No evidence of China supporting Maoists: Chidambaram

[Honor]

You are absolute right No one has right to accept lines provided by Brits and started fighting to grab the lands from history whenever they were in advantage.. Do you want me and other to follw the same line and new world war to take place in the world? As according to map I have some 600 years BCE Maurya/Gupta empire was spread from Iran till Java. We should also go and attack all of them for my belief?

If we dont send any army just that understanding you as friendly neighbour then you build roads there and start accepting as defacto line and when we send our troops to examine the current situation then it is "Forward Policy". Isn't it hypocrisy??

We are talking about modern history! No one is putting up Ancient claims.

 

[Pride]

We are talking about modern history! No one is putting up Ancient claims.

1600 AD as claimed by other poster on which China's line drawn is modern history?? Nopes..

 

[RAHUL INDIAN]

We are talking about modern history! No one is putting up Ancient claims.

what modern history..!!

 

[Honor]

1600 AD as claimed by other poster on which China's line drawn is modern history?? Nopes..

Qing dynasty lasted from 1644 to 1912. This is follow by Republic of China after 1912.

 

[Pride]

Yep we don't like MacMahon Line as it is drawn to expand British India but we are willing to accept it as a fact of life.

CS, Britishers redrawn Indian borders many times which include Burma as recent as 1920's. We need to accept the status quo of borders and as you mentioned you are ready to accept Macmohan then I appreciate your understanding. The only problem which remains Johnson line (Aksai Chin) to discuss.

China settled its borders with 6 out 8 of its neighbours right after independence through diplomacy and after China settled its borders with Russia peacefully through negotiation in the 1990's. India remains the only country left who refuse to talk about the land border.

Dispute remains with North Korea, Taiwan (If you accept it..) and Bhutan remains even today. You also have to see how the Border settlement took place in Tibet.

You are wrong when you say we dont discuss to settle the disputes.We have so many round of discussion happened but both the party could change the stance (CBMs) only once and that was Tibet Vs Sikkim exchange.
Reason is, rather to understand status quo positions there were enarmous border skirmish happened even after '62. Aksai Chin area, Sikkim's finger tip area, Pakistan's donated Karakoram area and AP's specific Tawang area are still under discussion where de facto standards are not accepted by both the government.

China didn't accept the line suggested by China?

Yes China signed border agreement with Britishe India as Johnson Line which in 1947 GoI took it as de facto border. Hence not accepting it as border is what backtracking of its position.

Source?

If Johnson Line is not accepted by China then demarcated border shows half of Laddakh as disputed. Please refer 1950 map.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/may/23spec.htm

"By 1958, Beijing was urgently calling for a standstill agreement to prevent patrol clashes and negotiations to agree on boundary alignments. India refused any standstill agreement, since it would be an impediment to intended advances and insisted that there was nothing to negotiate, the Sino-Indian borders being already settled on the alignments claimed by India, through blind historical process. Then it began accusing China of committing 'aggression' by refusing to surrender to Indian claims."

From 1961, the Indian attempt to establish an armed presence in all the territory it claimed and then extrude the Chinese was being exerted by the Army and Beijing was warning that if India did not desist from its expansionist thrust, the Chinese forces would have to hit back. On October 12, 1962, Nehru proclaimed India's intention to drive the Chinese out of areas India claimed. That bravado had by then been forced upon him by public expectations which his charges of 'Chinese aggression' had aroused, but Beijing took it as in effect a declaration of war. The unfortunate Indian troops on the frontline, under orders to sweep superior Chinese forces out of their impregnable, dominating positions, instantly appreciated the implications: 'If Nehru had declared his intention to attack, then the Chinese were not going to wait to be attacked.'

As per my current knowledge, Neither I accept nor reject Mr Neville's explanation as I need to look from other resources. Hence no comment on the same but yes there are something fishy from our side as well as 1962 war statements are still classified.

Some stab in the back... you can't be surprised by a fight when you start screaming "I'm going to kick your ***!" What was China suppose to do, run away from an inferior opponent?

Again my response is same as above, If war has been initiated by Nehru without proper preparation then I dont have any issue at all with your position.

It was Nehru that refused to talk. China will settle the border anytime and promptly when politicians in India can gather enough support to come to the negotiating table. However in order to do that they need to have the courage to tell its people the truth about the war.

Our side of story still says that it was earlier Zhou Enlai who did not negotiate on borders and build roads and then later claiming its Nehru's "Forward Policy" asked their division to attack on our division.

You have to equally blame Chinese politicians for not resolving the border disputes as one or another map from China pops up in which Sikkim and AP is shown as PRC's map. Similarly there were not one but many stepwise Confidence building measure's (CBMs) took place
which were not successful because of all disputed regions, border skirmishes and then ego of leaderships due to rising economy and power.

 

[Pride]

Qing dynasty lasted from 1644 to 1912. This is follow by Republic of China after 1912.

Year 1600 came in discussion with the post of "conwordus" and hence I replied with India's most profitable time.

Johnson lines were negotiated with China and British India after 1912 only. Tibet was also a separate nation even after 1912 whose positions were changed only in 1950. The point is we have to some where take status quo position and not to discuss some thing which was in some where past.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

The point is we have to some where take status quo position and not to discuss some thing which was in some where past.

I agree, I think it's best to maintain the status quo.

The alternative is a war between China and India, which would quickly turn into a Nuclear war... and we would both lose out from that.

The best thing for us both, is to focus on our economic growth.

 

[Pride]

I agree, I think it's best to maintain the status quo.

The alternative is a war between China and India, which would quickly turn into a Nuclear war... and we would both lose out from that.

The best thing for us both, is to focus on our economic growth.

CD, If you see already this staus quo maintained for so many years and it is going to be same.. No one is going to redraw Line of controls to international borders as this will bring uprising on both the side..