String of Samosa

[Hafizzz]

India's Own String of Pearls Around China
New India: India's Own String of Pearls Around China

China’s official statements on Arunachal Pradesh and the larger border dispute since late last year clearly indicate a conscious change in China’s policy towards India. China, which used to have border disputes with almost all its neighbours, has settled it amicably with the sole exception of India.

China’s strategy towards India on the border and territorial dispute was clear for some time now – delay the settlement till China can negotiate it from a position of considerable military and economic strength. China pinned its hopes on the economic reforms, which it started in the 1970s to make it economically, militarily and politically strong vis-à-vis India. All of a sudden in the early 1990s circumstances forced India too to embark on the economic reforms route. This, China was never able to foresee and today an India growing at 9% has upset China’s calculations.

China, realising what economic reforms can do to a nation, embarked on its contain India strategy. China got down to its business of encircling India with its strategic string of pearls, which are pressure points to make India uneasy and vulnerable. The results have been fantastic as far as China is concerned; what with India’s supposed allies like Maldives, Seychelles, Sri Lanka, etc joining the party.

As India found herself at the world’s high table as a consequence of her unprecedented economic growth and post cold war geopolitical realties, China’s strategy of playing for time failed miserably. Today India is an Asian ally of USA and rapidly getting economically and militarily closer to it. This has clearly rattled the Chinese and IMHO exactly because of this we are hearing those noises from China on the border and territorial dispute.

B. Raman, however, is of the view that China wants to settle the Tibet issue after the death of the present Dalai Lama by incorporating Tawang or possibly the whole of Arunachal Pradesh in to China Occupied Tibet by any means including another war if necessary.

Now the question is what should be India’s response to an increasingly belligerent China?

On the one hand China wants the trade relation, because it is heavily tilted in its favour to continue and grow further but also wants to have a multi-faceted relation covering all spheres with India. And on the other hand it wants to settle the border and territorial dispute in its favour, on its terms and at a time of it’s choosing. By its string of pearls strategy China wants to confine India to the subcontinent by making it feel strangled and thus vulnerable.

India too has an interest in continuing and boosting the trade relation with China particularly if India’s export share of value added products increases. But that definitely shouldn’t undermine India’s interests or its territorial integrity. If anything that is clear from China’s policies or official statements is that it doesn’t want to do anything that will disrupt its “peaceful” growth. This means China surely can get belligerent but will not be stupid enough to get into a full-scale war to settle the border dispute when it knows unlike in 1962, today, India can hit back hard.

If one studies the geopolitical situation in the subcontinent and the belligerent noises emanating from China, then it is time for India to stop being pusillanimous in its relation with China. In other words, it is time to reciprocate China’s policy of encirclement. Some joint Naval exercises and some security meetings between India, USA and allies have rattled the Chinese like anything. So how much more will China be rattled if India replicates its version of string of pearls around China?

China’s Achilles Heels

To fuel it’s voracious growth, China is signing up oil, gas, and minerals deals of all kinds around the world. From South America to Australia, from Central Asia to Africa, the Chinese are rummaging for stuff to keep their country running. Signing up deals is the easy part but getting it to their country is the difficult part.

China and Pakistan have lined up ambitious plans for their growth. Pakistan hopes to benefit financially and economically from being a trade and energy corridor to the Central Asian Republics and China. China, which is building the Gwadar port in Pakistan, hopes to lay oil and gas pipelines to route crude and gas from the Persian Gulf and Africa to China through Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (***). Not only this, for China the shortest route to transport raw materials it plunders from the African continent to the mainland will be via the soon to be laid all-weather Karakoram Highway. A rail link is also planned.

The Karakoram Highway that connects Pakistan with China passes through the Khunjerab Pass in ***. If what Pakistan and China have planned for themselves - by exploiting India’s legitimate territory - comes to fruition, then the Karakoram Highway, the pipelines, the rail link all well could become China’s Achilles heel. In other words, destruction of these economic links will make China highly vulnerable. This is an important pressure point India can exploit to make China feel the pressure. The strategy of targeting this vital economic corridor of China should be on two fronts. One, from Jammu and Kashmir and the other from the Wakhan Corridor in Afghanistan, which is nearer to the Karakoram Highway. To get access to Wakhan Corridor and establish a military outpost there, it would take India’s best diplomatic efforts in cajoling Afghanistan to grant it. One way of getting access is on the pretext of building roads that benefit Afghanistan in the Wakhan Corridor.

One of the reasons China is keen on routing oil and gas from Gulf and Africa through *** is to avoid the shipping lanes of Malacca Strait, which are patrolled by USA and allies. As India increasingly engages with USA and allies on security matters, sooner or later if India can play its cards shrewdly, it can hope to be given the exclusive or major responsibility of safeguarding the shipping lanes of SE Asia and the Malacca Strait. Once this fructifies China will surely know the pressure.

China’s economically important areas are in Eastern China – the coastal areas to be precise. That is were China’s SEZs are. India’s IRBM Agni III, which is still in the developmental stage, can very well target these areas. But the distance just will not make China feel the pressure because China’s BMD system will have ample time to knock them out.

India’s relation with Vietnam has been strong from the Cold War days. Apart from political and economic relations, India also has military relations with Vietnam. Vietnam’s northern borders are very close to China’s economically important coastal regions. India needs to have a full-fledged military base in this area with a battery of appropriate missile targeting China’s SEZs. Once again it would take India’s best diplomatic efforts in cajoling Vietnam to grant it. USA is also increasing its political and economic relation with Vietnam in order to pressure China on trade issues such as intellectual property rights and currency reform.

Another country with which India’s relation has been strong from the cold war days is Mongolia. An Indian military base here would be a good bet to put additional pressure on China.

Finally there is the Taiwan card. Nothing rattles China more than Taiwan getting any type of political importance particularly from countries that matter. India suffering from Sino-phobia after the 1962 war refused to have anything to do with Taiwan lest it annoyed China some more and China rubbed its nose in the mud again. Today, India has at last allowed a harmless (for China) Taiwanese politician to set foot in India only after taking due permission from Communist China. India needs to change its policy on Taiwan This card is to be kept aside till the appropriate time and let China know it.

What I wrote on the strategy to contain China is no fairytale but something that is achievable. To achieve this, as I mentioned earlier, it would take strong political resolve and India’s best diplomatic efforts. A military base each in Northern Vietnam immediately and the Wakhan Corridor later is of paramount importance if India wants to keep the boisterous and belligerent dragon away from mischief directed at it. Once China realizes that India can take out its vital economic assets and it can’t respond before it is too late, it will have no option but to behave.

At the end of the day India also wants the border and territorial dispute with China settled amicably. This cannot be achieved as long as India decides not to confront the dragon with the ground realties.

If India remains complacent it will surely pay the price in not too distant future. If it is too incompetent to come up with a “contain China” strategy of its own, then the next best way to keep the dragon away and secure its borders is to get into full military alliance with the United States of America.

India denies that she has a string of Samosas around China's neck.

LOL

 

[CardSharp]

China’s official statements on Arunachal Pradesh and the larger border dispute since late last year clearly indicate a conscious change in China’s policy towards India. China, which used to have border disputes with almost all its neighbours, has settled it amicably with the sole exception of India.

Is this a chinese conspiracy against India or India's unwillingness to settle the border reasonably like all of China's other neighbours?

This article is so symptomatic of India's obsession with China. Every move China makes is closely watched and interpreted as some grand design against India. China is developing better relationships with all countries, African, SE Asian, European, S. American, and it has little to do with India.

Yet you talk yourselves into huge arms purchases, creating new mountain divisions, militarizing borders. I am really at a loss here, yours may be a self-fulfilling prophecy.China is not your nemesis but if you treat her as your nemesis, she will become one.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Is this a chinese conspiracy against India or India's unwillingness to settle the border reasonably like all of China's other neighbours?

The Answer is complexity of the issue and variables involved.

China has solved border disputes well by mostly "give and take" principle,however the same can't be applied to India so easily.

First lets consider Aksai Chin.

Aksai Chin is desert with almost no population.
This can be solved by simply asking China to accept Arunachal Pradesh as Indian territory in return for India's recognition of Aksai Chin as Chinese territory.But unfortunately,it not so easy because Aksai Chin is considered a part Kashmir,which itself is a disputed territory,the people of Kashmir themselves aren't comfortable being under India.So we only end up angering Kashmirs even more.leading to greater local support for the insurgency over there.

Second,Arunachal Pradesh

There can be no or never compromise on this for the following reasons.
1.people of Arunachal Pradesh consider themselves to be Indians,We can't sell our citizens under any circumstances.
2.Strategic value as it neighbors Assam(another Indian state) where most of India's oil wells are.
3.There is some animosity towards India in the North-east,as the consider that they are under Indian colonial rule.hence the Insurgency there will get even more local support and erupt.

Third,Other variables
1.Many Indian leaders when considering border issues with China,consider recognition of Tibet as a mistake,also responsible for the 1962 blunder,as Tibet was buffer between the 2 nations.
2.General Indian public feeling that we have lot enough during the partition of our country in 1947.

Any change or progress can happen when Indians have complete confidence over their Govt and I don't see that happening before 2030(for the least),hopefully by then condition of all Indians might improve.

Like i said before,the border dispute will continue to remain a blemish on our ties for a long time.

PS:I didn't even read the article,since its from a blog.That too 3 years old

 

[banned]

China is not your nemesis but if you treat her as your nemesis, she will become one.

Indian leaders all silently and eagerly commit to India superpower doctrine which aims to establish once hegomonis India from border of China to heart of South Asia streching upto middle wast and Southeast asia. Their doctrine, like the colonial mentality is very much shaped by the british experiment which relied on population growth to achieve power status. The soviets has very low population so they relied on spreading their doctrine into locals for garnering sympathy. India on other hand encourages population growth to natrually people seek to immigrate for better economic prospect. The colonisation by population growth will increasingly speak into Indian favour once forigen born Indian generation start occupying key positions in Canada, USA, UK & europe.

 

[Tshering22]

Indian leaders all silently and eagerly commit to India superpower doctrine which aims to establish once hegomonis India from border of China to heart of South Asia streching upto middle wast and Southeast asia. Their doctrine, like the colonial mentality is very much shaped by the british experiment which relied on population growth to achieve power status. The soviets has very low population so they relied on spreading their doctrine into locals for garnering sympathy. India on other hand encourages population growth to natrually people seek to immigrate for better economic prospect. The colonisation by population growth will increasingly speak into Indian favour once forigen born Indian generation start occupying key positions in Canada, USA, UK & europe.

Wow and you were under colonization from Martians isn't it when we were under the British? Sure is highlighted in your fantastic out-of-this-world analysis.

But nice strategy. We'd been sub-conciously doing that, but you just gave us the idea now. Thanks

 

[Tshering22]

India denies that she has a string of Samosas around China's neck.

LOL

When I read the thread topic, I thought its some kind of a record of longest string of Samosas by India. But yeah, you're right. Chinese are really experts in pearl business so they call it their "String of Pearls". And we make amazing samosas so we'll call it just that "String of Samosas" for originality sakes

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Wow and you were under colonization from Martians isn't it when we were under the British? Sure is highlighted in your fantastic out-of-this-world analysis.

But nice strategy. We'd been sub-conciously doing that, but you just gave us the idea now. Thanks

Don't bother replying to him,with such views here,soon his username will be replacing his "FULL MEMBERS" title.

 

[CardSharp]

I thank you for the reply but I have a few problems with what was written

China has solved border disputes well by mostly "give and take" principle,however the same can't be applied to India so easily.

Give take is diplomacy, without it nothing gets solved.

Aksai Chin is desert with almost no population but of strategic value as it is close to our capital.

This can be solved by simply asking China to accept Arunachal Pradesh as Indian territory in return for India's recognition of Aksai Chin as Chinese territory.But unfortunately,it not so easy because Aksai Chin is considered a part Kashmir,which itself is a disputed territory,the people of Kashmir themselves aren't comfortable being under India.So we only end up angering Kashmirs even more.leading to greater local support for the insurgency over there.

Aksai Chin according to Neville Maxwell is an artificial creation by an Indian historian (whose name I’ve forgotten and will have to look up) so it seems to me personally (just personal opinion) unreasonable to ask China for concessions in Arunachal Pradesh in return for concessions in an artificial territory claim. It would be the same as if China claimed Mumbai through historical fabrication, and then ask for favourable settlement in the AP region in return for ceding its right to Mumbai.

As for Aksai Chin being a strategic threat to New Delhi? that is no excuse. The majority of China’s borders there is much much closer to New Delhi and of much greater strategic value than Aksai Chin.

Second,Arunachal Pradesh
There can be no or never compromise on this for the following reasons.
1.people of Arunachal Pradesh consider themselves to be Indians,We can't sell our citizens under any circumstances.
2.Strategic value as it neighbors Assam(another Indian state) where most of India's oil wells are.
3.There is some animosity towards India in the North-east,as the consider that they are under Indian colonial rule.hence the Insurgency there will get even more local support and erupt.

I don’t mean to offend but this is precisely the attitude and rationalizing that led India to fight an unnecessary. This is not how diplomacy works. China can and does make dozens of reasons of its own why AP is part of southern Tibet. Self-proclaimed reasons and principals from both sides are meaningless until reconciled and acknowledged by the other party in negotiations. By peevishly listing reasons why things are non-negotiable, you tie your own hands in resolving the matter.


I'm not sure how long China can wait patiently. Nationalism is on the rise and settlement will grow harder on the Chinese side day by day.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

I thank you for the reply but I have a few problems with what was written


unreasonable to ask China for concessions in Arunachal Pradesh in return for concessions in an artificial territory claim.

I won't comment much on that since the i lack historical knowledge on it,But i'm sure the Kashmir's won't agree with Mr.Neville.

As for Aksai Chin being a strategic threat to New Delhi? that is no excuse. The majority of China’s borders there is much much closer to New Delhi and of much greater strategic value than Aksai Chin.

Acknowledged,will remove that portion out.

I don’t mean to offend but this is precisely the attitude and rationalizing that led India to fight an unnecessary. This is not how diplomacy works. China can and does make dozens of reasons of its own why AP is part of southern Tibet. Self-proclaimed reasons and principals from both sides are meaningless until reconciled and acknowledged by the other party in negotiations.

I said it from the fact that i"ve never seen any country under any circumstances selling its citizens.

By peevishly listing reasons why things are non-negotiable, you tie your own hands in resolving the matter.

My objective was just to give my perspective of the Indian perspective,i don't support them nor am i against them.

I'm not sure how long China can wait patiently. Nationalism is on the rise and settlement will grow harder on the Chinese side day by day.

If you hinting about the return of Nationalists to China.Then China will be fighting war with almost every neighbour,as per ROC's territorial claims.

Anyway,i won't go more deep into this with you,because judging your reply,you need answers from a person who has more thorough knowledge on this issue.

 

[CardSharp]

I won't comment much on that since the i lack historical knowledge on it,But i'm sure the Kashmir's won't agree with Mr.Neville.



Acknowledged,will remove that portion out.


I said it from the fact that i"ve never seen any country under any circumstances selling its citizens.



My objective was just to give my perspective of the Indian perspective,i don't support them nor am i against them.



If you hinting about the return of Nationalists to China.Then China will be fighting war with almost every neighbour,as per ROC's territorial claims.

Anyway,i won't go more deep into this with you,because judging your reply,you need answers from a person who has more thorough knowledge on this issue.

No No I appreciate your input and I definitely want Indian perspectives (after all this is bi-lateral problem). In this case, common sentiment is just as important as historical knowledge so it is important to have a spectrum. Besides I am a novice as well, I am limited to what I can gleen from books and read on the web and those are written by other people who may or may not be reliable.


On your comment

If you hinting about the return of Nationalists to China.Then China will be fighting war with almost every neighbour,as per ROC's territorial claims.

I didn't mean Nationalists as in the ROC but the patriotic movement in China. Let me explain, as China returns from abject humiliation to being a great power, many chinese are getting a swelled head (chinaownseverything and some others are great examples). Where before China could negotiate its borders without much complaint by the populace, the government will have these patriots jumping down their throat if they take anything but a hardline. And more and more people are thinking the way they do (esp. young men pumped full of testosterone)

and if China eventually take the step of becoming more democratic, these are the people who will have a vote on the India-China border issue.

I said it from the fact that i"ve never seen any country under any circumstances selling its citizens.

Nor will you have to, what China basically want is to formalize the status quo and the actual lines of control. This is centered around the Mahone line as drawn by the british, what is under India now will remain Indian.

My frustration is at the unwillingness of India to even talk openly. China has been waiting to settle for near 60 years now and its terms hasn't changed even though it fought and won the 62' war. The Mahone line is a good deal for India and a generous concession in my opinion because as it was intended by the British to serve as a buffer India against russian intrusion, they draw the line much further North than the historical border.

Also please don't take my quips too seriously, I am by nature a little hot headed (as are all 22 year olds ). I apologize for any perceived anger and please allow me to say I've always respected Indian members on here like you or Mr. Shearer.

 

[navtrek]

I thank you for the reply but I have a few problems with what was written

Give take is diplomacy, without it nothing gets solved.

Aksai Chin according to Neville Maxwell is an artificial creation by an Indian historian (whose name I’ve forgotten and will have to look up) so it seems to me personally (just personal opinion) unreasonable to ask China for concessions in Arunachal Pradesh in return for concessions in an artificial territory claim. It would be the same as if China claimed Mumbai through historical fabrication, and then ask for favourable settlement in the AP region in return for ceding its right to Mumbai.

As for Aksai Chin being a strategic threat to New Delhi? that is no excuse. The majority of China’s borders there is much much closer to New Delhi and of much greater strategic value than Aksai Chin.

I don’t mean to offend but this is precisely the attitude and rationalizing that led India to fight an unnecessary. This is not how diplomacy works. China can and does make dozens of reasons of its own why AP is part of southern Tibet. Self-proclaimed reasons and principals from both sides are meaningless until reconciled and acknowledged by the other party in negotiations. By peevishly listing reasons why things are non-negotiable, you tie your own hands in resolving the matter.

I'm not sure how long China can wait patiently. Nationalism is on the rise and settlement will grow harder on the Chinese side day by day.

Very true and i think India's stand is pretty clear on that and we are ready to give and take without unsettling already populated areas.

I just want to know how China can claim the whole of Arunachal pradesh as belonging to Tibet. Want to know the reasons and historical links behind it ?

 

[CardSharp]

Very true and i think India's stand is pretty clear on that and we are ready to give and take without unsettling already populated areas.

I just want to know how China can claim the whole of Arunachal pradesh as belonging to Tibet. Want to know the reasons and historical links behind it ?

I have no idea, the extent of my knowledge on the actual negotiation current or historical comes from a joint lecture by journalist Neville Maxwell and Indian Prof. Dibyesh Anand titled "Renewed Tension on the India/China Border: Who's to Blame?"

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/podcasts/India_China_Border.mp3

In it, Maxwell said he's read the minutes of the border negotiation as well as the memoirs of leaders like Zhou Enlai. He said that China's offer has always been centered around the McMahon Line and the watershed of the Himalaya.

McMahon Line - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Again keep in mind that the British coerced the Tibetans into recognizing McMahon line by sending a modern army under Francis Younghusband to crush the Tibetan army armed with matchlocks. (this affects the legality of all Indian claim on the area because Indian essentially took over Britain's claim when they left the subcontinent.)

Invasion of Tibet and Massacre at Guru
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Younghusband#Invasion_of_Tibet_and_Massacre_at_Guru


Needless to say the war (if you can call it that) was a pretty one sided affair.

 

[navtrek]

I have no idea, the extent of my knowledge on the actual negotiation current or historical comes from a joint lecture by journalist Neville Maxwell and Indian Prof. Dibyesh Anand titled "Renewed Tension on the India/China Border: Who's to Blame?"

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/podcasts/India_China_Border.mp3

In it, Maxwell said he's read the minutes of the border negotiation as well as the memoirs of leaders like Zhou Enlai. He said that China's offer has always been centered around the McMahon Line and the watershed of the Himalaya.

McMahon Line - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Again keep in mind that the British coerced the Tibetans into recognizing McMahon line by sending a modern army under Francis Younghusband to crush the Tibetan army armed with matchlocks. (this affects the legality of all Indian claim on the area because Indian essentially took over Britain's claim when they left the subcontinent.)

Invasion of Tibet and Massacre at Guru
Francis Younghusband - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Needless to say the war (if you can call it that) was a pretty one sided affair.

Am not really trying to troll around my friend. For the first time i find a Chinese member on the forum so polite and ready to talk. So i just want to take up this opportunity to let u know the other side of things the Indian point of view.

Again keep in mind that the British coerced the Tibetans into recognizing McMahon line by sending a modern army under Francis Younghusband to crush the Tibetan army armed with matchlocks. (this affects the legality of all Indian claim on the area because Indian essentially took over Britain's claim when they left the subcontinent.)

And don't you think this is what China did when it Invaded Tibet. A powerful communist army over ran the Tibetans ?

So how can u call the Mac mohan line unjustified ? Because you think it was forced on to them ?

If that is how you claim. Then the very basis of your claim is flawed because by questioning that you have questioned China's claim of Tibet being an integral part of China. As even that was forced on to Tibetans.

But we Indians have nothing to do about Tibet. Nor have we taken the responsibility of protecting Tibetan freedom. India is open for the people of Tibet to seek refuge and live in freedom protecting their culture and religion. So am not really interested in deviating to Tibet.

We firmly believe that it is a "part of China" i just used the above argument as an example to show how biased your claim is.

So coming back next ill just let u know some more facts and

 

[CardSharp]

Am not really trying to troll around my friend. For the first time i find a Chinese member on the forum so polite and ready to talk. So i just want to take up this opportunity to let u know the other side of things the Indian point of view.


And don't you think this is what China did when it Invaded Tibet. A powerful communist army over ran the Tibetans ?

So how can u call the Mac mohan line unjustified ? Because you think it was forced on to them ?

If that is how you claim. Then the very basis of your claim is flawed because by questioning that you have questioned China's claim of Tibet being an integral part of China. As even that was forced on to Tibetans.

But we Indians have nothing to do about Tibet. So am not really interested in deviating to Tibet.

We firmly believe that it is a "part of China" i just used the above argument as an example to show how biased your claim is.

So coming back next ill just let u know some more facts and

This is a logic trap.

If you bring China-Tibet up as an example of illegality, and draw parallels to the MacMahon line then you are automatically ceding the point because if such claims are illegal by your definition, India would be breaking her own laws by conspicuously taking up Britain claim verbatim.

All beside the point, no future border negotiations between India and China will reference China's reestablishment of central control in Tibet. (I really prefer this term over invasion)

 

[navtrek]

http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/36037-indian-land-chinese-land.html

You must go through this thread to understand more