The Chinese are very focussed and their strategy is beyond India. Prior to marching into Tibet they signed the Pancsheel agreement with India thus neutralising all issues between China and India,who at that time was completely blinded for whatever reason. Then China got a first hand measure of the Indian capabilities and fire power. Sure that Tibet will not receive any assistance from India they marched in and butchered the peace loving Tibetans and carried on such massive destruction. India kept quiet. However,I am proud that India granted asylum to the Dalai Lama and the Tibetans and allowed them to settle down. However,every now and then we read of Chinese incursions into Arunachal which the army is quick to deny - what really is the truth. India must realise that China will never give up their claim - why should they as they can swipe India anytime. They will continue the dialogue and carry on trade and ensure that the Tibert issue is never raised and at the opportune time act.
I couldn't understand China's intentions. It is the real threat, I know, but what are we, India, doing to counter that? It seems that we will be at the receiving end if something happens between China and India.
At least I am happy that there are concerned citizens who think and ask questions. I don't know when our country's establishment start to take things seriously?
RE:What excatly is China's ambition? and what's why is not India doing anything about it?
by raja on Jun 01, 2007 11:20 AM Permalink
sir, i think they want dalilama,s parallelel govt should be removed from india,i read from some websites that u cannot get any information from chinese because their genes is like that and also their main concern is their country's soverignity---they are more concerned abt tibet--they dont want to loose at any cost--i think they want to pressurise us--- once us president asked one question to mao that "we have changed the world"--he told usa aligns with communist china but mao told --i have not changed rural part of china but i have chaned only urban part of china ---they are more dangerous when u create enemity with them --they are more friendly if u have real friendship with them i believe even china wont believe russia because during 1962 war russia supported india
RE:What excatly is China's ambition? and what's why is not India doing anything about it?
by Rajat on Jun 01, 2007 11:35 AM Permalink
China is the major threat to India. Indian army should be prepared for another war with china in near future. This country can not be trusted. They have cheated us before also.
we should ask our bloody indian comminists..CPI, CPM etc to clarify and ask their chinese brothers to return our land...the parliamentary delegation should contain a mix of commies and non commies so that these commmies become answerable to the people of India and parliament..why are they keping quiet now? This is what their integrity is..al are anti nationals
RE:chinese intrusion
by Ashok Gupta on Jun 01, 2007 11:22 AM Permalink
This is a tall ask from the CPM/CPI willingly they would handover India to China who they regard as the bastion of communism. Our CPM friends have forgotten the huge price the people of China paid by way of the Cultural Revolution and the massacres that took place and the senseless destruction. Are the CPM/CPI willing to accept this kind of revolution in their states ? They are in power because there is no alternative or strong opposition. The congress completely botched up their chances and as usual did nothing when they could have.
If China was a friendly country and its claim on Tibet was acceptable to us, where was the question of granting the Dalai Lama and his entourage asylum in India to establish and run a parallel government? We even posted a foreign ministry officer to Dharamsala to represent India in the durbar of the Dalai Lama. If we believed in the justness of the Chinese claim over Tibet, then the maximum we should have done was granted asylum to the Dalai Lama with a small entourage (not thousands of followers) on humanitarian grounds, but permitted no political activities.
Alternatively, we could have objected to the Chinese occupation of Tibet in 1950, albeit in soft, diplomatic language, insisted on retaining our mission in Lhasa as per the 1906 convention with Tibet and agreed to and ratified by China; protested when they forced Tibet to surrender its sovereignty and permitted it to maintain only regional self-governance in 1951, and in 1956 when they began to deny them self-governance, eventually forcing the Dalai Lama to flee. Granting political asylum to the Dalai Lama in 1959 would then have been justified. As a result, the Chinese would have certainly remained hostile to us on this point, but respected us for what we are.
Instead, in 1955, while relinquishing the rights and privileges India had enjoyed in Tibet from the times of Colonel Younghusband's expedition in 1904, Nehru declared: "Free India has no wish to continue with any imperialistic rights or privileges."
Nehru continued with his blind love for socialism and an oppressed sister nation. Zhou and his generals were invited for many military functions like the passing out parade of the National Defence Academy, firepower demonstration/exercises by the army, and even visits to the various military establishments like the Defence Services Staff College and the College of Combat, Mhow. Zhou embraced the young cadets passing out then with affection, but had no qualms in butchering them when they were guarding our borders in 1962 as young officers.
The Chinese premier and his generals went all round India visiting our industrial and military establishments, observing, learning and preparing for an eventuality (or planning for a showdown?), while we enjoyed our reverie. The example of one firepower demonstration in 1956 arranged by none other than General B M Kaul stands out.
"The firepower demonstration went off admirably well. It had to; we had practised it for months. A Chinese general who was sitting next to General B M Kaul found it a bit too difficult to swallow and asked General Kaul whether it would be possible to achieve in actual battle conditions, the kind of concentration of fire then observed during the demonstration.
"Instead of answering that question directly, General Kaul went into the mechanics of strategy and tactics vis-à-vis firepower concentration. The Chinese military delegation on their return journey said to the Burmese in Rangoon that the senior office
He was proudly going around as the unchallenged leader of the Third World. He failed to realise that the Chinese leaders had begun to resent his approach and his manner of dealing with them, that as per them China was the natural leader of the Third World, that the initial bond of personal friendship he had formed with the Chinese leaders was not strong enough to withstand this strain, and that personal relations can never score over vital national interests in any case. Countries fight wars when their vital interests are threatened. Nehru and Krishna Menon failed to understand this. # Nehru's rigidity on the border issue, his insistence on Chinese withdrawal before border talks could begin, his grant of political asylum to the Dalai Lama and permission to him to establish a Tibetan government-in-exile (an act that created conditions for a future invasion of Tibet by India or outside powers through India to restore the Dalai Lama's rule, if desired), the hostile Indian press on the question of the occupation of Tibet, and Nehru's increasingly aggressive statements on the border made the Chinese believe he had become a tool in the hands of the Anglo-American imperialists.
Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai was maintaining a friendly posture, but he had practically begun to hate Nehru, as is clear from the text of his conversations with US President Richard Nixon in 1972, now made public. There were possibly some outward signs of this and some hints were dropped, but Nehru was
# Nehru was the architect of Article 370, with which he burdened India to placate a hurt Sheikh Abdullah. # The Chinese occupation of Tibet should have forced a reassessment of the threat to India. After they enforced their suzerainty on Tibet in 1951, the threat deserved greater attention. But when General K M Cariappa met Nehru to discuss the defence of the North East Frontier Agency, he was bluntly told to mind only Kashmir and Pakistan as his concerns for defence and leave China to the politicians and the diplomats.
As Lieutenant General S P P Thorat recounts in his autobiography 'From Reveille to Retreat', "When [in 1959] I, as GoC-in-C Eastern Command, met Menon in Delhi, I opened the subject [of defence against the Chinese] with him. In his usually sarcastic style he said that there would be no war between India and China and [if there was] he was quite capable of fighting it himself at the diplomatic level." # Nehru learnt no lessons from the war in Kashmir. Practicality always took a back seat in his mind, which was dominated by idealism. He went on emotionally in his rhetoric of 'Hindi Chini bhai bhai', all the while considering himself a superior international statesman and India an elder brother of China.
As for our leaders then, only Sardar Patel had some understanding of the concept of sovereignty. Nehru always displayed an abject lack of it. Examples are galore, right from the time of Partition.
1. His refusal to accept the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir on September 19, 1947, when it was originally offered by Maharaja Hari Singh, a good five weeks before the invasion of his state by Pakistan. Had the accession been accepted then, the entire state would have been ours. The Pakistan of those days would never have dared attack India, so superior was our military strength on account of the division of the armed forces on religious lines. 2. Later, Nehru practically surrendered our sovereignty when he invited Lord Louis Mountbatten, the governor general, to preside over and chair the meetings of his own Cabinet and the Cabinet Committee on Defence on matters regarding the accession and the military action after Pakistan invaded Jammu and Kashmir. Mountbatten, basically a servant of the British Crown, did his best to delay the decisions. 3. Worse, as India started winning the war and liberating parts of north Kashmir, Nehru inexplicably (most likely under the strong influence of Mountbatten and his wife, who shaped much of his thinking in those days) declared a 'ceasefire' and stopped our victorious army dead in its tracks before it could liberate the entire state. He declared the ceasefire arbitrarily, without consulting his full Cabinet, the Constitu
RE:Arunachal ~ a part of China!
by Vinay Gupta on Jun 01, 2007 10:56 AM Permalink
Bhai Vinay, but govt of India has to give clear signal to people of Arunachal that there is no amguity as far as their status as Indian state is concerened.
