grey boy 2
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2009
- Messages
- 6,484
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
What is beyong the physical Line?
+ - 15:45, August 12, 2009
What is beyond the physical Line? - People's Daily Online
By Li Hongmei, People's Daily Online
First, the sore point of contention between China and India is not the one rising along the border line, as assumed by people with little sense of history, but the widely divergent positions of the two countries towards the line, or the so-called MacMahon Line, named by the British General MacMahon as a result of the predatory and imperialist imposition of the British government in the year 1914, when China was weak, divided and under the domination of foreign imperialist powers.
In history, however, no Chinese government has ever accepted the MacMahon Line, nor did even the Imperial Government of China in 1914. The Chiang-Kai-Shek government was forced to agree to it, in that his clique was then nothing but a tool of the U.S. power. But the then U.S., as well as the British imperialists, who did draw the line, dared not to occupy in actual deeds the territories of China to the south of 'MacMahon Line', as the aggressive Nehru government did.
Evidence accumulated over years has throw it into a sharp relief that Nehru government, in the early years of Indian independence, not only took over the legacy of British imperialist strategic perceptions of security, but turned out even more arrogant and un-rational on boundary issues than the British Raj, interfering many times in China's Tibet affairs.
As a result of Nehru's unceasing 'forward policy' after occupying further Tawang and other Chinese territories to the south of 'MacMahon Line', and India's provocative actions in an attempt to extrude Chinese army out of all the Chinese territory it claimed, in late 1962, China-India border war broke out, making breach of the peace and tranquility across the whole border areas and, with the fallout of Indian troops beating a retreat and in the following days India embarking on intensive arming which contributes to a long-term confrontation between the two countries, a huge unnecessary waste of manpower and material resources to both sides.
What lies behind the aggressive attitude of the Nehru government was the then imperialist world, in particular, the U.S. would like nothing better than to see the two principal Asian powers locked in military combat, shedding blood and absorbing resources and energies of millions which could otherwise have been used to construct a strong and promising Asia. Even today, some Western powers still choose to side with the right-wing extremist elements in India as against China on the decades-long border disputes. Their intention of doing so is abundantly clear to the peace-loving people either in China or in India.
Back to 'MacMahon Line', then and now, no sovereign state would abide by the border line and treaty artificially created and imposed upon it by powerful hands. Let us suppose that if a general of a colonialist power, by force of arms, succeeded in subjugating the North American continent and on that basis had artificially drawn a border line between the U.S. and Canada; and if, supposing further, the boundary line demarcated by the general in question included, with the tilt going to the favor of Canada, parts of Buffalo, Detroit, Seattle, and some adjoining area, would a sovereign Washington government readily agree to the Line?
All we have to do with the above analogy is to just change the name to suit the case in discussion. In truth, both the Chinese government and people have consistently regarded the border line and relevant treaties dictated by the then colonialist power as illegal, null and void.
Thanks to the late Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi' historic visit to China in 1988, Sino-India relations have since restored to normality gradually. But it should be noted that, in terms of populations, sizes, economic scales and the roles played in the contemporary world both by China and India, the bilateral cooperation is still far from reaching the level it should be. Border dispute aside, what else is hindering Sino-Indian relations from developing further and in depth? The answer is, perhaps, the theory of 'China threat', and the mentality of cut-throat competition thereupon incurred, also artificially hyped up but deeply-seated in the minds of many Indians.
Even today, there still are a considerable number of politician officials, military figures and think tanks in India who have not liberated their minds from the shadows of the misunderstanding related to the 1962 war and some even still adhering to the strategic perception of security prevailing in the colonial times, counting China as a threat or a potential adversary. The Indian Air Force chief has said China poses a more real and potent threat than Pakistan. Some Indian media go so far as to predict by citing some political figures that there will be another war between the two Asian giants within the year 2012.
Groundless clamors of the kind would possibly bring about the malign consequences even worse than India's boosting forces along the border with the deployment of two army divisions and a squadron of top-of-the-line Sukhoi Su-30 MKI warplanes. In response, China stands in readiness to take defensive actions.
Fortunately, the sober-minded people on both sides would prefer to avoid being dragged down by the past. Instead, they have been making every effort to achieve a reasonable and just settlement of the territory in dispute and turn to a broader cooperation gearing to future.
During the just concluded 13th China-India border talks held in New Delhi, both sides agreed to press ahead with the framework negotiations in accordance with the agreed political parameters and guiding principles in an effort to seek for a fair and reasonable solution acceptable to both. Although a substantive breakthrough is yet to be made, at least, a glimpse of light looms at the end of the tunnel.
As a matter of fact, China and India enjoy a long history of friendly interactions and a fine tradition of learning from each other, both being the densely populated nations and both suffering from imperialist and colonialist aggression and exploitation. The improved Sino-India ties with a more comprehensive cooperation will not merely do good to them both, but benefit the entire Asia. The day will come when the misunderstanding shrouding them is thoroughly dispersed, which is decided by something beyond the border line.
+ - 15:45, August 12, 2009
What is beyond the physical Line? - People's Daily Online
By Li Hongmei, People's Daily Online
First, the sore point of contention between China and India is not the one rising along the border line, as assumed by people with little sense of history, but the widely divergent positions of the two countries towards the line, or the so-called MacMahon Line, named by the British General MacMahon as a result of the predatory and imperialist imposition of the British government in the year 1914, when China was weak, divided and under the domination of foreign imperialist powers.
In history, however, no Chinese government has ever accepted the MacMahon Line, nor did even the Imperial Government of China in 1914. The Chiang-Kai-Shek government was forced to agree to it, in that his clique was then nothing but a tool of the U.S. power. But the then U.S., as well as the British imperialists, who did draw the line, dared not to occupy in actual deeds the territories of China to the south of 'MacMahon Line', as the aggressive Nehru government did.
Evidence accumulated over years has throw it into a sharp relief that Nehru government, in the early years of Indian independence, not only took over the legacy of British imperialist strategic perceptions of security, but turned out even more arrogant and un-rational on boundary issues than the British Raj, interfering many times in China's Tibet affairs.
As a result of Nehru's unceasing 'forward policy' after occupying further Tawang and other Chinese territories to the south of 'MacMahon Line', and India's provocative actions in an attempt to extrude Chinese army out of all the Chinese territory it claimed, in late 1962, China-India border war broke out, making breach of the peace and tranquility across the whole border areas and, with the fallout of Indian troops beating a retreat and in the following days India embarking on intensive arming which contributes to a long-term confrontation between the two countries, a huge unnecessary waste of manpower and material resources to both sides.
What lies behind the aggressive attitude of the Nehru government was the then imperialist world, in particular, the U.S. would like nothing better than to see the two principal Asian powers locked in military combat, shedding blood and absorbing resources and energies of millions which could otherwise have been used to construct a strong and promising Asia. Even today, some Western powers still choose to side with the right-wing extremist elements in India as against China on the decades-long border disputes. Their intention of doing so is abundantly clear to the peace-loving people either in China or in India.
Back to 'MacMahon Line', then and now, no sovereign state would abide by the border line and treaty artificially created and imposed upon it by powerful hands. Let us suppose that if a general of a colonialist power, by force of arms, succeeded in subjugating the North American continent and on that basis had artificially drawn a border line between the U.S. and Canada; and if, supposing further, the boundary line demarcated by the general in question included, with the tilt going to the favor of Canada, parts of Buffalo, Detroit, Seattle, and some adjoining area, would a sovereign Washington government readily agree to the Line?
All we have to do with the above analogy is to just change the name to suit the case in discussion. In truth, both the Chinese government and people have consistently regarded the border line and relevant treaties dictated by the then colonialist power as illegal, null and void.
Thanks to the late Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi' historic visit to China in 1988, Sino-India relations have since restored to normality gradually. But it should be noted that, in terms of populations, sizes, economic scales and the roles played in the contemporary world both by China and India, the bilateral cooperation is still far from reaching the level it should be. Border dispute aside, what else is hindering Sino-Indian relations from developing further and in depth? The answer is, perhaps, the theory of 'China threat', and the mentality of cut-throat competition thereupon incurred, also artificially hyped up but deeply-seated in the minds of many Indians.
Even today, there still are a considerable number of politician officials, military figures and think tanks in India who have not liberated their minds from the shadows of the misunderstanding related to the 1962 war and some even still adhering to the strategic perception of security prevailing in the colonial times, counting China as a threat or a potential adversary. The Indian Air Force chief has said China poses a more real and potent threat than Pakistan. Some Indian media go so far as to predict by citing some political figures that there will be another war between the two Asian giants within the year 2012.
Groundless clamors of the kind would possibly bring about the malign consequences even worse than India's boosting forces along the border with the deployment of two army divisions and a squadron of top-of-the-line Sukhoi Su-30 MKI warplanes. In response, China stands in readiness to take defensive actions.
Fortunately, the sober-minded people on both sides would prefer to avoid being dragged down by the past. Instead, they have been making every effort to achieve a reasonable and just settlement of the territory in dispute and turn to a broader cooperation gearing to future.
During the just concluded 13th China-India border talks held in New Delhi, both sides agreed to press ahead with the framework negotiations in accordance with the agreed political parameters and guiding principles in an effort to seek for a fair and reasonable solution acceptable to both. Although a substantive breakthrough is yet to be made, at least, a glimpse of light looms at the end of the tunnel.
As a matter of fact, China and India enjoy a long history of friendly interactions and a fine tradition of learning from each other, both being the densely populated nations and both suffering from imperialist and colonialist aggression and exploitation. The improved Sino-India ties with a more comprehensive cooperation will not merely do good to them both, but benefit the entire Asia. The day will come when the misunderstanding shrouding them is thoroughly dispersed, which is decided by something beyond the border line.
