the rulers that controlled a big portion of today's India is no different than Charlemagne, Napoleon or even Hitler conquered a big portion of Europe. They were doing it for themselves or their own kingdoms, but not for the country of India or Europe respectively.

 

[faithfulguy]

When Chinese say China is a nation since ancient time, one has to understand its meaning by looking at Chinese historical view.

China has this concept of mandate of heaven and the idea that the rightful state of being is that all people under the heaven(meaning China) has to be united under one nation or political/administrative unit. There is only one China/mandate of heaven. So when one dynasty falls, all the broken-up warlords/kings would compete for the orthodoxy of having the mandate of heaven. And they would fight each other until China is whole and united again. The winner would then establish the new dynasty. It is viewed more or less like the passing of generation in a family. Therefore even though the ruling family/dynasty has changed, but China is still China, that did not change. In that respect, in Chinese eye, China since millenniums ago is the same nation as it is today. This is similar to modern democratic nation when government and political party come and go but the nation stay the same.

Chinese historical view is taught since young in an orderly account of one dynasty to the next from prehistoric(meaning there are no preserved written continuous historical account) to historic to present day. Chinese has bother to made the effort of preserving historical account since 300B.C. Every new dynasty would record, collect and compiled the history of previous dynasties.

The end result is Chinese since ancient times has similar historical view of people of a modern nation. Chinese at all time would be able to recount China history in an orderly, continuous lineage and in a highly confident manner.

But true Chinese history is not without problem, there are a few discontinuous period in Chinese history that were ignored in order to maintain the clean, orthodox view of Chinese history. So in that sense, the Chinese orthodox historical view is also artificial as other historical view that other nation compiled to make a more modern and orderly view of their own history.

Another country that has continuous dynasty and defined border is ancient Egypt. They have a continuous history from 3000BC up until the time of Cleopatra. I had tried to use analogies of ancient Egypt to China since 256BC and explain to the Indians in here. But only a few would be willing to accept the facts.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

And when the hasha rulers ruled north India, do they regard all other rulers within all India as rebels that must be absorbed. If not, than your post again prove my point that india was a geographical expression. So all the rulers that controlled a big portion of today's India is no different than Charlemagne, Napoleon or even Hitler conquered a big portion of Europe. They were doing it for themselves or their own kingdoms, but not for the country of India or Europe respectively.

Plz,so according to you no other country had a identity and were geographical expressions except egypt and china until recently?
Any emperor who had will or strength strived to be 'ekraat' .Because indian culture and geography is far more diverse and less militant in outlook successes have been low.You keep talking about china,the same china that was ruled until 20th century by foreign manchu qings.

 

[k_arura]

This "expert" is either stupid or just blind.

Back in the warring states in China. 7 states exist. One is the eventual ruling state, Qin. The other six attempted an Alliance to bring down Qin through an masterful politician called Su Qin.

The Alliance on paper was stronger, but each individually was much weaker. The Qin politician used his diplomacy skills to dissolve the alliance and paved the way to eventual unification by Qin.

He used the common mistrust, the weakness of the weaker states, and used bribes, and other means to stop a few other nations. The Alliance collapsed before it even did anything meaningful.

The 6 states, were much like Europe in the sense they had much in common, as well as differences. The proposed alliance by this author has nothing, and much like BRICS, there power, interest and everything else has pretty much nothing in common, and even worse, some of these countries are developed or soon to be developed like SK, Japan and Australia, while some are pretty low on the food chain.

Moral of the story, unlike Nato where US is the undisputed leader and has command over all Allied forces, there isn't and won't be a command structure that would work in a India Japan + whatever.

India won't listen to Japanese command, and I know the Japanese won't listen to Indians, Vietnam and Philippines also won't listen to another's command, while Australia and Indonesia has at least some bad feelings, from my understanding.

With out an effective Chain of command, a mistrust between the countries, economic interests with China as well as countries friendly with China, European and American interests with China and other countries.

All these things are things that would doom any alliance against China. All China has to do is offer unification for South Korea, negotiate with Vietnam and Philippines on a common ground (they won't really want to go to war with China so the end result is irrelevent, all it needs is to delay or stop them from taking action) and the way US China trade is going, US will do all it could to hold back Japan.

India, let's face it won't move alone, Australia loves Chinese Yuan, while Indonesia, Malaysia somehow seems indifferent to the SCS issue.

No there won't be an Anti China Alliance

An overdose of wishful thinking may I say? The fact that it happened way back in China wizens us all up in the 21st century to Chinese designs and tricks

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

This is actually true, they even said it themselves:

Indian troops suspend patrols at Chumar - Times Of India



They were the ones who broke our tacit agreement by setting up entire sets of bunkers and starting aggressive patrolling on the LAC.

And when they backed down, they destroyed the entire set of strategic bunkers, as well as halting all infrastructure building in the region, and cancelling troop patrols.

Again cherry picking old may 10 rumour monger reports-hear it staright from latest report from mouth of head of northern command IA.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/258851-no-compromise-made-end-stand-off-china-army.html
Your own govt denied nay deal lol.And they never pass up a chance to brag.

Chinese incursion: Indian soldiers to patrol closer to China border
Here it noob,later may 28 report.India not only didn't stop patrolling,now patrolling further.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Again cherry picking old may 10 rumour monger reports-hear it staright from latest report from mouth of head of northern command IA.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/258851-no-compromise-made-end-stand-off-china-army.html
Your own govt denied nay deal lol.And they never pass up a chance to brag.

Chinese incursion: Indian soldiers to patrol closer to China border
Here it noob,later may 28 report.India not only didn't stop patrolling,now patrolling further.

LOL, "nationalturk.com"? None of your sources are mainstream media, the other one is the idrw blog.

I could quote blogs all day as well, but no... I quoted Senior officials in the Indian Army themselves.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

'No compromise was made to end stand-off with China'

Here june 17 news not may 10,right from mouth of northern army command head not anonymous 'senior officials',from the statesman not blog.

Indian patrols to move closer to China border

Source hindustan times not national turk.

This is where u shut ur trap once and for all.

 

[JSCh]

Nice post. The Old Europeans had a similar concept relating to sovereignty:

Divine right of kings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Though the "Mandate of Heaven" we used in East Asia is a much older concept.



Agreed.

Yes in term of sovereignty, although European kings derived their right to rule from God/church and bloodline. Chinese emperor although derived legitimacy from dynastic bloodline also, but it is conditional on the acquiescence of the people. Dynasty could be overthrown by revolt and anybody with whatever background could become emperor.

The idea of one "orthodox/official"(Confucian and nonreligious) China is more akin to monotheism idea of one orthodox church.

There could be one and only one "orthodox/official" China, and China manage to keep this idea alive as a fact since millenniums ago.

 

[JSCh]

I highlighted the facile errors that superficially informed people make. You subscribed instantly to every one of them. Now join the dots.



I suggest a quick visit to the dictionary to look up the esoteric word historiography. It might put a more meaningful face to what you have, no doubt with reason, described as the use of history "to serve contemporary political ends." Not every historian sits down and says, "Now what do we do about falling ratings for our government? I know! Let's re-write our history texts!" It is a tad more complex than that.

You are right that not all revision of history are totally politically motivated, but some are(I am not saying that Indian did). But historian are people and inevitably political. Modern revision of history does tend to how should I put it err on the bright side of thing whenever possible. This happen to all countries. Most people in the world would accept it whenever that happen. But Chinese is a historically minded people and tend to have a set standard derived from Chinese historical view and would be uncomfortable when it doesn't fit into that set standard.

 

[timetravel]

When Chinese say China is a nation since ancient time, one has to understand its meaning by looking at Chinese historical view.

China has this concept of mandate of heaven and the idea that the rightful state of being is that all people under the heaven(meaning China) has to be united under one nation or political/administrative unit. There is only one China/mandate of heaven. So when one dynasty falls, all the broken-up warlords/kings would compete for the orthodoxy of having the mandate of heaven. And they would fight each other until China is whole and united again. The winner would then establish the new dynasty. It is viewed more or less like the passing of generation in a family. Therefore even though the ruling family/dynasty has changed, but China is still China, that did not change. In that respect, in Chinese eye, China since millenniums ago is the same nation as it is today. This is similar to modern democratic nation when government and political party come and go but the nation stay the same.

Chinese historical view is taught since young in an orderly account of one dynasty to the next from prehistoric(meaning there are no preserved written continuous historical account) to historic to present day. Chinese has bother to made the effort of preserving historical account since 300B.C. Every new dynasty would record, collect and compiled the history of previous dynasties.

The end result is Chinese since ancient times has similar historical view of people of a modern nation. Chinese at all time would be able to recount China history in an orderly, continuous lineage and in a highly confident manner.

But true Chinese history is not without problem, there are a few discontinuous period in Chinese history that were ignored in order to maintain the clean, orthodox view of Chinese history. So in that sense, the Chinese orthodox historical view is also artificial as other historical view that other nation compiled to make a more modern and orderly view of their own history.

Show me the address or Mobile Number of God who mandated?

As there are different kings / Warloads, there was no entity called China ever. China is only created in 1950.

It is your wish that there was a China, but there never was a country called China before.

 

[JSCh]

Show me the address or Mobile Number of God who mandated?

As there are different kings / Warloads, there was no entity called China ever. China is only created in 1950.

It is your wish that there was a China, but there never was a country called China before.

Mandate of Heaven - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

God is not involved in the Chinese mandate of heaven. You do not need to contact HIM.

The perception of the continuous lineage of the Chinese nation is maintained by viewing the chaotic period between change of dynasty where there are many kings/warlords as a transitional period.

The modern equivalent view would be a revolution or civil war.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

China indeed has had a long line of dynasties,but claim of chinese members that only egypt and china had identities and rest are just modern creations is hogwash and reflects lack of understanding and respect for other nations and civilizations.Not unusual in 'middle kingdom'/sinocentrism propagandists.

 

[faithfulguy]

Plz,so according to you no other country had a identity and were geographical expressions except egypt and china until recently?
Any emperor who had will or strength strived to be 'ekraat' .Because indian culture and geography is far more diverse and less militant in outlook successes have been low.You keep talking about china,the same china that was ruled until 20th century by foreign manchu qings.

That is not true. The modern European states evolve out of medieval Europe. The English, French, Dutch, Spanish and later German and Italian kingdom were created because of nationalism in Europe. If its not for British unification of India, the various Indian states such as Hyderabad, Mysore, Bengal, and Sikh kingdom would evolve to become nation states in their own right.