India and China reach agreement on border patrolling along LAC

[Vi-va]

Western power interference on media is an independent thing. Indian emissaries have not gone around from door to door asking editors to report matters the way India would like it projected.

That is the trouble with living in a controlled society, where every aspect of public life, every sentiment, every media trend is dictated from above, and a watch has to be kept on the unofficial and self-created and directed exchanges of views outside the official record.

As for economic pressure, the figures speak for themselves; that is an extremely shallow argument, brought up merely to lend weight to the rest.


In India, we have shopkeepers and small companies who raise the sticker prices on their goods and then announce massive discounts. That seems to be the most likely interpretation of your government's approach - to grab land and put in military formations where they never existed, and then ask that to be treated as the new balance from which negotiations should begin.

Why bring the balance where there was no Chinese presence, even token presence, before 1950? Why not take it back to Qing Hai and to Gansu? And Sichuan, coming to balance. All these are non-Han locations that have been forcibly occupied over the last two assertive dynasties, and that are now presented to the world as traditional homes of the great Chinese civilisation. That would be a balance that would be nice to see, and when your population numbers shrink to where they will be in fifty years time, maybe new wisdom will dawn on your leadership in Beijing.

All according to the Mandala paradigm, not to worry.


Thousands of miles from China proper, misappropriation of land owing loyalty to the Dzungarians, who were targets of one of the most horrid genocides in history, but hey, no pressure.


More self-serving twists and turns.

What was the Chinese government doing until 1962? Sleeping? Or merely pushing in more and more force to create a fait accompli?

Does the Chinese government represent all Chinese? Quite possibly.

Does it represent the people of Tibet, who never wanted direct control, the injection of outsiders, and the systematic demolition of their culture and legacy?

If we all stand on our heads, maybe.

When people talk about the India government not being at the negotiation table in the first place, they omit to mention that in a miniature scale, the India government has had to be at the negotiation table for two futile years, while one corrupt Chinese field commander after another has taken his place on the other side, and mechanically mumbled whatever was last articulated by his predecessor. Only when the US falters and fails, and suddenly there is an opportunity for some more balance, this time a balance in Taipei, is there suddenly sweet reason and a willingness to listen and to put forth whatever had been suggested two years ago.

How phoney can this get?


The Indian government does not want to make a grand deal. Kashmir is not somebody's personal real-estate for it to be a bargaining counter in a grand deal. We were given independence after a 90 year struggle with strict terms and conditions. One beneficiary accepted it, the other did not.

There is no case, and no space, for grand deals.

When I say BALANCED treaty, it's based on ground reality and balance of power. It has little to do with history or who has more righteousness.

As many members pointed out, India may not exist if British had not colonized Indian subcontinent.

I don't want to argue on those things, because it's irrelevant to border issues, and it won't be helpful if we bring those things into border dispute.

India may believe time is on your side, that's fine. As long as India keep growing fast, India may have better negotiation power, I agree with that.

The border issue is not a big deal if both sides are pragmatic. We should have already solved it decades ago.

1. I haven't changed my view that India so-called democracy is incapable to strike a necessary grand bargain, whether it's about Pakistan or China, or even U.S.
2. China knew India is a sway state, so there is no need to do anything.
3. The irony: The Anglo-Saxon created India, but they can't make a grand deal with India either because of India domestic politics.

India wants to keep the wound open on both LAC and LOC, let's keep whatever it is.

Damn smart geopolitical policy of India.

 

[Circadian Rhythm]

@tower9

China government wants a BALANCED border treaty.

China government can make necessary concession near the east LAC in exchange for some land near west LAC. China government has the authority and power to do that regardless western power interference on media or economic pressure.

While India government knew exactly the same that concession is needed if a BALANCED treaty to be made. Can any India government do that?

You can't. So dude, don't say we want to put pressure on India.

India government is incapable to conclude the transaction with China and Pakistan. Any concession near the LAC will result in the fall of India government.

That's the fact. The big difference is:

1. China government can represent all Chinese to sign a BALANCED treaty.
2. India government can't make the call. India government are not on the negotiation table in the first place.

The 77 years DRAMA of the India-Pakistan border dispute around the Kashmir region, tell everyone that India government is incapable of making any grand deal.

Your Expectations and Demands are Totally Unrealistic and Unacceptable

 

[Vi-va]

Your Expectations and Demands are Totally Unrealistic and Unacceptable

Fine.

If India insists on keeping wound of LAC and LOC open, Pakistan and China have no choice, keep playing the game, watch the drama.

You just demonstrated so-called India democracy kill any grand deal. That's the nature of incompetency.

 

[Joe Shearer]

When I say BALANCED treaty, it's based on ground reality and balance of power. It has little to do with history or who has more righteousness.

You should make that clear.

As many members pointed out, India may not exist if British had not colonized Indian subcontinent.

I sympathise deeply. You are only voicing the thoughts of the multitude, and it is not your own silly shallow misunderstanding. Not your fault. Absolved.

I don't want to argue on those things, because it's irrelevant to border issues, and it won't be helpful if we bring those things into border dispute.

Have you counted the number of posts you have dedicated to not arguing? At least if you had a sense of humour when writing these things.....

India may believe time is on your side, that's fine. As long as India keep growing fast, India may have better negotiation power, I agree with that.

India growing fast has nothing to do with negotiating power, it has everything to do with the uplift of our wretchedly poor people, and the reduction of the shameful gulf between our richest and our poorest, without becoming a communist dictatorship.

The border issue is not a big deal if both sides are pragmatic. We should have already solved it decades ago.

Of course, the recorded Chinese failure to make their claims about the border - never once recorded, through the discussions over fifty years - has nothing to do with the delays. You are probably not aware of this, it is not part of the tool-kit ready at hand for champions fighting the Chinese cause on the Internet.

1. I haven't changed my view that India so-called democracy is incapable to strike a necessary grand bargain, whether it's about Pakistan or China, or even U.S.
2. China knew India is a sway state, so there is no need to do anything.
3. The irony: The Anglo-Saxon created India, but they can't make a grand deal with India either because of India domestic politics.

That clarifies everything, and now there is no more need for long and boring PhD theses on these subjects. What a relief!

India wants to keep the wound open on both LAC and LOC, let's keep whatever it is.

When the matter remains open, it is all India's fault.
When the matter abruptly reaches a compromise and rapidly becomes workable on the ground, it is all Taiwan's fault.

Got it. Very clear.

Damn smart geopolitical policy of India.

Not very smart. Nobody on the Indian side has the smarts to make dotted lines on a map and announce smugly to the world that this is reality, the international law of the seas is a hollow, capitalist joke.

That would be damn smart.

 

[Joe Shearer]

If India insists on keeping wound of LAC and LOC open, Pakistan and China have no choice, keep playing the game, watch the drama.

The visible progress achieved by both partners is laudable, it is clear and visible and strikes the on-looker silent with awe and respect.

You just demonstrated so-called India democracy kill any grand deal. That's the nature of incompetency.

Damn!

Nobody warned us, there was a Grand Deal in the making. Chinese competence discovered it, identified it, defined it and forgot to tell anybody else about it, but that's all right, it's the incompetents on the other side who missed seeing it.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@iblini

Now do you get why nobody loves me?

 

[Vi-va]

Of course, the recorded Chinese failure to make their claims about the border - never once recorded, through the discussions over fifty years - has nothing to do with the delays. You are probably not aware of this, it is not part of the tool-kit ready at hand for champions fighting the Chinese cause on the Internet.

I think there may be misunderstandings among many Indians on this issue, including you.

My view on this is exactly the opposite:
It shows China's sincerity to make concession if a grand deal can be made.

China government has authority to make a BALANCED deal for the long term interests of China, India and Pakistan. But China government also need legitimacy to do it, which means we can't ignore the opinions of most Chinese.

China intentionally kept the border dispute blur, it gave China government some maneuvering space of diplomacy.

Not very smart. Nobody on the Indian side has the smarts to make dotted lines on a map and announce smugly to the world that this is reality, the international law of the seas is a hollow, capitalist joke.

KMT made 11 dash line in 1945 after ww2, not CCP.

The current China government inherited the heritage, just like India kept the British heritage.

Same thing here, 9 dash line is there, but no exact coordinate. So that diplomacy has some room to play, deals (concessions) can be made.

 

[Guynextdoor]

I think there may be misunderstandings among many Indians on this issue, including you.

My view on this is exactly the opposite:
It shows China's sincerity to make concession if a grand deal can be made.

China government has authority to make a BALANCED deal for the long term interests of China, India and Pakistan. But China government also need legitimacy to do it, which means we can't ignore the opinions of most Chinese.

China intentionally kept the border dispute blur, it gave China government some maneuvering space of diplomacy.



KMT made 11 dash line in 1945 after ww2, not CCP.

The current China government inherited the heritage, just like India kept the British heritage.

Same thing here, 9 dash line is there, but no exact coordinate. So that diplomacy has some room to play, deals (concessions) can be made.

China is no such thing.

- Only reason why China is ready to compromise is because it is convinced that BRICS is the only way it can put a front against the US
- BRICS without India is a chicken$hit force of consequence
- India has the ability to throw spoilsport in BRICS and create a big division in the group

China has threfore called a purely 'temporary' truce. India knows not to read too much into this. We continue nuilding roads and tunnels to deploy troops faster.

 

[Vi-va]

China is no such thing.

- Only reason why China is ready to compromise is because it is convinced that BRICS is the only way it can put a front against the US
- BRICS without India is a chicken$hit force of consequence
- India has the ability to throw spoilsport in BRICS and create a big division in the group

China has threfore called a purely 'temporary' truce. India knows not to read too much into this. We continue nuilding roads and tunnels to deploy troops faster.

First, I think BRICKS is not NATO or G7. BRICKS is just a very loose org.

If India joined in BRICKS and AIIB, then spoilsport the org as a member.
If India wants to destroy your own reputation.

JUST DO IT.
JUST DO IT.


Second, org like BRCKS can be made (w/o I). If India refuses to play as a member by the rule, that's fine. You really overestimate the importance of BRICKS to China.

China never ever bond herself with any specific org.

Last but not the least, BRICKS is nothing without China. India may be a superpower in the future, but not today.

 

[Joe Shearer]

First, I think BRICKS is not NATO or G7. BRICKS is just a very loose org.

If India joined in BRICKS and AIIB, then spoilsport the org as a member.
If India wants to destroy your own reputation.

JUST DO IT.
JUST DO IT.


Second, org like BRCKS can be made (w/o I). If India refuses to play as a member by the rule, that's fine. You really overestimate the importance of BRICKS to China.

China never ever bond herself with any specific org.

Last but not the least, BRICKS is nothing without China. India may be a superpower in the future, but not today.

It's BRICS, by the way, unless you are personally under Pakistani pressure to slip in an extra 'K'.

 

[Joe Shearer]

My view on this is exactly the opposite:
It shows China's sincerity to make concession if a grand deal can be made.

In brutal reality, it is a legitimisation of theft.

If you believed in treaties and laws, you would not have circumvented the Treaty of Chushul, the only direct treaty between non-suzerain powers on the present India-China boundaries.

If you believed in treaties and laws, you would not be bullying smaller nations in the South China Sea in disgraceful ways, including ramming their ships, pointing high-speed water-jets at them and obstructing passage.

China obeys laws and treaties when it suits her, and flouts them when it doesn't.

 

[Guynextdoor]

First, I think BRICKS is not NATO or G7. BRICKS is just a very loose org.

If India joined in BRICKS and AIIB, then spoilsport the org as a member.
If India wants to destroy your own reputation.

JUST DO IT.
JUST DO IT.


Second, org like BRCKS can be made (w/o I). If India refuses to play as a member by the rule, that's fine. You really overestimate the importance of BRICKS to China.

China never ever bond herself with any specific org.

Last but not the least, BRICKS is nothing without China. India may be a superpower in the future, but not today.

f**k off.
We aren't going to 'support' any organization that China is trying to use as a rubber stamp for it's own policies.

And you are not some 'world renouwned superpower' that everyone respects. Tell this to other countries how you will 'challenge US' because you are so high and mighty and they will laugh at your face.

If China presents a reasonable discussion without a stupid idea of how it is 'smarter' than the rest and 'better', we can discuss. Else you can go stuff yourself.

 

[Guynextdoor]

In brutal reality, it is a legitimisation of theft.

If you believed in treaties and laws, you would not have circumvented the Treaty of Chushul, the only direct treaty between non-suzerain powers on the present India-China boundaries.

If you believed in treaties and laws, you would not be bullying smaller nations in the South China Sea in disgraceful ways, including ramming their ships, pointing high-speed water-jets at them and obstructing passage.

China obeys laws and treaties when it suits her, and flouts them when it doesn't.

Na- I hear they retreated to previous positions, dismantled all camps in Galwan and so on. Obviously they wanted to kick the US in the BRICS summit so didn't want India to have any reasons to complain.

 

[Guru Dutt]

Chinese are smart enough to know that they will be the biggest loosing side if they get into a fight with india thats totlly avoidable and same is with India and its is US interest that both these nations fight .... hence why five them what they want .. why now what is best for India and China

but none trusts another and as they say

Paradise is Under the Shades of Swords (Hadith No. 2466)​

 

[Guynextdoor]

And @Vi-va China has ZERO groupings that can counter the US other than BRICS. Nothing.