What's new

WHAT SOUTH CHINA SEA RIVALS CAN LEARN FROM THE DOKLAM BORDER DISPUTE

To be honest, I do not expect Modi government will come this sense. They will start another media propaganda campaign to make it yet another Victory for Modi. There are plenty of India media outlets that are capable of finding few grains of undigested wheat from a pile of cow dung and spin it into a major achievement, and the gullible Indian masses will continue to buy it.




Joe, I have read enough Indian side of story, and I understand that India has a legitimate concern for the security of its chick neck, but that doesn't give India a legality to invade Chinese territory. Bhutan was just used as an excuse, both you and I know it.

It seems you are attacking author's personality rather than his points. Interesting shift from what I know about you. RSS' tactic is working, maybe?

First, I did not comment about the legality or otherwise of the Indian intrusion into Chinese territory. But since you insist, the 'intrusion' was into disputed territory. It was the building of a road in disputed territory that sparked off the confrontation. Stating that it was Chinese territory is wrong, factually as well as politically.

Whether it is true or not, I have no way of knowing, there was apparently an exchange where the Chinese representative stated flatly,"Was it your land?", implying that at best, it was Bhutan that had a claim to the land, and the dispute lay between the PRC and Bhutan; to this, the retort was "Does every piece of land that is disputed become yours by default?" This may or may not have taken place; it does, however, encapsulate the point of view of the two sides.

If Bhutan had not raised an issue, about Chinese activities on land disputed between Bhutan and the PRC, Indian troops would have had no reason, no justification to move into territory claimed by both China and Bhutan.

Second, you have just done what you accused me of doing: attacking my personality rather than the underlying point. Very simply, I have read Bhadrakumar's articles for nearly twenty years; you seem to have just discovered him. Allow me the elementary knowledge of his stand on different issues over this period of time, and some prior knowledge about the stand that he takes.

Accusing me of falling prey to RSS tactics is unworthy of you. Considering that my family and I have been threatened by goons already, and that this is known to many members, I can only suppose that your loyalty to your country and its actions is so strong that any opposition to it invokes the most fundamental abuse that you can summon.

I had only marginal, rather amused views towards this subject. On the other hand, something major seems to have gone wrong, judging by the anguished and infuriated responses that I am reading and will continue to read. It doesn't really matter to me.
 
First, I did not comment about the legality or otherwise of the Indian intrusion into Chinese territory. But since you insist, the 'intrusion' was into disputed territory. It was the building of a road in disputed territory that sparked off the confrontation. Stating that it was Chinese territory is wrong, factually as well as politically.

Whether it is true or not, I have no way of knowing, there was apparently an exchange where the Chinese representative stated flatly,"Was it your land?", implying that at best, it was Bhutan that had a claim to the land, and the dispute lay between the PRC and Bhutan; to this, the retort was "Does every piece of land that is disputed become yours by default?" This may or may not have taken place; it does, however, encapsulate the point of view of the two sides.

If Bhutan had not raised an issue, about Chinese activities on land disputed between Bhutan and the PRC, Indian troops would have had no reason, no justification to move into territory claimed by both China and Bhutan.

Second, you have just done what you accused me of doing: attacking my personality rather than the underlying point. Very simply, I have read Bhadrakumar's articles for nearly twenty years; you seem to have just discovered him. Allow me the elementary knowledge of his stand on different issues over this period of time, and some prior knowledge about the stand that he takes.

Accusing me of falling prey to RSS tactics is unworthy of you. Considering that my family and I have been threatened by goons already, and that this is known to many members, I can only suppose that your loyalty to your country and its actions is so strong that any opposition to it invokes the most fundamental abuse that you can summon.

I had only marginal, rather amused views towards this subject. On the other hand, something major seems to have gone wrong, judging by the anguished and infuriated responses that I am reading and will continue to read. It doesn't really matter to me.

China did give India a 3 week head start on its intention to build the road, and India failed to respond through diplomatic channel before taking military action. Before and after the standoff, what Indian Army face across the border was/is Chinese, not Bhutanese troop. So the argument of "dispute territory" was nothing but lame excuse.

Doval resorted to a typical logic fallacy in responding to his Chinese counterpart when he failed to answer a straight forward question, had the so called "inside story" to be believed. It is a display of low level street smart that somehow so many Indian members are taking pride for.

There is no any evidence for public record that Bhutan had asked Indian to intervene. So Indian troop did not have a justification to enter the area on behalf of Bhutan. India shouldn't flip flop between per Bhutan's request or per its own security concern of "chicken neck". It is dishonest.

Being anti-establishment doesn't mean either right or wrong, considering current BJP government itself is the result of anti-Congress-establishment. You can't really discount his points based on this alone.

Sorry to hear your story that you and your family have been through under goons, which itself indicates that something have gone wrong in your country.

I would not have engaged with you had you not assumed Chinese mus be "frustrated", or "butthurt" per your countrymen, by India's "victory". I just wanted to tell you what I, an independent thinking overseas Chinese, have observed.
 
@Dungeness

I really am not interested. I was amused; now I am bored.

China did give India a 3 week head start on its intention to build the road, and India failed to respond through diplomatic channel before taking military action.

It is not clear how you know so intimately what transpired. It is also not clear on what grounds India should have responded when the dispute was between Bhutan and China, unless it is your presumption that an intimation to India was in effect an intimation to Bhutan, with whom China has no direct diplomatic relations. Even in that case, until the Bhutanese themselves had taken a view, it was not open to India to do anything.

Before and after the standoff, what Indian Army face across the border was/is Chinese, not Bhutanese troop. So the argument of "dispute territory" was nothing but lame excuse.

A puzzling wording. It sounds as if you are saying that the Indian Army faced the PLA, and did not face the Bhutanese Army. Presumably you mean that it was the Indian Army facing the PLA, and the Bhutanese did not face the PLA. Possibly; but in what way does that make disputed territory a weak excuse? The whole point of an Indian presence is to supply the muscle that Bhutan lacks; how does that spill over into deciding on behalf of Bhutan what is disputed and what is not?

Doval resorted to a typical logic fallacy in responding to his Chinese counterpart when he failed to answer a straight forward question, had the so called "inside story" to be believed. It is a display of low level street smart that somehow so many Indian members are taking pride for.

On the contrary, that is precisely the crux of the matter. I am not a Doval fan - the contrary, in fact - but the purported exchange is precisely the question that China needs to be asked about the nine-dash line. Why is it low-level street smart when one side uses such word play, and high level statesmanship when artificially concocted maps are thrust on all parties by one?

There is no any evidence for public record that Bhutan had asked Indian to intervene.

Why should there be any public record? These are not matters to be decided in a town house meeting, these are communications at responsible levels, and not meant for broadcasting.

So Indian troop did not have a justification to enter the area on behalf of Bhutan.

Weak. The justification is based on Bhutan's request, and that did not, and does not have to be communicated at a press conference.

India shouldn't flip flop between per Bhutan's request or per its own security concern of "chicken neck". It is dishonest.

Where is the flip-flop? What everybody commenting on the subject has said is that on top of the dispute being addressed by coercive force by one disputant, there is also a geo-political threat. The threat added an edge to the action, it was not the motivation for the action. Which part of that do you find it difficult to understand?

Being anti-establishment doesn't mean either right or wrong, considering current BJP government itself is the result of anti-Congress-establishment. You can't really discount his points based on this alone.

No, it doesn't mean right or wrong. If you had read carefully, you would have seen that I approve of this, as a democracy needs these mavericks to counter the establishment. I discount his posts not on his anti-establishment attitude, but on the distortion that creeps into his articles, a distortion beyond anti-establishment positioning, which by itself would not have been cautionary.

Sorry to hear your story that you and your family have been through under goons, which itself indicates that something have gone wrong in your country.

That is self-evident. But that does not mean that all other reasoning has to be suspended. It is not RSS thinking influencing me, it is a bewilderment at China's inexorable pressure on all neighbours on all sides, excepting Russia, Mongolia, and North Korea, perhaps also Myanmar, under the present regime, and a relief that at least in one case, it failed.

I would not have engaged with you had you not assumed Chinese mus be "frustrated", or "butthurt" per your countrymen, by India's "victory". I just wanted to tell you what I, an independent thinking overseas Chinese, have observed.

Fair enough. When you make statements, those are to be taken seriously, and I do take them seriously. It is just that in this case, I was not bothered to engage with the deeper issues, but merely amused - I am getting quite tired of explaining this, and wish I had not mentioned that word at all - at the frenetic Chinese netizen reaction. And I do not see it as India's victory; for that matter, even the Government of India does not project it as an Indian victory, it is only the tabloid media and the Indian fringe elements, such as Internet fan-boys, who do.
 
I


IF? says pity little Indian, expect US navy to do your midday fantasies? Grow up! Indian own cow has back to their Modi pastureland their own, now their acting like a bull back home.

The first sign of losing an argument is talking nonsense. Even Joe Shearer, Indian professional was unable to debate.

What to expect from Indian hiding behind western avatar name?[/QUOTE]
It's closest thing for him to being white.

Wait till next year when constructions is gonna restart then they will realize how painful the humiliation really is. Until then let them enjoy this euphoric sensation. In reality Modi and the slumdog military higher ups saw the writing on the wall when our missiles were being transported, signaling a war is coming. That's why the slumdogs unilaterally crapping their pants on their way back to the border.
Your post is a fair neutral assessment of possible future actions by China. Not sure why you were given a negative.
 
It is not clear how you know so intimately what transpired. It is also not clear on what grounds India should have responded when the dispute was between Bhutan and China, unless it is your presumption that an intimation to India was in effect an intimation to Bhutan, with whom China has no direct diplomatic relations. Even in that case, until the Bhutanese themselves had taken a view, it was not open to India to do anything.

We can only go by public records. It is in public record that China claimed it gave India 3 weeks notice to indicate its intention, and India did not deny China's claim. You are right, since Bhutan did not openly invite India to get involved, India did not really have the legal ground to intervene.

A puzzling wording. It sounds as if you are saying that the Indian Army faced the PLA, and did not face the Bhutanese Army. Presumably you mean that it was the Indian Army facing the PLA, and the Bhutanese did not face the PLA. Possibly; but in what way does that make disputed territory a weak excuse? The whole point of an Indian presence is to supply the muscle that Bhutan lacks; how does that spill over into deciding on behalf of Bhutan what is disputed and what is not?

The area has been under effective Chinese control. The very fact that Indian troop withdrew from the area back to its side of border means India respects the border before and after the standoff. The excuse of "dispute territory" used temporarily during the standoff made India's stand inconsistent and dubious.

On the contrary, that is precisely the crux of the matter. I am not a Doval fan - the contrary, in fact - but the purported exchange is precisely the question that China needs to be asked about the nine-dash line. Why is it low-level street smart when one side uses such word play, and high level statesmanship when artificially concocted maps are thrust on all parties by one?

So India has withdrew from the "dispute area" and Chinese are still there, does it mean Doval was arguing just for the argument sake? India indeed recognized China's control over this "dispute territory"?


Why should there be any public record? These are not matters to be decided in a town house meeting, these are communications at responsible levels, and not meant for broadcasting.

So it could well be an excuse made up by India, because Bhutan did not made its intention a public knowledge. Actually, even India did not make it clear it was requested by Bhutanese government to intervene. It used a term "consulted".

Where is the flip-flop? What everybody commenting on the subject has said is that on top of the dispute being addressed by coercive force by one disputant, there is also a geo-political threat. The threat added an edge to the action, it was not the motivation for the action. Which part of that do you find it difficult to understand?

What is the exact reason for India to get involved? Per Bhutan's request, or per India's own concern of "chicken neck"? You said it was due to India's concern of "chicken neck", and then you said India did not have the reason to do anything if not for Bhutan's request.

No, it doesn't mean right or wrong. If you had read carefully, you would have seen that I approve of this, as a democracy needs these mavericks to counter the establishment. I discount his posts not on his anti-establishment attitude, but on the distortion that creeps into his articles, a distortion beyond anti-establishment positioning, which by itself would not have been cautionary.

But you did not even read his article.

That is self-evident. But that does not mean that all other reasoning has to be suspended. It is not RSS thinking influencing me, it is a bewilderment at China's inexorable pressure on all neighbours on all sides, excepting Russia, Mongolia, and North Korea, perhaps also Myanmar, under the present regime, and a relief that at least in one case, it failed.

Your misunderstanding of China's border issues may have influenced the way of your thinking. In fact, China has resolved border issues with 12 out of 14 land bordering countries. Which 2 are problematic, go figure.

Fair enough. When you make statements, those are to be taken seriously, and I do take them seriously. It is just that in this case, I was not bothered to engage with the deeper issues, but merely amused - I am getting quite tired of explaining this, and wish I had not mentioned that word at all - at the frenetic Chinese netizen reaction. And I do not see it as India's victory; for that matter, even the Government of India does not project it as an Indian victory, it is only the tabloid media and the Indian fringe elements, such as Internet fan-boys, who do.

I have no problem with this. Lots of posts from Chinese members are merely the reaction to Indians peculiar triumphalism. Hey, we need to have our share of fun. :cheesy:

In fact, I have been advocating "win-win" scenario, in which each side could pick up bits and pieces to claim a victory, and even before the end of standoff, I had predicted there would be no "hot war".
 
Interesting to read your comment after our conversation elsewhere. So you are an invested party in this controversy. Good going.



Perhaps you could contribute strategic inputs and general officers, to share your long and successful campaign to put them in their right place.



Does this resentment of what you, and the Chinese, are claiming as a victory not seem strange to you? What does this frequent itch to wipe the barely-concealed smirk on the faces of the rest of the world mean? Are you getting to feel uneasy in your complete isolation?

Just asking.



You mean the sane Chinese won over the Han Chinese? That sounds hopeful.

Blabla need wisdom and comprehensive knowledge, follow Chinese foreign affair press conference to get reliable sources and keep off your low quality fabricating papers. No claim from Chinese government spokeperons said it's a victory. They stated indian trespassing troops and equipment have retreated back to indian boundary and Chinese troops will still patrol in the area, carry out sovereignty rights.
The press is precise and obvious, only the idiots can't understand and seek face-saving report form the medias lacking quality control.
 
Blabla need wisdom and comprehensive knowledge, follow Chinese foreign affair press conference to get reliable sources and keep off your low quality fabricating papers. No claim from Chinese government spokeperons said it's a victory. They stated indian trespassing troops and equipment have retreated back to indian boundary and Chinese troops will still patrol in the area, carry out sovereignty rights.
The press is precise and obvious, only the idiots can't understand and seek face-saving report form the medias lacking quality control.

@Dungeness

Please read this idiotic note above, and tell me that I am wrong to laugh at it, and at what it represents.
 
@Dungeness

Please read this idiotic note above, and tell me that I am wrong to laugh at it, and at what it represents.


Joe, his criticism about sensational Indian media was right, just like what you have pointed out. Chinese media may not meet the western standard of "free press", but it is usually more concise and relies more on facts than sensationalism, especially when reporting issues associated with national security. Of course Chinese media also suffers its share of problem of "partial truth" or "alternative truth", so it serves as an ingredient for a nice pot of information soup.

As I mentioned before, Chinese members' posts, to a large degree, are just reactions to Indian members taunting.
One highly regarded Indian Elite Members even opened a thread, claiming "China deadline had expired, Chinese can't stop humiliate themselves". He based his entire point on one random Chinese's guess of timing of war. That thread collected 58 thanks from Indian members, and countless insults to China and Chinese. Only a couple of Indian members correctly pointed out Chinese gov. never issue a deadline but they were totally ignored.

Emotion from both sides are subsiding now, so let's just keep it this way.
 
Last edited:
@Dungeness

Please read this idiotic note above, and tell me that I am wrong to laugh at it, and at what it represents.
Calm down Joe, it was a win win situation, de facto Chinese control of Doklam exchanged with road postponement. Good deal to me. India gets to save face, China get's the strategic plateau. And best of all the 50bil$ surplus stays.:rofl:
 
Calm down Joe, it was a win win situation, de facto Chinese control of Doklam exchanged with road postponement. Good deal to me. India gets to save face, China get's the strategic plateau. And best of all the 50bil$ surplus stays.:rofl:

How can I be calm with such hysterically funny reactions in front of me? That's why I wanted @Dungeness to lighten up; this is irresistible.
 
How can I be calm with such hysterically funny reactions in front of me? That's why I wanted @Dungeness to lighten up; this is irresistible.
Well I only follow official press releases from GOI and PRC, no point referring to dozens of Indian anal lyst, splurting our different views and anal lysis. The point is GOI is suspiciously silent on this, as if they are hiding something.:coffee:
 
Well I only follow official press releases from GOI and PRC, no point referring to dozens of Indian anal lyst, splurting our different views and anal lysis. The point is GOI is suspiciously silent on this, as if they are hiding something.:coffee:

Ignore the Indian analysts. Who reads them, other than hysterical Chinese fanboys? I don't; I know what to read, and that is the stuff between the lines. What the MEA of India said, what it did NOT say, what the Chinese MOFA said, what it did NOT say. That is more worthwhile and more rewarding, with the exception of hypercharged posts from young idiots who can't smell a deal if it came and threw up in their faces.

That is why I was laughing.
 
Ignore the Indian analysts. Who reads them, other than hysterical Chinese fanboys? I don't; I know what to read, and that is the stuff between the lines. What the MEA of India said, what it did NOT say, what the Chinese MOFA said, what it did NOT say. That is more worthwhile and more rewarding, with the exception of hypercharged posts from young idiots who can't smell a deal if it came and threw up in their faces.

That is why I was laughing.
Good for you. Now let the peace return and the trade continue to roll. Modi need to clean up a lot of mess, from demonetization to Hindu mob lynchings. Extremism does not bode well, didn't Mao taught you guys something? Cultural revolutions and shit like tht?
 
Good for you. Now let the peace return and the trade continue to roll. Modi need to clean up a lot of mess, from demonetization to Hindu mob lynchings.

I'm not Modi. When he stood for election, he opted to face all this. As far as I am concerned, neither demonetisation nor mob lynchings are funny. But the hypercharged emotions were, and I took a break. If you want to make yourselves laughing stocks, why shouldn't I laugh?

@Dungeness pointed out Indians acted just as idiotic. I can't laugh at them, I live here, my family lives here. I can, and do, laugh at you.
 
Back
Top Bottom