Modi protests China's veto on Indian motion for UN action against Pakistan

[uparyupari]

You ridiculed me by suggesting to grow a pair and that I should not show my cowardice. Freedom of speech for you? And what bravado and cowardice when we both are sitting behind our keyboards and expressing ourselves. Is it your consolation that Kashmir, though Indian legally based on the accesion protocol, has a part of it with the enemy, just because we think it was never going to be ours? Brave indeed, anyway off with you, welcome to the ignore list.

If I ridiculed you/your post, it was because you deserved it. Your present post is just rant and has nothing of substance so stop whining.

 

[Hindustani78]

You are free to express your opinion and I am free to ridicule it for the rubbish it is. The wonders of free speech goes both ways.

Non Aligned status helped us kick start our Nuclear program and the LCA. Soviet treaty helped us split pakistan in two and liberate Bangladesh.

That is called being pragmatic, not idealistic, not hypocrisy. NA helps us sign a friendship treaty with US too. Maybe with the SCS heating up, we just might do it too.

There are plenty of reports which are not made public, including what happened to Subash Chandra bose. That is again pragmatic governance. (though I am personally against it). Not every report is made public ............ where is the Chinese official report on the invasion of Tibet or Indai ?

Where is the Indian report on the liberation BD ? Most of it has been destroyed.

Kashmir was never going to be ours under normal circumstances, we have managed to wrestle half of Kashmir by guile so again it is pragmatic to keep what was never ours. Same goes for Arunachal pradesh.

Only gullible fools swallow propaganda. Chinese or Indian.

Soviet treaty was mainly to counter the Chinese and it was done after China-Soviet Union war in 1969 and it would even led to the nuclear war during that time.

The Indian nuclear policy underwent changes after the Sino-Indian War in 1962 and the first Chinese bomb explosion in 1964 which forced Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri to dilute the policy of Nehru. Prime Minister Shastri said in Parliament: "I cannot say that the present policy (of nuclear pacifism), is deep-rooted, that it cannot be set aside and that it would not be changed." This was the first declaration by the Indian government favouring nuclear weapons. Indian anxiety over the Chinese nuclear programme had never diminished since 1964; in fact, with the launching of China's first nuclear missile in October 1966, Indian concerns became more critical. The Indian debate on the bomb became more intense when China launched its first satellite in 1970. The Indian victory in the Indo-Pak War of 1971 gave a powerful boost to the development of nuclear capabilities. It was believed that the Indian nuclear weapons would compel China and Pakistan to change their attitude of hostility towards India. In May 1974, the Atomic Energy Commission conducted a nuclear explosion at Pokhran in the Rajasthan desert. Though the world community took note of the Indian nuclear capabilities, it was Pakistan which reacted immediately.

********************
Sushma Swaraj meets Chinese counterpart, raises Lakhvi issue | Zee News
"The External Affairs Minister raised the issue of Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi on the stand China has taken on this matter in the United Nations 1267 committee. She said both India and China have been victims of terrorism and therefore there should be no distinction made between good terrorists and bad terrorists," External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Vikas Swarup said.

"She said China's stand on the matter appears to be at variance with the excellent progress otherwise being achieved in India-China bilateral relationship," Swarup said.

He said Wang assured Swaraj that China opposes all forms of terrorism and that he will look into the matter.

"He (Wang) assured that there was no reason why India and China could not cooperate more closely on anti-terrorism efforts," Swarup said.

At a meeting of the UN Sanctions Committee, India had sought action against Pakistan for release of Lakhvi in the 26/11 trial in violation of a UN resolution but the Chinese representatives blocked the move on grounds that New Delhi did not provide sufficient information.

Lakhvi, the mastermind of the 26/11 terror attack, was released from a Pakistani jail in April. The UN Sanctions Committee met at India's request last week.

In a letter to the current Chair of the UN Sanctions Committee Jim McLay, India's Permanent Representative to the UN Asoke Mukherjee last month had said Lakhvi's release by a Pakistani court was in violation of the 1267 UN resolution dealing with designated entities and individuals.

The sanctions measures apply to designated individuals and entities associated with terror groups including al-Qaeda and LeT, wherever located. MORE PTI

PTI

**************
Modi protests China's veto on Indian motion for UN action against Pakistan | Page 4

"The (UN) sanctions committee has five permanent and 10 non-permanent UN member states in it. Out of these, almost all countries, including the US, Britain, Russia, France and Germany supported India's stand, but China opposed it.

"On one hand, China brutally crushes terrorism in its state and on the other hand supports the perpetrators of terrorism in India. This is China's double standards," the Sena said in its editorial in party mouthpiece 'Saamana'.

"China's ideology seems to be eliminating terrorism from its country but letting terrorist activities flourish in India," the Sena said.

China's call of Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai (Indians and Chinese are brothers) in 1960 has proved to be a farce time and again in the aftermath, it said.

"China supplied atom bombs, missiles, and nuclear reactors to Pakistan to help the country have an edge over India. Except its army, all of Pakistan's ammunition is provided by China," the editorial said.

Stressing that China can never be India's friend, Sena said, "What more proof does one need to prove this?..What had to happen in the UN Sanctions meet has happened. But, India needs to be very careful with China in future."

 

[Hindustani78]

In a guarded reply over the issue to PTI here, Chinese Foreign Ministry said China is actively taking part in international cooperation against terrorism under the aegis of the UN.

"China opposes all forms of terrorism and supports the United Nations to play a central coordinating role in International Counter-Terrorism Cooperation, and actively participate in international cooperation against terrorism," the Ministry said in an e-mail response to reports that China blocked India's move at UN demanding action against Pakistan for releasing Lakhvi, operations commander of Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba.

"China and India, including all other relevant parties should maintain communication on the related issues" in the UN Security Council's Committee formed in pursuant of resolution 1267 relating to terrorism, it said.

It's not clear if "other relevant parties" in the Chinese response meant included Pakistan.

Early this month, Chinese Foreign Ministry had declined to comment on allegations that Beijing had put a technical hold on India's demand to UNSC to take action against Hizbul Mujahudeen's chief Syed Salahuddin and Lashkar-e-Taiba leader Hafeez Sayed, citing the UNSC resolution 1267.

 

[uparyupari]

Soviet treaty was mainly to counter the Chinese and it was done after China-Soviet Union war in 1969 and it would even led to the nuclear war during that time.

The Indian nuclear policy underwent changes after the Sino-Indian War in 1962 and the first Chinese bomb explosion in 1964 which forced Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri to dilute the policy of Nehru. Prime Minister Shastri said in Parliament: "I cannot say that the present policy (of nuclear pacifism), is deep-rooted, that it cannot be set aside and that it would not be changed." This was the first declaration by the Indian government favouring nuclear weapons. Indian anxiety over the Chinese nuclear programme had never diminished since 1964; in fact, with the launching of China's first nuclear missile in October 1966, Indian concerns became more critical. The Indian debate on the bomb became more intense when China launched its first satellite in 1970. The Indian victory in the Indo-Pak War of 1971 gave a powerful boost to the development of nuclear capabilities. It was believed that the Indian nuclear weapons would compel China and Pakistan to change their attitude of hostility towards India. In May 1974, the Atomic Energy Commission conducted a nuclear explosion at Pokhran in the Rajasthan desert. Though the world community took note of the Indian nuclear capabilities, it was Pakistan which reacted immediately.

********************
Sushma Swaraj meets Chinese counterpart, raises Lakhvi issue | Zee News
"The External Affairs Minister raised the issue of Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi on the stand China has taken on this matter in the United Nations 1267 committee. She said both India and China have been victims of terrorism and therefore there should be no distinction made between good terrorists and bad terrorists," External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Vikas Swarup said.

"She said China's stand on the matter appears to be at variance with the excellent progress otherwise being achieved in India-China bilateral relationship," Swarup said.

He said Wang assured Swaraj that China opposes all forms of terrorism and that he will look into the matter.

"He (Wang) assured that there was no reason why India and China could not cooperate more closely on anti-terrorism efforts," Swarup said.

At a meeting of the UN Sanctions Committee, India had sought action against Pakistan for release of Lakhvi in the 26/11 trial in violation of a UN resolution but the Chinese representatives blocked the move on grounds that New Delhi did not provide sufficient information.

Lakhvi, the mastermind of the 26/11 terror attack, was released from a Pakistani jail in April. The UN Sanctions Committee met at India's request last week.

In a letter to the current Chair of the UN Sanctions Committee Jim McLay, India's Permanent Representative to the UN Asoke Mukherjee last month had said Lakhvi's release by a Pakistani court was in violation of the 1267 UN resolution dealing with designated entities and individuals.

The sanctions measures apply to designated individuals and entities associated with terror groups including al-Qaeda and LeT, wherever located. MORE PTI

PTI

**************
Modi protests China's veto on Indian motion for UN action against Pakistan | Page 4

"The (UN) sanctions committee has five permanent and 10 non-permanent UN member states in it. Out of these, almost all countries, including the US, Britain, Russia, France and Germany supported India's stand, but China opposed it.

"On one hand, China brutally crushes terrorism in its state and on the other hand supports the perpetrators of terrorism in India. This is China's double standards," the Sena said in its editorial in party mouthpiece 'Saamana'.

"China's ideology seems to be eliminating terrorism from its country but letting terrorist activities flourish in India," the Sena said.

China's call of Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai (Indians and Chinese are brothers) in 1960 has proved to be a farce time and again in the aftermath, it said.

"China supplied atom bombs, missiles, and nuclear reactors to Pakistan to help the country have an edge over India. Except its army, all of Pakistan's ammunition is provided by China," the editorial said.

Stressing that China can never be India's friend, Sena said, "What more proof does one need to prove this?..What had to happen in the UN Sanctions meet has happened. But, India needs to be very careful with China in future."

Indo soviet Treaty of Friendship was signed in Aug 1971 and the ware for BD was fought in Dec 1971, what does that tell you ?

 

[Hindustani78]

Indo soviet Treaty of Friendship was signed in Aug 1971 and the ware for BD was fought in Dec 1971, what does that tell you ?

Soviet Union did friendship treaty with India to keep Chinese at bay in 1971 and during that time Pakistan Administration was in bed with the Chinese and the elections result which led Awami league in stronger position was not digested by the Pakistan military and they rejected the election results.


During the 1960s the Sino-Soviet ideological dispute deepened and spread to include territorial issues, culminating in 1969 in bloody armed clashes on their border. In 1963 the boundary dispute had come into the open when China explicitly raised the issue of territory lost through "unequal treaties" with tsarist Russia. After unsuccessful border consultations in 1964, Moscow began the process of a military buildup along the border with China and in Mongolia, which continued into the 1970s and 1980's.

The Sino-Soviet confrontation had now become a conflict between states. In January 1967, Red Guards besieged the Soviet Embassy in Beijing. Diplomatic relations were never formally broken, but they went into a deep freeze.

During 1968, the Soviets massively increased their troop deployments along the Chinese border, particularly the border with Xinjiang, where a Turkic separatist movement could easily be fostered. In 1961, the Soviet Union had around twelve half-strength divisions and 200 aircraft on the border; by the end of 1968 there were 25 divisions, 1,200 aircraft and 120 medium-range missiles. Although China had detonated its first nuclear device in 1964 at Lop Nor, its military power could not compare to that of the Soviet Union. Tensions along the border escalated until March 1969, when armed clashes broke out along the Ussuri River on Damansky Island, followed by more in August.

In the 1970s, Sino-Soviet rivalry also spread to Africa and the Middle East, where each Communist power supported and funded different parties, movements, and states. This helped fuel the war between Ethiopia and Somalia, the civil wars in Zimbabwe, Angola and Mozambique, and the rivalry between various groups of radical Palestinians. Unlike the Soviets, the Chinese did not actually send troops to any of these trouble spots, but their competitive intervention helped create and maintain instability.

the Soviet military build-up on the Chinese border continued: in 1973, there were almost double the number of Soviet troops present as in 1969. The Chinese continued to denounce "Soviet social imperialism" and accuse the Soviets of being the enemies of the world revolution. This was despite China's cessation of direct support for revolutionary groups in other countries after 1972, and its support in 1973 for a negotiated end to the Vietnam War.

 

[uparyupari]

Soviet Union did friendship treaty with India to keep Chinese at bay in 1971 and during that time Pakistan Administration was in bed with the Chinese and the elections result which led Awami league in stronger position was not digested by the Pakistan military and they rejected the election results.


During the 1960s the Sino-Soviet ideological dispute deepened and spread to include territorial issues, culminating in 1969 in bloody armed clashes on their border. In 1963 the boundary dispute had come into the open when China explicitly raised the issue of territory lost through "unequal treaties" with tsarist Russia. After unsuccessful border consultations in 1964, Moscow began the process of a military buildup along the border with China and in Mongolia, which continued into the 1970s and 1980's.

The Sino-Soviet confrontation had now become a conflict between states. In January 1967, Red Guards besieged the Soviet Embassy in Beijing. Diplomatic relations were never formally broken, but they went into a deep freeze.

During 1968, the Soviets massively increased their troop deployments along the Chinese border, particularly the border with Xinjiang, where a Turkic separatist movement could easily be fostered. In 1961, the Soviet Union had around twelve half-strength divisions and 200 aircraft on the border; by the end of 1968 there were 25 divisions, 1,200 aircraft and 120 medium-range missiles. Although China had detonated its first nuclear device in 1964 at Lop Nor, its military power could not compare to that of the Soviet Union. Tensions along the border escalated until March 1969, when armed clashes broke out along the Ussuri River on Damansky Island, followed by more in August.

In the 1970s, Sino-Soviet rivalry also spread to Africa and the Middle East, where each Communist power supported and funded different parties, movements, and states. This helped fuel the war between Ethiopia and Somalia, the civil wars in Zimbabwe, Angola and Mozambique, and the rivalry between various groups of radical Palestinians. Unlike the Soviets, the Chinese did not actually send troops to any of these trouble spots, but their competitive intervention helped create and maintain instability.

the Soviet military build-up on the Chinese border continued: in 1973, there were almost double the number of Soviet troops present as in 1969. The Chinese continued to denounce "Soviet social imperialism" and accuse the Soviets of being the enemies of the world revolution. This was despite China's cessation of direct support for revolutionary groups in other countries after 1972, and its support in 1973 for a negotiated end to the Vietnam War.

Spare me the history lessons if you cannot draw the right conclusion.

In 1971 USSR was a super Power and china was a nobody.

Its laughable to think India could have helped USSR in 1971. Indira Gandhi campaigned all over the world to raise awareness about atrocities in BD and the treaty with Russia was signed when she saw that US and allies would not stand with her.

 

[Hindustani78]

Spare me the history lessons if you cannot draw the right conclusion.

In 1971 USSR was a super Power and china was a nobody.

Its laughable to think India could have helped USSR in 1971. Indira Gandhi campaigned all over the world to raise awareness about atrocities in BD and the treaty with Russia was signed when she saw that US and allies would not stand with her.

These are the historical realities of the cold war.

After 1964 Chinese Nuclear test , regional and international politics were changed in the region. Soviet Union was in need of friendship treaty with India which happened in August 1971 because Egypt was moving away from Soviet Union after Anwar Saadat become President in 1970 and In the 1970s, Sino-Soviet rivalry also spread to Africa and the Middle East, where each Communist power supported and funded different parties, movements, and states. This helped fuel the war between Ethiopia and Somalia, the civil wars in Zimbabwe, Angola and Mozambique. And it was same even in Vietnam .

 

[Hindustani78]

RSS mouthpiece takes a dig at China in Lakhvi case | Zee News
Last Updated: Saturday, July 4, 2015 - 20:20


New Delhi: Expressing concern over growth of ISIS in the world, RSS mouthpiece 'Organiser' today stressed on a coordinated approach to tackle it and said "selective abetment" as China did to Pakistan in the Mumbai terror attack mastermind Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi case will not help the cause.


It said that mere high-handed military approach will not address the issue and will instead make ISIS more popular, noting that unless it is accepted that political Islam with ideology of Jihadism has emerged as a challenge to Western liberalism, a piecemeal approach to the problem will be maintained.

"Mere high-handed military approach will not address the issue; on the contrary, it would make the group more popular. There is a need for coherent containment strategy to deal with the menace and the selective abetment as China did to Pakistan in the Lakhvi case will not help the cause," the editorial in the 'Organiser' said today.

China had recently blocked India's move in the UN demanding action against Pakistan over release of LeT commander Lakhvi in violation of a resolution of the world body as it contended that India provided insufficient information.

The RSS mouthpiece suggested that Islamic countries in West Asia who believe in democratic traditions and understand the dangers of IS menace should lead the strategy for containing Jihadi forces and the voices of Muslims victims of Jihadi terror need to be strengthened.

"Unless we openly accept that political Islam with the ideology of Jihadism has emerged as a challenge to the Western liberalism, we will maintain the piecemeal approach towards the problem.

PTI