What's new

Tibetan leader to India: make Tibet 'core' issue

Can someone clarify? Doesn't the GOI already recognize Tibet as part of China?

Yes. There is not even ONE single national government in the entire world, that recognizes Tibet as an Independent state.

But there are so many Indian warmongers who wish for their government to do this, so I am just wishing them good luck. :azn:
 
.
LoL how long does it take re-print papers and change opinions, GOI can stand accordingly to the situation that fruits positive results for People of India
 
. .
Yes, it has become well-documented history. A history that burns in the Indian mind, while the vast majority of Chinese haven't even heard of 1962.

(I never actually knew about it until I came on this forum).

Yeah well it also screwed China's image internationally.

The Chinese military action has been viewed by the United States as part of the PRC's policy of making use of aggressive wars to settle its border disputes and to distract from its internal issues. According to James Calvin from the United States Marine Corps, western nations at the time viewed China as an aggressor during the China-India border war, and the war was part of a monolithic communist objective for a world dictatorship of the proletariat. This was further triggered by Mao Zedong's views that: "The way to world conquest lies through Havana, Accra, and Calcutta". Calvin believes that Chinese actions show a "pattern of conservative aims and limited objectives, rather than expansionism" and blames this particular conflict on India's provocations towards China. However, Calvin also expresses that China, in the past, has been adamant to gain control over regions to which it has a "traditional claim", which triggered the dispute over NEFA and Aksai Chin and indeed Tibet. Calvin's assumption, based on the history of the Cold War and the Domino Effect, assumed that China might ultimately try to regain control of everything that it considers as "traditionally Chinese" which in its view includes the entirety of South East Asia.

The Kennedy administration was disturbed by what they considered "blatant Chinese communist aggression against India". In a May 1963 National Security Council meeting, contingency planning on the part of the United States in the event of another Chinese attack on India was discussed. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara and General Maxwell Taylor advised the president to use nuclear weapons should the Americans intervene in such a situation. Kennedy insisted that Washington defend India as it would any ally, saying, "We should defend India, and therefore we will defend India". The Johnson Administration considered and then rejected giving nuclear weapons technology to the Indians.

The non-aligned nations, perhaps unsurprisingly, remained non-aligned, and only the United Arab Republic openly supported India. Of the non-aligned nations, six, Egypt, Burma, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Ghana and Indonesia, met in Colombo on 10 December 1962. The proposals stipulated a Chinese withdrawal of 20 km from the customary lines without any reciprocal withdrawal on India's behalf. The failure of these six nations to unequivocally condemn China deeply disappointed India.

In 1972, Chinese Premier Zhou explained the Chinese point of view to President Nixon of the US. As for the causes of the war, Zhou asserted that China did not try to expel Indian troops from south of the McMahon line and that three open warning telegrams were sent to Nehru before the war. However, Indian patrols south of the McMahon line were expelled and suffered casualties in the Chinese attack. Zhou also told Nixon that Chairman Mao ordered the troops to return to show good faith. :rolleyes: The Indian government maintains that the Chinese military could not advance further south due to logistical problems and the cut-off of resource supplies.

While Western nations did not view Chinese actions favourably because of fear of the Chinese and competitiveness, Pakistan, which had had a turbulent relationship with India ever since the Indian partition, improved its relations with China after the war. Prior to the war, Pakistan also shared a disputed boundary with China, and had proposed to India that the two countries adopt a common defence against "northern" enemies (i.e. China), which was rejected by India. However, China and Pakistan took steps to peacefully negotiate their shared boundaries, beginning on 13 October 1962, and concluding in December of that year. Pakistan also expressed fear that the huge amounts of western military aid directed to India would allow it to threaten Pakistan's security in future conflicts. Mohammed Ali, External Affairs Minister of Pakistan, declared that massive Western aid to India in the Sino-Indian dispute would be considered an unfriendly act towards Pakistan. As a result Pakistan made efforts to improve its relations with China. The following year, China and Pakistan peacefully settled disputes on their shared border, and negotiated the China-Pakistan Border Treaty in 1963, as well as trade, commercial, and barter treaties. On 2 March 1963, Pakistan conceded its northern claim line in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir to China in favor of a more southerly boundary along the Karakoram Range. The border treaty largely set the border along the MacCartney-Macdonald Line. India's military failure against China would embolden Pakistan to initiate the Second Kashmir War with India. However, it effectively ended in a stalemate as Calvin states that the Sino-Indian War had caused the previously passive government to take a stand on actively modernising India's military. China offered diplomatic support to Pakistan in this war but did not offer military support. In January 1966, China condemned the Tashkent Agreement between India and Pakistan as a Soviet-US plot in the region. In the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, Pakistan expected China to provide military support, but it was left alone as India successfully helped the rebels in East Pakistan to found the new nation-state of Bangladesh. :lol:


And yes the rest is history
 
.
Good luck sir. :D


Good luck getting that Arms Embargo lifted... While India adavances in Tech, china will be left in the dust with soviet style machines... While we integrate western Tech! so what if its not indigenious, we will have our great minds work on it to make it that much better.. and move forward...


i am still waiting for the performances of J-17, j-10..
 
.
Yes. There is not even ONE single national government in the entire world, that recognizes Tibet as an Independent state.

But there are so many Indian warmongers who wish for their government to do this, so I am just wishing them good luck. :azn:

But there is one country that is hosting its leader though.
Now I am afraid that he might get naturalized one day and get elected as leader of India and then openly recognizes Tibet as an Independent state. :lol:
 
.
Yeah well it also screwed China's image internationally.

Is that why BBC's Country Rating poll, shows China with a higher worldwide positive rating than India? :azn:

As for the rest, let's look at today. China and India had similar sized eonomies in 1962. Today, China's economy is FOUR times bigger. We beat India, in almost every single ecomomic indicator that matters.

China sits at the global high table (UNSC) with veto power, and there were even suggestions of a G-2 between the world's two biggest economies, USA and China. China has strong strategic relations with Russia (both founding members of the SCO), and strong trade relations with the EU, Africa, Central Asia, South America... and the rest of the world.

Today, both the USA and China, fund and support the Pakistani Army.

As for India... well... anything I say would be seen as flaming, so I will save it for now. :P
 
.
Can someone clarify? Doesn't the GOI already recognize Tibet as part of China?



Yes India does. Chinese officials were in a quandary on this issue, as any protests to India would mean an explicit endorsement of India's governance of Sikkim, which the Chinese still regarded as an independent state occupied by India. China eventually recognized Sikkim as an Indian state in 2003, on the condition that India accepted the Tibet Autonomous Region as a part of China. This mutual agreement led to a thaw in Sino-Indian relations. New Delhi had originally accepted Tibet as a part of China in 1953 during the government of then-Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. On 6 July 2006, the Himalayan pass of Nathula was opened to cross-border trade, constituting further evidence of improving relations in the region.

Just to re-assure China that India does recognize Tibet as an integral part of China
 
.
Yes. There is not even ONE single national government in the entire world, that recognizes Tibet as an Independent state.

But there are so many Indian warmongers who wish for their government to do this, so I am just wishing them good luck. :azn:

Sounds silly open a thread just on this then, why would a government running one of the biggest nations on earth want to listen to some exiled government with no power to make foreign affair decisions. Ludicrous
 
.
Yes India does. Chinese officials were in a quandary on this issue, as any protests to India would mean an explicit endorsement of India's governance of Sikkim, which the Chinese still regarded as an independent state occupied by India. China eventually recognized Sikkim as an Indian state in 2003, on the condition that India accepted the Tibet Autonomous Region as a part of China. This mutual agreement led to a thaw in Sino-Indian relations. New Delhi had originally accepted Tibet as a part of China in 1953 during the government of then-Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. On 6 July 2006, the Himalayan pass of Nathula was opened to cross-border trade, constituting further evidence of improving relations in the region.

Just to re-assure China that India does recognize Tibet as an integral part of China

Thanks for that, I'm sure the GOI has better things on their hand then to take opinions from a third party with their own agenda. I'm staying outta this one
 
.
Yeah well it also screwed China's image internationally.

The Chinese military action has been viewed by the United States as part of the PRC's policy of making use of aggressive wars to settle its border disputes and to distract from its internal issues. According to James Calvin from the United States Marine Corps, western nations at the time viewed China as an aggressor during the China-India border war, and the war was part of a monolithic communist objective for a world dictatorship of the proletariat. This was further triggered by Mao Zedong's views that: "The way to world conquest lies through Havana, Accra, and Calcutta". Calvin believes that Chinese actions show a "pattern of conservative aims and limited objectives, rather than expansionism" and blames this particular conflict on India's provocations towards China. However, Calvin also expresses that China, in the past, has been adamant to gain control over regions to which it has a "traditional claim", which triggered the dispute over NEFA and Aksai Chin and indeed Tibet. Calvin's assumption, based on the history of the Cold War and the Domino Effect, assumed that China might ultimately try to regain control of everything that it considers as "traditionally Chinese" which in its view includes the entirety of South East Asia.

The Kennedy administration was disturbed by what they considered "blatant Chinese communist aggression against India". In a May 1963 National Security Council meeting, contingency planning on the part of the United States in the event of another Chinese attack on India was discussed. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara and General Maxwell Taylor advised the president to use nuclear weapons should the Americans intervene in such a situation. Kennedy insisted that Washington defend India as it would any ally, saying, "We should defend India, and therefore we will defend India". The Johnson Administration considered and then rejected giving nuclear weapons technology to the Indians.

The non-aligned nations, perhaps unsurprisingly, remained non-aligned, and only the United Arab Republic openly supported India. Of the non-aligned nations, six, Egypt, Burma, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Ghana and Indonesia, met in Colombo on 10 December 1962. The proposals stipulated a Chinese withdrawal of 20 km from the customary lines without any reciprocal withdrawal on India's behalf. The failure of these six nations to unequivocally condemn China deeply disappointed India.

In 1972, Chinese Premier Zhou explained the Chinese point of view to President Nixon of the US. As for the causes of the war, Zhou asserted that China did not try to expel Indian troops from south of the McMahon line and that three open warning telegrams were sent to Nehru before the war. However, Indian patrols south of the McMahon line were expelled and suffered casualties in the Chinese attack. Zhou also told Nixon that Chairman Mao ordered the troops to return to show good faith. :rolleyes: The Indian government maintains that the Chinese military could not advance further south due to logistical problems and the cut-off of resource supplies.

While Western nations did not view Chinese actions favourably because of fear of the Chinese and competitiveness, Pakistan, which had had a turbulent relationship with India ever since the Indian partition, improved its relations with China after the war. Prior to the war, Pakistan also shared a disputed boundary with China, and had proposed to India that the two countries adopt a common defence against "northern" enemies (i.e. China), which was rejected by India. However, China and Pakistan took steps to peacefully negotiate their shared boundaries, beginning on 13 October 1962, and concluding in December of that year. Pakistan also expressed fear that the huge amounts of western military aid directed to India would allow it to threaten Pakistan's security in future conflicts. Mohammed Ali, External Affairs Minister of Pakistan, declared that massive Western aid to India in the Sino-Indian dispute would be considered an unfriendly act towards Pakistan. As a result Pakistan made efforts to improve its relations with China. The following year, China and Pakistan peacefully settled disputes on their shared border, and negotiated the China-Pakistan Border Treaty in 1963, as well as trade, commercial, and barter treaties. On 2 March 1963, Pakistan conceded its northern claim line in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir to China in favor of a more southerly boundary along the Karakoram Range. The border treaty largely set the border along the MacCartney-Macdonald Line. India's military failure against China would embolden Pakistan to initiate the Second Kashmir War with India. However, it effectively ended in a stalemate as Calvin states that the Sino-Indian War had caused the previously passive government to take a stand on actively modernising India's military. China offered diplomatic support to Pakistan in this war but did not offer military support. In January 1966, China condemned the Tashkent Agreement between India and Pakistan as a Soviet-US plot in the region. In the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, Pakistan expected China to provide military support, but it was left alone as India successfully helped the rebels in East Pakistan to found the new nation-state of Bangladesh. :lol:


And yes the rest is history

We all know too well not to take American criticisms too seriously as they are often the pot who calls the kettle black. Besides there are more Indians who know about 1962 than there is Chinese knowing it. That's the level of importance it had in the thousands of years or Chinese history. :azn:
 
.
Your sarcasm here might have been more effective if you stopped covering for the Indian component of the brewhaha (however you spell it)

Fools will be fools on both sides, just as you don't act the caretaker of anybody on your side (stated by yourself on a previous thread i remember recently) i can't educate everybody.

brow haha is it, thank you and Namaste.
 
.
I'm kind of agreeing with Dharmachakra here.

India will not go to war with China or Pakistan until it risks destruction. Destruction will not only be in terms of physical damage but also India will disintegrate quickly. This is the problem Indians faced from the onset, hence no progress on Kashmir issue. Despite Kashmiris not in a mood to be under Indian occupation at any cost.

The day Kashmir gone, India will disintegrate very rapidly, it is not a country, historically it always had been small independent states. This artificial country was gifted by the British to the Indians, history proves it. Indian should be thankful to the British for creation of India, and also creating the problem of Kashmir purposefully by fraudulently creating the document, which is never produced by the Indian in International forums.

If India goes to war with China, it risks disintegration. China will not end the war on just Tibet independence issue, it has claims over two states of India. It will take those two states as well. India will start a downward spiral of destruction and disintegration.

Thats why the Indian twice have huffed and puffed to bring the house down, brought their army to the borders with Pakistan, spend few months and then withdrew. They know, the game has changed, Pakistan this time will cause untold destruction to India.

Recently Pakistan has successfully tested battlefield specific, miniature nuclear capable short range Hatif IV missiles. It is a game changer in terms of war, Pakistan is capable of hitting Indian formation and military concentrations with small low yield armaments, blowing away thousands of troops in an instant. It is also working on even smaller depleted uranium based weapons.

As time goes by, the War between India and Pakistan would become impossible, unless India wants complete destruction. Sensible thing for India to do is to let the Kashmiris free. We are cool if they want to join Pakistan or become independent. But one thing is obvious they don't want to be under Indian occupation. It should also settle all the border issues with China. Give back the states which are Chinese land, return back all stolen land belonging to other people and then live in peace with all its neighbors.

Indian should look around, they have not one single regional friend, they have problems with all their neighbors, BD, China, Nepal, Bhutan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Maldives. Time for Indian to reflect on their attitude towards its neighbors. If they are relying on USA for support, then they should think twice, USA is playing India against China for its own purposes, it would not worry about your destruction, learn from their behavior.
 
. .
This is expected and it just means everything going as per the plan. So folks expect a brief war in next 2 years. It was on cards already and we are prepared for it this time tooo....

India has no plan to press the reset button on 67 years of development. A conflict with China will be a foolish misadventure by India, she is too shrewd an operator to do such a folly.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom