PLA Presence in Northern Areas ? ? ?

[Hulk]

I will take Taimi's word over NYT. The reason is that I feel more comfortable knowing from someone on the ground then from article. I feel this because a lot of anti India article are like that which does not have ground reality and some people take it as source of truth.

 

[CardSharp]

Armed insurgencies usually come up with only external support.

Armed insurgencies usually come up with only external support? This is NOT a hard and fast historical rule. You are blatantly attempting to explain away India's ineffectual COIN efforts. I've seen too many Indian articles blaming the Maoist on China, Nepal, and the Martians to give this excuse much creedance.

The Uighur's keep exploding a bomb or two in Xinjiang once in a while. So your assertion that there is no armed insurgency is factually incorrect.

What hypocrisy! Why is it that when a bomb explodes in India, it's terrorism when a bomb explodes in China, it is an armed insurgency? An armed insurgency implies organization above and beyond covert cells that plant bombs and suicide attacks.

Secondly an armed rebellion did exist in Tibet against the Chinese in 1959. Then the CIA trained armed guerrillas at Camp Hale in the US. Then Nixon's policy change axed such covert support.

emphasis did but no more.

Then Nixon's policy change axed such covert support.

This is a lie. Tibet was firmed under control by normalization of relations in the 1970's. Don't insinuate that it was American's cutting off support that doomed the Tibetans. The Dalai Lama was long gone and the PLA had competently suppressed the area long before Nixon came around.

All the conditions for an armed insurgency in these two regions exit as clearly evident form the riots that have taken place there recently and the high level of resentment against the Han people who have migrated to these

But the fact remains there are no armed insurgencies in China and there ARE insurgencies in India. Instead of blaming others and whining, do something about it. Even your all important external support that "all" armed insurgencies need, is not invulnerable, if you have to will to press the state actors. A will that India is sorely lacking.

 

[fallstuff]

Which is why so many military books were written and so many military courses were taught through out the centuries.

Case and point , "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu is taught at:

West Point- The United States Military Academy
The United States Naval Academy
Naval War College
United States Marine Corps
Maxwell Air Force Base- Air University
Army War College

 

[Tractor]

Case and point , "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu is taught at:

West Point- The United States Military Academy
The United States Naval Academy
Naval War College
United States Marine Corps
Maxwell Air Force Base- Air University
Army War College

If Sun Tsu had met Himalaya Range he should wrote another edition of "The Art of War".

 

[Saleem]

I think Palistan should give the "northern borderlands" on lease to the PRC for 100 years. they are much better off this way. Maybe when the Chinese have developed them and built a sense of patriotism in them and got rid of the corrupt politicians we can have them back....

 

[Tractor]

I think Palistan should give the "northern borderlands" on lease to the PRC for 100 years. they are much better off this way. Maybe when the Chinese have developed them and built a sense of patriotism in them and got rid of the corrupt politicians we can have them back....

Palistan should think like that and maybe just thinking about it.

 

[huzihaidao12]

I think Palistan should give the "northern borderlands" on lease to the PRC for 100 years. they are much better off this way. Maybe when the Chinese have developed them and built a sense of patriotism in them and got rid of the corrupt politicians we can have them back....

I cry, China is really not interested in the Pakistani territory,and mutual respect for territorial sovereignty is a basic principle, I really will cry, Pakistan's relationship is far more important than a barren land. Why should we develop traffic of a deserted area ? Only because the trade can connect Pakistan. If there is no Pakistan, who are willing to waste money on a piece of bad terrain, barren place. Please do not give the enemy an opportunity to attack. China and Pakistan is an important strategic relationship in now and future, whether in Central Asia or South Asia.

 

[Tractor]

I cry, China is really not interested in the Pakistani territory,and mutual respect for territorial sovereignty is a basic principle, I really will cry, Pakistan's relationship is far more important than a barren land. Why should we develop traffic of a deserted area ? Only because the trade can connect Pakistan. If there is no Pakistan, who are willing to waste money on a piece of bad terrain, barren place. Please do not give the enemy an opportunity to attack. China and Pakistan is an important strategic relationship in now and future, whether in Central Asia or South Asia.

Karakorams to the east of Khunjerab Pass which belong to China is just bad terrain/ barren place,but to the west is the most beautyful land on earth and is really good for human habitation. For example Hunza which located in that area is famous for it's long-lived people.
It's absurd that Chinese tourists always get to Khunjerab Pass look some bad terrain then turn back home.

 

[huzihaidao12]

Karakorams to the east of Khunjerab Pass which belong to China is just bad terrain/ barren place,but to the west is the most beautyful land on earth and is really good for human habitation. For example Hunza which located in that area is famous for it's long-lived people.
It's absurd that Chinese tourists always get to Khunjerab Pass look some bad terrain then turn back home.

Please understand me. My words are exaggerated, I apologize. I am also very grateful to the trust of Pakistan to China, however, the territory of any country is sensitive, the enemy might use to attack, China needs a more careful attitude.

 

[GUNNER]

Pakistan denies giving Gilgit Baltistan to China


ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Foreign Office strongly denied the news propagated in the US and Indian media claiming that ‘Galgit Baltistan’ region had been handed over to China, on Tuesday.

“The Chinese were working on landslide, flood hit areas and on the destroyed Korakoram Highway with the permission of Pakistani Government,” said Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit.

Selig Harrison in his article, published in the New York Times, wrote that on invitation of the Pakistani government ‘seven to eleven thousand’ Chinese soldiers had entered Gilgit Baltistan area.

Referring to the article, Basit said “The statements are based on incomplete information. Harrison has an anti-Pakistan mindset and has tried to deform the facts in his article to sensitize the situation.”

– DawnNews

 

[Urbanized Greyhound]

Its a common practice for the chinese to gain a strategic foothold first through the guise of economic and infrastructure involvement....

 

[third eye]

Is it possible that GOP doesn't know of this !

There are after all parts of Pak's W borders where the writ of Islamabad does not run.

 

[GUNNER]

Is it possible that GOP doesn't know of this !

There are after all parts of Pak's W borders where the writ of Islamabad does not run.

No, it's not. Because there is a difference in the two. Lack of knowledge in the first case - which is not the case - while failure to enforce the writ in the second, which has reduced in the past two years.

 

[GUNNER]

@Topic: Why does Pakistan allow other militaries to run free in territories which it claims sovereignty over?

What is China doing with 11000 troops in GB? Even in the face of a raging militancy in Afghanistan India has only 1000 paramilitary troops (IIRC a contingent of ITBP) to protect workers. And India has much more investment in the country than China has in GB. Even China does not have that many troops to protect their workers in Afghanistan (not that they really need protection in Afghanistan for reasons that are all too clear).

One doesnt need 11000 troops to protect a civilian construction project and that too in a "friendly" country. Or is that Pakistan is incapable of providing security due to unrest in the region that the world in large does not know about?

Other than the hyper-paranoid NY Time report, do you have any ither source to verify this figure of '11000' Chinese military personnel in GB?

 

[Renegade]

Armed insurgencies usually come up with only external support? This is NOT a hard and fast historical rule. You are blatantly attempting to explain away India's ineffectual COIN efforts. I've seen too many Indian articles blaming the Maoist on China, Nepal, and the Martians to give this excuse much creedance.

Yes indeed it is not a hard & fast historical rule, that's precisely why i used the word "Usually". Let me be more specific - "successful armed insurgencies have come up with external support". The examples are all around for us to see, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Vietnam etc..

India's ineffective COIN efforts? Hate to say this my friend but i guess that you are not fully aware of latest developments in this field. As with terrorism in Kashmir the Indian Army has done a very good job nearly eradicating the menace. As regard's to the Maoist problem, yes till date the COIN operations have been a mixture of failure & success. While this phenomenon has been nearly eradicated in certain states it is rather active and blossoming in a few other. But this large scale Maoist insurgence is a recent phenomena and efforts are being made to tackle it, we will see the results in the near future.

As for the alleged Chinese support to the Maoist, India's Home Minister is on record saying that with the current intelligence available with him there is no proof that China is backing the insurgents. So where is the ambiguity? As of now GoI is not pointing a finger at China and that is good enough to convince me.

What hypocrisy! Why is it that when a bomb explodes in India, it's terrorism when a bomb explodes in China, it is an armed insurgency? An armed insurgency implies organization above and beyond covert cells that plant bombs and suicide attacks.

emphasis did but no more.

You are simply inferring things from my post. I never said that the bomb explosion in Xinjiang was not terrorism. I mere pointed it out as proof towards the existence on an armed insurgency. Don't confuse the two. If i am endorsing a point doesn't me that i am automatically negating its opposite.

This is a lie. Tibet was firmed under control by normalization of relations in the 1970's. Don't insinuate that it was American's cutting off support that doomed the Tibetans. The Dalai Lama was long gone and the PLA had competently suppressed the area long before Nixon came around.

Nixon's policy change had a major impact on the armed rebellion. I will take your word for it that PLA might have been largely successful in neutralizing the insurgency. But only in the absence of American support did the insurgency completely die down.

But the fact remains there are no armed insurgencies in China and there ARE insurgencies in India. Instead of blaming others and whining, do something about it. Even your all important external support that "all" armed insurgencies need, is not invulnerable, if you have to will to press the state actors. A will that India is sorely lacking.

I am largely in agreement with you on the highlighted part. Indeed the level of insurgency that exists in India is much larger than what is happening in China. But they are many reasons to it. Let me not get into them for it will not serve any purpose and we will also be deviating from the topic at hand.

Secondly whom am i blaming & for what? Didn't quiet get you there. As far as i remember, i had mere point out that armed insurgence's only blossom with external support. How is that blaming anyone?

As for the italics part. Indeed the external support by state actors is not "invulnerable", but there are certain limitations to it. While China has been fortunate in this regard that Pakistan listens to it when it comes to Uighur's using the terror infrastructure present there, while India has been less fortunate. Either the Pakistanis understand that they cant afford to piss off two giants at once or either they are indeed grateful to China for gifting them with Nuke & Missile tech. The truth is somewhere between the two. They sympathies with the Uighur's but cant afford not have Chinese support.

India is not so fortunate in this case. Either we make them understand by talking to them that Terror will not help (as the current government is doing) or we make war. I don't see either of these options helping. The mistrust simply runs too deep, largely on the part of Islamabad than New Delhi.