NDTV: India's Faceoff with China A sign of The Future

[dray]

I'm new around here so perhaps some of the more senior members can clue me in. Are these types allowed to come here and "designate" this section as they please?

This is an open forum and all members from all countries can express their views in all the sections, only personal abuses are not allowed in the forum. Seeing your Canadian flags it is hard to assume which 'types' you don't want in this section, but this forum doesn't have such an 'exclusive club' facility.

 

[ito]

I agree...the new normal will be lots more confrontation between India and China on various issues. This is just a start. There are already disagreements on BRI and RCEP. Now add Doklam to the list.

 

[Rollno21]

Feel sad for Chinese ,they are trying to do anything and everything to get a reaction from India and trying to intimidate India like they do with other nations ,best part is India is silent and just said no road .

 

[Dungeness]

I knew the author will be labelled as a "traitor" or "anti-national" by people who lack the ability to introspect. It is still nice to know there are still some sane minds in today's ultra nationalistic Modi India.

 

[Suika]

Typical western report will hype up China aggression movement while
Ignoring others. Vietnam has long started shoal building since early 2000 and aggressive militaries many of its islet and expanding them and yet the western media will never tell you such thing. Yet they never claim this action as changing the status quo. Same as Japan who first nationalise the diaoyutai island.

Instead of pointing at China and claim as aggressive. Why not look at Indian pushy and aggressive policy towards its neighbour? There is a reason why bangladesh and Nepal has serious problem with India.

In regards to the Senkaku islands, China is the aggressive country.

During the 1950s and 1960s, China recognized those islands as Japanese territory. Even though the islands were owned privately by a Japanese family, China still printed maps indicating that the islands were Japanese islands with the name Senkaku. In 1971, China suddenly made a claim that they belong to China, as did with KMT's Taiwan. Then in 2008, two Chinese boats intruded into the territorial waters of the Senkaku islands. As an isolated incident, it didn't cause alarm. In 2010, over a period of a few months, about 50 Chinese boats came very close to the territorial water boundary in an area called the contiguous zone, and included one incident of a Chinese trawler ramming a Japanese Coast Guard patrol ship (at 1:05)

Throughout 2011, there was a few more cases of Chinese boats going into the contiguous zone and 2 intruded into territorial waters. Entering into 2012, the intrusions into the contiguous zone continued, giving a sense of a new normal, with one territorial intrusion in March 2012, and then 4 Chinese boats intruding into territorial water in July 2012.

Obviously what was going on is that Chinese boats were increasing their activities into Senkaku waters at a salami slicing rate. But while looking at the long term, their intention was clear. The islands now needed to be included as part of national defense. So the Japanese government purchased the islands (hence nationalized them) in September of 2012. So then China put up an innocent face to the mass media like a lying mischievous girl and then through a tantrum by attacking Japanese businesses in China. And then kicked up the number of intrusions into the territorial waters of the Senkaku islands.

The rate of territorial intrusions of both territorial water and the contiguous zone in the link below.
http://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000170838.pdf

If China was really interested in peace, they would have never started to intrude into the Senkaku waters and even would have never made the territorial claim in the early 1970s. Even if the territorial claim made in the early 1970s was to happen, it could arguably enable the use of the territorial claim as a mechanism for negotiation between the PRC and Japanese governments. But territorial intrusions is crossing the line, and Japan isn't having any of that, an early sign that Japan will not kowtow to coercion, and the sooner China realizes that, the better off they will be. Who ever thought of the idea of making trouble with Vietnam, India, and Japan, all at once did a disservice to China and the Chinese people. Such a stupid foreign policy. No idea how that idea dawned upon them. Sorry Pakistan.

 

[dray]

I knew the author will be labelled as a "traitor" or "anti-national" by people who lack the ability to introspect. It is still nice to know there are still some sane minds in today's ultra nationalistic Modi India.

Mihir Sharma already had that label for a long time.

 

[Dungeness]

Mihir Sharma already had that label for a long time.

So dose anyone who refuse to fall in line with the ultra nationalistic masses.

A nation that is not capable of introspecting its own past, is not going to realize its full potential. That is one of the reasons that I do not hold a very optimistic view about India's future.

 

[dray]

So dose anyone who refuse to fall in line with the ultra nationalistic masses.

A nation that is not capable of introspecting its own past, is not going to realize its full potential. That is one of the reasons that I do not hold a very optimistic view about India's future.

Coming from a Chinese...the irony is too stark!

 

[Dungeness]

Coming from a Chinese...the irony is too stark!

Please read this 20 year old article on LA Times, you may have a better understanding as why India can never catch up China ( provided China is not in turmoil because of "color revolution") . Taking a long view, India is between a rock and a hard place: without a revolution India will be what it has always been; with a revolution there may not have a country called India as we know of.

Uneasy reading for any Indian, but it may help to cure some insanity.

How China Beat India in Race for Success
http://articles.latimes.com/1997/aug/10/news/mn-21296

 

[Place Of Space]

In regards to the Senkaku islands, China is the aggressive country.

During the 1950s and 1960s, China recognized those islands as Japanese territory. Even though the islands were owned privately by a Japanese family, China still printed maps indicating that the islands were Japanese islands with the name Senkaku. In 1971, China suddenly made a claim that they belong to China, as did with KMT's Taiwan. Then in 2008, two Chinese boats intruded into the territorial waters of the Senkaku islands. As an isolated incident, it didn't cause alarm. In 2010, over a period of a few months, about 50 Chinese boats came very close to the territorial water boundary in an area called the contiguous zone, and included one incident of a Chinese trawler ramming a Japanese Coast Guard patrol ship (at 1:05)

Throughout 2011, there was a few more cases of Chinese boats going into the contiguous zone and 2 intruded into territorial waters. Entering into 2012, the intrusions into the contiguous zone continued, giving a sense of a new normal, with one territorial intrusion in March 2012, and then 4 Chinese boats intruding into territorial water in July 2012.

Obviously what was going on is that Chinese boats were increasing their activities into Senkaku waters at a salami slicing rate. But while looking at the long term, their intention was clear. The islands now needed to be included as part of national defense. So the Japanese government purchased the islands (hence nationalized them) in September of 2012. So then China put up an innocent face to the mass media like a lying mischievous girl and then through a tantrum by attacking Japanese businesses in China. And then kicked up the number of intrusions into the territorial waters of the Senkaku islands.

The rate of territorial intrusions of both territorial water and the contiguous zone in the link below.
http://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000170838.pdf

If China was really interested in peace, they would have never started to intrude into the Senkaku waters and even would have never made the territorial claim in the early 1970s. Even if the territorial claim made in the early 1970s was to happen, it could arguably enable the use of the territorial claim as a mechanism for negotiation between the PRC and Japanese governments. But territorial intrusions is crossing the line, and Japan isn't having any of that, an early sign that Japan will not kowtow to coercion, and the sooner China realizes that, the better off they will be. Who ever thought of the idea of making trouble with Vietnam, India, and Japan, all at once did a disservice to China and the Chinese people. Such a stupid foreign policy. No idea how that idea dawned upon them. Sorry Pakistan.

Damnit, Japan should have been restricted to 4 islands after WWII.

"During the 1950s and 1960s, China recognized those islands as Japanese territory."

This is most stupid content I read today, in 50's, 60's China had not signed Peace Treaty with Japan after WWII. Neither Russia have done it till now!

 

[Realtalk108]

And meantime, why not behave as if we already have?

This is the key.

 

[Dungeness]

This is the key.

Indeed. It is clearly displayed in some of our elite members' attitude.

 

[Sky lord]

China seems to have forgotten that every tribe and every country that overran china historically. Has been economically much smaller than china.

 

[dray]

Please read this 20 year old article on LA Times, you may have a better understanding as why India can never catch up China (provided China is not in turmoil because of "color revolution"). Taking a long view, India is between a rock and a hard place: without a revolution India will be what it has always been; with a revolution there may not have a country called India as we know of.

Uneasy reading for any Indian, but it may help to cure some insanity.

How China Beat India in Race for Success

http://articles.latimes.com/1997/aug/10/news/mn-21296

Okay...let's dig deeper, shall we?

What is the most important factor for long term success & growth of a country, is it industry, HDI, economy? None of these, it's the political system in place that decides the fate of a country in the longer run, it forms the very important foundation of a country, and we know the consequences of a weak foundation. Democracy has certain flaws, its takes time to build the system with all components in place, ours is 70 years old and still improving itself continuously, the decision making and especially implementation is slow in a democracy, it tends to avoid hard economic decision that might offend people...etc. But among all its faults, it has a basic difference with any non-democratic systems; be it a dictatorship, monarchy, religious state, or communism...that is, in a democracy the political system is separate from the ruling regime, in a democracy the ruler or regime may change, and they do change through votes, but the political system remains intact, thus ensuring long term stability with near zero risk of the whole system crashing down to dust, provided the system has matured to a reasonable degree with checks & balances to prevent any hijacking...which we have already achieved.

A non-democratic system; be it a dictatorship, monarchy, religious state, or communism has its strengths, provided the people in power are a capable lot. In this system the decision making and especially implementation is faster, it can take hard economic decision without worrying much about whether it might offend people, etc. In short, democracy's weaknesses are its strengths, but then...democracy's strengths are its weaknesses. With all its positive sides, a non-democratic system has a shelf-life, an expiry date, it is short-lived, unstable, and it ends, and when it ends, everything it has built come crushing down with it. Because, unlike a democracy, here the political system and the ruling regime are inseparable, the ruling regime itself is the political system, and it creates a large void when it ends...there can be a possibility of peaceful transfer of power, but that rarely happens, and even if it happens, a major disruption is unavoidable. And we can see examples of it all across the world.

India has built a stable democratic political system after decades of improvements & necessary modifications, and all the stake-holders have learned to respect it, we won't have to worry about a meltdown of the political system that forms the very basis, the foundation of our nation, and now we can focus more on all other important aspects of our country. The weaknesses of a democracy mitigates as it gets matured, and the results of which have started showing in our country.

But China is yet to build such a stable political system, it has built its nation on a weak foundation that is bound to go away at some point in time, CCP won't be ruling China forever, and the transition will be a major disruption...if not a complete meltdown. And then China will have to build a new political system from scratch, most likely a democratic one, and it would need to spend decades improving & perfecting it...with all the expected disruptions in its economy and social structure during the transition process that may take decades to become a stable one.

I will end this post here by quoting a paragraph from your link:

"China, which followed the Soviet model that lifted Russia from a big but backward agrarian state to a global superpower before its 1991 collapse, granted total power to the Communist Party; Beijing continues to crack down severely on any form of dissent".

And Russia is yet to become a democracy in true sense even after so many years, there will still be a void after Putin.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

Name one country you don't have problem with which you share border .
If India supplied missiles ,nuclear tech to Vietnam will China tolerate .
I don't to talk about 9 dash line and disputes in scs ,have you seen the claim of China ,you will lol at the claim yourself mate.

Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan , Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal . And in between there is a odd on called India.

Have the Indians gone full retard ever since the hindu terrorist Modi came to power?