Chinese Foreign Affairs News & Discussions

[Martian2]

Four important lessons from 1962 Sino-Indian border war

1. When the People's Daily newspaper publishes an article warning you to back off, you better listen. It is a prelude to war. The Indians ignored the warning from the People's Daily in 1962 and they paid the price of defeat in the Sino-Indian border war.

This lesson is applicable today to Vietnam and the Philippines. After the People's Daily, Xinhua, and Global Times warned them of military action, Vietnamese and Filipino provocations in the South China Sea stopped.

Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"On 22 September 1962, the People's Daily published an article which claimed that "the Chinese people were burning with 'great indignation' over the Indian actions on the border and that New Delhi could not 'now say that warning was not served in advance'."[37][38]
...
On 14 October, an editorial on People's Daily issued China's final warning to India: "So it seems that Mr. Nehru has made up his mind to attack the Chinese frontier guards on an even bigger scale....It is high time to shout to Mr. Nehru that the heroic Chinese troops, with the glorious tradition of resisting foreign aggression, can never be cleared by anyone from their own territory... If there are still some maniacs who are reckless enough to ignore our well-intentioned advice and insist on having another try, well, let them do so. History will pronounce its inexorable verdict... At this critical moment...we still want to appeal once more to Mr. Nehru: better rein in at the edge of the precipice and do not use the lives of Indian troops as stakes in your gamble." [38]"

----------

2. Chinese weaponry stationed across from Taiwan can be moved to the Indian sector. In 1962, China moved heavy artillery. In the current context, China can move 1,800 short-range ballistic missiles from the Taiwan sector for use against India.

Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Chinese attention was diverted for a time by the military activity of the Nationalists on Taiwan, but on 23 June the U.S. assured China that a Nationalist invasion would not be permitted.[30] China's heavy artillery facing Taiwan could then be moved to Tibet.[31] It took China six to eight months to gather the resources needed for the war, according to Anil Athale, author of the official Indian history.[31] The Chinese sent a large quantity of non-military supplies to Tibet through the Indian port of Calcutta.[31]"

----------

3. PLA's blitzkrieg will slice through the enemy's best troops.

Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Marshal Liu Bocheng headed a group to determine the strategy for the war. He concluded that the opposing Indian troops were among India's best, and to achieve victory would require deploying crack troops and relying on force concentration to achieve decisive victory. On 16 October, this war plan was approved, and on the 18th, the final approval was given by the Politburo for a "self-defensive counter-attack", scheduled for 20 October.[2]
...
At 5:14 am, Chinese mortar fire began attacking the Indian positions. Simultaneously, the Chinese cut the Indian telephone lines, preventing the defenders from making contact with their headquarters. At about 6:30 am, the Chinese infantry launched a surprise attack from the rear and forced the Indians to leave their trenches.[36]

The Chinese troops overwhelmed the Indians in a series of flanking manoeuvres south of the McMahon Line and prompted their withdrawal from Namka Chu.[36] Fearful of continued losses, Indian troops escaped into Bhutan. Chinese forces respected the border and did not pursue.[7] Chinese forces now held all of the territory that was under dispute at the time of the Thag La confrontation, but they continued to advance into the rest of NEFA.[36]
...
Western theatre

On the Aksai Chin front, China already controlled most of the disputed territory. Chinese forces quickly swept the region of any remaining Indian troops.[42] Late on 19 October, Chinese troops launched a number of attacks throughout the western theatre.[8] By 22 October, all posts north of Chushul had been cleared.[8]"

----------

4. In 1962, the United States rejected India's plea for military jets. Today, China is a well-armed thermonuclear power. What are the chances that the United States would be willing to supply India with a single bullet in the next Sino-Indian border war?

Sino-Indian War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Involvement of other nations

During the conflict, Nehru wrote two desperate letters to JFK, requesting 12 squadrons of fighter jets. These jets were necessary to beef up Indian air strength so that an air war could be initiated safely from the Indian perspective. This request was rejected. According to former Indian diplomat G Parthasarathy, "only after we got nothing from the US did arms supplies from the Soviet Union to India commence." [57] In 1962, President of Pakistan Ayub Khan made clear to India that Indian troops could safely be transferred from the Pakistan frontier to the Himalayas.[58]"

There are citations throughout this post. What's wrong with it? Or are you complaining about the other post? That has a citation too. My posts are based on facts. Just because you don't like them, that doesn't make my posts any less true.

Let's compare the trust among Chinese citizens in the CCP (88% trust) and the foreigners living in democratic nations. Why would Chinese want to emulate the inferior and far-less-trustworthy democratic model in the United States (40% trust) or India (44% trust)?

2011 Edelman Trust Barometer (see page 7 at http://www.edelman.com/trust/2011/uploads/Edelman Trust Barometer Global Deck.pdf).

Edelman (e.g. company behind "Edelman Trust Barometer") is the "world's largest independent public relations firm with over 3,100 employees in 54 offices worldwide" (see Davos Diary - The United States and the Trust Barometer).

----------

China's growing prosperity is clear for all to see.

Countries are like people. They have personalities that reflect the character of a particular country, its culture, history, traditions, and people.

America is a country based on individualism and democracy works very well for Americans. In America, the basic unit of society is the individual and his/her ambitions.

However, looking at Chinese history, it is obvious China's Confucian culture is a collectivist society. Chinese people are most comfortable working in groups. For the past 30 years, the economic and technological advancements accomplished under the CCP have been astonishing.

Thirty years of breathtaking progress have shown that China has found a socioeconomic system that works best for Chinese people. China will continue to pursue "socialism with Chinese characteristics" for the betterment of all Chinese people (except for the tiny disgruntled democracy agitators working for the CIA).

It is unreasonable to call for democracy in China at this time. Democracy in China under Chiang Kai Shek and the Kuomintang did not work. China was impoverished and invaded by foreigners. Today, under the CCP, China possesses advanced thermonuclear weapons and stealth technology to defend the country.

The CCP is doing a great job and it is governing China with the consent of the people. Someone once said that the CCP is the best government that China has had in the last 5,000 years. 88% of Chinese agree.

----------

Survey: 88 percent of Chinese trust government - People's Daily Online

"Survey: 88 percent of Chinese trust government
16:04, January 27, 2011

On Jan. 26, the 2011 Edelman Trust Barometer, which ranks institutions by the amount of trust people have in them, was released by Edelman, one of the top five global public relations firms. The report shows that China ranked first in the world in terms of trust in government with 88 percent trust.

The tradition in recent years is that Edelman releases the results of the annual Edelman Trust Barometer before start of the annual World Economic Forum meeting.

Trust in government in China has increased by 14 percentage points, up from 74 percent to 88 percent. In addition, the trust in government in Brazil has risen sharply, up from 39 percent in 2010 to 85 percent this year.

However, trust in government fell in the United States from 46 percent to 40 percent.

By People's Daily Online"

 

[Martian2]

I just noticed this thread has no military pictures. I'll rectify that. An interesting question is what would a repeat of the 1962 Sino-Indian war look like today? I haven't followed Indian military exercises, but I can give you a glimpse of the PLA's current arsenal.

----------

Preview of next Sino-Indian War

The Chinese combined-arms exercises on the Tibetan plateau show that China will hammer India with air power (J-10, J-11B, Su-27, and Su-30), attack helicopters, armor columns, and mobile heavy artillery (e.g. MLRS and howitzers) in the next Sino-Indian war.

Though it is not shown in the photographs, the opening salvo in the next Sino-Indian war will most likely start with a massive attack by Chinese cruise missiles on Indian military installations.

The Indians better say their prayers. They're not going to last very long against that much Chinese firepower.

Joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area_XINHUANET
English.news.cn | 2011-10-22 08:37:23 | Editor: An

A photo taken in this Autumn shows the army aviation troop taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Xing'an)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows a Jian-10 fighter taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Xing'an)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows a self-propelled weapon system of missile and gun taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows tanks taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows a Jian-10 fighter taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows the tanks during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows a Jian-11 fighter taking off during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows a Jian-11 fighter sending infrared decoy during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

[Note: Thank you to Greyboy2 for the post.]

 

[Martian2]

Joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area_XINHUANET

A photo taken in this Autumn shows rocket guns taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Zhao Haibo)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows a self-propelled howitzer taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Xing'an)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows a Jian-11 fighter taking part during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows cannons taking part during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Zhao Haibo)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows infantry taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows a soldier using a portable air-defence missile during a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows infantry with machine gun taking part in a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

A photo taken in this Autumn shows a joint military drill of air and land forces held on west China's plateau area which reached an altitude of 4,500 meters above the sea level. (Xinhua/Liu Yinghua)

[Note: Thank you to Greyboy2 for the post.]

 

[帅的一匹]

i never said that we dont have our privileges...tell me how many times have you cursed the system when the likes of raj thackeray or modi or sri ram sene...or vhp or simi are allowed to spread hate...?
whether you like it or not...india is still a nation of village dwellers and they can be moved easily...to form the righteous opinion you have to be educated...and democracy works on the opinion of the largest homogeneous group...so that way..we all would be burning hay in the middle of the chowk to rid the area of mosquitos...or something like that.
dude...democracy is obviously the best and most modern system...but nothing works the way it is intended to...to comfort you...i agree with your observations...but i have a point.

you are a respected Indian according to your mature thinking. In china, we do not regard Indian as hell visitors. We know Indian have great history, ordinary Indian do not seem to conceive hatred against chinese. We watch lots Indian love movie in our childhood and we like the touching content demonstrated within it. I hope Indian goverment rethink the relationship between the countries, we should stop those crap and start to know about each other from now.

 

[Joe Shearer]

There are citations throughout this post. What's wrong with it? Or are you complaining about the other post? That has a citation too. My posts are based on facts. Just because you don't like them, that doesn't make my posts any less true.

Your posts are based on facts? I doubt it; they are based on "very superficial and decidedly skewed and distorted reporting". That quality of citation does not amount to anything more than expressions of nationalist fervour.

If you are looking for a neutral and objective view of military and geopolitical events, you might like to look up past threads where, for instance, 'Cardsharp' has been involved. In particular, the thread on the incidents relating to the Tawang front, where the posts were of a high order. That thread did not deal with incidents on the Aksai Chin fronts (neither of them) or with the other clashes in Arunachal Pradesh, which, taken into consideration as a whole, are rather more thought-provoking than the tabloid versions to which you seem to have access.

Every single conclusion that you have drawn, based on silly citations, is wrong. That includes your conclusions about the utility of the People's China Daily as a harbinger of military action to come; the transferability of heavy artillery from the Taiwan front to the two military districts responsible for management of the disputed borders with India; the concept of a Chinese blitzkrieg to "slice" through the enemy's (I thought you were free of the 'nationalist' virus?) troops (which happened only on one front, not on the others); most of all, your misunderstanding and consequent misinterpretation of the Indian request for additional arms as an insight into aerial weakness at the time.

The People's China Daily has been in threat mode, off and on, for some decades now. India does not occupy the centre of Chinese administrative attention, and the references have been few and far between. When they have occurred, they are usually negative. There have still been dozens of citations in the years since 1962; they did not result in military clashes. It is silly to connect the two.

The transfer of heavy artillery, of artillery resources in general, has always been possible. What is new about it? As your own post points out, it was done - partially - in 1962. Your post does NOT point out, however, that heavy artillery was not used uniformly on all fronts, and that the most dramatic results did NOT come with the maximal deployment of heavy artillery. Your original point was mysterious, re-stating a known fact, but building it into a foundation of success. Its conclusions in present circumstances are on weak foundations.

Your fanciful imagery of blitzkrieg attacks is misplaced. A thorough examination of the battles on different fronts would reveal the correct picture, and would indicate where these tactics were actually used, where they were successful and where they failed in effect.

Finally, the reference to Indian pleas for American aid was really bad. There was panic in the Indian ministry, and consequently panic calls for additional forces, including aeroplanes. This has nothing to do with either the real availability of Indian aircraft to fight in these theatres, or their effectiveness in high mountain warfare in case of their use. Those were - and continue to be - the real issues, not a gross number of aircraft available, or a disastrous shortage, or a supply against such a mythical shortage.

If you were within respectable distance of the facts, there might be a discussion. Confronted with such a collection of self-seeking, propaganda masterpieces, the only possible reaction is of distaste and avoidance of a food fight. Learn your subject first.

Subsequent posts confirm that we need not bother about expecting any serious analysis from you; the glossy propaganda pictures, and the accompanying comment about not having followed Indian military exercises, clearly indicate what objectivity you bring to the table.

Try not to waste any more bandwidth.

 

[Martian2]

Your posts are based on facts? I doubt it; they are based on "very superficial and decidedly skewed and distorted reporting". That quality of citation does not amount to anything more than expressions of nationalist fervour.

If you are looking for a neutral and objective view of military and geopolitical events, you might like to look up past threads where, for instance, 'Cardsharp' has been involved. In particular, the thread on the incidents relating to the Tawang front, where the posts were of a high order. That thread did not deal with incidents on the Aksai Chin fronts (neither of them) or with the other clashes in Arunachal Pradesh, which, taken into consideration as a whole, are rather more thought-provoking than the tabloid versions to which you seem to have access.

Every single conclusion that you have drawn, based on silly citations, is wrong. That includes your conclusions about the utility of the People's China Daily as a harbinger of military action to come; the transferability of heavy artillery from the Taiwan front to the two military districts responsible for management of the disputed borders with India; the concept of a Chinese blitzkrieg to "slice" through the enemy's (I thought you were free of the 'nationalist' virus?) troops (which happened only on one front, not on the others); most of all, your misunderstanding and consequent misinterpretation of the Indian request for additional arms as an insight into aerial weakness at the time.

The People's China Daily has been in threat mode, off and on, for some decades now. India does not occupy the centre of Chinese administrative attention, and the references have been few and far between. When they have occurred, they are usually negative. There have still been dozens of citations in the years since 1962; they did not result in military clashes. It is silly to connect the two.

The transfer of heavy artillery, of artillery resources in general, has always been possible. What is new about it? As your own post points out, it was done - partially - in 1962. Your post does NOT point out, however, that heavy artillery was not used uniformly on all fronts, and that the most dramatic results did NOT come with the maximal deployment of heavy artillery. Your original point was mysterious, re-stating a known fact, but building it into a foundation of success. Its conclusions in present circumstances are on weak foundations.

Your fanciful imagery of blitzkrieg attacks is misplaced. A thorough examination of the battles on different fronts would reveal the correct picture, and would indicate where these tactics were actually used, where they were successful and where they failed in effect.

Finally, the reference to Indian pleas for American aid was really bad. There was panic in the Indian ministry, and consequently panic calls for additional forces, including aeroplanes. This has nothing to do with either the real availability of Indian aircraft to fight in these theatres, or their effectiveness in high mountain warfare in case of their use. Those were - and continue to be - the real issues, not a gross number of aircraft available, or a disastrous shortage, or a supply against such a mythical shortage.

If you were within respectable distance of the facts, there might be a discussion. Confronted with such a collection of self-seeking, propaganda masterpieces, the only possible reaction is of distaste and avoidance of a food fight. Learn your subject first.

Subsequent posts confirm that we need not bother about expecting any serious analysis from you; the glossy propaganda pictures, and the accompanying comment about not having followed Indian military exercises, clearly indicate what objectivity you bring to the table.

Try not to waste any more bandwidth.

I saw no citations. Therefore, I didn't bother to read your rhetoric. Remember, no reputable citations = "too long didn't read."

 

[帅的一匹]

New Delhi fears Beijing’s territorial claims to the north-eastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh and its growing naval power.The states of Kashmir, Arunachal Pradesh and Tamil Nadu sit uneasily in the union. Maoists hold sway across much of the central belt.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I saw no citations. Therefore, I didn't bother to read your rhetoric. Remember, no reputable citations = "too long didn't read."

Your heading was five words too long.

 

[帅的一匹]

November 1914, plot by the British government, British India authority hold meeting in simla north India. During the meeting, British government representative Henry McMahon created a MacMahon line with Tibetan local authority without permission of China government, since this 90 thousand square kilometers in the eastern border line territory historically belonging to China was illegal allotted to India. Peolple living in this region is bearing exactly the same religious, features and living habit with people living in Tibet. All previous China government never admit the MacMahon line, thus, it is unlawful and invalid. The British government have guilty conscience by not making the exchange of notes known to public until the India government label the MacMahon line on its official map in 1937. April 1960, premier Zhou en lai paid visit to New Dehli having a talk with premier Nehru to seek peaceful resolution of border dispute, but India refuse any reasonable proposal by China side. Year 1962, India military troops stir up conflict in the border, which finally was beaten back by PLA force as easy as blowing off dust. Year 1987, India officially set up a Pradesh on the region.

 

[帅的一匹]

The btitish goverment induced the loacal tibetan authority to cede China territory without thinking many years later, India will get inpendant. And india goverment ignored the historical truth and pretend not to know the history. The british empire is the principle criminal who buried seeds of hatred between to largest population in the world and India appropriated territory of china without any payback.

 

[帅的一匹]

According to a veteran description, PLA disarmed thousands of Indian soldiers and gave back the gun to them before removing rifle bolt. This make a joke at our leisure.

 

[Martian2]

Panda Armed

I don't believe India has to worry about South Tibet for three decades. It's at least a generation away. China's priority list seems pretty clear. I would say the absolute deadline is 2049, the 100th anniversary of New China.

Return of Hong Kong (1997)
Return of Macau (1999)

Return of Taiwan (2020-2040?)
Return of Diaoyu Islands (2030-2040?)
Return of South Tibet (2040-2049?)

 

[Dron.ru]

Lavrov: Russia will not participate in schemes to contain China

«It must be very clear that Russia would not support the scheme that can initiate a new round of confrontation in international relations. We will not participate in structures designed to contain China, which is our good neighbor and strategic partner»

The announcement was made after meeting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Hillary Clinton. The U.S. is trying to encircle China. We should work together in order to reduce the negative impact of the U.S. in Southeast Asia.

 

[HongWu]

The announcement was made after meeting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Hillary Clinton. The U.S. is trying to encircle China. We should work together in order to reduce the negative impact of the U.S. in Southeast Asia.

When Russia is ready to beat back the USA, you should sanction india and Vietnam, because they are both strongly in USA's camp. Look at how india voted to attack Syria your ally and naval base! They also want to be friends with Japan, who claims your Southern Kuril islands. Georgia's relations with india is getting better too.

Once Russia sanctions india and Vietnam, including arms sale sanctions, then China will attack these two countries and regime change them. China can give Russia a chunk of Vietnam and a chunk of india too as gratitude.

 

[Martian2]

China's next top leader: Xi Jinping (president-in-waiting)

Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping (center) is currently in the United States where he met U.S. President Barack Obama. (Source: CNN)