Why India's choosing US side to contain China is an epic mistake

[bolo]

It will very much happen. This is the entire premise behind Pompeo's ruling China's South China Sea claims illegal.

Nope. You take war too lighly. Not just any war but a war between two great powers . US does not even want to fight Iran, or North Korea. And recently failed a coup attempt in Venezuela. Why would they take a chance with China and have a very high chance of losing . All US war simulations since 2007 show US will lose a war in China's backyard.
China never lose any war it fought with the US directly or indirectly.
A war with China is political suicide for Trump and Republican. Won't happen. let's just agree to disagree and wait until October/November. You will see that I am right.

 

[tower9]

Nope. You take war too lighly. Not just any war but a war between two great powers . US does not even want to fight Iran, or North Korea. And recently failed a coup attempt in Venezuela. Why would they take a chance with China and have a very high chance of losing . All US war simulations since 2007 show US will lose a war in China's backyard.
China never lose any war it fought with the US directly or indirectly.
A war with China is political suicide for Trump and Republican. Won't happen. let's just agree to disagree and wait until October/November. You will see that I am right.

Trump doesn't want to fight a war with North Korea or Iran because he knows those are distractions.

He will be willing to fight a limited war with China because he considers China the No. 1 threat, so if he can use military force to damage China's cities or infrastructure in order to slow down China's growth, isolate it, and destroy its economy for a generation, he would do it. That would be worth it.

 

[Surya 1]

First of all, I need to make it clear that India is completely responsible for the recent China-India tensions. After Trump visited India in February, Modi had already made up his mind to join in anti China coalition. From April India army broke the status quo at LAC to build roads and bridges there.

Back to the topic. The best choice for India is, sitting on the fence(plan A). Keeping same distance between China and US. Good choice is joining in China’s side(plan B). Worst choice is Joining in US side(plan C).

1, Why is plan A the best choice? It will guarantee India to make profit from both sides. Both sides are willing to offer bribes to India. After joining in US side, India has lost its strategic flexibility. China of course will become its enemy. For US, it doesn’t have to please India because India has no way back. Before the day India decided to side with US, India was the boss. After, US was the boss.

2, Why plan B is better than plan C? 1) If India joins in China side, its position in the ally will be one of the leader countries. May be next to China. On US side however, India will be one of pawn countries like Australia, Canada, Japan. Maybe even worse. 2) China can help India more than US does. First, China has more free money than US to invest. Second, India’s economic structure is too different than US’. China’s technology transfer is more suitable for India’s industry demands. China is good at infrastructure, energy, electronics, labor-intensive industries. US is good at semiconductors, aircraft, high tech products. US is neither suitable for India’s development phase nor willing to transfer it technologies to India or other counties. The China-US trade war has proven that. 3) China is India’s neighbour. US is too far away. China can help India more, also can hurt India more. I mean much much more.

Modi is not a smart leader. He may want to become Indian version Deng Xiaoping. Who joined in US side during cold war and started a war with China’s neighbour Vietnam, Which demonstrated to the world that China was on US board. And China gained a huge reward by that. But things are different this time.

1, Soviet Union was barely a big economic power. It was an energy and materials supplier. And it’s a declining super power. Leaving it would not cause serious loss. Now, US is the declining super power and China is the biggest and growing industry country.

2, Boycotting Chinese products set a glass ceiling for India’s future development. India can boycott Chinese products because it is an importer. But if Indians have a wider and longer view, they should know China is the world biggest market and will be the biggest technologies transfer source. Giving up China is equal to giving up India’s future. “No China” is okay for present India, but not okay if India wants to upgrade its industry structure. The higher India’s development stage is, the harder the glass ceiling will be.

3, China will not collapse like Soviet Union did. China is way stronger than Soviet Union. Western countries have huge interests in China. Chinese leaders are much smarter than Soviet Union’s leaders. Compared with Russians, Chinese are much hardworking and good at science and economic activities. China will haunt India forever.

Current Chinese regime is an expansionist, dictatorial regime opposed to any world order. To impress domestic audiences, this uncivilized, barbaric regime try to do such gimmicks. This one is going to cost Xi heavily. I foresee his resignation in an year of time on medical grounds.

 

[Figaro]

Current Chinese regime is an expansionist, dictatorial regime opposed to any world order. To impress domestic audiences, this uncivilized, barbaric regime try to do such gimmicks. This one is going to cost Xi heavily. I foresee his resignation in an year of time on medical grounds.

Yeah I would have to agree with you there. Taking so much Indian territory on the LAC in recent months is definitely expansionist. Indeed the Chinese are uncivilized ... I mean what civilized nation would kill 20 to 50 Indians and capture 60 more in peacetime? And also I agree Xi is going to resign on medical grounds. If anything, he is going to go to Delhi to seek medical treatment as we all know India has the best hospitals in the world.

 

[bolo]

Trump doesn't want to fight a war with North Korea or Iran because he knows those are distractions.

He will be willing to fight a limited war with China because he considers China the No. 1 threat, so if he can use military force to damage China's cities or infrastructure in order to slow down China's growth, isolate it, and destroy its economy for a generation, he would do it. That would be worth it.

There is no such thing as a limited war if US fight China. If you think there is a war in two months time you better stop posting here and look for another country to move to. Asian Americans will be the first casualties of war in US.

 

[Surya 1]

Yeah I would have to agree with you there. Taking so much Indian territory on the LAC in recent months is definitely expansionist. Indeed the Chinese are uncivilized ... I mean what civilized nation would kill 20 to 50 Indians and capture 60 more in peacetime? And also I agree Xi is going to resign on medical grounds. If anything, he is going to go to Delhi to seek medical treatment as we all know India has the best hospitals in the world.

100 + against 20. You have been kicked out of 4 sector and will be kicked of one remaining. Just wait.your small chinese army is unfit to fight a war against Indian soldiers. They are very scarred after 15 th june incident.

 

[tower9]

There is no such thing as a limited war if US fight China. If you think there is a war in two months time you better stop posting here and look for another country to move to. Asian Americans will be the first casualties of war in US.

There will be a military incident short of full scale war. Maybe a bombing of a Chinese claimed island in the SCS.

 

[Figaro]

There will be a military incident short of full scale war. Maybe a bombing of a Chinese claimed island in the SCS.

The US would never do this ... it might try to provoke China into a war (although this imo is highly unlikely), but it would never start a war. One of the good things about Trump is he finally recognizes consequences of wars, with Iraq and Afghanistan draining the US for the past two decades. That's why he (thankfully) did not make war with Iran but instead pursued the political route to deal with it. I really don't see how he would be willing to go to war with China if he isn't even willing to do it with Iran. Bombing Chinese islands would be an act of war, even if the US doesn't recognizes those islands.

 

[tower9]

The US would never do this ... it might try to provoke China into a war (although this imo is highly unlikely), but it would never start a war. One of the good things about Trump is he finally recognizes consequences of wars, with Iraq and Afghanistan draining the US for the past two decades. That's why he (thankfully) did not make war with Iran but instead pursued the political route to deal with it. I really don't see how he would be willing to go to war with China if he isn't even willing to do it with Iran.

Trump killed a major Iranian general and also provoked the Iranians militarily at other times. The only thing that prevented a war was Iranian restraint.

 

[Figaro]

Trump killed a major Iranian general and also provoked the Iranians militarily at other times. The only thing that prevented a war was Iranian restraint.

Because he calculated that Iran wasn't willing to launch a full scale war either. Killing a Chinese or a Russian general on the other hand would be a casus belli. So would bombing the Chinese islands. The US knows it can get away doing things against Iran because they know the capabilities of the Iranina military, and hence their leadership's ability to retaliate. The same cannot be said about China or Russia. The US knows more than well that bombing Chinese islands would instantly lead to a full scale war and possibly even a nuclear war.

 

[Feng Leng]

There is no such thing as a limited war if US fight China. If you think there is a war in two months time you better stop posting here and look for another country to move to. Asian Americans will be the first casualties of war in US.

Trump killed a major Iranian general and also provoked the Iranians militarily at other times. The only thing that prevented a war was Iranian restraint.

Because he calculated that Iran wasn't willing to launch a full scale war either. Killing a Chinese or a Russian general on the other hand would be a casus belli. So would bombing the Chinese islands. The US knows it can get away doing things against Iran because they know the capabilities of the Iranina military, and hence their leadership's ability to retaliate. The same cannot be said about China or Russia. The US knows more than well that bombing Chinese islands would instantly lead to a full scale war and possibly even a nuclear war.

It is highly likely that Trump will launch an attack on Scarborough Shoal, which is completely uninhabited although China claims it and Chinese ships patrol its waters. This controls the the possible escalation while serving as a purely political statement. This would be equivalent to the Israeli cyber attacks on Iran (nobody dies).

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/us-attack-on-scarborough-shoal-might-be-under-preparation.677560/

A much more aggressive version of this would be an attack on islands where China has forces. This would be equivalent to the assassination of Soleimani. This is much less likely though since US bases including Guam are highly exposed. For example the AIT building in Taipei could be hit by a deep penetrating bunker buster -- and that isn't even US / Japan / Korea territory.

 

[nahtanbob]

China has been S.Korea's biggest market for decades. China is one of major reasons for S.Korea's development. Actually if there weren't China's decades economy growth, S.Korea, Taiwan, Japan, even US would not enjoy today's prosperity. China was the main engine of world development.

Japan, Taiwan, S. Korea was all prosperous societies by 1990. Check their 1990 GDP stats
Without China USA was a basketcase

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Trump doesn't want to fight a war with North Korea or Iran because he knows those are distractions.

He will be willing to fight a limited war with China because he considers China the No. 1 threat, so if he can use military force to damage China's cities or infrastructure in order to slow down China's growth, isolate it, and destroy its economy for a generation, he would do it. That would be worth it.

there's no such thing as a limited US-China war. Nobody can control the scale of a direct attack on mainland China. US didn't strike the Soviets directly in 1962 and the Soviets only had 12-36 ICBMs back then.

 

[Adonis]

First of all, I need to make it clear that India is completely responsible for the recent China-India tensions. After Trump visited India in February, Modi had already made up his mind to join in anti China coalition. From April India army broke the status quo at LAC to build roads and bridges there.

Back to the topic. The best choice for India is, sitting on the fence(plan A). Keeping same distance between China and US. Good choice is joining in China’s side(plan B). Worst choice is Joining in US side(plan C).

1, Why is plan A the best choice? It will guarantee India to make profit from both sides. Both sides are willing to offer bribes to India. After joining in US side, India has lost its strategic flexibility. China of course will become its enemy. For US, it doesn’t have to please India because India has no way back. Before the day India decided to side with US, India was the boss. After, US was the boss.

2, Why plan B is better than plan C? 1) If India joins in China side, its position in the ally will be one of the leader countries. May be next to China. On US side however, India will be one of pawn countries like Australia, Canada, Japan. Maybe even worse. 2) China can help India more than US does. First, China has more free money than US to invest. Second, India’s economic structure is too different than US’. China’s technology transfer is more suitable for India’s industry demands. China is good at infrastructure, energy, electronics, labor-intensive industries. US is good at semiconductors, aircraft, high tech products. US is neither suitable for India’s development phase nor willing to transfer it technologies to India or other counties. The China-US trade war has proven that. 3) China is India’s neighbour. US is too far away. China can help India more, also can hurt India more. I mean much much more.

Modi is not a smart leader. He may want to become Indian version Deng Xiaoping. Who joined in US side during cold war and started a war with China’s neighbour Vietnam, Which demonstrated to the world that China was on US board. And China gained a huge reward by that. But things are different this time.

1, Soviet Union was barely a big economic power. It was an energy and materials supplier. And it’s a declining super power. Leaving it would not cause serious loss. Now, US is the declining super power and China is the biggest and growing industry country.

2, Boycotting Chinese products set a glass ceiling for India’s future development. India can boycott Chinese products because it is an importer. But if Indians have a wider and longer view, they should know China is the world biggest market and will be the biggest technologies transfer source. Giving up China is equal to giving up India’s future. “No China” is okay for present India, but not okay if India wants to upgrade its industry structure. The higher India’s development stage is, the harder the glass ceiling will be.

3, China will not collapse like Soviet Union did. China is way stronger than Soviet Union. Western countries have huge interests in China. Chinese leaders are much smarter than Soviet Union’s leaders. Compared with Russians, Chinese are much hardworking and good at science and economic activities. China will haunt India forever.

First uplift your existing allies and demonstrate through them that what ever you have blabbered above is actually true.....How many of your allies have benefited from you to the extent you have hypothesise above??

Truth is ... To be partner of a Communist state..you need to agree with their thinking...or you need to submit. I don't think any free country will do that unless it comes to submission...like you are pressing poor countries to do through your debt trap approach.

 

[kankan326]

Japan, Taiwan, S. Korea was all prosperous societies by 1990. Check their 1990 GDP stats
Without China USA was a basketcase

Prosperity in 1990 is not same concept of prosperity of 2019. China is the part of reason why they are in 2019 prosperity.

First uplift your existing allies and demonstrate through them that what ever you have blabbered above is actually true.....How many of your allies have benefited from you to the extent you have hypothesise above??

Truth is ... To be partner of a Communist state..you need to agree with their thinking...or you need to submit. I don't think any free country will do that unless it comes to submission...like you are pressing poor countries to do through your debt trap approach.

You forgot China itself was a poor country 10 years ago. You need to be patient to see how China will help others.