What's new

India matching China in border infrastructure

Thanks for your reply, I have read about the Sino-India war and I agree that they could do more damage. I believe the Chinese also voluntary moved back to pre-war borders.

You mentioned China only attacked due to Nehru's foul play on the Tibet case. Could you elaborate more on what you mean?

He might mean Nehru's "forward policy". You may see a small collection of articles by Indians here: rediff.com: The India-China War, 40 Years On
 
.
China is not threat for India.. China attacked India only due to foul play by Nehru on tibbet's case.. if chnia was really such aggressor then in 1962 they can hit us more than what they did.....

Exactly.

Why should China make India its enemy? Does that do anything good to China?

Simple as that, but alas not much Indian friends can see this through except a limited few wise ones.
 
.
Exactly.

Why should China make India its enemy? Does that do anything good to China?

Simple as that, but alas not much Indian friends can see this through except a limited few wise ones.

i think you are wrong here. many indians on forums cannot see through this. most indians in india have no animosity or hostility towards china. indians who dont like USA often see china as a potential counterweight to USA, and hope that sino-indian relations will improve.

and there are many commies in india who will die for china.
 
. .
India matching China in border infrastructure: Pallam Raju

Shillong (PTI): India is building infrastructure along the Indo-China border to match the developments on the other side with the Centre approving a 1,850-km Trans Himalayan Highway in Arunachal Pradesh, Minister of State for Defence Pallam Raju said here on Tuesday.

"Centre has approved the Trans-Himalayan highway which aims at providing inter basin double lane connectivity," Raju told reporters here.


The Hindu News Update Service

Excellant project. India and China are both future super economies. Most of their border issues have been solved and both are well on the way of solving the remaining. Today the infrastructure is for military purpose but tommorrow it can be used for trade and tourism. It will be beneficial for both.

Regards
 
.
.
It's hard to believe anyway, you know communism is not religion.

religion is not the only cause people die for. some communists in Kerala and west Bengal, two states in India where communists are very influential, there are many who support China and Cuba over India!
 
.
religion is not the only cause people die for. some communists in Kerala and west Bengal, two states in India where communists are very influential, there are many who support China and Cuba over India!

I guess that's more like activity of the 4th Communist International, do they support North Korea too, where CP is actually the core of their KWP?
 
.
When were those airbases built and then closed?

btw I think it a farseeing decision to build up infrastructure alone the border, much wiser than the reported deployment of Su-30 fighters. India should've done it earlier because it is now an era for soft power, and China doesn't have any southward expanding plan into India.

It's a good move but not only for military purpose but also to increase the tourism and in case if any thing happens to create bases from where you can supply the relief materials asap.
 
.
i think you are wrong here. many indians on forums cannot see through this. ...

You are probably right.

One Chinese forumer posted that it is much to his surprise that so many Indians (on internet, of course) are so anti-China.

Most people worry about their own life more than about whatever across a remote boarder...

and there are many commies in india who will die for china.

Similar statement has been seen more than one thousand times... I wonder if they can't die for themselves, how could they die for others?

It's too illogical, isn't it?
 
.
You are probably right.

One Chinese forumer posted that it is much to his surprise that so many Indians (on internet, of course) are so anti-China.

Most people worry about their own life more than about whatever across a remote boarder...

If you distribute a questionnaire on the streets of Mumbai and ask about opinion on china, most people would say they are neutral, or that they are ok with china. some will hate china for 1962 and for supporting pak, and an communist would love china. but vast majority have no ill feeling towards china.

On the net, most indians who post on forums are patriotic, and dont like china for supporting pak.

Similar statement has been seen more than one thousand times... I wonder if they can't die for themselves, how could they die for others?

It's too illogical, isn't it?

I didnt mena dying literally. i meant that they love china a lot. Actually their love is for the Communist Party Congress, not the people of China.
 
.
well, pakistani's won't learn what indians think about chinese from bollywood movies. the indian feeling towards china is mostly a "i don't care" attitude. though everyone in india knows that china attacked india some decades back. they hate this fact.
 
.
China is not threat for India.. China attacked India only due to foul play by Nehru on tibbet's case.. if chnia was really such aggressor then in 1962 they can hit us more than what they did.....

Bullshit. They withdrew because their lines were stretched ridiculously thin. They literally ran back to the safe lines behind the border. They could not have carried on in India, they simply didnt have the logistics for it.

Secondly, India did not do spend money on infrastructure development near the border areas in NE before was because India did not have and neither did it plan to have many tanks/IFV's/ armoured vehicles in that area that could use those roads, etc. Building those roads would have aided China in case of an invasion by them-as they had a good number of them.

In hindsight, this could be thought of as a bad move, as the infrastructure would give a massive boost to the ailing economy of the region, but you have to consider the threat perspective as well-and our meager resources.

Now however, India is buying and building a massive tank force, and its not only for the western border, they also plan to increase the IFV's/APC's and other armoured vehicles in that area. Since they also plan to revamp the complete arty system, it fits well, that the guns are mobile and can take advantage of the roads in the NE. This is additionally well, as the primary LACM of India would be BrahMos which is launched from trucks-again-need of roads and mobility.

You see the whole flood of articles about how the Airforce is revamping its infrastructure in the NE as well. They plan to deploy Su-30MKI's there. So there would be no problems in air support for the Army as well.

And please cut the crap about China being friends, etc. Did you not see China's role at the NSG meeting? What they did there? Or of the repeated border incursions, or the Chinese ambassador saying that China claims the entire Arunachal Pradesh or the arming or Pakistan?
 
.
China never stops claiming AP as its territory: before and now. It is not new!

As far as NSG stuff is concerned, I can't but be brought down to my knee in acknowledging that Indian propaganda is indeed much stronger than that of CPC in fanning up nationalism.

A Chinese Puzzle in Vienna


Jabin T Jacob
Research Fellow, IPCS
e-mail: jabin@ipcs.org

With the India-specific waiver finally making its way through the Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG), the immediate focus of China watchers has been on interpreting the perceived Chinese opposition to the Indo-US nuclear deal at the NSG. While the National Security Advisor (NSA) declared that India was "disappointed," others less diplomatic, have cried 'betrayal,' referring to earlier declarations by China's top leaders that it "would not stand in the way." In reality, very few in India seem to have actually trusted China or expected anything good of it in the IAEA and NSG deliberations, and there are, no doubt, many who felt vindicated by the turn of events.

The key event here, however, is not the Chinese 'betrayal' but of remembering what was achieved. The point remains that the Chinese did not scuttle the deal - something that was within their power to do. Chinese leaders, in fact, realized at an early date that there was very little they could do to block the deal given the importance of China's relationships with the US and India. To say that China appeared to have encouraged others in the NSG to put paid to the deal is perhaps carrying the argument a bit too far. Surely, India also needed to consider and address the views of the smaller countries on their own merits, with or without Chinese support for them. Indian diplomats would have known that any shortcoming in this regard, could conceivably be exploited by China. In the event, both India's diplomats and its leaders realized this and stuck to their task without wasting their time wringing their hands about any attempted Chinese sabotage. It was nobody's case that the Indo-US nuclear deal would pass the IAEA and NSG only on the strength of American diplomacy and pressure tactics. India too had a job to do and it did it, despite the obituaries on the deal being written by 'strategic experts' in New Delhi.

Meanwhile, in contrast to the Indian NSA's unhappiness, the External Affairs Minister (EAM) has appeared more sanguine about the Chinese role at the NSG by saying that "[t]his is their internal matter." The key word here is "internal." Perhaps, the EAM is not unaware of the pulls and pressures within the Chinese establishment on the Indo-US nuclear deal. Like any country, China has its hawks and doves on matters of national security and foreign policy. One must understand, for instance, that the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) does not function as its counterparts in India or the US do. Not only is the MOFA answerable to the Communist Party, the Ministry can sometimes be in the dark, as to what the military establishment is up to (as in the case of the Chinese ASAT test in January 2007) and its views are in reality often also of secondary importance to what the PLA has to say. It is likely there were differences of opinion at the highest levels of decision-making in China on how to react to the Indo-US nuclear deal and on China's options at the NSG.

In this case, China's powers that be probably decided that angering India a little was less of a problem than giving the view domestically that China had given the US and India (in that order) a walkover. Every action including China's original declarations of support, Pakistan's unhappiness, US pressure and Indian expectations, formed part of the larger tableau playing out within China. It was, therefore, surely no coincidence that the Chinese Foreign Minister was in India at precisely this time, when he would be most required, to smoothen ruffled Indian feathers.

If China did attempt wholeheartedly to oppose the deal, it certainly was aware that there would have been a price to pay, to mollify New Delhi. Even if the deal had not gotten through the NSG, China would have had to make up for it with concessions to India in other areas. This in itself would have been an achievement of these negotiations, even if most lay observers would not see it that way. Indeed, one can be sure that Beijing will extract its pound of flesh from Washington as well, for agreeing to the latter's requests, perhaps on Iran and North Korea. All of this is part of normal diplomatic maneuvering. Indeed, the NSA's statements and the Indian demarche to Beijing could well be interpreted as attempts to keep China off-balance and to avoid giving the impression that India owed China anything for the waiver. On the other hand, carrying this point still further, India could even have been helping Chinese moderates to convince their hard-line counterparts that if India has taken offense at the Chinese actions, then surely the Chinese delegation must have done its best to stop the deal. This sort of logic is nothing new and has been employed within India to counter the opposition of the Left and the BJP to the nuclear deal.

However, the time now is to look forward, not back in the interests of better Sino-Indian relationship. To that end, the fact that China went beyond narrow conceptions of strategic gain to let the waiver for India pass at the NSG and that the Indian EAM has refused to have words put in his mouth about any alleged Chinese betrayal are encouraging signs.

IPCS - China & East Asia
 
.
I am inclined to point out, that the Chinese could NOT scuttle the deal on their own as it would have directly affected bilateral relations with India, not to mention with the world, where China would be seen in a negative light. What it did try to do however was fan up the opposition as much as it could in other countries. What it did try to do was send its diplomats to the nations who were holding out and tell them further.

There is nothing to whip out nationalism, the deal went through, and it was there that India saw what China was doing.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom