"India has become slave of US, begging for protection from China" says Congress leader Manishankar Aiyar at Indo-Russian event

[SuvarnaTeja]

You have a too pessimistic view of your country's leadership. On the contrary, India gains a lot in the largely mutually beneficial relationship with America. But India could have gained those benefits while NOT so overtly antagonizing China. For decades, China was not as supportive of Pakistan as now. The Chinese would always say something like 'Why can't we all get along?' when India-Pakistan had problems. Things have changed drastically in last few years and I wouldn't be surprised IF/When America promises to look the other way the Chinese would grab more land from India and neutralize whatever threat India may pose against CPEC. Who knows what Biden-Xi have spoken in their recent 3 hour talk?? Big powers have historically made secret agreements where smaller powers are used as pawns even if they are supposed allies.

BJP is a pawn of the US. It is not a surprise that they will name China as an enemy.

 

[MH.Yang]

Nehru said that Tibet is a use land where not single blade of grass grows. India does not have any interest any land. India just does what she is asked to do by the US.

What China needs to do is to take control of India from within India like US and the Soviets and change the Indian policy towards China.

Tibet is the source of all important rivers in China, it is full of water resources. Moreover, Tibetans support the Chinese government and Chinese rule is very stable. On the contrary, Arunachal people do not support Chinese rule, and the cost of forcible rule is too high. Moreover, there are no resources here, and the strategic position is not important, even if we get it, we are likely to make it independent.
So from the beginning, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for western territory. In 1959, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for Aksai Chin. In 2020, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for Ladakh.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Tibet is the source of all important rivers in China, it is full of water resources. Moreover, Tibetans support the Chinese government and Chinese rule is very stable. On the contrary, Arunachal people do not support Chinese rule, and the cost of forcible rule is too high. Moreover, there are no resources here, and the strategic position is not important, even if we get it, we are likely to make it independent.
So from the beginning, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for western territory. In 1959, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for Aksai Chin. In 2020, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for Ladakh.

Yes. If India were being independent then Sino-Indian issues would have been resolved a long time back. Unfortunately India has become a slave of the US. Hence no deal with China.

 

[Meengla]

Tibet is the source of all important rivers in China, it is full of water resources. Moreover, Tibetans support the Chinese government and Chinese rule is very stable. On the contrary, Arunachal people do not support Chinese rule, and the cost of forcible rule is too high. Moreover, there are no resources here, and the strategic position is not important, even if we get it, we are likely to make it independent.
So from the beginning, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for western territory. In 1959, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for Aksai Chin. In 2020, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for Ladakh.

Sounds like a reasonable approach to resolving the issues. Live and let live should be the policy of Asian countries otherwise powers from thousands of miles away will keep finding 'allies' to push back the region.

 

[SIPRA]

Nehru said that Tibet is a useless land where not a single blade of grass grows. India does not have any interest in any land.

You are mistaken. Nehru made this statement about Aksai Chin, and not Tibet

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

You are mistaken. Nehru made this statement about Aksai Chin, and not Tibet

Aksai Chin is extension of Tibet hence China claims it.

 

[MH.Yang]

Yes. If India were being independent then Sino-Indian issues would have been resolved a long time back. Unfortunately India has become a slave of the US. Hence no deal with China.

Don't put all the blame on the USA. I don't believe that the USA has the ability to control the Indian govt, the USA can control at most some Indian media.
What the Indian govt has done is more a reflection of the mainstream public opinion in India. At most, the USA has only amplified the anger of Indian public opinion. In essence, the Indian govt just needs an enemy that makes Indians fear to divert contradictions in India.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Don't put all the blame on the USA. I don't believe that the USA has the ability to control the Indian govt, the USA can control at most some Indian media.
What the Indian govt has done is more a reflection of the mainstream public opinion in India. At most, the USA has only amplified the anger of Indian public opinion. In essence, the Indian govt just needs an enemy that makes Indians fear to divert contradictions in India.

Do you know Indian intelligence agency was created by CIA? You have no clue how much influence US on India. Almost all Indian political parties barring Congress and Communists are on the payroll of the US.

 

[Cheehg]

Yes. If India were being independent then Sino-Indian issues would have been resolved a long time back. Unfortunately India has become a slave of the US. Hence no deal with China.

I think that no India party dear makes deal because it will be seen as treason. This is the problem. The idea of both west and east lands belonging to India is so deeply inside Indians.

 

[kankan326]

Tibet is the source of all important rivers in China, it is full of water resources. Moreover, Tibetans support the Chinese government and Chinese rule is very stable. On the contrary, Arunachal people do not support Chinese rule, and the cost of forcible rule is too high. Moreover, there are no resources here, and the strategic position is not important, even if we get it, we are likely to make it independent.
So from the beginning, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for western territory. In 1959, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for Aksai Chin. In 2020, China prepared to trade southern Tibet for Ladakh.

Things changed. In 1959 China didn't think it could control South Tibet because at that time it seemed impossible to connect South Tibet to China inner land. Now China is building railway to connect Nepal. Connecting South Tibet of course is not a problem now.

 

[SIPRA]

Aksai Chin is extension of Tibet hence China claims it.

China considers Aksai Chin as part of Sinkiang. But that is not the point. Nehru's statement was about Aksai Chin, and not about Tibet. Nehru gave a lot of importance to Tibet, far before the issue of Aksai Chin arose. Tibet was bone of contention between India and China, right from 1950; wheras issue of Aksai Chin arose in 1958/59.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

I think that no India party dear makes deal because it will be seen as treason. This is the problem. The idea of both west and east lands belonging to India is so deeply inside Indians.

That is what outsiders think but the reality is India is being ruled by political parties which are on the US payroll. India will make a deal with China only if US gives the green light.

 

[MH.Yang]

Aksai Chin is extension of Tibet hence China claims it.

In 1962, we pay attention to Aksai Chin because of the Karakoram Highway. This highway is the fastest passage from Xinjiang to Tibet and the passage between China and Pakistan.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

China considers Aksai Chin as part of Sinkiang. But that is not the point. Nehru's statement was about Aksai Chin, and not about Tibet. Nehru gave a lot of importance to Tibet, far before the issue of Aksai Chin arose. Tibet was bone of contention between India and China, right from 1950; wheras issue of Aksai Chin arose in 1958/59.

Yes because the forward policy was run by CIA and Dalailama was a CIA agent. India had to acquiesce to the US policy on China as we needed food aid from the US.

 

[MH.Yang]

Things changed. In 195 China didn't think it could control South Tibet because at that time it seemed impossible to connect South Tibet to China inner land. Now China is building railway to connect Nepal. Connecting South Tibet of course is not a problem now.

The cost of governance is too high. What can southern Tibet provide us? Nothing. On the contrary, it will costs us a lot of money to help there poor. And the southern Tibetans do not support Chinese rule, there may be separatist organizations. Let it become an independent and dependent country on China, which is more in our interests.