India, China Near Pact Aimed at Keeping Lid on Border Tension

[News_Editor]

Indian and Chinese government officials and military personnel are pictured at a checkpoint on the Sino-Indian border (Photo: Subir Bhaumik / The Irrawaddy)

NEW DELHI — India and China are close to an agreement to stop tension on their contested border touching off confrontation, while they try to figure out a way to break decades-old stalemate on overlapping claims to long stretches of the Himalayas.

The border defense cooperation pact that diplomats are racing to finalize ahead of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to China next week is a small step forward in a complicated relationship marked by booming economic ties but also growing distrust.

In May, the two armies ended a three-week standoff in the western Himalayas after Chinese troops set up a camp at least 10 km (6 miles) inside territory claimed by India, triggering a public outcry and calls that India should stand up to its powerful neighbor.

China denied that troops had crossed into Indian territory.

Under the new agreement, the two nuclear-armed sides will give notice of patrols along the ill-defined border. They will ensure that patrols do not “tail†each other to reduce the chance of confrontation.

The two armies, strung out along the 4,000-km (2,500-mile) border from the high altitude Ladakh plateau in the west to the jungles of Arunachal Pradesh in the east, have also agreed to set up a hotline between top ranking officers, in addition to existing brigade-level contacts.

“The key issue is maintaining peace and tranquility on the border,†said an Indian government official.

The border defense cooperation agreement is built on existing confidence-building measures and is designed to ensure that patrolling along the Line of Actual Control, as the unsettled border is called, does not escalate into an unintended skirmish, he said.

“Barring last minute problems, there should be an agreement. It’s a question of crossing the Ts and dotting the Is,†the officer said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

India and China fought a brief border war in 1962 and since then ties have been mired in distrust. China lays claims to more than 90,000 square km (35,000 sq miles) of land in the eastern sector. India disputes that and instead says China occupies 38,000 sq km (14,600 sq miles) of territory on the Aksai Chin plateau in the west.

A Chinese airline last week blocked two Indian archers from disputed Arunachal Pradesh from travelling to China, souring the mood in India just days before Singh travels to Beijing.

“The fundamental problem they are not tackling is defining the Line of Actual Control and then a settlement of the border,†said Srikanth Kondapalli, a China expert at New Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University.

Beefing Up Defenses

One reason tension has risen is that both countries are upgrading civil and military infrastructure on either side of the frontier.

China has vastly improved its roads and is building or extending airfields on its side of the border in Tibet. It has placed nuclear-capable intermediate missiles in the area and deployed about 300,000 troops across the Tibetan plateau, according to a 2010 Pentagon report.

India has also woken up and is in the midst of a 10-year plan to scale up its side of the border with a network of roads and airfields. In July, the cabinet cleared the raising of a new mountain corps comprising about 50,000 troops to be deployed on the Chinese border.

“China has developed the border infrastructure so intricately that its roads and tracks even in high mountainous regions look like fingers running down your spine,†said retired Lieutenant General Prakash Katoch who commanded the Indian army’s Special Forces wing.

Chinese nuclear and missile assistance to Pakistan as well as a widening trade deficit in China’s favor have added to Indian fear about encirclement. China, on the other hand, is concerned about Tibetan activists using India as a base to further their separatist aims.

“It strikes me that many of the usual grievances have grown in prominence over the past several months: Chinese incursions on the border, the issuance of irregular visas, continued Chinese support for Pakistan’s nuclear program, and so on,†said Shashank Joshi, a fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London.

“It also seems that India is eager to keep these grievances in check.â€

The post India, China Near Pact Aimed at Keeping Lid on Border Tension appeared first on The Irrawaddy Magazine.

Source: Irrawaddy.org

[Publicus]

It's good to see India and the CCP-PRC can make agreements pertaining to their border disputes that had produced a PRChinese initiated brief war in 1962, when the CCP-PRC made a surprise without warning army invasion of northern India.

Now however, the fact India is nuclear armed and capable means the CCP in Beijing will tread a bit more lightly in the area. Still, as the OP points out, Beijing has positioned 300,000 army troops across the disputed border in occupied Tibet. That's a large and lethal military force by any standard, and constitutes somewhere between 15% to 20% of the PLA's total army force.

Beijing's provocative territorial claims against sovereign Indian territory in Arunachal Pradesh state will remain a danger point no matter what agreements may be made concerning the Line of Actual Control, i.e., the disputed border. India will never submit to surrendering the 90,000 sq km Beijing wants for itself as a buffer between Indian supporters of the Dalai Lama and Tibet.

Very much to the irritation and anger of Beijing, the Dalai Lama has been in northernmost India for decades, where monks and other Buddhists from Tibet can cross over to visit him without much travel or difficulty. It's a porous border along the Himalayas so the back and forth between Tibet and Arunachai Pradesh occurs without hindrance by CCP-PRC border/immigration officials. That's not to say it's an easy journey that's without risk or danger.

As is clear from the news article below, which appeared in the Taiwan press, India fully intends to keep an eye on troops of the CCP-PRC and the Pakistanis as well.

Good idea.

Unstated in this news report is that the mini drones are Israeli made and were purchased from Israel, which also will provide technical assistance to the Indians as they have no experience with drones.

Indian mini drones deployed to patrol Chinese border

I

A Heron unmanned aerial vehicle operated by Indian Air Force. (Internet Photo)

The Northern Command of the Indian Army has recently purchased 49 miniature unmanned aerial vehicles to patrol its border region with China and Pakistan, according to the Mumbai-based Daily News and Analysis.

The Indian Army will deploy the drones to carry out reconnaissance mission over its disputed border areas after 50 soldiers from China's People's Liberation Army were found setting up camp in the remote region of eastern Ladakh, which is also claimed by India, on the night of Apr. 15.

The drones are the true "game changers" in India's territorial dispute with China, the paper said, adding that a new 72,000-strong Mountain Strike Corp has been established in the region to prevent a potential Chinese attack.

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1101&MainCatID=11&id=20131018000052

[boomerangutang]

I can't agree that it's rather easy to cross from Tibet in to India. I just read a first hand account of refugees, mostly boys, who were attempting the crossing, and suffered a high mortality rate, from freezing and lack of supplies.

Anyhow, as far as China and borders go, I'd trust the Chinese about as far as I could toss a full grown panda.

[Publicus]

I can't agree that it's rather easy to cross from Tibet in to India. I just read a first hand account of refugees, mostly boys, who were attempting the crossing, and suffered a high mortality rate, from freezing and lack of supplies.

Anyhow, as far as China and borders go, I'd trust the Chinese about as far as I could toss a full grown panda.

Your point is well taken, but my post focuses on the facility travelers have in avoiding border guards and immi checkpoints, and I do note the journey is not without risk or danger.

I didn't get in to the specifics of it because the focus of the post was the drones and Beijing's territorial aggression.

I'm among those of us who are glad to see India negotiating with Beijing but simultaneously standing up to Beijing.

[folium]

It's good to see India and the CCP-PRC can make agreements pertaining to their border disputes that had produced a PRChinese initiated brief war in 1962, when the CCP-PRC made a surprise without warning army invasion of northern India.

Now however, the fact India is nuclear armed and capable means the CCP in Beijing will tread a bit more lightly in the area. Still, as the OP points out, Beijing has positioned 300,000 army troops across the disputed border in occupied Tibet. That's a large and lethal military force by any standard, and constitutes somewhere between 15% to 20% of the PLA's total army force.

Beijing's provocative territorial claims against sovereign Indian territory in Arunachal Pradesh state will remain a danger point no matter what agreements may be made concerning the Line of Actual Control, i.e., the disputed border. India will never submit to surrendering the 90,000 sq km Beijing wants for itself as a buffer between Indian supporters of the Dalai Lama and Tibet.

Very much to the irritation and anger of Beijing, the Dalai Lama has been in northernmost India for decades, where monks and other Buddhists from Tibet can cross over to visit him without much travel or difficulty. It's a porous border along the Himalayas so the back and forth between Tibet and Arunachai Pradesh occurs without hindrance by CCP-PRC border/immigration officials. That's not to say it's an easy journey that's without risk or danger.

As is clear from the news article below, which appeared in the Taiwan press, India fully intends to keep an eye on troops of the CCP-PRC and the Pakistanis as well.

Good idea.

Unstated in this news report is that the mini drones are Israeli made and were purchased from Israel, which also will provide technical assistance to the Indians as they have no experience with drones.

Indian mini drones deployed to patrol Chinese border

I

A Heron unmanned aerial vehicle operated by Indian Air Force. (Internet Photo)

The Northern Command of the Indian Army has recently purchased 49 miniature unmanned aerial vehicles to patrol its border region with China and Pakistan, according to the Mumbai-based Daily News and Analysis.

The Indian Army will deploy the drones to carry out reconnaissance mission over its disputed border areas after 50 soldiers from China's People's Liberation Army were found setting up camp in the remote region of eastern Ladakh, which is also claimed by India, on the night of Apr. 15.

The drones are the true "game changers" in India's territorial dispute with China, the paper said, adding that a new 72,000-strong Mountain Strike Corp has been established in the region to prevent a potential Chinese attack.

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1101&MainCatID=11&id=20131018000052

Oh dear...sorry to be nitpicky but your Taiwanese source got a few details wrong.

The Heron is by no means a "mini-drone". It has a wing span of almost 17metres. See full spec below.

http://www.unmanned.co.uk/autonomous-unmanned-vehicles/uav-data-specifications-fact-sheets/heron-1-specifications/

Herons were first bought by the Indian Air Force in 2004 though not delivered till 2009 and have been used extensively along their northern and western boundaries since. They have bought further batches and now operate some 60 Herons (that includes those flown by all 3 services).

Similar to many other armed forces India has had experience with UAVs since the 1990's, deploying the Nishant in 1999.

Apparently due to a spat with Israel over sea defence missile systems the Indians are now developing home grown Rustom UAVs to eventually supercede the Heron fleet, which seems remarkably short-sighted as IAI is probably the world leader in UAV design.

Again in line with many armed forces India wants to equip its units down to battalion level with a full suite of UAVs covering all roles from combat to surveillance. Mini drones (eg the 10cm Black Hornet) tend to be used at the unit level and by recce and special forces. It would some challenge to stuff a Heron into your bergen (backpack)!

[folium]

It's good to see India and the CCP-PRC can make agreements pertaining to their border disputes that had produced a PRChinese initiated brief war in 1962, when the CCP-PRC made a surprise without warning army invasion of northern India.

Now however, the fact India is nuclear armed and capable means the CCP in Beijing will tread a bit more lightly in the area. Still, as the OP points out, Beijing has positioned 300,000 army troops across the disputed border in occupied Tibet. That's a large and lethal military force by any standard, and constitutes somewhere between 15% to 20% of the PLA's total army force.

Beijing's provocative territorial claims against sovereign Indian territory in Arunachal Pradesh state will remain a danger point no matter what agreements may be made concerning the Line of Actual Control, i.e., the disputed border. India will never submit to surrendering the 90,000 sq km Beijing wants for itself as a buffer between Indian supporters of the Dalai Lama and Tibet.

Very much to the irritation and anger of Beijing, the Dalai Lama has been in northernmost India for decades, where monks and other Buddhists from Tibet can cross over to visit him without much travel or difficulty. It's a porous border along the Himalayas so the back and forth between Tibet and Arunachai Pradesh occurs without hindrance by CCP-PRC border/immigration officials. That's not to say it's an easy journey that's without risk or danger.

Oh dear Part 2...

I fear you are muddling up your Pradeshs. Confusing as there are no less than 5 Indian provinces with a Pradesh suffix.

Arunachal Pradesh (or South Tibet as China refers to it) is at the extreme eastern end of the Indian stretch of Himalayas. The Dalai Lama is based in the charming old cantonment/hill station of Dharamsala in Himachal Pradesh at the western, opposite end of the Indian stretch of Himalayas.

The Sino-Indian war of 1962 was not quite the unprovoked Chinese assault that you hint at. Neville Maxwell, the Times correspondent in New Delhi during that war summed it up as the "hopelessly ill-prepared Indian Army provoked China on orders emanating from Delhi paid the price for its misadventure in men, money and national humiliation". His book "India's China Wars" is worth a read. Certainly Nehru's rashly aggressive Forward Policy along the AP border, coupled with his neglect of India's armed forces set the scene.

The main territorial loss for India in 1962 was the Aksai Chin area of Jammu & Kashmir, but this icy, high altitude wasteland is hardly a prized possession for anyone. While the PLA occcupied much of Arunachal Pradesh it then withdrew voluntarily to the McMahon Line (a colonial era attempt to designate the boundary between Tibet and British India, but subsequently rejected by both China and the British-run Government of India), and this border has never been finalized similar to the western end.

While we are talking Tibet, perhaps it plus Xinjiang might be some of the only places that might see advantage in an uncontrolled collapse of the CCP/PRC. Unfortunately Xinjiang might rapidly become a Chechen style Al Qaida outpost, training ground...perhaps not such a great outcome. At least Tibet might be able to break free like some of the former Soviet Republics....

[Scott]

Post removed.

[LawrenceChee]

Another good day for China and India.

It takes 2 calm heads to understand that there will always be right wing parties that like to settle on a point while overlooking the bigger picture of collaboration

I am very hopeful that a calm and collected Premier Li will continue to be a influence in the regional ties.

He is a good replacement for PM Wen as their styles are very non confrontational and consultative while not appearing weak in the face of criticism which builds up national pride

I am keen to see if he and Abe can break the deadlock in the other territorial dispute.

Time and patience is the call of the day in events like this ...less haste and more tolerance is needed by all.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[boomerangutang]

Another good day for China and India.

It takes 2 calm heads to understand that there will always be right wing parties that like to settle on a point while overlooking the bigger picture of collaboration

I am very hopeful that a calm and collected Premier Li will continue to be a influence in the regional ties.

He is a good replacement for PM Wen as their styles are very non confrontational and consultative while not appearing weak in the face of criticism which builds up national pride

I am keen to see if he and Abe can break the deadlock in the other territorial dispute.

Time and patience is the call of the day in events like this ...less haste and more tolerance is needed by all.

As calm and collected as Li appears on the world stage, he's still the leader of a country which is militarily occupying Tibet. If you don't believe me, then imagine if the PLA were not in Tibet, and the Tibetans (not the hordes of Han who have been shipped there relatively recently) were allowed a free and fair election - to decide the fate of their country. If you're realistic, you'll admit the vote would be overwhelmingly in favor of independence, with their rightful leader at the helm.

reason for edit: one word misspelled

[LawrenceChee]

Another good day for China and India.

It takes 2 calm heads to understand that there will always be right wing parties that like to settle on a point while overlooking the bigger picture of collaboration

I am very hopeful that a calm and collected Premier Li will continue to be a influence in the regional ties.

He is a good replacement for PM Wen as their styles are very non confrontational and consultative while not appearing weak in the face of criticism which builds up national pride

I am keen to see if he and Abe can break the deadlock in the other territorial dispute.

Time and patience is the call of the day in events like this ...less haste and more tolerance is needed by all.

 

 

As calm and collected as Li appears on the world stage, he's still the leader of a country which is militarily occupying Tibet. If you don't believe me, then imagine if the PLA were not in Tibet, and the Tibetans (not the hordes of Han who have been shipped there relatively recently) were allowed a free and fair election - to decide the fate of their country. If you're realistic, you'll admit the vote would be overwhelmingly in favor of independence, with their rightful leader at the helm.

 

reason for edit: one word misspelled 

This is an issue that warrants more examination.

I am not a Tibetan expert but looking at the history between various Chinese Emperors and dynasties and the current geo-political moments, both have valid points that stand the test of ownership. This seems consistent with most western countries having a hold on their current territories which seem to have similar traits

I don't believe a vote would solve the problem simply.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Credo]

I am not sure if Tibet is relevant to this topic, but I think the big problem for China with regard to Tibet isn't that they occupied it, but that they did it at a time when doing so was going out of fashion. Had they done it 100 years earlier, no problem.

[boomerangutang]

As calm and collected as Li appears on the world stage, he's still the leader of a country which is militarily occupying Tibet. If you don't believe me, then imagine if the PLA were not in Tibet, and the Tibetans (not the hordes of Han who have been shipped there relatively recently) were allowed a free and fair election - to decide the fate of their country. If you're realistic, you'll admit the vote would be overwhelmingly in favor of independence, with their rightful leader at the helm.

This is an issue that warrants more examination.

I am not a Tibetan expert but looking at the history between various Chinese Emperors and dynasties and the current geo-political moments, both have valid points that stand the test of ownership. This seems consistent with most western countries having a hold on their current territories which seem to have similar traits

I don't believe a vote would solve the problem simply.

Tibet (or the Occupied Territory of Tibet, if you will) shares a border with India, so I believe it's on-topic. It's not possible to have a plebiscite or vote among Tibetans re; the Tibet issue. It's less likely than the Turks or Iraqis allowing the Kurds to vote on having an independence state. Tibet has had the earmarks of a sovereign country for hundreds of years before the Chinese rolled in tanks and troops to take it over in the 1950's. The Chinese sheeple can't fathom that, because they've been so successfully brainwashed, but outsiders who care to study the history of that region can see it clearly. It's no surprise why any real info about Tibet's pre-occupation history is strictly outlawed in China, both online and elsewhere.

[LawrenceChee]

http://asianhistory.about.com/od/china/a/TibetandChina.htm

This is an interesting article as it presents the many facets of the relationship between Tibet and China between its various dynasties and Dalai Lama

China recognized and created the Dalai Lama position in the Ming Dynasty and accepted that as a spiritual leader to China then. Chinese assisting Tibet to drive out the Nepalese and Gurkhas , British Invasion of Tibet to counter the Russians threat and protecting India, and also the current relationship is intertwined in history. Tibet at one time invaded China up to present day Xian which is just hours from Beijing.

Even today, the fraught relationship between India and China means Tibet remains military an important outpost to China which means they will not give it up easily if they feel there is an impending threat from India much the same way USA hold on to Guam for military reasons for its pacific war theatre rather than any meaningful historical or cultural reasons.

Although there are groups that like to focus on the recent military intervention in 1950s, a closer review of the history of the relationship will reveal many other elements that makes the relationship so intertwined and not one side has a real resolution.

The author finishes the article well saying the next 100 years will provide more twists.

I concur with the author ...the relationship is hard to define.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[boomerangutang]

It's funny, the post above looks at the article, and summerizes the article in about.co from a Chinese ownership stance. I look at the same article and come to a v. different view. Here are some excerpts from the article.

"Tibet and China signed a peace treaty in 821 or 822, which delineated the border between the two empires. The Tibetan Empire would concentrate on its Central Asian holdings for the next several decades, before splitting into several small, fractious kingdoms."

"Three years later, the Chinese and Tibetans signed a treaty that laid out the boundary line between the two nations. It would remain in force until 1910."

"The British invaded Tibet in 1903 with 10,000 men, and took Lhasa the following year. Thereupon, they concluded another treaty with the Tibetans, as well as Chinese, Nepalese and Bhutanese representatives, which gave the British themselves some control over Tibets affairs."

"The Chinese Revolution swept away the Qing Dynasty in 1911, and the Tibetans promptly expelled all Chinese troops from Lhasa."

"Thubten Gyatso ...issued a proclamation that was distributed across Tibet, rejecting Chinese control and stating that 'We are a small, religious, and independent nation.'"

"The Dalai Lama took control of Tibet's internal and external governance in 1913, negotiating directly with foreign powers, and reforming Tibet's judicial, penal, and educational systems."

The Simla Convention (1914)

Representatives of Great Britain, China, and Tibet met in 1914 to negotiate a treaty marking out the boundary lines between India and its northern neighbors.

The Simla Convention granted China secular control over "Inner Tibet," (also known as Qinghai Province) while recognizing the autonomy of "Outer Tibet" under the Dalai Lama's rule. Both China and Britain promised to "respect the territorial integrity of [Tibet], and abstain from interference in the administration of Outer Tibet."

China walked out of the conference without signing the treaty after Britain laid claim to the Tawang area of southern Tibet, which is now part of the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. Tibet and Britain both signed the treaty.

As a result, China has never agreed to India's rights in northern Arunachal Pradesh (Tawang), and the two nations went to war over the area in 1962. The boundary dispute still has not been resolved.

China also claims sovereignty over all of Tibet, while the Tibetan government-in-exile points to the Chinese failure to sign the Simla Convention as proof that both Inner and Outer Tibet legally remain under the Dalai Lama's jurisdiction.

Boomerangutang adds: Saying Buddhism came to Tibet from China is almost laughable. Tibet is much closer to the birthplace of Buddhism (Nepal) than any part of China. Buddhist Pilgrims coming over the Himalayas had to go through Tibet to get to China. Google 'Marpa.'

Tibet is much closer allied with Mongolia than with China, both from family ties, religion and historical inter-action. Saying Tibet is part of China is like saying Mexico or Canada are part of the US, because there have been some interactions and wars. The Tibet/China debacle would be ridiculous were it not really happening. We're witnessing the grave consequences (self-immoliations) - yet most of the damage we're not hearing or seeing: thousands of Tibetans held in dungeons for thought crimes.

[LawrenceChee]

I agree with Credo that had China done all these earlier ...it would not be such a complex issue as it is today.

The current focus on human rights issue from the west puts China in a bind where it cannot be given the same latitude as some other western powers during their colonial conquests in the pre-google and YouTube days ...

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[boomerangutang]

I agree with Credo that had China done all these earlier ...it would not be such a complex issue as it is today.

The current focus on human rights issue from the west puts China in a bind where it cannot be given the same latitude as some other western powers during their colonial conquests in the pre-google and YouTube days ...

Yes, people to tend view the world from a contemporary perspective. Slavery was generally accepted up until about 150 years ago, now it's not accepted anywhere, though there are still slave-like scenarios in many countries. Similarly, imperialist impulses are not accepted - as they generally were up to a hundred or so years ago. That's part of the reason the take-over of Kuwait by Iraq was such a big deal. Too bad for China, the world won't stand by as it continues to try and grab territory. Perhaps that realization (by Chinese leaders) was a factor in why their authorities chose to be step back and adopt a reasonable approach re; their border spats with India.

[LawrenceChee]

I agree with Credo that had China done all these earlier ...it would not be such a complex issue as it is today.

The current focus on human rights issue from the west puts China in a bind where it cannot be given the same latitude as some other western powers during their colonial conquests in the pre-google and YouTube days ...

Yes, people to tend view the world from a contemporary perspective. Slavery was generally accepted up until about 150 years ago, now it's not accepted anywhere, though there are still slave-like scenarios in many countries. Similarly, imperialist impulses are not accepted - as they generally were up to a hundred or so years ago. That's part of the reason the take-over of Kuwait by Iraq was such a big deal. Too bad for China, the world won't stand by as it continues to try and grab territory. Perhaps that realization (by Chinese leaders) was a factor in why their authorities chose to be step back and adopt a reasonable approach re; their border spats with India.

And yet as the world see China manages the dispute with India, opening a dialogue and sealing a hotline with Vietnam and even today the forum agreeing on the importance of looking at similarities rather than allow the media to portray the quarrel between Japan / China over the disputed islands ...they still get no credit.

It's diplomacy, patience and talking at the lower levels that keep it open while the leaders spit it out at each other to keep the nationalists happy.

Perhaps there is a thing or two the world can learn from China.

It is taking its own stance and resolving its own issues with its neighbor at its own time and not at the timetable of the west.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Publicus]

Another good day for China and India.

It takes 2 calm heads to understand that there will always be right wing parties that like to settle on a point while overlooking the bigger picture of collaboration

I am very hopeful that a calm and collected Premier Li will continue to be a influence in the regional ties.

He is a good replacement for PM Wen as their styles are very non confrontational and consultative while not appearing weak in the face of criticism which builds up national pride

I am keen to see if he and Abe can break the deadlock in the other territorial dispute.

Time and patience is the call of the day in events like this ...less haste and more tolerance is needed by all.

As calm and collected as Li appears on the world stage, he's still the leader of a country which is militarily occupying Tibet. If you don't believe me, then imagine if the PLA were not in Tibet, and the Tibetans (not the hordes of Han who have been shipped there relatively recently) were allowed a free and fair election - to decide the fate of their country. If you're realistic, you'll admit the vote would be overwhelmingly in favor of independence, with their rightful leader at the helm.

reason for edit: one word misspelled

This is an issue that warrants more examination.

I am not a Tibetan expert but looking at the history between various Chinese Emperors and dynasties and the current geo-political moments, both have valid points that stand the test of ownership. This seems consistent with most western countries having a hold on their current territories which seem to have similar traits

I don't believe a vote would solve the problem simply.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

There are people who don't believe in voting or in democracy.

Their fear is that a vote might settle some matters of significant differences.

Settle them against their point of view.

Such people are instead authoritarians, i.e., dictators.

They prefer the quiet, subtle approach - sarcasm/on - such as prison camps, forced re-education, oppression of beliefs, suppression of

cultural values and similar insults and offenses.

http://asianhistory.about.com/od/china/a/TibetandChina.htm

This is an interesting article as it presents the many facets of the relationship between Tibet and China between its various dynasties and Dalai Lama

China recognized and created the Dalai Lama position in the Ming Dynasty and accepted that as a spiritual leader to China then. Chinese assisting Tibet to drive out the Nepalese and Gurkhas , British Invasion of Tibet to counter the Russians threat and protecting India, and also the current relationship is intertwined in history. Tibet at one time invaded China up to present day Xian which is just hours from Beijing.

Even today, the fraught relationship between India and China means Tibet remains military an important outpost to China which means they will not give it up easily if they feel there is an impending threat from India much the same way USA hold on to Guam for military reasons for its pacific war theatre rather than any meaningful historical or cultural reasons.

Although there are groups that like to focus on the recent military intervention in 1950s, a closer review of the history of the relationship will reveal many other elements that makes the relationship so intertwined and not one side has a real resolution.

The author finishes the article well saying the next 100 years will provide more twists.

I concur with the author ...the relationship is hard to define.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

No people who are occupied are going to wait 100 years to see how things develop or turn out to be 100 years from now.

That's absurd and unacceptable thinking and logic. It's the thinking and severely flawed logic of the occupying force, the CCP-PRC, making ridiculous excuses and offering repugnant rationales.

(In fact only the old fashioned Chinese continue to think in centuries. The younger, contemporary PRChinese think more in decades, same as in the United States - we tend (strongly) to think in decades, in respect to our own young history especially.)

Neither do the Indians nor the Tibetans think in centuries any more. That's antiquated thinking and, in the particular instance of offering a rationale to occupy Tibet, offensive.

CCP-PRC occupation of Tibet remains a serious issue between New Delhi and Beijing.

[LawrenceChee]

This is adversely true that people don't always believe drones, attacks in the dead of the night to snatch "terrorists" , bombing with no accuracy is the way to go for some.

How do we resolve this ? China declares in a term of a few years they will give up Tibet, I suppose the west will come in with aid like they did with East Timor, ask all of the Han Chinese to return to the mainland and everyone is happy ?

In a perfect world this will happen and no one is ever upset by the status quo.

China is not a pushover or a bully. It is big enough to state their points and what is important to them and their needs. It may not make everyone happy but who ever does with their own nationalist policies ?

Every country has a bear on its back and while not all the same it's a bearing on the difficulty of governing fairly ..USA with their NSA , financial and closing the govt mess ...the Aussies with their problem of fair treatment and compensation to the Aborigines, turning away boat people and the deplorable conditions in their camps.

There is no easy solution and it's not not shrinking from ones responsibility

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Publicus]

This is adversely true that people don't always believe drones, attacks in the dead of the night to snatch "terrorists" , bombing with no accuracy is the way to go for some.

How do we resolve this ? China declares in a term of a few years they will give up Tibet, I suppose the west will come in with aid like they did with East Timor, ask all of the Han Chinese to return to the mainland and everyone is happy ?

In a perfect world this will happen and no one is ever upset by the status quo.

China is not a pushover or a bully. It is big enough to state their points and what is important to them and their needs. It may not make everyone happy but who ever does with their own nationalist policies ?

Every country has a bear on its back and while not all the same it's a bearing on the difficulty of governing fairly ..USA with their NSA , financial and closing the govt mess ...the Aussies with their problem of fair treatment and compensation to the Aborigines, turning away boat people and the deplorable conditions in their camps.

There is no easy solution and it's not not shrinking from ones responsibility

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

There's no way to justify the CCP-PRC invasion and occupation of Tibet.

There's no way to justify the CCP-PRC destruction of a country and its culture, society, civilization.

The CCP says it is bringing civilization to Tibet.

The fact is the CCP-PRC is a Marxist-Maoist-Leninist dictatorship that, in the 21st century is a censoring, punishing, elitist single party state and fascist dictatorship that detests democracy and human rights, and believes literally it has the inherent birthright to lord over all of the world irrespective of the rule of consensual international law.

The CCP-PRC is extreme, and extremely dangerous. To the CCP, Tibet is important in itself, but Tibet also is important beyond itself. To the CCP Tibet is its workshop for the world.

[LawrenceChee]

http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2012/results/

When I can see Iraq, Afghanistan all moving up from the last place of this index, maybe many can understand the reasons behind the invasion of western forces in the hope of bringing democracy and a better life for the people there vs the current destruction and disruption to normal life and the governance civil mess.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Credo]

It's a nice deflection, but I don't think those countries were invaded to bring democracy and a better life. They were invaded because they presented what some some considered a clear and present danger to the present way of life.

I don't know that the same can be said for India or Tibet.

[Publicus]

http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2012/results/

When I can see Iraq, Afghanistan all moving up from the last place of this index, maybe many can understand the reasons behind the invasion of western forces in the hope of bringing democracy and a better life for the people there vs the current destruction and disruption to normal life and the governance civil mess.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

It's a nice deflection, but I don't think those countries were invaded to bring democracy and a better life. They were invaded because they presented what some some considered a clear and present danger to the present way of life.

I don't know that the same can be said for India or Tibet.

There anyway aren't going to be any more Vietnam in the jungles of SE Asia wars or Iraq or Afghanistan in the dessert wars, as the US Army is being declassed under the new AirSea Battle strategic war doctrine of the Pentagan, which is supported by the Congress at the initiative of the Obama administration.

The present new AirSea Battle strategy integrates Air Forces and Naval Forces into a synergistic high tech military supported by Marine combat forces. The AirSea Battle strategy puts US Air and Naval forces in a standoff position from the land mass of any continent from which it can use stealth warplanes, stealth warships, missiles, stealth submarine forces. The Army is declassed to a support role of cleaning up and occupying territory already neutralized by the AirSea Battle war plan.

The AirSea Battle strategic doctrine applies to either a global war or to a single particular battle. It includes cyberwarfare, electromagnetic laser and pulsing warfare, inner space warfare and other electronic means of warfare.

Each India and the CCP-PRC continue to have the Army as their primary military force which continues to consume up to half of each country's military budget and resources. Each government, however, is moving more towards air and naval warfare, just not to the extent the United States is moving in that direction.

The CCP-PRC is further along than is India in creating an architecture of A2/AD defense systems combined with missile based offensive capabilities. A2/AD refers to the modern high tech missile defense systems intended to deny access to the air and sea areas, respectively, off the coasts of each country - Anti-Access, Area Denial.

In India and in the CCP-PRC, transforming to A2/AD from having the army consume half the military budget is to turn the Titanic, whereas in the United States it's a matter of bringing in a couple of new computers.

The Pentagon's new strategic doctrine is that there are no more land wars - that there are, in a manner of speaking, only star wars.

[LawrenceChee]

Exactly.

Someone doing up the budgets has finally realized since you never win on the ground, it's better to have inaccurate missiles flying in ...at least on the TV screen it looks rather impressive with everything blowing up ...a hit and run strategy is a better descrip.

Sun Tzu art of war will tell you ...you win nothing in that kind of war

I would suggest a better resolution is just not attack.

Have a strong defense like Singapore , acts as a deterrent and have no eternal bills to pay for someone's else issues. Each year that country balances the bills with a surplus and surprising people are seem to get on life okay without the need to own a firearm.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Publicus]

Exactly.

Someone doing up the budgets has finally realized since you never win on the ground, it's better to have inaccurate missiles flying in ...at least on the TV screen it looks rather impressive with everything blowing up ...a hit and run strategy is a better descrip.

Sun Tzu art of war will tell you ...you win nothing in that kind of war

I would suggest a better resolution is just not attack.

Have a strong defense like Singapore , acts as a deterrent and have no eternal bills to pay for someone's else issues. Each year that country balances the bills with a surplus and surprising people are seem to get on life okay without the need to own a firearm.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Singapore is a city state of 4 million people, the same population as New Zealand or the city of Los Angeles.

Sun Tzu??

China was conquered and ruled for centuries by each the Mongols and the Manchus, while the 19th century Qing Dynasty twice got whupped by the Brits and carved up by the European Powers along with Japan.

China got overrun in World War II which itself was a rather unpleasant interruption of the nasty civil war that began before it and ended after it.

It can be suggested all of the foregoing and more is strong evidence Sun Tzu didn't know rice from beans. Either that or your emperors, to include the current crowd of CCP klutzes in Beijing, don't know Sun Tzu from sun set.

It's been said that to get intelligence information about a beach for a landing the Russians send in two dozen muscle men to dig up the beach and take sand away for assessment and evaluation, that the Chinese send in 500 men and women dressed like tourists and each picks up a grain of sand, and that the United States takes satellite topography reconnaissance and quietly pays the town's locals for their personal knowledge of the beach.

Which two country's nationals are most likely to get noticed?

[LawrenceChee]

Missing the point again.

Citizens vote for a government that can generate trade, build up infrastructure, get healthcare and education up and build a strong military to deter attacks. Balancing of budgets is a plus.

Mocking the size of Singapore is silly. The scale is replication and some government have failed not because of the size but bi partisan politics and they think the average joe actually enjoy watching the theatrics

I doubt there are many Americans who wants to see another " victory parade" ...they want their dads, brothers , lovers at home enjoying life with the family with lower taxes and a high standard of living.

The Indians and Chinese get it ...trade and feeding your family is more important than "regional wars" ...however the media like to escalate the scenarios and get people feeling its tense here.

I'm in Beijing now and people look as relaxed as possible on an afternoon stroll in Wangfujing Street. Trade everywhere, shopping bags, hotels are full.

No sign of the fenqing, Indian, Japan or USA haters anywhere. Just another day in Asia.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Publicus]

Missing the point again.

Citizens vote for a government that can generate trade, build up infrastructure, get healthcare and education up and build a strong military to deter attacks. Balancing of budgets is a plus.

Mocking the size of Singapore is silly. The scale is replication and some government have failed not because of the size but bi partisan politics and they think the average joe actually enjoy watching the theatrics

I doubt there are many Americans who wants to see another " victory parade" ...they want their dads, brothers , lovers at home enjoying life with the family with lower taxes and a high standard of living.

The Indians and Chinese get it ...trade and feeding your family is more important than "regional wars" ...however the media like to escalate the scenarios and get people feeling its tense here.

I'm in Beijing now and people look as relaxed as possible on an afternoon stroll in Wangfujing Street. Trade everywhere, shopping bags, hotels are full.

No sign of the fenqing, Indian, Japan or USA haters anywhere. Just another day in Asia.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I lived and worked in the CCP-PRC for four years, talked with and got to know those people.

Need I say more?

And your experiences in the United States are.........?

Sometimes I think there are people who walk around with a "Kick Me" sign on 'em.

[folium]

Funny I thought this thread was about reducing tensions along the India China border zones rather than how long it takes to make an expert, but ho-hum...

Meanwhile a more interesting line would revolve around settling these highly ill-defined borders which anyway involve largely unimportant chunks of real estate. The Aksai Chin is a high altitude desert with no resident population apart from the military and serves no strategic purpose. The link below highlights this point plus focusing on the need to remove these distractions and focus on less tension and more trade.

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?207284

[Credo]

If it's of no importance, then why are they disputing it? If no one lives there, it seems like an ideal place for the two militaries to play out this dispute.

[folium]

If it's of no importance, then why are they disputing it? If no one lives there, it seems like an ideal place for the two militaries to play out this dispute.

Old story of good fences make good neighbours in reverse. The borders in both eastern and Western Indian Himalayas have never been clearly defined and agreed on, thus creating the chance of conflict.

Not sure why you would want the military to "play out this dispute" especially when all conflicts have in the end to be solved politically. The role of the military us to hold the ring until the politicians do their job. Postings to the Aksai Chin or Siachen Glacier are more about surviving the elements than confronting any human enemy.